Common myths About KBOO
Jun 8, 2014 17:27:35 GMT -8
Post by Comrade Red on Jun 8, 2014 17:27:35 GMT -8
There are several myths and deliberate misinformation about the KBOO corporation, it's membership and how it runs. These are used to manipulate naive and unsophisticated volunteers into doing things they otherwise wouldn't.
Myth 1. KBOO is not a business. Wrong. KBOO is a public benefit corporation in the radio business. The confusion stems from an antibig business culture and the ignorant assumption that non-profits are not businesses.
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/05/423145.shtml?discuss#414408
the minute someone says "bizness," I get worried--unless I've misunderstood. KBOO is not a business. It provides a service for the community. I am not interested in business.
Myth 2. KBOO is anti-Corporate. Wrong. As stated, KBOO is a public benefit corporation(non-profit) and by definition a corporation, regardless of what members think of corporate entities. KBOO must follow laws for corporate entities of it's type. Nonethless, members of KBOO's staff and board have cynically expoited anti-corporate sentiment in it's ranks to push propaganda that KBOO's value are at odds with corporate procedure.
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/06/423658.shtml
Therefore, an activist faction on the KBOO Board has installed an Executive with corporate-style sweeping powers. She spiked the Winter Membership Drive, losing $50,000 or thereabouts, and then took the attitude that changers were necessary because of a financial crisis. She has become known for the anti-Left sneering rhetoric appearing on the KBOO website, though she has linked herself with Arlo Guthrie and claims to be neutral in programming decisions (which are now officialy her bailiwick per the new corporate-generated Board Policy Manual).
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/06/423607.shtml?discuss#416692
90% opposing Lynn Fitch and the whole corporate agenda, Board Member Hadrian left as soon as he hratd opposition to his fatuous comments.
In one of the grossed displays of stupidity by Theresa Mitchell, Mitchell calls Lynn Fitch a liar, and corrects Fitch in a way that proves both that Fitch knows what she's talking about and Mitchell knows it too:
1 Fitch also stated that KBOO was a corporation, and that a corporate handbook was appropriate. Actually, KBOO is a public benefit corporation, under Chapter 65 of Oregon Revised Statutes organized for the purpose of the promotion and operation of a listener-sponsored, non-commerical, community radio broadcasting station.
This anti-corporate hysteria has been going on for years:
portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/10/347004.shtml
Corporate takeover of KBOO
Otherwise the article is noteworthy for one of the rare level headed rational contributions of Ani Haines, as she explains Under Writing is not a corporate takeover:
At KBOO, Underwriting Does NOT Influence Programming 07.Oct.2006 11:43
ani volunteer@kboo.org link
I just saw this thread and thought that I might share some information, in an open (non-anonymous) way. I have been a KBOO volunteer since '89, began producing on air programs in '92, sat on the board from 95 - 2000 and have been on staff as the volunteer coordinator since Sept. 2000. I preface my comments with this because in all of that time, and in all of those roles, I have NEVER seen underwriting influence KBOO's programming.
KBOO has guidelines restricting the station from accepting underwriting from businesses who invest in oppressive governments, have labor disputes, poor environmental record, or are defense / weapons industry contractors... and there is another restriction that I am forgetting (contrary to popular belief, I don't keep a copy of our policy manual at home, and that's where I am). We have those guidelines to ensure that the businesses that buy underwriting are not in conflict with the values that are put forth in our programming charter which are peace, justice, democracy, human rights, environmentalism, multiculturalism, freedom of expression and social change.
As a programmer in the early 1990's, I had heard that the underwriting didn't effect programming, but I was really skeptical-- I decided that I would "push the envelope" and would often say things that I thought critical of underwriters, if I thought they deserved criticizing (I specifically remember talking about a store that bought underwriting and my saying on air that they were a part of the gentrification cycle, and boring to work for, etc.) primarily to see what the response from the staff would be-- there was none. After several incidents, I realized that KBOO really did behave responsibly around this issue.
I know of underwriters who have called in to complain about programs, and I know that they were told to quit underwriting-- that KBOO would not change programming to suit them.
KBOO does depend on some underwriting to make up the difference in the budget between what listeners contribute, and our expenses. Our Underwriting Coordinator has worked with KBOO for many years, and I have seen him act ethically that entire time. He is a believer in KBOO's mission, and is dedicated to seeing KBOO stay strong.
I appreciate the concern shared here--- eternal vigilance is the only way to maintain this community resource. That said, I urge you to get more information before you get too alarmed.
And speaking of maintaining this community resource--- we are at the beginning of our Fall Membership Drive. We need more people to participate! Can you come into KBOO and answer phones during the drive? Contact me by phone or email (listed in this post)-- check out the station for yourself and get invovled with the community.
Solidarity-
ani
www.kboo.fm
503-231-8032 ext 213
ani volunteer@kboo.org link
I just saw this thread and thought that I might share some information, in an open (non-anonymous) way. I have been a KBOO volunteer since '89, began producing on air programs in '92, sat on the board from 95 - 2000 and have been on staff as the volunteer coordinator since Sept. 2000. I preface my comments with this because in all of that time, and in all of those roles, I have NEVER seen underwriting influence KBOO's programming.
KBOO has guidelines restricting the station from accepting underwriting from businesses who invest in oppressive governments, have labor disputes, poor environmental record, or are defense / weapons industry contractors... and there is another restriction that I am forgetting (contrary to popular belief, I don't keep a copy of our policy manual at home, and that's where I am). We have those guidelines to ensure that the businesses that buy underwriting are not in conflict with the values that are put forth in our programming charter which are peace, justice, democracy, human rights, environmentalism, multiculturalism, freedom of expression and social change.
As a programmer in the early 1990's, I had heard that the underwriting didn't effect programming, but I was really skeptical-- I decided that I would "push the envelope" and would often say things that I thought critical of underwriters, if I thought they deserved criticizing (I specifically remember talking about a store that bought underwriting and my saying on air that they were a part of the gentrification cycle, and boring to work for, etc.) primarily to see what the response from the staff would be-- there was none. After several incidents, I realized that KBOO really did behave responsibly around this issue.
I know of underwriters who have called in to complain about programs, and I know that they were told to quit underwriting-- that KBOO would not change programming to suit them.
KBOO does depend on some underwriting to make up the difference in the budget between what listeners contribute, and our expenses. Our Underwriting Coordinator has worked with KBOO for many years, and I have seen him act ethically that entire time. He is a believer in KBOO's mission, and is dedicated to seeing KBOO stay strong.
I appreciate the concern shared here--- eternal vigilance is the only way to maintain this community resource. That said, I urge you to get more information before you get too alarmed.
And speaking of maintaining this community resource--- we are at the beginning of our Fall Membership Drive. We need more people to participate! Can you come into KBOO and answer phones during the drive? Contact me by phone or email (listed in this post)-- check out the station for yourself and get invovled with the community.
Solidarity-
ani
www.kboo.fm
503-231-8032 ext 213
It's too bad she couldn't have walked her talk when it came to values.
Myth 3. KBOO's mission is to serve it' members. Wrong. KBOO as an incorporated Non-profit serves the tax paying public at large. In the event KBOO goes bankrupt and is dissolved, it's property and assets will be distributed to the owners: the public, either by auction or through another non-profit.
Nonetheless Theresa Mitchel a programer and the spouse of head of staff, insisted on misinforming members and the effects are wide spread:
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/423088.shtml
KBOO does not "compete with the business community" in staffing practices--KBOO was formed to do what its members want, not what the business community expects.
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/04/423088.shtml#414613
For a non-profit organization, the "customers" are its community--its members or clients or constituency.
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/06/423742.shtml?discuss#418217
The KBOO Foundation is a membership organization 20.Jun.2013 17:35
Justa little detail link
The State of Oregon lists the KBOO Foundation as being of the type "public benefit with members". I think that that the 'membership' part of the definition is important enough to bring forward. Don't forget the members.
Without members, KBOO would exist for naught.
Justa little detail link
The State of Oregon lists the KBOO Foundation as being of the type "public benefit with members". I think that that the 'membership' part of the definition is important enough to bring forward. Don't forget the members.
Without members, KBOO would exist for naught.
Myth 4. The Board and Staff are "at odds", don't get along, etc. Wrong. This is the most pernicious of the myths. It works as propaganda because so many organizations have this problem it's easy to believe KBOO has it too without looking deeper. The truth is at all times, regardless of appearances, the Board is working in tandem with Staff through the head of Staff Ani Haines who always has members of the board who are her personal friends or in her pocket. This has been documented many places, and is obvious to anyone with access to the Facebook. In 2013, board president CW Conser aka Conch was the most blatant example. Conch told Willamette Week he didn't know about the Save KBOO/SKFSK conflict. Anyone who saw him at Theresa Mitchell's birthday party would have called bullshit:
(Note, center in background is Kurt Lauer]
This was acquired from Facebook. If it wasn't for Facebook, no one would know the president of the board was personal friends with a woman using confidential KBOO emails to harass one of KBOO's employees.
This type of toxic nepotism has been business as usual for KBOO ever years.
Myth 5. Your personal information is protected. Wrong.
Three posts by our "friend" Hadrian, forwarding a complaint to KBOO, illustrate how free KBOO is with personal details:
operationfreespeech.boards.net/post/1282/thread
J A <redacted@gmail.com>
Aug 22
bcc: me
Greetings,
I'm not actually sure if this is a Board or Staff Issue so I am addressing
all of whom I have contact information.
I received a phone call a few days ago from a Jennifer Davis, who is
apparently running for the board and representing "Keep KBOO KBOO". She
seemed misinformed about a lot of what is going on at the station but
wanted me to know who Keep KBOO KBOO was supporting.
I was a little blown away by the phone call so I pulled over and put it on
speaker phone so my partner and I could listen. Jennifer stated multiple
times "Even if you don't vote for me its important that you know who Keep
KBOO KBOO is endorsing". At the end of our conversation I asked her how she
got my phone number. Instead of answering me she began to list off reasons
that Keep KBOO KBOO was trying to do the right thing. I repeated my
question until she finally told me my information was from "The Volunteer
List." When asked how she acquired the list, she replied that it was
someone named Jamie Partridge.
To my knowledge The Membership List can be used if requested in a given
amount of time, but that list does not contain phone numbers. I know that
there is a privacy policy surrounding volunteer information so I would like
to know how she acquired the Volunteer List.
I'm not even sure which of you Staff, Board or ED have access to this
information. Was it given to Jamie? Was it given to Jennifer? Or, did one
of them take it? If the information was taken from someone's office without
anyone knowing, the culprit should be banned form the station at the very
least. I have never given my consent to have my information used for any
other purpose then to contact me for volunteer activities. I would like a
written apology and explanation addressed to me and everyone else on the
volunteer list whether they were called or not, since all of our
information was compromised and is now in the hands of ...who knows who?
In the spirit of "transparency" we as KBOO shareholders and volunteers all
have a right to know.
Isnt the KBOO organization required to inform their entire membership if
member privacy is breached?
I would also like to know the answers to these 3 specific questions...
1. How, Where and from Who was the Volunteer List, complete with phone
numbers, acquired for this use?
2. What are the consequences for each individual?
3.Who else has this list? A whole organization or just specific members of
it?
Thank you for your time, I look forward to your responses...
J A
6 Year Volunteer
Former Board Member
Aug 22
bcc: me
Greetings,
I'm not actually sure if this is a Board or Staff Issue so I am addressing
all of whom I have contact information.
I received a phone call a few days ago from a Jennifer Davis, who is
apparently running for the board and representing "Keep KBOO KBOO". She
seemed misinformed about a lot of what is going on at the station but
wanted me to know who Keep KBOO KBOO was supporting.
I was a little blown away by the phone call so I pulled over and put it on
speaker phone so my partner and I could listen. Jennifer stated multiple
times "Even if you don't vote for me its important that you know who Keep
KBOO KBOO is endorsing". At the end of our conversation I asked her how she
got my phone number. Instead of answering me she began to list off reasons
that Keep KBOO KBOO was trying to do the right thing. I repeated my
question until she finally told me my information was from "The Volunteer
List." When asked how she acquired the list, she replied that it was
someone named Jamie Partridge.
To my knowledge The Membership List can be used if requested in a given
amount of time, but that list does not contain phone numbers. I know that
there is a privacy policy surrounding volunteer information so I would like
to know how she acquired the Volunteer List.
I'm not even sure which of you Staff, Board or ED have access to this
information. Was it given to Jamie? Was it given to Jennifer? Or, did one
of them take it? If the information was taken from someone's office without
anyone knowing, the culprit should be banned form the station at the very
least. I have never given my consent to have my information used for any
other purpose then to contact me for volunteer activities. I would like a
written apology and explanation addressed to me and everyone else on the
volunteer list whether they were called or not, since all of our
information was compromised and is now in the hands of ...who knows who?
In the spirit of "transparency" we as KBOO shareholders and volunteers all
have a right to know.
Isnt the KBOO organization required to inform their entire membership if
member privacy is breached?
I would also like to know the answers to these 3 specific questions...
1. How, Where and from Who was the Volunteer List, complete with phone
numbers, acquired for this use?
2. What are the consequences for each individual?
3.Who else has this list? A whole organization or just specific members of
it?
Thank you for your time, I look forward to your responses...
J A
6 Year Volunteer
Former Board Member
Then there's the Bruce Silverman phone bank fiasco. He wrote a confession:
operationfreespeech.boards.net/post/170
The problem is people who have worked at KBOO insist the volunteer list isn't "lying around" and it can only be found on Ani Haines' computer.
And then there was Theresa Mitchell actively berating a member of staff for warning membership their information had been compromised:
operationfreespeech.boards.net/post/114
And Andrew sent out the following email with mass distribution–evidently intending to imply that volunteer-to-volunteer phoning is a breach of security, and pretending that “all your personal contact information” is “compromised.”
Then says nothing is wrong with KBOO's practices:
portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/08/424683.shtml?discuss#420559
The lisssst 24.Aug.2013 10:01
Theresa Mitchell link
The Volunteer list has been passed around and photocopied at the Station for years and years. Despite the language ("all data compromised") of the email above, it does not contain address or bank information. Because I (happily!) sleep with Ani, I did not supply the list. I easily could have. But since it's neither legally nor morally culpable to supply the phone list, I don't care who brought it to the Keeper group.
Theresa Mitchell link
The Volunteer list has been passed around and photocopied at the Station for years and years. Despite the language ("all data compromised") of the email above, it does not contain address or bank information. Because I (happily!) sleep with Ani, I did not supply the list. I easily could have. But since it's neither legally nor morally culpable to supply the phone list, I don't care who brought it to the Keeper group.
The Truth: if you give any member of the KBOO organization any personal information, do not expect it to be used responsibly.
Corrections of details with documentation welcome.