This is an open letter regarding KPFA’s cancellation of Guns and Butter, a public affairs show that has run weekly on KPFA-FM since 2001.

Pacifica In exile’s editor, Tracy Rosenberg,  was employed at the time as KPFA’s program coordinator, and in that capacity facilitated a program council at KPFA that greenlighted the program for broadcast 17 years ago. I firmly believe that over the program’s 17-year life span that it has been a service to KPFA’s listeners, has been appreciated by them and provided an important source of alternative information on a variety of issues, and has made a great deal of money for the station and for Pacifica Radio. There is no doubt that the programs’s overall impact has been beneficial. I am distressed at the cavalier treatment of a long-time programmer.

That said, and I want to be very clear about this, I do not believe that the broadcast of an uncorrected claim that the German holocaust claimed only 300,000 victims is responsible nor factual. In this era of “the Jews will not replace us” and what I believe to be a coming genocide against the US population of undocumented immigrants, I do not and will not tolerate the obscuring of historical genocide to score political points. It is such inaccuracies that are used to pave the path to repeating genocide. The targeting and profiling of populations for hunting and detention, and finally elimination, is a repeating atrocity and without complete clarity about it, all targeted groups, at least one of which I am a member of,  are put at risk. Were I in a position to do so, I believe the broadcast called for reprimand and corrective action. I am not interested in defending the right of anyone to come onto KPFA and broadcast genocide minimization at 59,000 watts.

However, and I want to be equally clear about this, I do not believe this incident called for the cancellation of the program. I am equally disturbed at the action of KPFA management and the specious language used to justify it. No other program is safe from an arbitrary attack if we do not demand transparency and clarity with regard to programmatic decision making. As I have said for many years, written programming policies and criteria are the only way to prevent arbitrary fiats.

I have heard two written statements from management on the subject and both are wanting, for reasons that I shall enumerate below:

1. The first is that the content was “unbalanced”. The content in question consisted of a broadcast speech. KPFA airs, and in fact, sponsors, speech events that consist of one individual stating their position on public issues, literally every single week. In no case, are these presentations or speeches balanced. They consist of one person’s presentation. They are aired consistently and given away as premiums. This often disturbs me, when I happen to disagree with the perspective presented, but if the programming policy is that all content must be balanced, then violations of that policy occur every single day and without fail.  I do not think it is helpful for management to cite programming policies that do not exist and that are not enforced.
2. The second is a statement regarding an “”avalanche” of listener protests. Ms. Faulkner has stated that the only material that she received is a communication of two emails on July 18th, 6 days after the program in question aired. There is no correlation between the number two and the word avalanche. It is incumbent on KPFA management to:

a) share all communication from listeners regarding a programmer’s content with that programmer. Why did this not occur?

b) if a public statement is made regarding avalanches, then that public statement should not be deceptive. If said avalanche occurred at some date between July 18th and August 8 when the cancellation decision occurred and the avalanche is the putative reason for the cancellation, then it is required for management to document said avalanche.

So this is a formal request for KPFA management to release all emails received protesting the program (with email addresses redacted to protect privacy) and a log of all phone calls, so the public may judge for themselves what an avalanche looks like.

With all due respect, I understand that programming decisions are difficult and the default response of objecting to all program changes has not served the institution well. But that does not excuse those in decision-making positions from transparency, due process and the requirement to back up their statements with documents and policies. Management does not consist of whims and rhetoric. Not good management, anyway.

Please provide the requested documentation as well as any current programming policies in effect.

Thank you.