Public radio listeners in Detroit have become openly cranky about one station’s decisions to radically rethink its daytime format. WDET-FM switched from a mix of local programming and music to more nationally syndicated talk programs in December. But a few who gave money during the prior pledge drive consider this change a bait and switch. Says this article:
The seven plaintiffs, who donated money to the public station in the fall, say management decided more than two months before the October pledge drive to get rid of daytime music programming, yet tricked listeners during that fund-raising campaign into thinking their beloved shows would continue.
”The station solicited these donations knowing full well they intended to cancel the programming,” said Kevin Ernst, an attorney who filed the lawsuit Monday.
The Chicago Tribune covered the story last week.
According to the group’s web site, the suit isn’t just about the perceived bait and switch during the fund drive, but also about the public’s role in determining the programming of publicly supported instutitions:
We should have a say in what is aired on WDET, OUR public radio station in Detroit. We have supported, promoted, and cultivated WDET for 35 years. Music is art, and it is also an integral part of Detroit’s history. Therefore, it should remain a large part of WDET, OUR public radio station. WDET is a part of the fabric of this city, and was the last station format truly acting in the best interest of the public at large.
They’ve proposed holding a special, emergency fundraiser, to give the old format one last chance.
It’s a fascinating exploration of publicly supported cultural enterprise, and the bundle of trust and expectation generated by donor support. Should your donors have a say in what you program, produce, and present? Can cultural organizations change their strategy and content to become more sustainable, or to alter their creative focus? And if they do so, what obligation do they hold for those that have already contributed?
The total amount of the lawsuit isn’t likely to cause much concern ($850, the total amount contributed by the combined plaintiffs). But the question is a juicy one that’s worth following.
When I was in Detroit over the holidays I turned on the radio to WDET with a reaction very different from others. As part of their programming shift, WDET brought back three local shows that had been cut a few years ago which play to hugely underserved music listeners – folk, blues, and bluegrass. Each of these shows have AWESOME hosts who are great to listen to and really promote local live music events. I love that all these guys are back on the air.
When these shows were originally cut, there were a variety of reasons cited, including budget constraints. Another reason was that they wanted to make their music programming more consistent and uniform. Doesn’t this go against their mission to reflect the diversity of the community they serve? (that’s paraphrased from their mission statement) I would have thought a big fuss would have been made here, but there were almost no complaints.
To me, it appears that WDET has diversified its programming even further – there’s a mix of national and local, talk and music (jazz, blues, bluegrass, folk, classical, indie, caribbean, electronica). I wonder if anyone would have even noticed the changes if they hadn’t made them during the 9am-3pm weekday spots.