Klose Encounter: National Public Radio & LPFM
Questioning NPR Prez Kevin Klose

In March, 2001 I had an opportunity to question National Public Radio president Kevin Klose live on the radio during an edition of WILL-AM's call-in talk show, Focus 580. After the show I also spoke with Klose more on the issue. Unfortunately, right after the "encounter" I never quite had the time to do a full write up of the exchange, but did post some details on the site. Now, several months after the event I was motivated to write it up, after reading a nice article posted to Seattle Indymedia on the decline of NPR's reporting and its growing corporate-think: "How 'Public' Is National Public Radio?"

Below is my original post giving the setup along with the new addition.

A week after my conversation with Klose I did get a chance to discuss it on my radio program. The audio from my program and the audio from the interview on WILL are both available on line.

• Click here to listen to the March 4 edition of Radio Free Conscience where I talk about my "Klose Encounter."
• Click here to listen to the Focus 580 program where I questioned Kevin Close
  (both in Real Audio)

Here's the original post about the "interview:"

Thursday, March 01, 2001

National Public Radio & LPFM: Questioning NPR Prez Kevin Klose
Yesterday I attended the 20th anniversary of the radio call-in talk show Focus 580 where the special guest for the program was the president of National Public Radio, Kevin Klose. For this special program there was a studio audience which would be allowed to ask questions, just like callers. I attended with the intention of asking about NPR's role in the effective demise of legal low-power FM radio.

To their credit, the staff of WILL-AM doesn't screen callers (nor, in this case, audience members), and so Klose had to field questions about corporate underwriting and the recent underwriting of NPR programming by the governement of Kuwait, as well as more general questions about the bias and integrity of NPR's news reporting. Unfortunately, Klose did not do a particularly good job answering most questions. Aside from questions about the Kuwait underwriting, which he did answer directly, most of the time he would pick some subtopic out of a caller's question and expound on it, whether or not it addressed the point of the question. It was difficult to tell if he was being evasive, or if he just isn't very good at this type of forum. But to be fair, as anyone who's listened to call-in radio should know, frequently callers submit rambling diatribes rather than actual questions.

About a third of the way through the program I raised my hand and was given the microphone to ask a question. My question was (paraphrased here, because my memory isn't perfect): "Last year NPR's and you [Mr. Klose's] expressed publicly strong objections to low-power radio. Yet, public radio stations rely heavily upon translator stations, like WILL's own translator at 101.1 FM, which are, in effect, simply low-power stations, operating under the same technical requirements as the proposed low-power FM stations, except that they are barred from originating programming. Given this, how do you justify your opposition to low-power FM?"

My expectation was that Mr. Klose would evade or blow off my question, but instead, as soon as I uttered the words "low power FM" a look of recognition came across his face. He appeared to get excited, and started scribbing on a scrap of paper in front of him. As soon as I finished my question, he jumped in with his explanation, which surprised me some.

posted 3/1/2001 03:09:59 PM

What happened next...

Klose vigorously defended his and NPR's opposition to LPFM, saying it was based purely on technical grounds. He expressed his opinion that the FCC had rushed the LPFM effort, and in doing so had let interference concerns take a back seat. He made effort to show that he and NPR were not against LPFM, but that the interference issue was the real sticking point. I follwed up my question by asking if that, given the fact that translators are the same as low-power stations, didn't this indicate that NPR's concern wasn't really interference, but rather competition and control? Klose didn't answer this question directly, instead noting that NPR's Western US affiliates were concerned about the interference that LPFM stations might cause with their translators in remote and mountainous areas. He didn't acknowledge at all that translators are low-power stations.

Receiving a non-answer to my question, I decided to let up and let someone else have a shot.

After the program was over there was a small reception, during which Klose pursued me, saying "Hey, low-power FM guy." We talked for at least 15 minutes, wherein he continued to make his case that he was not against low-power FM per se. He seemed to be annoyed with the FCC, and specifically annoyed with then-Chairman Kennard, who he believed blew him off on the issue of interference.

When I pointed out his bedfellows on the issue--namely the National Association of Broadcasters--he distanced himself, saying that their agenda was not his. In fact, he made pains to prove that he was sympathetic to the LPFM movement and its aim to give voice to unserved communities and audiences, even expressing sympathy for some pirate broadcasters--specifically mentioning latino ones in Chicago and elsewhere.

He continued to crticize the FCC, saying that the LPFM effort was in effect Kennard's way to try and make up for the corporate consolidation of the radio dial, and a case of "too little too late."

His intensity in defending himself and NPR on this issue took me by surprise. He also surprised me in his willingness to listen and dialogue with me some, although, truthfully, he did most of the talking.

Afterwards I wasn't quite sure what to make of it--whether to take him at face value or not. My own belief is that the interference argument against LPFM is largely a red herring. This is especially true in light of the fact that the very same standards the FCC originally proposed for LPFM are almost identical to those already in place for translator stations--low-power stations whose only purpose can be to relay the signal of another full-power station, currently mostly used by Christian stations to blast their signals across the country cheaply, and also used by many NPR affiliates. Klose reiterated that it was the worry of Western NPR affiliates who use a lot of translators to reach remote mountainous areas that sparked NPR's objections, also claiming that initially he was cautious about their concerns.

It did really seem as though Klose believes the interference argument--or at least he wants to believe it. It also seems as though his opposition to LPFM is also somewhat of a personal issue between him, the FCC and former Chairman Kennard. In a way, under the corporate-think reasoning that seems to guide NPR, LPFM stations could be good for the network, providing some relief from having to give the appearance of attempting to serve listeners who aren't middle- and upper-income whites. This is the same logic commercial broadcasters used when they embraced the creation of US public broadcasting in the late 60s--they figured it would take some of the pressure off them for providing educational and public service programming.

Yet, regardless of how sincere Kevin Klose is about his affinity for the goals of LPFM, the fact is that the service has been eviscerated by Congress and effectively kept out of many of the dense urban areas where it is most needed.