OK, it was just an off-hand comment intended to squeeze out small donations during the final (I hope) pledge break, but I heard this comment by one of OPB's people and it troubled me.
Paraphrasing, but close, and I sincerely apologize if I have it wrong:
"You know and I know that a couple of bigwigs could come in here and open their wallets, and they would have undue influence over what goes out."
Really? I thought public radio was immune to undue influence from its contributors, no matter how big their wallets. Thus we hear underwriting messages on Morning Edition from petrochemical and pharmaceutical companies yet feel fairly assured that they are not influencing content. I realize that NPR has its critics who claim that corporate sponsors have their fingers on the product, but I've never believed that to be true. That's why today's remark was disconcerting. It came at about 5:25, if anyone there wants to check the logger. Again, if I have it wrong, I'm truly sorry.
You got it right, Spiro. I was the offending party. (and by day 8 of a pledge drive, lots of odd things get said)
What I was trying to get across was that OPB could have chosen a different funding model, ala rich people buying the station or newspaper and dictating content (Wall Street Journal anyone?) but instead we consciously chose to have our funds come from thousands of small contributions to spread the accountability around.
And underwriting is very strictly controlled to keep exactly that separation from funding sources and content. To give you an idea of how conservatively it's interpreted around here, our radio news crew won't meet with donors so as to avoid even the appearance of undue influence.
Sorry I was unclear. Hope I convinced you to donate anyway...
John Bell
Associate Director of Membership
On-air, on-line and Event
Oregon Public Broadcasting