I attended a meeting Wednesday night (19 January), called by the administration of the University of San Francisco to explain to the community at large, including KUSF paid staff and volunteers, the background behind the university's sale of the FM license and transmitter to the University of Southern California.
There will probably be more comprehensive accounts in various media later today, and I don't intend to provide a blow-by-blow account. This is purely and only my distillation of the high points, followed by a personal comment.
Father Stephen Privett, university president, was on hand to present the university's position. Fr. Privett didn't present any information that hasn't been in news accounts such as those I listed earlier. However, Fr. Privett placed great emphasis on the non-disclosure agreement by which USF was bound from the beginning of its negotiations with USC. Agreeing to the NDA was a requirement for commencement of negotiations, he said, and the NDA also prevented him from discussing the sale with anyone outside a small circle of USF executives until it actually went through.
Fr. Privett also stressed that the sale of the license and transmitter was motivated solely by his judgment that the operation of a radio station was not part of USF's mission, and that the resources devoted to the station would be better directed elsewhere. The fact that the station was regarded as an invaluable community resource was not relevant to his decision, he said. His responsibility was only to determine the best course of action for USF's students.
As for the online stream promised by USF's press release as KUSF's future, Fr. Privett made it clear that every aspect of it would be designed with students in mind. He said no firm plans had yet been made regarding the stream.
I give credit to Fr. Privett for addressing this gathering, and for placing no conditions on who could attend. He got a cross-section of KUSF volunteers, many of whom had not been active participants for some time (by the way, nice to see you, J Boogie, Linda Champagne, Kathy w/ a K, Ratso Russo, Ira of the Morning, Mystery DJ, Squid, Carrie, David Katz, Debi Dangerously; apologies to any other oldsters I saw but forgot to mention), as well as a sizable turnout from the station's listenership, and several current USF students, most of whom are also station volunteers.
I also think Fr. Privett made himself admirably clear on most points.
Let me say that I'm grateful to USF for giving me the opportunity to be on its airwaves, to experiment in its production studio, and to listen to more music than I ever knew existed. I have had a hell of a lot of fun in my more than two decades of on-again, off-again volunteering there. I always knew I was doing so at the sufferance of the university, and I always tried to be a responsible beneficiary of its generosity.
The FM license was always USF's to dispose of as it saw fit. While I am disappointed, of course, that USF decided to sell the license and to get out of the business of operating a radio station, I can understand Fr. Privett's reasoning and feel no need to ascribe malice to his decision.
That all said, I have no respect for Fr. Privett personally.
The inarguable fact is, USF exercised its police powers to shut down KUSF without notice to the volunteers who have done the lion's share of the work to keep the station on the air the last 33 years. It shut down KUSF without regard for the listenership. USF's treatment of all those parties has been shabby, high-handed and contemptuous.
And the responsibility lies with Fr. Privett. He sets the tone for the university. And the tone he set at the meeting was redolent of indifference to anyone but his students, exactly in keeping with the tone set by his staff on the day of the shutdown (except that even student volunteers were treated pretty badly that day).
That's his right, of course, and some university partisans might even consider it his responsibility. But it's not an attitude that will foster respect for him or the university.
Fr. Privett's profound indifference to the community outside USF suggests that it never crossed his mind that it might be a charitable act to allow the large volunteer staff to say goodbye to its listeners over the air. I have no doubt that he will take refuge behind the almighty NDA to explain this misstep. However, my reading of the man from his statements at the meeting indicates that he simply didn't care.
Still, let's assume that Fr. Privett did consider the possibility of a mass farewell, and decided that the logistics would simply not permit it. What about recording a brief message explaining the situation, and having the station's manager, a paid staffer, take over the air booth just before transmitter shutdown to play that message over the air?
Would that have been beyond the pale, Fr. Privett? Did even this meager sop to your (former) station's staff and listenership simply never occur to you?
Was it really necessary to cut off the transmitter in the middle of a song, and herd the volunteers then present out like criminals?
Are you really that devoid of human feeling, Fr. Privett?
In a ludicrous postscript, Fr. Privett guardedly, and only once, invited the KUSF volunteer staff to participate in the online feed, whenever it is back up. At the moment, no facilities exist from which to originate this feed, as the old studios have been vacated and new ones have not been made available. (This small oversight makes a mockery of Fr. Privett's insistence that the license's sale was carefully considered and planned.) More to the point, given Fr. Privett's demonstrated indifference to the volunteers, what on earth would motivate them to participate?
I rather expect Fr. Privett is counting on minimal volunteer enthusiasm so as to compel significant student input from the start. Again, that's his right, but it would have given me a smidgen of respect for him had he simply said this.
Ah well. I'm done with him, and he with me. Good riddance.
Stick a fork in KUSF as you knew it: it's done.
No comments:
Post a Comment