The Public Radio Program Directors Association is asking public radio programmers for help in developing a “Programmers Manifesto,” a collaborative project that will build on and update the organization’s work on defining public radio’s “Core Values” for today’s media environment. In a blog post, PRPD says the project is inspired by The Cluetrain Manifesto, a landmark 1999 work about the Web’s disruptive effect on traditional business models and practices. PRPD members are asked to “document and share their beliefs and aspirations for serving significant audiences on line, on the air, during fundraising, and in their communities.” The process, which will unfold over the next few months, will result in “a modern vision of public service,” says Arthur Cohen, president of PRPD.

Tomorrow the New America Foundation in Washington, D.C., will host “From Broadcast to Broadband: New Theories of the Public Interest in Wireless.” In two panel discussions, running from 9:30 a.m to noon Eastern time, communications wonks will discuss the role of the public interest in broadband and wireless technologies. Panelists will include Joaquin Alvarado, formerly the senior v.p. for digital innovation at American Public Media, and Andy Schwartzman, senior v.p. and policy director for the Media Access Project. New America will provide a live web stream on the event’s web page and an archived video after the panel concludes.

The Ford Foundation, a longtime supporter of public broadcasting, has given a grant of $1 million to the Los Angeles Times, which will expand its coverage of beats including immigration and ethnic communities in Southern California, the southwest U.S. border and Brazil. A Ford Foundation spokesman told the newspaper that as media organizations face challenges funding reporting through traditional means, “we and many other funders are experimenting with new approaches to preserve and advance high-quality journalism.” In a column on the announcement, Adam Clayton Powell, senior fellow at the USC Annenberg Center on Communication Leadership & Policy notes that Ford used to give NPR “six and seven-figure grants each year for international news coverage and reporting of certain topics.”

ProPublica, the nonprofit investigative reporting newsroom, has established a Facebook page for people affected by errors, injuries or infection while undergoing medical treatment. The page is moderated by ProPublica reporters Marshall Allen, who has covered the topic since 2006 and won a Goldsmith Award at the Las Vegas Sun for his series “Do No Harm: Hospital Care in Las Vegas,” and Olga Pierce, who covers health policy, insurance issues and data journalism. ProPublica’s plans for the online community include Q&A’s with experts and links to the latest reports, research and policy proposals.

Public broadcasting “suffers the main downside of public funding — political influence and control — yet enjoys little of the upside — a significant taxpayer contribution that would relieve it of the need to seek corporate underwriting and listener donations,” writes Trevor Burrus, a legal associate at the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies, in his policy analysis released today (May 21) titled, “If You Love Something Set It Free: A Case for Defunding Public Broadcasting.” Burrus writes that PBS and NPR “produce some excellent programming.” However, he believes a government-funded institution should be necessary, prudent, and, most important, “authorized by our Constitution.

Third Draft Recommendations of Core Working Group, October 1997 In the process of founding the Forum, this was the Core Working Group’s final draft, released Oct. 14, 1997, before the Convention of Stations, Nov. 5, where the Forum was voted into existence. Our Goal Our goal is to change the way station CEOs communicate, think and interact with one another on issues and opportunities that affect all licensees. Thus, our intent is to create a framework and process that enables public television senior executives to discuss and address critical opportunities and issues — and make collective decisions when necessary. Major Revisions Based on feedback from the Circle of Advisors, here are the major changes from the Sept.

Second Draft Recommendations of Core Working Group, September 1997 In the process of creating the Forum, public TV’s Core Working Group circulated this draft to its Circle of Advisors on Sept. 5, 1997. After revisions, the group circulated a third draft, Oct. 13. To the Circle of Advisors: We thank you for your thoughtful and timely feedback to our August 4th draft proposal and survey. Based on that feedback, the Core Working Group has modified its recommendations for Countdown ’97. The overall goals are: to create a new process to enable public television to discuss and address critical opportunities and issues — and make collective decisions when necessary; to create a new organizational structure for public television to serve its needs more effectively and efficiently.

Phase II: The Search for Paradigms Five months before public TV stations voted the Forum into being, this paper was prepared by their facilitators, the consulting firm BMR Associates. Released June 17, 1997. I. Introduction During Phase II of Countdown ’97, BMR Associates studied approximately 20 different organizations. The goal of the research was to discover whether other organizations  — similar in structure to public television — had established frameworks and processes that enabled them to make decisions and work together in a coordinated manner. In identifying organizations to explore, BMR focused on organizations that met the following criteria: The organization consisted of autonomous units, locally owned and operated.

Phase I: Overview of Conclusions and Their Implications Early in the year-long process of founding the Forum, the facilitating consultants, BMR Associates, prepared this summary of findings, released in October 1996. The goal of Phase I was to lay the foundation for Countdown ’97” as described in our project proposal. Phase I consisted of 49 interviews with public broadcasting industry leaders and managers, plus two facilitated workshops and two focus groups. As defined in the RFP, the project included all of public broadcasting. However, midway through Phase I we determined that we should focus our efforts on public television because public radio did not exhibit the same level of need for changes in governance and organization.

Speaking at The Media Institute today, Patrick Butler, president of the Association of Public Television Stations, reiterated his opposition to defunding public media at the federal level, recently pushed in letters by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) and Sen. James DeMint (R-S.C.). Butler also reached out to commercial media executives, and suggested ways public broadcasters could consolidate without sacrificing the quality of their product, according to John Eggerton of Broadcasting & Cable. The Media Institute is a nonprofit First Amendment think tank (based near Washington, D.C. in Arlington, Va.) supported by major media companies, foundations, associations and individuals. Many commercial media execs were in attendance for Butler’s speech, Eggerton said.

Dozens included the Core Working Group, the Circle of Advisors and consultants from BMR Associates. Countdown ’97 Core Working Group (CWG) The Core Working Group, consisting of 13 public television station chief executives, developed plans for the ongoing CEO Forum created in 1997. For background on how the Core Working Group was selected, the goal of the project and other details see Questions and Answers about Countdown ’97. Carole Cartwright, WYCC, Chicago, IL Bryce Combs, WMVS/WMVT, Milwaukee, WI Trina Cutter, WNIT, Elkart, IN Mark Erstling, WPSX, University Park, PA Ginni Fox, Kentucky Educational Television, Lexington, KY Dennis Haarsager, KWSU, Pullman, WA Mike Hardgrove, KETC, St.

This charter, which created the ongoing CEO Forum, was adopted in public TV’s Convention of Stations, Nov. 5, 1997. I. The Vision Technology is bringing a sea change to the broadcasting industry, but nowhere more profoundly than in public television. Stations will be free to specialize where they now dabble; to excel where they now experiment. In the one-channel analog world, stations of necessity can excel mainly in one mission. In a multi-channel digital world, they can — perhaps must — learn to serve other audiences from other mission bases. The winners in this new world will make decisions based on the best possible information, they will be agile enough to capitalize on developing opportunities, and they will form alliances with each other and with entities outside public television.

This concise document, making the case for the Forum, was prepared by public TV’s Core Working Group and released in this revised form in September 1997, two months before the Forum was established. See also other Forum documents. 1. The community of PTV stations needs a new process and a framework to address key business opportunities and issues. a. We are faced today with the need to address important issues brought about by advancing technology and increased competition. To be dealt with effectively, these issues need coordinated responses from PTV licensees. Current processes have proven to be less than satisfactory.

This is the record of recorded votes taken during the Convention of Stations, Nov. 5, 1997, in Austin, which established the Forum, amending and adopting its original charter. Voters “present” include chief executives voting by proxy. Vote on the Forum charter 113 votes were cast, including 7 not present On a one licensee/one vote basis: 90 voted yes, representing 85 percent of those present, 16 voted no, representing 15 percent of those present, 7 not present for the vote, representing 4 percent of those present at the convention. On a system-wide purchasing power basis: 576 purchasing power units voted yes, representing 86 percent of the units present, 68 purchasing power units voted no, representing 10 percent of the units present, 26 purchasing power units were not present for the vote, representing 4 percent of the units present Vote to join the Forum 117 votes were cast, including 11 not present and 26 abstains On a one licensee/one vote basis: 73 voted yes, representing 62.5 percent of those present 7 voted no, representing 6 percent of those present 26 abstained or were not present, representing 22 percent of those present 11 were not present for the vote, representing 9.5 percent of those present at the convention On a system-wide purchasing power basis: 465 purchasing power units voted yes, representing 65 percent of the units present, 24 purchasing power units voted no, representing 3.5 percent of those present, 183 purchasing power units abstained, representing 25 percent of those present, 46 purchasing power units were not present for the vote, representing 6.5 percent of those present at the convention.

As public TV’s Core Working Group worked to build consensus around creation of the Forum in 1997, it published this Q&A, both on paper and on its web site. “Countdown ’97” was the group’s name for its consensus-building process. Questions and Answers about Countdown ’97 Here are questions typical of those we’ve heard general managers and others in the public television community ask about Countdown ’97, along with answers from John Hershberger, Senior Associate with BMR Associates, the San Francisco consulting firm guiding the Countdown ’97 process. Countdown ’97 will conclude with a Convention of Stations in Austin, Texas, on Nov.