|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rice Thresher
Phone:
|
Programming on KTRU should be determined only by students. Whether or not athletics should be on the radio isn't the issue - the issue is that KTRU management is being pressured from an outside source to play things they don't want to play. It is wrong for the university to pressure students on this issue. When KTRU was a 650-watt station that could only reach listeners inside Loop 610, the university had little interest in the affairs of the station. With KTRU's substantial power boost to 50,000 watts, students involved in the station realized Rice's interest in KTRU's air time could increase and were hesitant about the move. However, Ronald Stebbings, who was Vice President for Student Affairs Zenaido Camacho's predecessor, assured students that Rice would not - at that time, or at any point in the future - interfere with students' control over KTRU's programming. Then, in 1996, President Malcolm Gillis formed a committee to examine how KTRU was benefiting Rice. The committee was made up of four faculty members, four staff members, one member of the Board of Trustees, two alumni, two undergraduates and one graduate students. This committee made recommendations about KTRU's programming in a 1997 report despite the fact that for the university to assume control over KTRU programming would be a direct violation of the verbal agreement made with the students in 1991. Gillis accepted all of the committee's recommendations and some, like the hiring of a professional general manager, have already been implemented. Students at KTRU did not publicly object to the committee's conclusions in 1997. We don't know why; maybe they didn't think the university would really seek to overturn student management of KTRU. But this doesn't change the fact that the university is trying to force a student organization to become a "university asset," as administrators are now fond of referring to KTRU. And now, the legacy of that committee is coming back to haunt the station. It has been made very clear that KTRU the student organization cannot simply say no to the proposal for more athletic broadcasts on the radio. They are being asked to make compromises - to air as many hours of athletics as KTRU can bear. There is no compromise in student-run radio. If students decide what is going on the air, it is student-run. Anything less than that contradicts the phrase. How can the university consider KTRU to be a place where programming can be aired when it's not supported by the students? True, there is the clause in KTRU-FM's original charter that says the radio station should be under the control of the university president. It comes right after the clause about how KTRU is to be a student radio station. There is a financial aspect - but then again, KTRU's operating budget comes from blanket tax money. The university does not put enough money into the station to have claim on its airwaves. Granted, Rice does foot the bill for KTRU General Manager Will Robedee and his part-time assistant Nancy Newton. However, there is no reason to claim the station as a university asset. Robedee and Newton are not the only staff members whose job it is to assist a student organization. Student Media Adviser Jen Cooper, Community Involvement Center Director Heather Syrett and Director of Student Activities Mona Hicks all work with student organizations as primary parts of their jobs. It's not unreasonable to ask the university to pay these salaries, assuming that the purpose of a university is to be a home for students and that those students may want to be involved in activities and organizations while they are here. We can find no reason to support the idea that KTRU is a university asset. In fact, the assurances given to the students in 1991 - as well as the history of the station - contradict this claim entirely. Therefore, we can only conclude that it is an unethical betrayal of past promises for anyone to demand airtime on KTRU against the will of the students. The Athletic Department should immediately withdraw its proposal to increase the number of games broadcast on KTRU because students (those who are involved in KTRU and those who are not) do not support it. Student organizations often encounter the problem of institutional memory. After all, the entire membership turns over every four years. However, this does not mean promises made to those organizations should be betrayed. Because the students involved in KTRU in 1996 did not remember going to 50,000 watts, and the students of today do not remember the circumstances of the 1996 committee and its report, KTRU's lack of institutional memory is being viciously used against them. Music, sports, Shepherd School of Music concerts and news could all be appropriate programming for KTRU. What to air, however, must remain a student decision. The administration should let go of plans to force university programming on the air.
- back - |
|
|
Search the Thresher pages:
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of: The Rice Thresher, Rice University MS-524, PO Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251-1892, USA. The Thresher Online Project -- ethresh@listserv.rice.edu |
