Evening Exchange; 2211; 35th Anniversary of Public Broadcasting / Weekly News Analysis / 22nd Anniversary of WHUT

Iraq agrees to allow U.N. inspectors. Osama bin Laden is apparently still alive. Public broadcasting turns 35 W H U turns 22 all next on evening exchange. Hi I'm Coach Anandi And the reason you're watching this program on this station right now is the result of two events one which occurred 22 years ago. More about that later. And one which occurred 35 years ago when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Public Broadcasting Act creating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which in turn recommended the formation of the Public Broadcasting Service. That now seems like it's been around forever.

Even in exchanges day and day Walton has this report. Day by day. Sesame Street a trusted friend and teacher for several generations of children. This is the very first episode of this educational show is just one of several monumental programs that makes public broadcasting its 30th anniversary such a rich one. One that makes the executive vice president and chief operating officer of PBS. Wayne Godwin proud. Our mission is to is to literally allow communities information and access to material quality material that indeed improves their awareness of their community their quality of life. We want them to do literally no more to do more to be more.

Which is what our slogan is day. Public broadcasting is commitment to education is reinforced both in front of and behind the camera. Dr. biddie foster a PBS board member was involved with national commissions in the 70s to study the role of minorities in public broadcasting. What we did in the 70s was to create special funds special internships and that worked for a while. And in fact some of your senior minority producers today were people who got their opportunities as a result of that pressure and general concern about diversifying mixes of public broadcasting that high standards then and now Corporation for Public Broadcasting Board member Dr. Ernest Wilson says these standards that public broadcasting apart from the rest. If you look at surveys that are done comparing the United States and Europe and Japan and other countries our public broadcasting system has the

highest levels of trust of any broadcasting system around the world. And when you compare US public broadcasting to private people think we're doing a good job. Godwin says Public Broadcasting is definitely something to sing about and he's happy to show off operation base of PBS. Located in Alexandria this is where all the national PBS programming is fed to local PBS stations. But just how many local PBS stations exist. That seems to be a question that's just a little difficult to answer. If you're looking at simply the number of stations then you're talking 345 350. When you marry the number of public television stations with public radio stations you end up with a broadcast system that's the largest in the world except perhaps China. What can I say except what I have.

So by Public Broadcasting has survived and is still going strong despite the funding difficulties that have always played be one of the real challenges in the financial world. I think ultimately that has to be met by Congress. Congress has to be convinced that we in public broadcasting are really providing value added high quality consistently that nobody else around their financial woes make for more work but they don't distract from the mission of public broadcasting. Take a look at some of the commercial channels who are now trying to program whether it be History Channel or Discovery that they in fact they've said gee this is what works in public broadcasting. So in fact let's try to imitate them out over the years. Oscar the Grouch made of change from Orange staggeringly new and birthmother's are a little fuller. But public broadcasting is

commitment to quality programming is stronger than ever. We're even exchange. I'm Jane de Waal. Joining us now to trace the growth and development of public broadcasting since 1967 is Robert Coonrod president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Jennifer Lawson former PBS executive vice president for programming and promotion services during a pivotal period for the network. Now she heads Magic Box media works and Gary Knell president and chief executive officer of Sesame Street Workshop. Bob Crow not allow me to start with you. 1967 the Public Broadcasting Act this passed CPB is created and CPB recommends the forming of the Public Broadcasting Service. When people in London or Britain think about public broadcasting they think about just one thing BBC here we think about CPB we think about PBS. We think about NPR some people think about the Pacific network. Why did CPB make that recommendation. How did this thing roll

out. Well it started really before that with the Carnegie Commission which recommended a structure for Public Broadcasting and educational radio and educational television already existed before Public Broadcasting was formed and it had its roots in communities around the country and one of the things that the Congress wanted to wish sure was that any public federal support for public broadcasting would not supplant the local nature of public broadcasting so that under the law there are many things that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting cannot do it cannot own radio or television stations it cannot distribute programming it cannot produce programming it can support the production of programming but it cannot produce that itself. Therefore one of the first things that the new board of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting did was to establish a public broadcasting service so that there would be a way for stations around the country to aggregate their their program resources and distribute them nationally. And because one of the things that is very important is the interconnected nature of public broadcasting in this country. And then shortly after

after the public television PBS NPR was formed to do essentially the same thing. The difference between PBS and NPR is that NPR also produces news programming and is also a producer of programming. PBS does not actually produce programming. The programs are produced by stations around the country by independent producers and by others. So there's a rich array of sources for programming on PBS. Gary Knell tell us a little bit about the early relationship between Sesame Street and PBS. Sesame Street is really starting to get the whole child curriculum going. And it was really the brainchild of several foundations like Carnegie and Ford and others who came along. Many of whom were the founders of public broadcasting the producers of the show had an idea to use the techniques of advertising the techniques that were on commercial television like Rowan and Martin's Laugh and at the time to try to teach kids something else like letters and numbers and having you know what is now sort of natural on

television and having the first truly integrated cast with a Hispanic couple as a lead and African-Americans know along with seven foot tall Parakey on the set. Maybe that's not so normal. But public broadcasting was the place where the show could be seen uninterrupted and virtually in front of every child in America through universal access that was very important that public television was around to present this revolutionary idea 1969 revolutionary in 1969 and until today Sesame Street remains popular. People are still craving for the Moffats Muppets in a way was the diversity that Sesame Street presented ahead of its time predicting a time to come in America. Well I think it was it was really showing I think the true America which was hidden in many ways and you know Sesame Street has never really been about a land of make believe it's had been it's been trying to deal with the reality that a child is being born into and that's true whether it's the domestic version of Sesame Street or some of the international shows

that we're doing now in places like South Africa where we're introducing an HIV positive Muppet into the cast to deal with some of the issues around stigmatization around AIDS with children in that country. So it's not a make believe place it's really in many ways a child appropriate way to teach important lessons whether they're social or cognitive. And Jennifer Lawson you come to PBS in 1989 as the first chief executive for programming you come as a black woman to historic first at the public broad public broadcasting service network. What did you see as your mission at that point. Well it was a really interesting mission at Bochum right. And that public broadcasting is an unusual structure since the stations really had been there first. So it was not a network and has never been a network in that sense but the local side of it was so important and the public broadcasting service PBS had been created as a membership organization to just distribute the programs effectively and

efficiently to the stations so that stations use to get together and vote. It had a process for voting a market each year whereby they would vote which programs they wanted on the air or not. And they realized after a point that that mechanism wasn't as effective in determining then what a national schedule could be. You couldn't sort of do strategies you couldn't do forward planning in the way that an individual could. So I was thrilled and delighted quite honored that then I would be selected as the individual who would be entrusted to create schedules like that. And I was extremely fortunate since one of the first series that I had to deal with was Ken Burns Civil War. Yeah you were you were honored. You were happy to do it but you were significantly challenged in order to provide a schedule that had not been provided before. Tell us how you were going to well-doing. It was a challenge because was also one of those sort of thankless task where it's dealing with a system that because of the Localism is

incredibly independent incredibly independent and that I value and respect that independence on one hand. On the other hand then there's the herding cats aspect about it where if you're trying to get people to agree to a national schedule then you want some of that independence to be sort of given up for a moment to agree to then run a programs on a certain day on it on the same day and everything in order to put that schedule together you also created some new programs. My favorite of all of course was were in the words common sense San Diego which was quite successful What were you trying to do with those problem. Well what we were trying to do was to to sort of really raise the flag again for public broadcasting to remind people that it's not the same thing that it's a surprise that it's something different that it's something new and wanted them to tune in and see that there was something for everybody. We had all of the wonders of Sesame Street. But what happened is when the kids graduate from Sesame Street

what was there for them. We had Zune but we felt they needed more. And that's where we were then looking. I wanted to create new programs that would have some of the same terrific values of Sesame Street but for older kids. And where in the world is Carmen San Diego was definitely one of those. Look at the differences in the world between 1967 and today the differences frankly between 1989 and today we're seeing the city now operates in an environment where most American homes have cable where they have the Discovery Channel they have the Learning Channel. What new challenges does that present for you also where a lot of American homes have the Internet as well and it's another challenge of the I guess I break it down into three three categories the the technical and telecommunications changes that were there were four broadcast networks. Now there are too many more than we can count so people get their information from a lot of different sources. But it isn't just broadcasting it's also the Internet it's the whole broadband expansion but also

the demographic changes in this country have been remarkable when you think about the America in 1967 in America in the 21st century so we're younger and an older nation and we're more ethnically and culturally diverse than we've ever been. That's that's a challenge and it's also an opportunity for public broadcasting to think about not for profit institutions we have about a thousand not for profit institutions around this country who are the actual purveyors of the programs other than the stations that broadcast to programs each of them has to do business in an environment that has changed significantly. So those are all the challenges that that sort of make up the day to day life of people in public broadcasting it's stimulating. It's complicated. Most of the time it's rewarding. And one of the ways that we see that is because the the public support continues to be extraordinary. People contribute voluntarily to public broadcasting. They don't have to do that. They can get it for free. Yet they are about five million people who every year make contributions. Isn't that the strongest argument for its continued existence or the fact that people contribute come up. I don't think it is because I don't believe the strongest argument for its continued existence.

But I think it underscores the value that the that the public contributes to public broadcasting. In other words they want they want to make sure it is there. And so if if if if the public sees that value. I think that's a very strong argument. Gary No comment getting a star on the Hollywood Walk of Jim Henson who passed in with you in 1990 1990 must have smiled in his grave on that. I think so. He was a special person and a brilliant creator who has thrilled now millions and millions of graduates of Sesame Street around the world free of charge and all volunteer. That's right. Good. If I may I think you know public broadcasting still in this universe that Bob was describing there is still a need for differentiation and I think public broadcasting really needs to embrace as it did in its core mission when it started in 1969. Is education and those of us not for profit organizations who have stayed the course. Now believe it or not the workshop is

34 years old which by itself is an accomplishment. I think we've had to go back to our core values and ask ourselves what that is about. And I think public television is certainly on the road to looking at itself and trying to embrace those things again because in a 500 channel universe where every cable organization has copied many of the success stories that creators like Jennifer were ahead of their time in doing 10 years ago and 15 years ago and even five years ago and if commercialized those public broadcasting needs a space today that it can own and we think they have leading it into education. Jennifer I think there's still a gap for those older kids that you tried to fill and we need more. Carmen San Diego is going forward. There is still a big block in children over the age of five about watching public television and we need to get them there and find a way to entertain and educate them at the same time there is still a need in this country for Public Broadcasting. We need to focus on the niches that are not other ways being filled.

And when you mention in existence for 34 years we now realize that we're dealing with adults and Jennifer is still continuing even though you are now in academia in large measure as a consultant are you still doing things with the public television stations and the public broadcasting service. I think of the Africa series that you did last year. I know you lived in Tanzania from 1970 to 1972. So that was probably always in your heart but you still see public television being able to perform those functions of GARITA Oh no question about it. And I think that Gary and Bob are absolutely right. I believe that they are still a very very strong place for Public Broadcasting and that there is a role that public broadcasting plays that no one else is feeling that part of it is that diversity of programming that Africa is a continent that you don't get. You don't see much of anywhere else on television and you certainly don't see it in the way it's presented on public television programming for young people and culturally diverse programming for young people not just the

little infants and kids who watch Sesame Street. But when we talk about teens and young people P.O.D. some of the other programs that public broadcasting had no question about it. Definitely you need a strong remarks to me but Jennifer did another remarkable thing recently when she helped cause to be created the best African-American Web site in the world. And then she she drew on the resources of public broadcasting to do the Web site. Yes. Yes. Well the plug there there's the the Internet is very definitely a part of who we are and what we do. And I certainly believe that African-Americans that the public broadcasting has done so much incredible programming about the African-American experience that I felt that here is a wonderful educational resource right through. W w w that PBS or at least a number of the reasons that arguments are continuing to be made very strong arguments for the continuing

support of PBS not the least of which is well with PBS you wouldn't have complicating matters for the campaign against terrorism. The latest moves of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Our news analysts join us when we come back. What has to be one of the serious events in America's confrontation with terrorism

is the uncertainty about the fate of Osama bin Laden. Well the speculation that bin Laden was killed during the height of the campaign in Afghanistan got a jolt this week when an audiotape was aired on Tuesday night with what experts seem to agree is bin Laden's voice speaking of recent events. Well joining us now to discuss this and more Tom Lindbergh of the Hoover Institution and policy review Jonetta Rose Barras freelance correspondent and author of the barest report which you can receive online. Joe Davidson of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. And Joyce Davis of Knight Ridder Newspapers. Todd Lindbergh does this bin Laden tape no complicate the war on terrorism because in addition to the obvious focus now on Iraq there emerges the voice of what appears to be Osama bin Laden and with it all of the chatter that the intelligence agency the agency seems to be receiving that al Qaeda or somebody related to al Qaeda might be able to strike again. Well I think anybody who had been speaking of Al Qaida in the past tense was really behaving quite

prematurely. Every indication that the organization is functioning at some level of functionality. Question is how high a level of functionality. You know the audiotape the experts seem to be fairly convinced that it is indeed authentic. But you know it raises interesting questions audiotape not a videotape. What would that have shown that they didn't want to be seen. And you know it's an endless series of speculation but I think the central point is. The United States government is going to have to prove that it can do it can walk and chew gum at the same time. The broader war on terror can continue even while we're managing our little Iraq situation. It's difficult to think of bin Laden as a distraction at this point when we're talking about the war on Iraq because this is how in a way it all got started. Well yeah it is he isn't a distraction. He is the central figure. But I think Todd is right that we are going to have to the American government rather is going to have to walk and chew gum. It sort of follows up with Al Gore said you are you know sort of

taking away the attention from the larger war on terrorism and I think it shows that maybe we are being a little bit premature with this war on Iraq when when we've got all this unfinished business with respect to bin Laden with respect to al Qaeda and other terrorist cells even here in this country and I do think that that Bush needs to spend more time cleaning that up before he goes into Iraq. Joe Davidson and that was one of the comments of a number of folks on the Hill People like Bob Graham senator from Florida who chairs at least for the moment for another few weeks at least the Senate Intelligence Committee who talked about how this tape indicates that the administration is spending too much time in Iraq and not focusing enough on the war on terrorism which should be the primary objective in which the administration claims is its primary objective. The the administration however says that they never assumed that Osama bin Laden was dead. And so this really doesn't change things. I was in a session with Condoleezza Rice with a group of black Journal

columnist the Trotter Group and she was saying that that that this really in some ways is not that significant because of the assumption that he was always alive. Now they're essentially confirmation that they're continuing to proceed and they claim that they can walk and chew gum at the same time. But you can't help noticing the timing of this as we are preparing for war against Iraq when the American people if not the administration are certainly suddenly reminded that this guy is still alive. Well it's certainly not the most reassuring thing that bin Laden appears with on a tape and manages to get it out to Al Jazeera. But but the truth of the matter is bin Laden you know bin Laden the United States still has a very serious problem with terrorism with or without Al Qaeda even even if they weren't to that out there. The root problems remain. There is a great deal of the world that is out to get us and they believe they have a lot of support in doing so. Well the think and I think Tim to also note is that this was the goal the goal was when we started all this when the country began all of this right after 9/11. The goal was

to get bin Laden dead or alive. That goal still has not been realized. And I think having that tape expose that this time are released at this time just indicates that the complete failure of this administration to marshal its resources to get this guy. Now we're getting ready to marshal resources to get somebody who is an owl who has at least made the kind of overt taken the award action to attack America as al-Qaeda has. Well we can therefore move on to Iraq Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld being quoted today as saying that the war in Iraq will be necessarily a very short war. But it won't necessarily be a very long war either that it can take maybe up to six months. Right. And that is long on the speculative front from what you're hearing talking to some military people who actually give much shorter directions is more likely and it goes on longer than that.

Doesn't that immediately give Saddam Hussein the advantage. I lasted longer than they said I would. Well our position. That's again to say that. No I think actually because I think that that would be spin. I mean once again I think it's pretty much out. Well maybe I'm putting the cart before the. Let's step back for a second to the fact that Saddam Hussein despite what the Iraqi parliament voted to do said I'm willing to cooperate with you completely in this deadly game of chess that we are seeing the next move is the next move is Hans blitz. But one thing that you and time. Very interesting because I think that is the sort of position that America has taken that the Bush administration has taken is that we know this guy is going to mess up and we're ready to go right now. There's that step in the U.N. resolution that says if Hans Blix and the team are doing that weapons inspection actually have some difficulty some interference they still have to go back to the Security Council. So this whole notion that the

Bush administration is selling is that right now we can go and kick butt and get Saddam Hussein. It's just not accurate unless they're going to do it unilaterally which wouldn't do. Why didn't you come to that and how you interpret that. Because the administration is interrupting any violation no matter how small as a material breach which they claim would then allow them to go in. But you know I think this notion of being out in six months is ridiculous. I mean I think it's going to take a lot longer than that George. And then we may have other battles to fight even if we do I mean we're looking at instability in Jordan. We wonder what could happen to the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia there's still a lot of variables in this whole invasion equation. I mean you can you can kill Saddam Hussein maybe you can find these weapons but if you're talking about making a new government and as much as this administration claims is that does want to get involved in nation building that's exactly what it's going to have to do if it takes out Saddam. Is it possible that Secretary Rumsfeld is seeking to reassure the American people that you won't have the kind of pain here that you had in the situation in Vietnam. We have a plan that's not going to make

us or the boys we sent to Iraq suffer that much. Well I'm sure that's got to be an element of it. But I think there's a question there's a distinction between the duration of the military campaign and the duration of the presence of the U.S. military in Iraq and I agree with Joe. Anybody who thinks that the six months figure somehow has anything to do with the reality of the military presence in Iraq is just wrong. Well and I think I think you still have to pay attention to France and Russia in this equation. I mean they were. Yes. There was a unanimous passage of the U.N. resolution but I don't think that it's going to be that easy to get everybody saddled up and to go attack Saddam Hussein. And I think a lot of people think it's going to be just that easy. I think what Rumsfeld is doing is probably trying to do two things. One is to convince the American people as you suggest Kojo but also to sort of send out signals to Saddam Hussein is that you know we're ready and we're going to come in real quick and do this and we're not afraid to bring it you know everything that we need to bring in to make it happen.

I think that's going in the previous Persian Gulf War situation. We're going to find his army and I think for the administration officials to put that out is really disingenuous and some just. This fabrication basically that there's a difference between a campaign and an occupation. That's ridiculous. You have these American troops over there really is going to take a tape it takes six months by everybody at this table. Are seven I don't want to make sure all of our viewers heard or read some high level stuff. No I mean it's it's clear that there's a lot that can go wrong with with an attack on Iraq. Although I don't think I don't think anybody in the administration should think that they have carte blanche that if Saddam hiccups that we have the rights or that anybody else in the world thinks we have the right to go in and start bombing. That's that's just not going to be the case. We'll have to see what happens. What's happening with the Homeland Security Bill is that it has been passed in the house and awaits passage in the Senate. But it is it seems as if with the Republican victories in the

midterm election set passage in the Senate is virtually assured am I correct. It certainly looks that way if this point of the Bush one. And the reason why he won is that he won the election. He's over here gloating. I'm giving you a strictly factual and I think it's important that you know look they've kept this off the table and they lost seats. They lost a senator and a governor in Georgia arguably because because of that strategy. And I think it certainly is from a political point of view for Democrats trying to move on you know what Democrats will look at or greatest civil service protection and I was about to say that people will keep talking about George W. being more like his daddy I think he's more like Ronald Reagan. I think the guy is doing union busting all over the place and this bill this homeland security bill is actually a version of union busting. While at the same time he's stripping. So is this civil servants of their rights. He's also organizing to privatized the federal government and a half million more

than a half million workers possibly losing their job. This guy is breaking the workers of America. You know another thing he's doing is he's really attacking civil liberties I mean one of the little noticed parts of that legislation and it's going to be in other parts of the government as well and other pieces of legislation I think is this whole business of this total information awareness thing where they can collect data mining data as they say and they can collect information on your banking transactions on what you buy by credit card. And that four suspects. No not for people who are being investigated. But basically for all of us and you have a lot of fire a lot of conservatives who are who were railing against that just as the ACLU is to William I had a pretty strong column about it in the New York Times a few days ago. And so these kinds of things are not getting that kind of notice that I think that I think would help people be more aware of what's going on with this legislation. Go ahead. I was just listening while everything you said is true. I don't disagree with that. The fact is this you know

Homeland Security is a very serious issue we're facing probably the worst crisis in I can think and in my lifetime we've got to find a way to come together and resolve these issues or we're all in trouble. I think all these issues can be resolved without stripping people of their rights. And that's that's part of the other part of it. There are a lot of people who feel that way but they do seem to be in the minority it seems to me that the threat that was that the American people confronted with 9/11 is the right wave on which President Bush is writing so far and that is that people still feel deathly afraid. And they seem to feel that while we were afraid we can for the time being in the short term overlook some of the civil liberties that be used. I think your reading of the public mood on the subject is exactly right. Security is the number one concern. And if you know people have different responses to it as to how far you go but the idea is go far enough to make sure that I'm safe. That is the message that every expert has said. Forget about trying to protect yourself from terrorists. Well it can't be done. Israel has tried everything it

can. It can't be done. We can do the best we can. And I think Americans want us to try. But the bottom line is we've got all of the money that the Democrats have been getting from organized labor in this country. Why then are Democrats in the House and the Senate backing off and letting President Bush because they're weak kneed. That's right. That's that's just the bottom line. But one thing that I think that people don't you're talking about the short term in the short term I think people think it will be in the short term. But all of these things will end up being a permanent part of the American system judicial system. And I think that's why we need to be concerned. We also need to be concerned that this homeland security bill gives a lot of stuff to the pharmaceutical industry and it tests and tagged on and all corporations that have offshore accounts are now free to do whatever they want to get defense contracts very much. And you can be very much in favor of a strong homeland security bill. But at the same time point out these things that in some ways go against the American character and I don't think the Democrats have been very strong at that at all.

Are they going to be strong in doing that now that they have elected the first woman in history to lead any of the two major parties in the House of Representatives. Nancy Pelosi is now the House minority leader beating off a fairly weak challenger by Representative Harold Ford. It would be I think would be good for American democracy if she shows if she shows more gumption than what we've seen so far particularly from people like Gephardt who really rolled over on the Iraqi resolution and Tom Daschle who wasn't much better. And I say that because no matter what side you're on a democracy really needs to at least two strong voices to supply alternatives. And I don't think that's going to be a stronger voice than Dick Gephardt. Is in opposition I think she will be stronger. But you have to understand she will mainly be talking to the Democrats at the moment. You know it is very difficult to get a word in edgewise on the national stage when you do not control either the House the Senate or the White House. You know also we were kind of up in the air with the DNC. There isn't a clear front runner in a presidential race. Her main job I think is solidifying the Democratic caucus in calm in Congress now

and trying as best she can to cue up some issues that will generate her so she's going to be all that difficult for her to shore up the Democratic caucus. You have the challenge from Harold Ford Jr. which I characterized this week which represented in part some of the more moderate some might even argue conservative elements in the Democratic Party. Well I think it is going to be difficult because at the same time you've got that element of the Harold Ford. You've got a much more kind of movement to the right happening not just in the country but also in the house. And people are going to be looking at what the Republicans did in this last election and how are we going to position ourselves for 2004. That means some of the Democrats are going to start moving a little bit more to the right or at least to the center. And that's going to be difficult for some fight left some people enjoy is there is hope that the election of Nancy Pelosi move means that the Democrats at least in the in the House of Representatives will be moving a little more to the left because that is her reputation she says is not going to try to impose that on anybody else. But isn't there a struggle going on for the heart and soul of this party.

Well it certainly does seem that way. But the bottom line is the party needs to try to differentiate itself from its competitor needs to stay in for something and not simply mimic whatever the Republicans are doing to try to that. So one way or the other she has to define what the Democratic Party has to want. One thing worth remembering I think those at the party out of power is always searching for it. And so really I was reminded of where when they were in power they were searching for their heart and soul. I mean it's a different kind of been in trouble for many years. It's not just this midterm election. I mean you know I think what I was reminded earlier today that the individual who generally sets the tone for where the Democratic Party is going ideologically is its presidential candidate. And that hasn't happened yet so we might be overestimating the influence that Nancy Pelosi might have if it's Dick Gephardt. Gephardt who has suggested that he might run or Al Gore and then they're still in trouble. But speaking of presidents and presidential candidate candidates earlier this week Reverend Al Sharpton was highly critical of the Democratic Party and the DNC chair

Terry McAuliffe because he said they seemed to feel that they couldn't get black voters to turn out to the polls in large numbers in the 2002 midterm election by just producing Bill Clinton anywhere and that they didn't really use grassroots black organizers to do this. And that's why they didn't get the turnout to the polls they lost because their basis of their base of support blacks and women didn't come out for them. He is talking of course about blessing that is not true that black turnout was like real poor. I don't think it was as good as anybody would have liked it then but that's true across the board and black turnout was mixed in some areas. It was it was much better than others. But generally speaking I think would be a big mistake and not to mention in accurate the kind of claim to claim that the Democratic the Democrats lost is due to poor black turnout. But it's really galvanized around the issues. There wasn't anything to really stir you up. I mean you're not really kind of taken on the locale. Let's just say that locally let's just remember that Al Sharpton is a presidential wannabe and therefore he is also trying to bring attention and trying

to get himself inside at the table. So some of this is Al Sharpton positioning. Al Sharpton who has very little to do with mid-term elections and black people who came out to vote didn't come out to vote. All of it. Well I think that's going to be the last word on this subject. We're going to take a short break. When we come back. Everything you need to know about a certain public television station how it got started where it's headed. All this. When we come back. There are two ways of telling you how this television station came to be the

facts. We'll get to shortly. But first a personal perspective. I was working a WMUR radio in the late 1970s when our chief engineer started disappearing a lot. And then showing up with several students from the School of Engineering Intel. It was clear they were building something. Rumor has it that it was a television station. All I know is that I somehow ended up moving over from the radio station to Howard University's television station and that chief engineer the one who built the television station. But he's now the general manager of the radio station. W.H. you are Jim Watkins welcome. Thank you. Good to have you here. Now for the real story. 22 years ago this month Howard University television w HDTV went on the air for the first time and history was made. Formerly w MTV. Howard University television is the first African-American owned and operated public television station and the first television

station owned and operated by an historically black university. This station belongs to the university in every sense of the word built by Howard University Engineering students. It has become a training facility for Howard University School of Communication students in addition to serving the needs of a regional audience of more than three million weekly viewers. In the beginning I was one of the students that were involved with the original design and planning of the TV station. There was an organization called the TV Club that we were all members of that a lot of those students were either engineering or communications students from that group. There were some that I hope to actually do the design and building on November 17th 1980. The switch was thrown as a first broadcast day began with co-host Jerry Philips and and Sawyer. One evening on Jerry selloffs and I'm in Sawyer welcome to this evening's one hour telecast

that brings WHV to the airwaves and a message from Howard University president James Cheek. My favorite story about working at W H M Now W H U T. TV happened to be the very first night that we signed on the air. It was November 17. 1980. It was cold it was windy and rainy. We were also on needles and pins for waiting for our first guest was going to actually make an address to our brand new audience as to who we were what our mission was about. How we were going to carry out that mission the mission of W H U T has been and remains today to provide quality programming on the African-American experience program such as in my opinion pioneers of color Comedy Jam Eden's choice and the reading club or examples of programs which have impacted viewers over the years. Evening exchange the station's flagship

public affairs program has been on the air since 1980 and continues to provide discussion and information of local national and international interest to the African-American community. I was an associate producer for evening exchange back when we were in the trailers. I went on to be a producer and senior producer and executive producer and it was interesting right. When I first started we had co-host for evening exchange it was Jerry Philipson and Sawyer from there we had a brief stint by Sam Johnson and then it was Rudy Brewington And then Rudy left and Bernie McCain came on. My experience being host of evening exchange was one that was really good. I had a lot of fun because I had the opportunity of doing television in Washington D.C. at Howard University after Bernie was the venerable Cojo now.

Good evening. I'm calling you on the Welcome to evening Exchange. Good evening and welcome to evening exchange I am normally under the new leadership of General Manager Adam Clayton Powell the third Howard University television's legacy continues with innovative programming including the new show at Howard and advancements in communications technology to is unique in the television world because WHL is the only African-American owned PBS station. And so you see that on the air we do African-American history documentaries every Sunday night every Thursday night is African night starting at 8:00 o'clock and you don't see that on any other public TV station. In addition to HOTU is Howard University television the only university on television station in a major market in the United States. Full power. And so we see Howard University on the air. In 1981 the stations celebrated its first year by rolling out the red carpet. And now we have a wonderful event. Ladies and gentlemen we

have. Our own G.V.. Twenty one years later we celebrate again as Howard University television enters its 23rd year of broadcasting and continues to serve as a proud symbol of excellence in broadcasting for evening exchange. I'm Eric Richardson. Also joining us now Gailani was the television stations first executive producer and Gerry Philips You now know the first host. I guess I should say co-host of evening exchange. Jerry how do you get that call. How did that happen. It was funny at that time I was like you and you and Jim and we were doing the morning show called The Morning sound and sound and someone caught me in the hall and said How would you like to do the television show. There was a new television station on campus and I said I'm like you. What television station and what television show. And next I

forgot the guy's name he called me on the phone he said I want you come over to channel 32 and and read the opening with and Sawyer. And from that day on I was just shaking my boobs. Nervous came on the whole were you introduced to what was then W. H. At the time I was a producer for WRC TV NBC and I went out and I came over to look into being a student. What I wanted to do was to get a Ph.D. in communications and someone said no you know we don't want you to go to school we want you to come over here and work. We wanted to bring the things that people learned at NBC and come over here and you know work with our students. And so I did I mean I taught at the College of Arts and Sciences and I also came to be executive producer. What did you see as your mission as executive producer when you first got it. My mission was to be able to teach to students the kinds of things that they

needed technically to be able to excel and at the same time keep that that youth and creativity and that feeling that the world was there you know not have them get bogged down too much in the work keep it fun learn play and keep it fun. Jim Watkins you had w it you are the radio station we all knew you as a radio guy and then all of a sudden you were building this television station. Did you at the time think this is going to be the first black owned public television station in the country. And I'm the guy who has to believe that intimidate you at all. I was too stupid to think we were going to fail at this level. It was a wonderful opportunity and it was one of my childhood dreams to design and build television station from scratch. Well you were a child at the time. So he was very young at the time. What was it that caused you to decide to get students from Howard University School of Engineering.

To your colleagues in that. Well what happened was approximately two and a half years before we started the station. I had a conversation with the vice president for administration was Dr on Nichols and Dr. Nichols sat down with me and said You know Jim television is very very expensive and you know we're not going to be able to hire a whole bunch of professional engineers that you're used to working with. And so I sat down for a second and I said you know why couldn't students build it. So I called over to the school of engineering and talked to a gentleman who was my first internet H-word and I told them that I had an idea that I think we can build this television station with students. And he called the meeting of the broadcasting club and they had a whole room of students there and we started to tell them what we were going to do. Half of them walked out immediately and we ended up with about 15 guys and ladies who wanted to do it. And so what we did was every Saturday morning at 8:00 o'clock they would come up to my office and we would go over the theory of television and we were able

to place them during the summer with ABC and CBS and NBC and the construction areas for summer jobs. And then from there we went ahead and we design and build stage. Gerry Phillips I got to tell you because you're a radio pioneer here in Washington D.C. And when you got this call you became a television pioneer also you and Soyo who had been working prior to that with Channel 4. When I looked at you you didn't seem to be nervous in any way shape or form. I just saw it again you seemed to be just as relaxed when you started out as you are now. Didn't it occur to you that this was going to be historic that it was going to be a first. Doesn't that make you nervous. Yeah. I stopped by the neighborhood bar. The word history just stayed in my head the whole time. Number one I was nervous very nervous because this was an historical moment and I was telling some folks a while ago that that particular night the very night that we went on the air Jane she Dr. Chih the president of Howard University

was saying Well about two feet from us because we were sitting on this stage like and I had these tables. And every time I went to read the teleprompter I saw Dr. Cheikh and I and the teleprompter was kind of slow that night. And Dr. CICA started up the sitting lever proudly looking at everybody. And all of this right in my head. I I'll let go of my job. I remember the one word don't mess up one word that you shouldn't mess up it's capstone. I mean that back then capstone was how in universities capstone word out of the picture. But anyway I wish we were very nervous and was very nervous. I was even more nervous working for me because here we are talking about it. An NBC anchor you know and here I was with oh I wish I were on it but I was shaking. Hey Tony I want to show some of the people that you hired who were at this station every time we have a picture of them. See if you can identify them or we're looking at that picture.

Who's on the far left Come on Jim Watkins who was on the far left that said Phil Evans standing next to Phil Evans who who's next to call him that at the time Alexis Revis pities Alexis Terri Horman. You hire all of those crazy Larry. They were kids we were kids weren't we. When you hired those producers brought them in here. What kind of instructions did you give them what did they have to do. What was their mission. Well you know it wasn't so much instructions it was more to try and get them to where they were all working at other stations. You know so here I was saying you know quit your job at ABC and NBC and CBS like I did and come over and help make this dream a reality. You know and you know they were you know just as crazy as I was and I guess you know I thought well you know what are we going to do something like this. This is the time to do it. How wonderful it would be if you know

we could all pull together and do this and you know how we always talked about we need something to do it together and we did. And you know we had leadership like Tim what then. And you know he was brilliant. It's like if anybody can do it he can do it. Let's go for it. Jim Watkins has been general manager of WHV radio since 1985 and we brought him back our universe to television a few years ago to manage it. Jim from a technical standpoint put on your engineering head again what's the difference between television now and television in 1980 as we move from analog to digital. Well I think basically things are easier now. Really yeah things. Isn't that the technology does a lot of the work that in the old days you had to do yourself just take things like graphic arts you know in the old days we didn't have machines that could draw maps and put names on the folks faces. Now it's all done electronically. It's much more complicated but

it's easier for the user. Is it also more expensive. Well expense is a relative term especially in television. It's always been expensive especially if you happen to be a non-commercial station. PHILLIPS You are born and reared in Washington D.C. You are like a barometer on this town where media are concerned. How have things changed in media in Washington between the time you started and what we're looking at today and how has this town changed during that period of time. Well I think it's changed greatly to start with the media the media has changed because back then Gail Jim you we can't name names for days all of the guys at the Washington Post on trash and we can go melt on Cold Mountain Home and we can go to Channel 4 that was the country club channel for you know Dan said just come to town. You had Angie Owens you know a little club and we had on the wall and everybody knew everybody all Association and everybody helped everybody. Today it's

different. We are living in a highly technological set with the media today. It's a lot colder. I'm a personality person. I like people we find that that's missing as far as the city is concerned. Washington is used to change it's a transient city. So I think Washington could keep up with the technological changes we see. We have a mayor now that has learned a lot recently about what Washington is all about and that's very important because when you come to Washington you have to fit into Washington way of doing things. Otherwise you're a loser. So I think the city has gained over the years because of this very channel because this is one of the last broadcast outlets that's doing community stuff and that's important. Indeed when you brought those producers in here it seems to me that what it was a time when we could experiment a lot more in media that even though a lot of those producers came from commercial television they came into a situation where their creativity was limitless. We

could do just about anything. Not so today you know absolutely it was very different. And the things that we did here as a team were different than anything we had been able to do at the commercial stations. I mean because we were given that kind of freedom that kind of creativity and at the time the station was the state of the art we had equipment that they didn't have uptown and we could do things that they were unable to do. So you know and you know live broadcast and or you know things like that. I mean we had the Spanish information network we had evening exchange which was live you know no one else was doing that kind of stuff. I got to tell you Joe Watkins favorite phrase guerilla television and television we were able to go out and just do whatever it was my Enscribe wanted us to do guerilla television. Now we operate in a much more structured environment unfortunately. Yeah I've got to remember when I first started at the radio station with anybody in the station could touch any piece of equipment that they wanted to. Watkins didn't like that very much.

It was an era in which there was a lot more freedom now that we exist in a market that is highly professional lives and now we have to compete with cable television. Competitor is a much more competitive environment environment that we work in today. Do you sometimes wish for the old days sometimes but we all have to evolve. We certainly do. How about you. Are you always switch from the old days those were the foundations but you have to go on like James. You have to in order to keep a job in this business. You've got to learn to work the computer. What do you see the television station going in the future. Good morning. Oh God I ask you that because as an alumnus of this station in a way you are able to look at this from the outside now and say I would like to see them do what and what in the next few years I would oh gosh I would just say to to continue to flourish the way it has. I mean if the station you know makes the same progress in the next 22 years that it made this 22 years I can't even imagine what these kids would be doing here. They be broadcasting to the moon from the TV and then

suddenly becoming the definition television opens up some new avenues for new types of programming beautiful programming itself. Nice beautiful black faces some high interactive interactivity. But if you look at the generations of students since 1980 that have come through that I've learned something I've stepped more than we into the world going into I think that is a great asset to the community. Looking at the generation of students who have come through these stations over the years I know this happens to all of us. We run into adults on the street sometimes they have children of their own and they say Jim I was your intern don't you like me. He really is. And frankly we're looking forward to seeing a lot more of that happening in the future hoping to syndicate some of our programs in the future. But I'd like to thank you all for the contributions that you have made to Howard University television over the years and I know that Jim is still with us as a part of Howard University. You two have moved on but I know that you still have all of your support. Absolutely and very much our thanks to all of our panelists for

joining us. Our thanks to you for watching. Stay well. Goodnight