CPB to Release Controversial Film Independent of PBS
Pressed by the Hill and conservative groups, the CPB will release the controversial documentary Islam vs. Islamists to Ore. Public Bcstg. for distribution to other public stations. PBS withheld airing the program because it’s “incomplete,” as a result of not meeting its “editorial standards,” it said. The Ore. network will distribute the documentary under an agreement with CPB, OPB Pres. Steve Bass told us.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“CPB has felt an obligation to get it out to the public TV system and frankly I agree with that,” Bass said. The best approach to a controversial yet unaired program is to “put it out there so people can see what the big fuss is about and make their own judgement,” he said. OPB won’t edit the documentary, he said, calling that approach “a nonstarter.” The program will be packaged with “some sort of panel” discussion, he added.
Allegations that PBS shelved the program drew fire from 8 members of Congress, including a Democrat. In a letter to CPB Pres. Patricia Harrison, they said CPB should get PBS to air the film or release it for showing elsewhere. The signatories were Reps. Franks (R-Ariz.), Sherman (D-Cal.), Akin (R-Mo.), Cubin (R-Wyo.), Hoekstra (R-Mich.), Royce (R- Cal.), King (R-N.Y.) and Walsh (R-N.Y.). Walsh raised the issue at an April 18 House hearing on CPB funding at which he decried a “long-standing and concerted effort” to suppress it. The film’s producers, including Frank Gaffney, pres. of the Center for Security Policy, told the CPB the film was “deliberately censored” because PBS and WETA didn’t like its main message.
PBS was “aware of discussions” between CPB and a station about distributing the film, said a spokeswoman. Some shows CPB funds aren’t distributed by PBS, she added. “PBS is not the sole distributor of television programming to stations. Stations have always acquired programming from multiple distribution sources, and as independently owned and operated organizations, they make their own decisions about what to air.” PBS has declined for many reasons -- “whether it be based on our guidelines or limitations in the schedule” -- to distribute shows that have found another conduit to screens, said the spokeswoman. PBS has refused to distribute CPB- funded shows, such as several Independent TV Service films, she said: “With Islam vs. the Islamists, it does not meet PBS’ editorial standards and as such is considered incomplete and has not been distributed by PBS to PBS member stations.”
Letting people see the film is “really playing to public broadcasting’s strength, [which is] allowing local stations to make their own decisions,” said Bass: “I am never going to criticize anybody that’s going to pass on it.” Asked if PBS objected to being bypassed, he said he hadn’t talked to PBS about distributing the film but merely “alerted them that this was a possibility.” He said there are valid reasons why PBS wouldn’t want to distribute the film, but there are also other means of getting the film out.
Calling the CPB move “troubling,” Jeff Chester of the Center for Digital Democracy said CPB’s role in such episodes is ill-defined. “CPB is supposed to be a heat shield, not really a producer. That role has been redefined over the years to give CPB the ability to create programming.” With Islamists, if the CPB were “unhappy” with a PBS editorial decision it should “appeal to the Congress and to the public,” he said: “It should not try to act as a distributor and bypass the PBS editorial process. This incident illustrates sadly once again how ideology not the public interest governs CPB at the moment.”