> --- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ---
>
> Sex Discrimination Suit Filed Against KPFA
>
> Community radio station KPFA was served on Monday with a lawsuit filed by Noelle Hanrahan, former producer and co-host of Flashpoints, the station’s drive-time public affairs broadcast. Also named in the complaint are Pacifica Foundation, Flashpoints executive producer Dennis Bernstein, and ex-general manager, Jim Bennett.
>
> Among the charges in the complaint are sexual harassment and sex discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
>
> Hanrahan, three-time winner of the Golden Reel Award, one of public radio’s highest honors, was hired in July 2000 as a temporary producer on Flashpoints, and elevated to co-host a year later. She alleges that in October, 2001, Bernstein informed her, “I’m going to torture you until you quit or I force you to leave.” Hanrahan informed General Manager Bennett of the incident, stating that she believed the actions were the result of sexual harassment and sex discrimination.
>
> Over the next five months, Hanrahan repeatedly requested of Bennett and others at both KPFA and Pacifica that her allegations be investigated and that disciplinary action be taken. During that period, according to the complaint, Hanrahan was exposed to an escalating pattern of harassment from Bernstein, who refused to talk with her, refused to inform her of information necessary to perform her job, and locked her out of editorial meetings. In one incident a master tape of an interview Hanrahan was preparing to air was erased, in an alleged attempt to sabotage her work and force her to resign.
>
> Throughout this period, according to the complaint, Bennett and others conducted no investigation and took no disciplinary action against Bernstein, despite Hanrahan’s repeated requests to management. At one point Hanrahan allegedly was informed by Bennett that, “If you file a grievance it will only get a lot worse.” Not long afterward management demoted Hanrahan, allotting her only 40% of the Flashpoints program.
>
> On November 20, 2001, Bernstein verbally attacked Hanrahan on the air, informing listeners she had made false allegations against him and was trying to take over the radio program, encouraging listeners to call KPFA and call for her dismissal. Less than three months later, Hanrahan was placed on involuntary leave and banned from the KPFA building.
>
> Citing KPFA’s failure to implement an effective procedure for reporting, investigating or addressing complaints of discrimination or harassment, the complaint alleges that prior to Hanrahan’s hiring, a number of other female employees had complained of Bernstein’s sexual harassment, discrimination and workplace violence. Those female employees resigned or were forced out of their positions as a result.
>
> “The fact that women’s voices are being silenced by gender-based harassment and intimidation is cause for deep concern,” Hanrahan stated. "My every attempt to have my grievances addressed was met with retaliation and a wholesale cover-up. Sadly, I was left with no other option but to turn to the courts for redress."
>
> Also cited in the complaint are a number of incidents of workplace violence by male KPFA employees. Unlike Hanrahan, those employees still work at KPFA.
>
> A week ago, another female Flashpoints producer, Solange Echeverría resigned, citing abusive behavior by Bernstein as the cause. In an open letter to the Local Station Board, Echeverría states:
>
> “ . . . I was FORCED OUT. I was left with no choice - I reported unfair treatment, favoritism, abuse and hostile working conditions on the Flashpoints program - perpetrated by Executive Producer Dennis Bernstein and I was met with complete disrespect, and disregard when I reported the abuse to the [now] General Manager, Roy Campenella.”
>
> Complaint online at www.purpleberets.org/pdf/firstamendedcomplaint.pdfhttp://www.purpleberets.org

>
> CONTACTS
>
> Tanya Brannan, Purple Berets
> 707.953.9412 www.purpleberets.org
>
> Wendy E.. Musell, Attorney
> 415.445.0146
>
> Elisa J. Stewart, Attorney
> 415.552.9900




I'm not winning any popularity contests at Pacifica anyway so why not? Before I do so I'd like to thank Alex Strinberg for inspiring me to write this peice by asking me a simple question namely "Do
I beleive in listener democracy?" To which I gave a simple answer...no. But if my answer was a simple one,
my reasons are not .

Each and every one of our stations has millions of potential listeners in its signal area. Each one of
those listeners has in a certain way, at one time or another, 'voted' for us. By choosing to listen to one
of our programs at some time or other. All Arbitron gives us is a guess as to how many do so at once at
any given time. Most of our potential listeners have probablly heard us at some or other. Of those who have some tune in more or less regularly for one or more of our program offerings. Weather they listen regularly
or sporadicly, each and every time a listener tunes in our signal he or she has 'voted' to listen to us. That
is no small thing. Collectively these listeners have hundreds of FM radio signals to chose from, and saying
that even avoids the wider question of how many different entertainment options they have available.
Now radio of course is free so most of these listeners, including most who tune in regularly, have
never and will never give us any of their time or money. If I recall correctly it is estimated that less
than 10% in fact do so. Of this small group of people most have no interest in our foundations governance.
In fact just over 10% voted our last election. Even out of these people, who themselves represent only
about 1% of the listenership and a 10th of the revenue, only a small fraction are interested enough
to go to candidate forums or have attended even one governance meeting. Those who run for governance
boards, attend regular business meetings, any fly, drive, and ride buses back and forth accross the
nation for national board meetings as I myself have done are not 'the community', nor even 'thelisteners', we are small groups of media activists with competing adgendas trying, with varying degrees of sucess, to exert influence upon the foundation. The outcome of our collective efforts has not been good governance, but institutional anarchy. As one activist described the board at the NY meeting it is 'a whole
which is less than the sum of its parts'.

Nor has the institution of this organizational chaos come cheaply. The NY meeting is reported to have cost
some $70,000 dollars. Multiply that by five. Now add to that the cost of the elections themselves...and the
cost of special events like the coming bylaws convention. On top of these costs each station is
forced to give air time to the candidates running in station elections and preempt regularly scheduled
programing to do so. It doesn't matter that 90% of the membership would gladly forego this oppurtunity to
become more involved in governance...or that they never fail to remind us of their sentiments with phone
calls, emails, and outright cancellations of their memberships. At the end of that process a board is finally seated. But it doesn't end there. Those to go down in defeat in the election and their most militant
supporters now fill the chairs to demand seats on committees and to 'hold the board accountable'. That
is to say to scream loudly when those to win the election seek to implement the program they promised
to enact, which the others of course are just as committed to fight. Only a few board members have any
organizational history and know the issues and currently most opposed the strike at all! by the
time the other good souls comprehend anything at all about the working of the foundation, its time for a new
election and many of them are gone. To say that still ignores that even after the election our long
suffering listenership is forced to endure yet more LSB shows and national board meetings broadcast live
for their enjoiment.

Nor as we all know is the sum total of this a well governed institution. Local autonomy has come to mean
that we now have 5 foundations instead of one, each being torn apart by factional infighting over control
of the budget and airwaves. The ED (who resigned recently) had to appease the local GM's who in turn need the support of entrenched staff weather in NY, DC, or Berkley to stay in office.It's these staff involved in governance who most often constitute the largest group to have any institutional memory, and as they already hold institutional power their adgendas are identical even though their politics may be diametrically opposed from one station to the next. Simply put those to have institutional power, that being control of airtime and budget, wish to keep it. Those who lack institutional power wish to access it. The result is that in a time of large scale war unpreceedented since Vietnam, all of our organization energy is consumed in arguements over
points of process.

I do not beleive that democracy is the highest ideal of this foundation. Some of our active members are
reactionaries like Colin Powell. Now I don't care that he can, and has, given us $500 he opposes our mission.
I don't want such people to participate in our decision making just because they paid their nickle.
As many of you were, I too was part of the Pacifica campaign. It was not to give Colin Powell a voice in
foundation governance, nor even to have such a voice myself, that I joined that campaign. I did so to
facillate certain outcomes, and to hold this accountable to its mission especially to local
communities, not to enshrine a process that I have never known to do anything more than to legitimate the
status quo. At the end of the day however it has left us with Ambrose I. Lane, who opposed the campaign, as both chairman of the board and CEO, since June 1st.

For two years until being forciblly disbanded we at the DC co-op put forward and implemented a different conception of 'a democratic Pacifica' one which put the community back into community radio. Rather than stations where as one member put at the national meeeting in NYC this year 'you have to wait for
someone to die to get on the air' our open trainning initiative aired some 120 new voices from this
community in the 2 years before its cancellation in October of 2004. We have gotten away from a community
based approach to radio, and opening our finance committee to everyone while closing are air to anyone won't make it better either. Not a single young person that I have met wants to attend governance meetings and argue about such topics as 'directors inspection rights'. They want to get on the air and talk about contemporary movements for social change, to 'spin', and perform and that is not happening. Instead we have a death grip on our listenership. The average member is 52 and we have next to zero growth. Moreover
the current structure makes any change difficult, and a complete format change anywhere impossible.

Rather than the insane and innane expense of a 'democratic process' that has enshrined institutional
chaos as the apogee of sound governance why not 'democratize' the damn airwaves? Instead of making
sure Colin Powell has a voice in our coverage of the war how about assuring us that our mission will be
upheld! Instead of governance by random people who've paid $25.00 how about opening the studio to the
community and letting those to create the work listeners 'vote' for from the janitor to Amy decide
what is to be decided? Instead of a tiered and secret wage system how about everyone gets paid the same and you're either full time, half time, three quarter time, or a stringer? Instead of voting why not make
decisions by 80% consensus? If nothing happens without broad agreement people will either agree or the ED and the station managers will run it until they do, its their choice. Hell if more than 20% of our listeners
walk out, or we bury ourselves in 10's of millions in litigation, we can turn the lights off anyway. Instead of
paying staff who come to work listening to Rush Limbaugh, or cheer for CIA backed coups in places like
Hatti, how about getting volunteers committed to fight for a better world? That doesn't mean a politics check
at the door. In the DC Co-op it just means that if you're all for the war Ryme's gonna assign you to
cover the Kwansa celebration not the state department, you'll still be on the air and we don't have to
paralyze ourselves with infighting. What we have now sucks! This ain't freedom folks, a better world is
possible!

This is the bio I used to win election to the WPFW LSB as unpaid staff representative, from which I resigned in August 2004, after posting the following on an internal Pacifica listserve on Apr. 30, 2004.

We here at the DC Radio Co-Op had a meeting yesterday to address racism and sexism here. A lot of the producers in the Co-Op are part of UNITY and as the caucus has put itself out there on these issues young producers, in my opinion rightly, hold us to high standards of accountability when they bring forward such concerns. That did not mean our process was free of acrimony, or that it is not ongoing, but some basic things were addressed seriously and resolved. We decided that our co-op will not tolerate anyone
acting in a manner that blatantly violates the rights of others without taking decisive action. In doing so we did nothing particularly heroic beyond what is called for in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the DC Human Relations Act. We chose not to tolerate a hostile work enviorment and called on our station manager to get involved in resolving a complaint of harrasment and intimidation by a male producer who had worked closely with us since our inception. At the request of the complaining producer we employed an open process in which all co-op members could participate. It was difficult, not all of us are happy with the outcome, but the offending freelance producer has agreed to resign.

Confronting racism, sexism, and patriarchy is never easy. It is made no easier by thinking you are good on these issues. The process we used involved bringing in an outside arbitrator as well as the station manager. After a meeting of almost five hours many of us felt drained. While we had made progress many felt fearful that the personal as the political could create a byzantine climate of charges and counter charges in which race, class, and gender become clubs to beat each other over the head. That said we had as a group moved forward on a set of explosive internal issues and are continuing to advance. Hetrosexual men, myself included, are often reluctant to confront themselves on these issues but they must be addressed. Instead too often men cover-up and make excuses for one and other. This is especially true of older men with greater stature in the movement who's accusers are often young women with little history. We have established a 'zero tolerance' policy as of last night. If a grievance is brought forward we have made a commitment to investigating the facts and calling for accountability, no matter who the perpetrator may be. That's a step forward, it isn't the end of our road though.

> But it is a step, and I commend our station manager for joining us as we, no pun intended, grope are way forward. Our process no doubt will fall short of perfection and in the process of developing a process we will lose some people whatever we do. That said I am concerned to have recieved reports that KPFA has shown considerablly less willness to confront some of these issues openly than our group of freelancers. Specifically a source on the paid staff claiming first hand knowledge of the situation has claimed to me that
Dennis Bernstien has for years sexually harassed and assaulted women at KPFA. It was further claimed to me by the same source (who I am unwilling to name without their consent as they, justifiablly or not, fear reprisal) that one woman was actually terminated on the final day of her probation possibly for refusing to "put out" for Mr. Bernstien. Is this true? Have we been taken to court on this before? If so how much has been paid by the foundation to settle these kinds of complaints? No one is perfect on these issues....but
for God's sake if these charges are true and we do nothing but defend priveledge and patriarchy we stand for nothing.
>
> If you care to visit DC Indymedia and type my name in some of the audio I've done is archieved there (I'm especially proud of the peice called "Human Rights" done at the end of 2003). I have also published for Poor Magazine while residing in SF and in City Paper here (just a letter). A search on Google will turn up some of the direct action stuff and arrests. I am co-founder of the group Mayday DC, which I am no longer active with. My history with the housing struggle goes back to the middle 80's Paul DiRienzo, once a personal freind, knows me personally (as does former Rev. Frank Morales). I currently reside at the Olive Branch a house similar to the late Phillip Berrigan's Jonah House in Baltimore, it is also online.

I am not a journalist, but a community activist. I first became involved in social issues during the 1986 occupation of Columbia University's Hamilton Hall in protest to apartheid in South Africa. Two years ago I was one of 4 activists to takeover the Franklin School here in Washington DC in protest to the shortage of homeless services in the District. The government has since opened the building, unused for 17 years, as a hypothermia shelter during the
winter months.

For the past 2 years I have been been involved with Ryme Kakthouda and the DC radio co-op in creating programming that seeks to address the causes of conflict in our community, our nation, and our world. Since then my work for radio has been heard
nationally on Free Speach Radio News, and Peacewatch as well as locally on the DC Co-op's Voices with Visions, Spirit in Action, and Metrowatch. In addition my work has also appeared in both print and audio on DC Indymedia. Last year I was elected to and
served on the WPFW local station board as a staff delegate. " We can not expect that CNN or Fox will do our work for us. Another world is possible only if we build ourselves the society we want."