The story behind the story

This is about my concerns with the program Muhammad, Legacy of a Prophet, broadcast by PBS. I found it to be basically a piece of propaganda, without any alternative, critical views. I could have lived with that but that wasn't the end of the story. It gets worse...

I watch PBS. In general, it is a good station - even if it thinks that British comedy is funny. The programs are mostly balanced and interesting, and it is usually free of the fluff and silliness that pervades other TV stations. At times, PBS even surprises me. I still remember seeing a program called "American Jihad" (or was it "Jihad in America"?) on PBS in the late 1990s, before 911. This was a documentary about radical Islam in America. Little did we know.....

Anyway, as to be expected, PBS is also very much infected with Political Correctness. Somehow and someway it decided to air a broadcast on the life of Islam's big guy - Big Mo, better known as Muhammud the Prophet. I did not expect a balanced look at the man, and I was not disappointed. It was pure puff. Nary a critical or controversial fact. So far, so good. After all, it was produced by Kikim Media, a Muslim organization, so they weren't going to talk about executions by the hundreds, nine year old girls, or the small matter that Old Muhammud was a big time slaver - yes, a man that went out to take slaves, and brought pain, suffering and death to thousands. Oh well. That was expected. What I did not expect was that PBS would turn over not only editorial control of the program to Kikim Media, the Muslim producers, but also the feedback forum on its website. Yes, PBS let a third party control its viewer forum where comments were left by viewers. Guess what? Comments were restricted and unfavorable comments were deleted. So much for freedom of speech.

So I got out my trusty pen and sent a letter off to PBS. Nada. Then I send a letter to my Senator, asking him to look into the matter. I got back a letter saying "no can do". Strike two. OK, Another letter went to my representative. I also sent a second letter to PBS threatening to use the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) to find out what matters had transpired between PBS and Kikim Media regarding their pet project. Nada.

Anyway, this is a record of the letters I sent...

.

A letter to a Senator

February 3, 2003
To the Office of Senator K.
About 10 days ago I sent an E-mail to the Public Broadcasting System, to the attention of Ms. Cheryl Jones, Senior Director, Program Development & Independent Film, raising some issues pertaining to the recent program Muhammad, Legacy of a Prophet. So far, I have been ignored. I would like my Senator, Mr. Jon Kyl, to contact Ms. Pat Mitchell and Ms. Cindy Johanson, respectively CEO and Head of development, production, and operations at PBS and request that they respond to my letter. Thank you very much.

Respectfully,
Jaques Arturo

As I said above, Senator K. did absolutely nothing to help me, again.... So I wrote another letter.

A letter to PBS

I didn't keep an exact copy of the letter sent to PBS, but the text below was adapted from a draft of the original E-mail sent Senator Kyl to explain my request for information from Ms Jones at PBS. I brought up two issues and requested an answer for each:

First of all, I stated my concern over the exclusion of any critical voices, especially considering the controversial life of the man and the PBS stated objective of presenting "fair and balanced views." To me, it was clear that PBS allowed certain major sponsors to exercise full editorial control over the program content, using the producing company as a mere intermediary to achieve that end, to promote the views of those sponsoring entities. May I quote from PBS own guidelines: "On the other hand, PBS will not accept a program where the potential funder has removed control and discretion from the producer by specifying in detail what the resulting program or series should be, or by pre-ordaining the conclusion the viewer should draw from the materials presented" and the observation that any proposed series would be unacceptable if it was "created to serve the business or other interests of the funder"

I requested a statement explaining on what grounds does PBS justify this program, in view of the editorial, perception and commercialism principals in the PBS statement of "Funding Standards and Practices." Also, I requested a copy of the "Evaluation sheet" prepared by PBS analyzing the merits of the Muhammad production as required in the "Funding Standards and Practices" section; and a copy of the Full Disclosure document for the same production identifying all funders, also required under PBS policy rules.

My second concern, equally important, was the fact that PBS relinquished full control of the discussion forum to Kikim Media, the same group producing the program. I was not able to leave a message (it was "full") and there seemed to a very noticeable one-sided commentary. I know for a fact that an undetermined number of commentaries to the forum were excluded and censured (there were comments about this on the forum). I checked the PBS site and could not find any other similar situation, where a private third party was given authority by PBS to monitor and censure public postings. I understand that PBS.org is a web site sponsored by the US government and, in large part, paid for by taxpayers.

I requested a statement from PBS as to the nature and extent of this control exercised by Kirkim Media, and on what grounds can PBS justify censorship of messages that were posted on the forum, even when in full compliance with PBS's own "acceptable use" guidelines.

Thank you for your kind attention to this letter. I expect a full response to these requests.

Jaques

Conclusion: PBS not only violated its own editorial policy, in at least three different ways, but was also complicid in restricting freedom of speech. Shame!

Why?

Very simple, my dear Watson... Because Islam is oppressive. Whereever Muslims dominate, individual freedoms are restricted and people are oppressed! That is a fact, but Muslims cannot and/or will not face it. Of course, the people that suffer the most are Muslims themselves. Instead of being honest about their religion, their holy writing and even history itself, they choose to ignore uncomfortable facts and hide behind distortions. I will write more about this...It will be one of my little pet projects...

Klog Main Page. Return to list of topics in Klog.


Eurika! I found a draft of the letter! Here it is:

Regarding the recent Muhammad series on PBS, I notice that not only did the program exclude any critical voices, but that the monitoring and management of the discussion forum has been turned over to Kikim Media, the same group producing the program. I was not able to leave a message (it was "full" and not taking additional postings) and there seemed to a very noticeable one-sided commentary of view and an uncharacteristic lack of controversy in the messages listed in the forum, particularly in view of the controversy surrounding the life of Muhammad and the PBS stated objective concerning "fair and balanced views."

I have considered this situation for a few weeks, and have decided to request a formal reply from PBS regarding the following two basic issues:

It appears that the certain major sponsors exercised full editorial control over the program content, promoting the views of those organizations and entities, contrary to PBS stated policy. May I quote: "On the other hand, PBS will not accept a program where the potential funder has removed control and discretion from the producer by specifying in detail what the resulting program or series should be, or by pre-ordaining the conclusion the viewer should draw from the materials presented" and the observation that any proposed series would be unacceptable if it was "created to serve the business or other interests of the funder."

1. On what grounds does PBS justify this program, in view of the editorial, perception and commercialism principals in the PBS statement of "Funding Standards and Practices" ? Also, I would like to receive a copy of the "Evaluation sheet" prepared by PBS analyzing the merits of the Muhammad production as required in the "Funding Standards and Practices" section; as well as a copy of the Full Disclosure document for the same production identifying all funders, also required under PBS policy rules.

It is clear that PBS turned over to the producer (in this case, Kirkim Media) the authority to setup, monitor and exercise full control over public commentary on a forum page of a web site (PBS.org) sponsored by the US government and individual taxpayers? A quick check of other forums on PBS seemed to indicate that this was unique. I know for a fact that postings were censored and excluded.

2. I would like a statement from PBS as to the nature and extent of this control exercised by Kirkim Media, and on what grounds can PBS justify censorship of messages that were posted on the forum, even when in full compliance with PBS's own "acceptable use" guidelines? Thank you for your kind attention to this letter. I expect a full response to these requests.