Mistick hits WQED execs hard
Pittsburgh: Duquesne University associate law professor Joseph Sabino Mistick is fighting mad at WQED-TV.
In an op-ed for Sunday's Tribune-Review, Mistick, a former executive assistant to Mayor Sophie Masloff, blasted the public station for laying off employees while upper managers make "six-figure salaries ... (with) Duquesne Club memberships included for some."
"The top executives continue to live in the lap of luxury while those employees who are least able to take the hit are the ones who were targeted," Mistick says.
"Ask yourself what it says about a public charity when it acts like Bernie Madoff or AIG or any of the robber-baron corporations that have coddled the rich and cast adrift the poor."
He's particularly hard on the station's production of the French and Indian War miniseries "The War That Made America," which he calls one of WQED's "colossal mistakes" and one that broke faith with Pittsburgh's major philanthropists.
"Other folks around the station point to the day that Fred Rogers died as the day that WQED lost its soul," Mistick says.
Until recently, Mistick has been one-half of an occasional Monday night panel show with Allegheny County Executive Jim Roddey, but says he's now "effectively ended my public-television career." We'd have to agree.
Readers’ Forum
It is hard to imagine it is not total incompetence and mismanagement at the root of most of WQED’s problems. Where is the board of WQED in all this? Do they actually do anything?
Droopy (URL) - July 14, 2009 at 7:56 pm
This is one of the reasons why the government should place a “For Sale” sign on all the licenses of “public” broadcast stations. We need to pull the plug on so-called “public” TV stations nationwide and stop supplementing these outrageous salaries on stations viewed by so few.
Just my $0.02
Tom
Tom Lacko - July 15, 2009 at 08:02 am
Why does any public station TV executive earn six figures? Public stations are NOT market-driven.
Cut the salary to $100,000, make the executives file their own tax returns for expenses like most companies. You can get great candidates for that price…give them commissions/incentives to succeed.
Trapper - July 15, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Hey, Tom … no offense, but can you tell me which government owns WQED?
And which of the other public broadcasting stations in Pittsburgh — WYEP, WDUQ, etc. — are government owned?
Or are you talking about the 1/50th of 1 percent of the federal budget that goes to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting?
Just curious. Thanks.
(Jason pops popcorn, waits for flame war)
Jason Togyer - July 16, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Heh heh…good one, Jason!!
I don’t know where the belief came from that public radio and television stations receive bushels of money from the government.
If you want to see the largest welfare recipients in Western Pennsylvania, you need look no further than the Pirates (PNC Park $228M), the Steelers (Heinz Field $233M) and the Penguins (Consol Energy Center).
How long do you think WQED could run on THAT kind of scratch?
Bruce - July 16, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Well to defend Tom, it is a common misconception amongst the citizenry of the United States that Public TV and Public radio stations are propped up by the U.S. Federal Government, namely through the National Endowment for the Arts, National Public radio, et al.
It’s a common misconception that the endless fund drives and Doo Wop events are just a portion of the funding.
That’s the common, mainstream belief. Wrong or not, that’s the perception. Thanks to the insiders for clearing it up.
Trapper - July 16, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Tom, I’m sorry for being a smart-arse.
Truthfully, some public stations are owned by government agencies — in West Virginia, for instance, there’s a state broadcasting authority.
In Pennsylvania, some public school districts and state universities own radio stations, too.
But as far as I know, many of the big-market PBS affiliate TV stations are private, non-profit corporations that receive very small subsidies from the state and federal governments. Most of their money comes from pledges and donations.
Maybe they should get zero public funding; that’s open to debate. But any blame in this instance lies on WQED, not the “government.”
Jason Togyer - July 17, 2009 at 1:42 pm
The above notwithstanding, there is further support for Tom’s argument because public television and public radio stations operate under a special set of U.S. government regulations that exclusively allocate bandwidth to such stations rather than commercial stations. There is indeed an economic benefit to this structure (not to mention that associated with being a nonprofit organization) for public broadcasters and this benefit comes from the U.S. government and state government.
There is an expectation that operations should adhere to standards of those who warrant those benefits. I do not think that the FCC had Lawrence Welk, Cookin’ with Chris, etc., in mind when public broadcasting bandwidth was carved out.
Note: Commercial stations indeed also benefit from their government-sancationed licenses, but the noncomms rightfully should be held to a higher standard — or deregulated altogether.
GV - July 17, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Perhaps the word “owned” is the problem in this discussion.
Let me phrase the question another way:
If —as several commenters assert— government funding for public TV is so negligible compared to other sources of income from the ‘private’ sector, then why is loss (or major cutback) in funding from Harrisburg seemingly so disruptive to the Pa. public TV stations ?
Also, don’t neglect all of the tax $$ which have been dumped into the PPTN pork-barrel operation in Hershey over the years.
If Heinz, Duquesne Light, PNC, Mellon, etc. willingly want to fund WQED (or any other non-profit charity), fine. No problem. But don’t force everyone else to subsidize it and its cousins.
Erie BlogWatch - July 17, 2009 at 9:48 pm