Sample letters on the debates

> ## SAMPLE LETTERS TO MEDIA TO REQUEST INCLUSION OF GREEN PARTY CANDIDATE DAVID BACON IN THEIR DEBATES

> ### Letter to KNME-TV re the October 18th Debate

> Mr. Ted A. Garcia
> General Manager and CEO
> KNME-TV
> 1130 University Blvd
> Albuquerque NM 87131

> September 10, 2002
> Dear Mr. Garcia:

> I understand that KNME-TV is planning to broadcast a debate between two of the three gubernatorial candidates in New Mexico. This letter is a request that you refuse to broadcast that debate unless the excluded candidate, Mr. David Bacon, is included.

> I believe that broadcasting this event will violate FCC regulations, and may place your broadcast license in jeopardy. Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 discusses your obligation to operate in the public interest and “to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.” This year’s governor’s race is replete with issues of public importance, many of which will be discussed during the debate. But other media outlets have presented the views of all three candidates, revealing that Mr. Bacon’s views clearly conflict with those of the two candidates you plan to present. A recent front page article in the Santa Fe New Mexican, capped by photos of all three candidates, highlighted several points of Mr. Bacon’s platform, including single-payer healthcare, publicly funded elections, and instant-runoff voting (IRV). Not only do these views conflict with those of the two candidates you will be presenting, they are views that are promoted time and again by public interest groups.

> Claiming that you are not involved in the production of this broadcast, but are instead merely a vehicle for it, is not a viable defense. You are responsible for the programs that you broadcast. This particular program is being co-produced by KRWG-TV, at their studio and hosted by their news director, with the program content and format being dictated by the commercial sponsor. Admittedly KRWG’s exposure is greater than yours, but your knowledge of the impropriety and willingness to further it by broadcasting the event puts your license at risk as well.

> Affording Mr. Bacon a separate opportunity to use your station outside the debate is not a satisfactory remedy. Broadcasting a debate with only two candidates gives the appearance that there are only two candidates, which deceives your viewers and deprives them of an opportunity to contrast the views presented with those of the third candidate. In doing so you are acting counter to the public interest. You have an opportunity at this time to correct that.

> I request that this letter be kept in your station’s Public File such that it is reviewed by the FCC along with your next application for license renewal. I have also forwarded a copy of this letter to Dr. William Gordon, President of UNM, in anticipation that he may want to assist you with this matter. I wish you the best of luck with your decision.

> Sincerely,

> ### Letter to KRWG re the October 18th Debate

> Some useful facts about KRWG-TV

> Can also send this to: rsalak@nmsu.edu
> Mr. Ron Salak, General Manager
> KRWG-TV
> Jordan Avenue, Milton Hall, Room 100
> Las Cruces, NM 88003

> September 9, 2002
> Dear Mr. Salak:

> It is my understanding that your TV station is planning to moderate and broadcast a debate between two of the three gubernatorial candidates in New Mexico, and that an objection has been raised by the campaign office of David Bacon, the excluded candidate. This letter is a request that you act on that objection by refusing to broadcast the debate unless Mr. Bacon is included.

> In your response to the objection by Mr. Bacon’s office you stated that MediaNews Group is responsible for the content of the forum, and you asserted that your broadcast of their event is clearly allowed under FCC regulations. I believe that this assertion is incorrect, and that your decision to broadcast this event as planned may place your broadcast license in jeopardy.

> Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934 affirms your obligation to operate in the public interest and “to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.” This year’s governor’s race is replete with issues of public importance, many of which will be discussed as your news director questions two of the candidates during the debate. But other media outlets have presented the views of all three candidates, revealing that Mr. Bacon’s views clearly conflict with those of the two candidates you plan to present. A recent front page article in the Santa Fe New Mexican, capped by photos of all three candidates, highlighted several points of Mr. Bacon’s platform, including single-payer healthcare, publicly funded elections, and instant-runoff voting (IRV). Not only do these views conflict with those of the two candidates you will be presenting, they are views that are promoted time and again by public interest groups.

> Affording Mr. Bacon a separate opportunity to use your station outside the debate is not a satisfactory remedy. Your presentation of a debate with only two candidates will give the appearance that there are only two candidates, which deceives your viewers and deprives them of an opportunity to contrast the views presented with those of the third candidate. In doing so you are acting contrary to the public interest. You have an opportunity at this time to correct that.

> I request that this letter be kept in your Public File so that it can be reviewed by the FCC as part of your next license renewal. I have also forwarded a copy of this letter to Dr. Jay Gogue, President of NMSU, and to each member of the NMSU Board of Regents in anticipation that they may want to assist you with this matter. I wish you the best of luck with your decision.

> Sincerely,

> ### Second letter re the KRWG debate:

> Dr. Jay Gogue, President
> New Mexico State University
> Hadley Hall, Room 210
> Las Cruces, NM 88003

> September 9, 2002
> Dear Dr. Gogue:

> I am writing to express my concern that an upcoming KRWG-TV broadcast of a debate between two of New Mexico’s three gubernatorial candidates may violate FCC regulations and clearly undermines the public trust. For the continued success of KRWG-TV, I urge you to insist that all three candidates be included in your broadcast.

> Station Manager Ron Salak claims that KRWG-TV is not producing the event, and believes that he is justified in broadcasting it based on an FCC regulation that allows on-the-spot coverage of bona-fide news events. (Ref. Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1934). Although there is precedent for using this rule to exclude candidates from debates, I believe that it cannot be used as justification in your case for the following reasons:

> 1. Your station is directly involved in the production of the event. You can claim that you are not the producer, but the event takes place at your studio and is hosted by your news director. So it’s hardly “on-the-spot” coverage, and with your news director asking the questions it certainly appears that you are involved with the production. It’s also filmed by your cameras and engineered by your production crew, making this argument even more difficult to defend.

> 2. Section 315 explicitly affirms the requirement for discussion of conflicting views on matters of public importance. The views of the candidate you are excluding clearly conflict with those of the other two candidates, are of public importance, and are in the public interest. Other media outlets have covered the views of all three candidates, and your decision to exclude one of them has the appearance of bias, since this requirement is being dictated by MediaNews Group, a commercial entity.

> Even if you successfully defend your right to air this broadcast, you may ultimately end up with a public support problem. Individual contributions to KRWG are primarily used to fund programs, and if your members realize that your program content is sometimes dictated by commercial entities, as in this case, you could quickly lose your base of supporespecially t.

> I have forwarded copies of this letter to your Board of Regents so that they will be prepared to discuss this matter with you. I hope you will take this opportunity to act in the best interest of all New Mexicans, and to preserve the reputation and trust that KRWG has earned. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this further.

> Sincerely,

> ### Letter to KNME-TV re the Debate