MPR Trustees: Yeah, right - like they'll make a difference (http://triumphofconservativephilanthropy.blogspot.com/2008/01/managed-coverage.html).

LAMBERT: The point is this -- Where in hell does Kling get off refusing money from a legitimate local organization, while simultaneously soliciting cash from the public and trustees? Does he need it, or not?

Good point Brian. He probably doesn't need the money, and would like to crush any incipient competition, no matter how minimal, and no matter what support that competition has among the plutarchs who span both organizations. BTW - how do you do a link in comments? Mine didn't come out right.

LAMBERT: I'll pass the link problem on to the tech wizards.

This is the exact lack of accountability that is frustrating the public with our government.

And, what can we do about it? Change the channel? Withhold our sustaining membership?

I think we need to call in a larger authority--their legacy. Bill, is this how you want to be remembered? That your insecure, closed-minded, paranoid leadership is undermining the favorable steps MPR has made with The Current energizing a broader audience and membership?

Dude, wake up! Stop making insecure decisions, realize you are in a position to be proud of certain accomplishments, and most of all, remember you ARE a PUBLIC servant in a NON-PROFIT and stop being so greedy and selfish.

Or, go ahead and continue to position yourself as the next Bill McGuire in town.

Your call Billy boy.

LAMBERT: The obvious irony is that MPR's products are so substantially superior to any commercial rival, Kling himself is -- or has been -- isolated and immune to any public criticism. Jacking around with heavyweights like Lee Lynch is a new twist to this psycho-drama.

Look at Kling's decades of opposition to even the most hypothetical, quixotic competition - like low-power FM, or to smaller, nonMPR public stations like KFAI, places whose budgets wouldn't/don't pay for Bill Kling's laundry bill.

The MNPost, tiny as it is, might be an even more credible competitor than either of the others, given the changes in the market from broadcast to online.

LAMBERT: Believe me, I recognize the pattern.

Eh, this is strictly Mpls Club calumny. I can hear it now, some attenuated chap in seersucker and bow tie with the affect of someone in the final stages of tetanus: "Oh, my gawwwwd, did you hear? It's too deliciously untoward. Billy Kling has turned back some piddling amount of money Joel Kramer offered up in a pitiable attempt at synergy between that little news blog of his and Billy boy's fundraising juggernaut, MPR. And now Prince William is snubbing both Joel AND MPR board member Lee Lynch's phone calls. Can you stand it?! The mouth does water...Speaking of mouth watering, Snookums got a fab-oh new recipe off "Splendid Table" she wants cook to try out on you and Bunny. Are you two kids free Saturday...?"

Who cares, man? You want Mendicant Pauper Radio to get better? Put the critical screws to 'em. Cover it with some real scrutiny more than once every five years whether or not Bill Kling returns your calls. Quit giving 'em a pass because they're better than what Clear Channel and KQ put out over the public airwaves. Talk about damning with faint praise.

How do they compare to Chicago public radio? Just run a transcript of any of Kathy Wurzer's gushing conversations with one of their meteorologists. Or Gary Eichten actually asking after watching Ken Burns America-centric WWII doc if he thought WWII affected other countries as much as it did the United States. I am not kidding. You can look it up. He actually asked that and they actually REPLAYED IT during a pledge drive as an example of their unparalleled genius. Would Tom Barnard ask such a ludicrous question? Does this really warrant subsidy?

You think Chicago public radio's "This American Life" would've gotten any traction at MPR? Heck, if some awkward, gawky, bearded, bespectacled string bean in a white linen suit and a panama hat from Anoka showed up these days at MPR proposing a Midwest version of the Grand Ole Opry with a humanities bent, you think he'd get past the lobby? Tuh, not unless he retooled it to sound more like something along the lines of "A Prairie Home Personal Finance and Haute Cuisine Hour."

Perhaps a post during one of their next orgies of self congratulations that they call pledge drives would light a fire under their self-satisifed kiesters.

If they're as good as they never tire of, or shrink from, telling us they are, they'll weather the increased scrutiny just fine. You're never going to change Clear Channel's ways. With MPR you've maybe got a shot.

LAMBERT: Mr, Rodney, your critique of MPR is so ... so ... workshopped. It's almost as though these aren't fresh pustules of venom. There's even a faint, dare I say, eery familiarity to some of this, the Gary Eichten as Low Priest of Soporifics and so on.

What intrigues me the more I think about this is the apparent indifference in Kling's slap at Lee Lynch, as though he is so thoroughly buttressed by fat cat (corporate) donors he can afford to burn off a couple if he feels like it.

As for me, I commit myself to nothing less than the public garroting and quartering of Gary Eichten. Will that suffice?

I see no reason why the Absolute Ruler of MPR, the Great and Powerful Kling, need exercise noblesse oblige with either Mr. Lynch or the likes of you. His authority and power after all, are bestowed unto Himself by Himself Alone. He is untouchable. On tithings from the peasants in Linden Hills and the serfs on Summit Avenue doth live the Kling, lordly in his St. Paul manorhouse. I say Rejoice! For MPR is a wonder and miraculous. Plus, that loud chick on Saturdays comes up with some tasty recipes.

LAMBERT: You sound the drunken rabble from the stables. Some respect, please, for those who bring an air of unimpeachable rectitude to this misbegotten backwater!

As good ol' Casey used to say to Como Park's beloved zoo keeper, Bob Doer after a few too many boilermakers into one of their marathon poker games over at Gramma Lumpit's Boarding House, "money talks and bullshit walks, bitch. Keep the damn lizard and lay down some benjamins."

Fer instance, a few years back after a "Midmorning" on the subject of CEO pay, a very even-handed treatment of the subject, BTW, Billy "Back Date Me" McGuire got on the horn to Bill Kling to make his objection to the unseemliness of publicly discussing something so sacred and beyond the ken of churlish listeners known. And, voila...danged if he didn't get him a sit down with the kids from Midmorning along with some of the quisslings in news management quicker than a pledge volunteer can debit your VISA.

I don't know what was kissed or how prolonged the prostration or how severe the rug burns, but rest assured, my good man that it shows that not only do some calls to Bill Kling get returned; but they get extra special follow up from his pliant surrogates. I gotta' believe McGuire, pre-litigation and stock option adjustments, was layin' out plenty more cash than the chump change proffered by your boys, Lynch and Kramer. They are to McGuire as that freak, Oswald was to moi on Lunch With Casey. Ya' follow, laddie?

You want access, and, here I'm quoting Clelen Card when Carmen the nurse wanted into Axel's treehouse, "you gotta' pony up, bitch." Or maybe that was Willie Ketchum to Clancy the Cop right around contract time. It's been so long.

Anyway, I think you get my point.

LAMBERT: I do get your point. And while the uber barons have played their T2T (tycoon - 2 - tycoon) game, bad manners toward a more public-spirited figure like Lynch strikes me as a very ill considered slight.

And someone tell Rodney that Chicago Public Radio (or WBEZ, as the diehards prefer to call it, the same way some in the Twin Cities prefer to say KSJN, KNOW or WCAL--they can't bring themselves to say KCMP, let alone the Current) is not exactly a universally-loved organization by its diehards. When the overnight jazz programming was dropped last year, the whining and moaning from jazz purists was bigger than the ratings or financial support ever was--and when they weren't blaming management, they were blaming Ira Glass or "Wait, Wait...Don't Tell Me."

The thing is that in public radio, no matter what you do and how insignificant it is (WAMU in Washington shunting off bluegrass from Sunday mornings to HD and online), someone's going to complain about it. Too many people hear those "we're your radio station" pitches in pledge drives and think that means that they should be able to micromanage the station to reflect their own minute tastes or that stations should be run "democratically" (never mind that the recent history of Pacifica proves that "democracy" puts the station in control of incompetent ideologues who wouldn't know good radio if it bit them on the rear end). I am convinced that wanting to run or program a public radio station makes you a masochist of the highest order.

LAMBERT: I agree. The "consumers"/members of public radio have a unique, highly proprietary attitude toward their stations.

You guys know that NO dollars were involved in this right? So the commenter who asked "where does Kling get off refusing money..." doesn't know what he's talking about.

MinnPost set up TRADE agreements, that is... one site would run banner ads in exchange for MinnPost running banner ads for that other site in exchange.

As for "sharing content," you folks are making the mistake of thinking of MPR as a radio station. It's not, it has an online site too... so what would be the purpose of steering an audience to an alternative of its own site.

Or is the Pioneer Press advertising in the Star Tribune? No? Why?

Is the Rake Magazine allowed to run Lambert's blog on its site?

Did anyone -- Brian? -- ask Joel if there was REAL money involved here? If not, why not? Did you ask why a media competitor should be steering audience to the competition? No? Why not?

Oh, right, because that would ruin a good story.

LAMBERT: So what is Kling's reason for treating Lynch so callously? i mean, not even returning calls? Come on. Kramer's "trade" is insignificant. My beef with Kling's style is that it is zero sum. He would honor the spirit of public radio with a bit of noblesse oblige. Do Kramer and Lynch a favor and let them sponsor, or cross-sponsor -- for a year or two -- then let 'em walk on their own. The same with KFAI. Show class befitting a stunningly successful business model. None of this -- MinnPost, other public stations -- has any potential to do him financial harm. Being a human being about it, being a better "public citizen" than the garden variety pirates running Clear Channel or some other commercial empire, only gilds his reputation.

Really, MPR has a website? Gosh, who'd ever know? Oh, wait, now I remember, THEY HYPE IT EVERY TWO MINUTES!!!!!!!

And now, let's go to Kerri Miller in our opulent new studios, Kerri: "We're streaming ON LINE," intoned as though she was saying, "we're levitating right now, right here in the studio, WTF!" or, "a UFO just landed in the lobby and PROBED BILL KLING, recoiled in horror and flew off!"

Yes, thanks, but I'm listening ON AIR!!!!! Unless, of course, I'm listening ON LINE!!!!! Which renders your alerting me to your on line streaming utterly gratuitous.

And then, after reading the story, Kerri'd dutifully tell us that if we'd like to see pictures of her and her in-studio guest levitating, or, the UFO probing Kling and then recoiling in horror, there are some amateurishly composed snapshots taken by our radio reporters available on our website.

And now, let's go to Morning Edition's Kathy Wurzer: "If my interminable weather chat rivaling the kind of happy talk on commercial radio and TV you thought public radio was an alternative to that takes away time from actual news hasn't sated someone's wonky weather fetish, you can go to our website and click on our "Jetstreaming" podcast and download it to your MP3 player just in case you suffer from insomnia tonight. But if you're taking a prescription cold medication, don't listen while you're driving or working in your basement woodworking shop."

It gets to be insufferable, guys, it really does. Sure Casey and I hyped a little snack food here and there. But this is ridiculous.

LAMBERT: Even if Kling fears a website v. website brawl with ... MinnPost(?) ... what is the problem with having a simple, cordial, business-like meeting with Kramer and Lynch and explaining his position? I'm afraid it appears as though Bill has some kind of "enemies" complex.

blog_watcher: Get your facts straight. There was $12,000 involved in the transaction, as reported by the Strib.

So the Trib reported that Kramer said that $12,000 in CASH was involved so that makes it a fact in your eyes? Is that the type of fact-checking you do over at cursor.org? The newspaper says it so it must be so? Yikes, how scary is that?

Kramer made the same deal with MPR that he made with other media institutions. Trade. That's how it almost always works.

Might want to pass that on to the Strib, too.

So the real story here is actually that Kling didn't return someone's phone call.

Wow, that's cutting edge material, right there.

This entire post and comments suggest that Kling turned his back on the deal. It's probably a picky point, but the $12,000 was the value of the trade arrangement that MPR and MinnPost worked out for ads for MPR on MinnPost and MinnPost ads on MPR AND which was upheld by both parties. The contract was filled by both sides who agreed to it.

So the story isn't that Kling (who didn't work out the deal with Kramer, so why is Kramer trying to get Kling to personally renew it?) snubbed a $12,000 equal-trade deal from MinnPost, even though the contention here seems to be that the story was about just that.

There was an exchange of advertising that both parties met.

some questions you might want to ask. Was this a 1 for 1 deal? In other words, one ad on MPR in exchange for 1 ad on MinnPost? and, if so, who benefitted most from that arrangement: a 40 year institution with a large audience. Or a start-up with a small one? What is the cost-per-view of the ad on MinnPost vs. MPR?

Those should be easy answers to get from Kramer, right? Because he returns his calls.

Levine, why don't you make that call? You seem to know how this journalism thing is done.

Kling's a jerk? Shoot, who doesn't know that? But why not just do that story instead of couching it in some drivel about a trade agreement?

Blog Watcher: You say:

//the $12,000 was the value of the trade arrangement that MPR and MinnPost worked out for ads for MPR on MinnPost and MinnPost ads on MPR AND which was upheld by both parties. The contract was filled by both sides who agreed to it.

How do you know that? The Trib might be wrong, but they reported:

//MinnPost.com had paid $12,000 for a month's worth of MPR underwriting, a deal that expired Dec. 5, according to Kramer. Such underwriting arrangements include on-air plugs for the sponsors, and help advertising-free public radio pay its bills.

The lede of the story said MinnPost wanted to:

//continue in a sponsorship role.

So you know it was a trade? How do you know that?

LAMBERT: I checked this "trade" vs. "cash" business with Joel Kramer. This is his response:

"... in response to your request for me to clarify, here is the deal. We paid about $12K cash at MPR's usual rates to be a sponsor on the radio. We also traded online ads with mpr.org. We ran on their website and they ran on ours. The online ads were straight trade, even up, no cash. But the sponsorship referred to in the Star Tribune was straight $12K cash, no trade."

blog_watcher seems to have more inside than inside information.

Actually, I believe '(t)his entire post and comments suggest that Kling turned his back on...' the public it is serving, not 'the deal'.

It is only using 'the deal' as a recent example of how the public is being treated by the head of MPR. The commentary seems to affirm this as typical.

Brian (and I guess me now) is simply calling him on it...we refuse to accept this treatment, of MinnPost, of our MPR board representatives, and in a larger sense of us.

Why do you accept this? I encourage you to hold people to a higher standard--to return your phone calls, to explain decisions, and to make the community a better and more civilized place.

I would hope if I am ever in his position of power and wealth, that I would do more to improve my community...AND I would hope if I wasn't doing so, that someone would kindly point that out to me while I was able to do correct the situation before I would lose friends or business associates as a result of my callous behaviour.

LAMBERT: Exactly. If there is a "spirit of public radio", Mr. Kling's boorish behavior ain't it.

there is nothing "irrational" in kling's shyness when it comes to financial disclosure.

Bill Kling is a robber baron. He took several other classical music stations away in this area. Bill Kling is a greedy pig.

I am sure this message will be killed. But before it is, think about it. And some research on your own, unless you are a suckling pig as well with your mind made over.

LAMBERT: Are you talkin' to ME?

Lambert says "The 'consumers'/members of public radio have a unique, highly proprietary attitude toward their stations."

It's not unique. It's typical for any (supposedly) donor-reliant organization. Public radio listeners, unlike standard commercial radio audiences, are told -- and they believe -- that their membership dollars are essential to keeping the stations on the air. It's natural and (one could argue) appropriate that these listeners would feel that their contributions give them the right to have a proprietary attitude.

I'm trying to understand why on earth MinnPost thought that being an MPR underwriter would be a wise use of their limited advertising dollars in the first place, given MinnPost's clear status as a competitor to MPR's news service? Did they think that MPR wouldn't notice? Did some lackey or minion at MPR sign the initial contract and then later realize what they'd done?

More to the point, the $12,500 from MinnPost and Lynch's $25,000 are basically insignificant to APMG/MPR, especially when you consider that they were prepared this past fall to shell out a reported total of $40-45 million for two radio stations, WGTS in the DC area and WMCU in the Miami area. Note the short shrift MPR's news department gave those two stories. (Ho-hum...two more stations...)

LAMBERT: MinnPost's interest in a sponsorship with MPR isn't hard to understand. An MPR listener is almost exactly the same person as Kramer wants reading MinnPost. That's why he, Lynch and I thought there might be a way to cobble together some kind of mutually beneficial relationship with MPR. "Enhancing the MPR mission" and all that.

Its the idea that Kling -- or anyone -- would go into a competitive crouch with a start-up like MinnPost ... less than a month into its existence. Come on! Who possibly believes MinnPost, at this point in its existence is going to do any financial harm to MPR?

More to the point, Kling's behavior is inexplicable to inexcusable. TALK to Kramer and Lynch. Politely explain your position, if you are threatened by them.

Beyond that, as I've said, the "spirit" of public radio, at least as I think of it, involves improving the quality of the information available to Minnesotans (and our culture in general). MinnPost shares that mission. Kling should show some dignity and honor that "spirit" by doing MinnPost and other like-minded organizations at least a short-term favor by recognizing their efforts.

Of course MinnPost's interest in MPR is understandable. The question was not why MinnPost would want sponsorship opportunities on MPR (who wouldn't??) but if it was *wise* to attempt it.
Maybe MinnPost was just damn lucky to get out while it could and remain relatively unscathed. Others have been far less fortunate.

Reality check, folks.

If anyone at, say, KFAI or KAXE suggested an underwriting agreement with MPR (because--following Lambert's line of reasoning--they have similar audiences and those stations are too small to be a "threat" to MPR and it could be mutually beneficial), there would probably be a stunned silence followed by shrieks of laughter resounding until the workday ended. I assume that MinnPost did not engage in this helpful bit of role-playing when the "sponsorship" idea was floated.

What do you expect? MPR is really a very well-run business shielded by nonprofit clothing. That's Kling's real legacy and he's probably happy as a clam with it -- as well as happy with the resulting clams.

I agree that MPR and Bill Kling's attitudes seem antisocial and the antithesis of what many people think is ideal nonprofit behavior. But since its founding, MPR has amply demonstrated its competitive nature and attitude towards other entities. Do we never learn from history?

The fact remains that most members of MPR and/or the regional media ignore it, put up with it or, worse, support it. It's really too late and almost disingenuous for people (especially local journalists and media critics) to act surprised at APMG/MPR or Bill Kling's questionable behavior now.

Two happy thoughts: Hubris is a fatal flaw. Karma will bite you.

LAMBERT: I'd love to be fully disputatious. But we're in basic agreement. Namely that Kling's style is anti-thetical to the idealized "spirit" of public radio/non-profit. While complimenting MPR's news, classical and pop music "services" I've been making this point for years. (Rob Levine has been making it louder and longer.)

Seems to be some life left in this, so I will add/reinforce another point--

There is this twisted sense of competition being tossed out in this situation. There is no competition when 'in the spirit of public radio' a community shares. There is also the 'spirit of the internet', which was completely built on linking to each other. Sharing audience and sharing knowledge was critical to increasing visibility in the anonymous internet.

People who are new to the internet forget the early days when linking was critical to making your website known to the world wide web. Sure, there is Google/Yahoo/search engines to assemble and organize the chaos of millions of website now, but even that is all based on the original algorithm that linking to each other was a sign of respect and credibility toward building pagerank.

So, to simplify, MinnPost wanted a link to MPR to increase its cred, and hoped MPR would see the benefit of adding MinnPost as a rising news website in the MPR community. News itself benefits from more journalists asking more questions and reporting more of the bigger story that grows from inspection.

There is no direct competition here, only paranoia and small-minded behaviour of 'I got mine'. Kling is forgetting an era back in the 50s-60s when he was gifted by greater men to built his fledgling empire and seems to think he can take it with him when he goes...down McGuire way.

LAMBERT: When you're right, you're right. (And BTW, I've been hearing of other MinnPost-level "sponsorships" being declined.)

This inside-baseball/cult of (bad) personality approach to covering MPR will never change a thing.

The pliant donors who pony up when the on-air talent take to pitiously keening over the airwaves for donations lest their signal go forever silent care not a wit about all of this Judith Martinesque criticism. All they know of Bill Kling is what they gleen from Gary Eichten's post-pledge drive "conversations with the president" that are conducted in a courtesan-like manner that makes Larry King look like Clarence Darrow and me hoping poor Eichten's at least wearing a carpet installer's knee pads.

Unless Bill Kling makes what Lambert or some other member of the shrinking ranks of local media critics deems an untoward remark or gesture, MPR, and TPT for that matter, get a pass on regular critical scrutiny of their product so long as it surpasses the fine work at any of our commercial stations, as if that is the standard to which MPR should be held.

To listeners, that's the critical issue, the quality of the broadcasts, not the already well-documented dark proclivities of the station's inscrutible progenitor. These petty backroom machinations cause the average listener to more likel feel pity than pique for Mr. Kling.

LAMBERT: Rodney, I vow to henceforth draw scurrilous attention solely to Mr. Eichten, and avoid any suggestion that Mr. Kling's behavior is significant to the broadcast tenor of MPR. I'm certain you will hold me to this promise.

Hey, fine, my suggestion was made in earnest. Breezily dismiss it.

I'm sure you're just one blog entry away from a Saul on the road to Damascus moment for Kling. Maybe after all this esoteric calumny he'll take some of that filthy lucor and head over to the stem cell lab at the U of M and have 'em build him one of those pig hearts.

It's bound to work eventually. Forget critical assessment of the product. The real issue is Bill Kling being courtly toward his wealthy peers. That's what listeners look to MPR for, amity among the elite.

LAMBERT: I get the earnest part. And yes, obviously, I -- or anyone else -- could pillory MPR's hosts and editorial process for failing to hit achieve an ideal. I have an idea in my head of what that would be, and no it wouldn't involve re-runs of months old interviews with Walter Mondale, or inane weather chat. But the Kramer/Lynch -- Kling incident isn't just inside baseball among the elites. As I follow the bouncing ball it is indicative of a stranger attitude -- a psychosis? -- that should be enhancing the quality and quantity of good information in the Twin Cities, no restricting it. Frankly, I strongly urge everyone who "consumes" MPR much ... much ... more voraciously than I do to feel free to use this forum to air whatever complaints they may have. Please though, no obscenities while eviscerating Gary Eichten. And go easy on Kerri Miller. I like her show.

There's no reason why Bill Kling can't be a plutarchical jackass who has figuratively robbed MPR of at least $3 million in the Rivertown scam, AND MPR's content suck. They are in fact both true.

LAMBERT: Rob, you're too generous.