March 3, 2002
To: Steve Starr, Josh Berman, Esther Manilla
Re: Irresponsible Programming, Irresponsible Premiums

Dear Steve, Josh and Esther:

Mike Ruppert's lack of credibility and embrace of paranoid conspiratorial theories is well known among journalists across the political spectrum. That KPFK chose to disregard Ruppert's lack of journalistic integrity in the final hours of fund drive deeply concerns us.

Ruppert was dismissed from the LAPD with a psychological discharge. For years, he has been peddling conspiracy theories about the CIA in south L.A., Jeb and George W. Bush and the drug trade, and now, apparently, the CIA's involvement in the World Trade Center attacks. Ruppert has been repudiated by everyone but the naïve, the unwitting, the psychotic and those willing to exploit him.

We were especially unnerved to learn that Dan Pavlish had been warned by Terrence McNally and Ian Masters (who is frequently contacted by Ruppert with his most recent tale of conspiracy) that Ruppert was not credible and had passed this information on to the general manager. Nonetheless, the show not only went on, but KPFK used Ruppert's video as a premium, an act which implies an endorsement of his point of view. That is certainly the spirit in which we pitch Cornel West, Ralph Nader, Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, Howard Zinn, Eric Schlosser, etc.

Are we to assume that such an implied endorsement of Ruppert is done in the name of KPFK's mission and "free speech?" The central question at KPFK is not about "free speech" but about what kind of speech KPFK will make room for. As difficult as they are to draw, lines need to be drawn. Sources need to be vetted. What is credible and/or important versus what is trivial or delusional needs, to the best of KPFK's ability, to be discerned. It is a tragedy that KPFK would jeopardize its overall credibility by lending credence to perspectives that are not credible. Offering premiums like Mike Ruppert's 9-11 videotape can destroy KPFK as a credible information source for important future news stories that are both controversial and credible. We can't have it both ways. Either we are a credible forum or we are an open mic for every delusional knucklehead who can talk his way onto the air.

We are deeply embarrassed by such irresponsible decision-making and fear for the long-term journalistic repercussions of such short-term and apparently expedient actions.

Barbara Osborn
Suzi Weissman
Terrence McNally
Jon Wiener
Marc Cooper

PS - FYI, we are attaching Nation magazine Washington DC reporter David Corn's most recent colum on 9-11 conspiracy theorists, including Michael Ruppert [not attached to this e-mail.]