From: larry@netcom.com (Larry Cordner)
Subject: KTEH -vs- KQED Please Help Out
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 03:02:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: ba


Dear Red Dwarf Fans:

I received this sad note in the mail today from my most favorite *PUBLIC*
television station.  It saddens me to think that those sleazy smeg heads
at KQED would stoop so low.  Please if your a fan of the KTEH crew and their
dedication to the science fiction fans in the area, don't hesitate to write
in and help KTEH out.

Message begins... 
***************************************************************************

Dear KTEH Supporter,

There has been a good deal of press coverage lately of an important
programming situation involving KTEH, KQED and the American Program Service.
We have received so many questions and requests for clarification about this
situation that we felt we should inform our members and viewers of the facts
involved.

KQED, the public station licensed to serve San Francisco, has initiated an 
action which could significantly affect KTEH's ability to serve the people 
of San Jose, the Silicon Valley and Monterey Peninsula.

The American Program Service (APS) is an important source of programs for
KTEH, supplying as much as 20% of our primetime schedule.  These series
include "Red Dwarf", "Sandbaggers", "To Serve Them All My Days", "Star Cops",
and many more.

Recently, KQED asked APS to rule KQED the "primary" station in our shared 
TV market for the purposes of buying programs.  APS has accepted this request
(although KTEH is appealing that decision). KQED's "primary" status not
only allows them first pick of all APS programs,. but also gives them the
ability to buy those programs *exclusively*.  Such exclusivity could deny
KTEH the ability to share these programs with you and thousands of other
viewers.

KQED says that its "primary" status will have insignificant impact upon
KTEH, since there are few KTEH purchases KQED would want.  In fact, the
potential will exist for KQED to block KTEH from every APS purchase.  And
if the result is insignificant, then why is KQED taking this action?

KQED has stated publicly that it would never interfere with KTEH's access
to programs "currently on its schedule."  The very fact that they have so
carefully distinguished between programs *currently* in the schedule, versus 
APS offers *yet to be made* demonstrates their true intent.  Is KQED willing
to say that they simply will not block KTEH from obtaining any APS program?

KQED says they should be the primary station because they pay 4 times as
much as KTEH for APS shows.  While this is true, the formula for who pays
what is based upon the Federal grant to stations, and KQED receives a
Federal grant *4 times as big* as the grant KTEH receives.

If you feel, as we do, that public television should be about the best
service to the people of the community, and not about one station seeking an
"advantage" over another, please let KQED know, in writing, how you feel
about the situation, and ASK THEM TO WITHDRAW THEIR ACTION WITH APS. 

Write to:

	Ms. Charlene C. Harvey
	Chair, KQED Board Of Trustees
	c/o The Management Center
	944 Market Street, Suite 700
	San Francisco, CA  94102

If you would like to do more, please consider writing the Editor of your
local newspaper.  PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR LETTER TO KTEH SO THAT WE MAY
USE IT IN OUR DIRECT APPEAL TO APS.

Thank you in advance, for your concern and your support.


Richard C. DiNapoli
Chair, Board Of Trustees
KTEH Channel 54

***************************************************************************
Messages ends...


Sincerly,

larry cordner
larry@netcom.com
Newsgroups: alt.tv.red-dwarf