WCHL Forum Today

I can't find any information online about WCHL's "2004 Chapel Hill-Carrboro Orange County Forum: A Sustainable Community." This is supposed to be some kind of Great Community Discussion, too bad they forgot to tell the community. Why isn't there any information about it in the local papers or even on WCHLs website? That's a real failure to be relevant, right there.

Here's the schedule:

8 am Growth - Town-Gown 2004, the Last Year, The Next Year and After
10 am Downtown - What to do about "The Gap" Gap
11am IFC Homeless Shelter Location - Homeless in Our Town?
12 noon Future of Downtown Carrboro
1 pm Violence and Crime - Has Crime Increased in Our Village?
2 pm Civil Rights - Is There Discrimination
3 pm Seniors - They Outnumber Our Kids!
4 pm Public Schools - Are Our Schools Good for Our Kids
5 pm What is a Sustainable Community (How Do We Build One?)

Update: the Today's Schedule page at WCHL was just updated while I was typing this. :(

Each hour will be re-broadcast at 7 pm on weekdays for the next six weeks.

Are you listening? What do you think?



I was checking up on Air America radio, and lo and behold, I saw that WCHL is now carrying Al Franken and the Majority Report. Praise the Lord! Is the weekly forum still on? I notice there are no posts on this topic in July?

John, they've been carrying Air America on WCHL since last April. See the discussion here: http://orangepolitics.org/media/the_real_liberal_media.html

The forums that were the topic of this thread are an annual event.

WCHL's Weekly Forum Replay Schedule

Tuesday, June 8th @10 am - Hour 7-Civil Rights: Is there discrimination in our town(race, sex or orientation)

Wednesday, June 9th @7 pm - Hour 8-Seniors: They outnumber our kids

Thursday, June 10th @7 pm - Hour 9- Public Schools: Are our schools good for our kids?

Friday, June 11th @ 7 pm - Hour 10- What is a sustainable community: How do we build one

Saturday, June 12th

Hour 7 @ Noon

Hour 8 @ 1 pm

Hour 9 @ 2 pm

Hour 10 @ 3 pm

Hours 1&2 @ 4-6 pm(Growth: Town-Gown 2004, The last year, next year and after)

Okay, we have another Chapel Hill-Carrboro-Orange County Forum Replay coming up...and this one's extremely interested. Interesting because of the subject matter, and interesting because orangepolitics.org's own Ruby Sinreich is one of the panelists.

Topic of discussion is "Civil Rights: Is There Discrimination In Our Town?" Other panelists include Fred Battle, Joal Hall Broun,

Allen McSurely, Don Holloway, and Steve England.

You can hear it Tuesday morning in the 10:00 hour on WCHL.

For more details, go to wchl1360.com Thank!

Another FORUM replay comes up tonight. WCHL presents Hour 6 of the FORUM, entitled, "Violence and Crime: Has Crime Increased in Our Village?" from 7 to 8 pm.

Panelists include Chapel Hill Police Chief Greg Jarvies, Carolyn Hutchison, the Police Chief in Carrboro + Carl Fox, Orange-Chatham District Attorney. Also featured are Deloris Bailey, a community activist and co-coordinator of Empowerment, Inc., and Christina Riordan, Executive Director of the Orange County Rape Crisis Center.

If you missed it the first time, why not listen tonight?

We had planned to have more FORUM replays on "Saturday, but the Tar Heel baseball team is playing in the opening round of the NCAA Tournament. Carolina plays Coastal ?Carolina at 2:00 today. If the Tar Heels win, they play at 3 tomorrow. If they lose, they'll play at 11. Stay tuned.

Don't forget...tonight we present another hour from our Chapel Hill-Carrboro-Orange County Forum, starting at 7:00.

Tonight's discussion focuses on THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN CARRBORO. You can always check out our daily schedule on WCHL on page 3 of The Chapel Hill Herald.

Hey, I'm with you on that one--I was jsut responding to another poster.


WCHL is presenting 3 more hours of our Chapel Hill-Carrboro-Orange County FORUM this week. Wednesday night from 7 to 8, it's "The IFC Homeless Shelter," Thursday from 7 to 8 pm, it's "The Future of Downown Carrboro," and on Friday night from 7 to 8, join us for a discussion on "Violence and Crime." The FORUM was originally aired live on May 19th, 2004. For more details, please go to our website at WCHL1360.com.

We are also working on getting all 10 hours of this show archived on our website, so that you can listen to each segment of the FORUM at your convenience. Thank you for listening, and, as always, please feel free to give us your feedback!

I would rather hear from OTHER parents who support differentiation--not parents of the gifted. How is this new system affecting average children and below average children? That is the real question.

As to finding a parent of gifted kids who SUPPORTS differentiation--I'd have participated--and could have suggested two other sets of parents of gifted kids who ALSO support differentiation. BUT--since I've been "off the board" and out in my garden for the past 3 months--missed the whole dang thing. Darn.

Melanie See

Terri: Tell it to Benjamin Franklin.

Everyone Else: Check out this cool link:


Activity 4: Meet My Alter-Ego

Like many of his contemporaries, Ben Franklin used pseudonyms for some of the letters and essays he published. Each of these noms de plum had a distinct personality and were written from a unique point of view. Students learn about Franklin’s pseudonyms, create pseudonyms for themselves, and write letters or essays from the point of view of their invented persona.

I have a Modest Proposal. Why not name the silly Carolina North, which seems backwards, Martin Luther King Campus of the University of North Carolina? That would honor King, address the historic problems of previous UNC adminstrators, and help the renaming of Airport to MLK Blvd make even more sense!

Tony, Chancellor, are you reading this?

Terri is exactly right about taking responsibility for one's opinions. Franklin wrote under pseudonymity because he didn't want his social and political commentary to affect his business or political relationships. He wanted it both ways, but I would argue that most of his pseudonymous writing would be considered unethical hoaxes by today's standard. Maybe a professional journalist/editor could comment on this further, and especially on the reasons for not accepting unsigned/anonymous letters.

Seems like a stretch to me to even suggest that what was at stake for Franklin and his fellow patriots is anywhere close to "discussing" town/county politics.

Luckily we're not all required to explain ourselves over and over as some who post here feel they must.

Franklin did write often in a humous vein using pseudonyms to aggrivate the rather uptight establishment of Boston (and later Philadelphia) when he was discussing town politics often in polemics or in satire -- especially famous (if you are an American historian, you may have read this) for complaining about potholes in one of his many (known) persona, Silence Dogood.


Well, Ben Franklin also faced the very real possibility of bloodthirsty police lodging steel-toed boots in his colon and tossing him in jail for what he wrote (thanks for pointing that out Howdy.) No offense to anyone posting on this site, most who write in are quite intelligent and isightful, but none of the posters here are such subversive firebrands that any scathing critiques they write will land them in jail, get them flogged, disemboweled, excommunicated, etc. (not quite as free a country then as it is now) Franklin also levied his criticism directly at the powermongers, Howdy, he didn't hide behind a fictional persona so he could engage in a public pissing match — a bloody boring one to boot — and constantly attack a private citizen like Fred Black. I don't know Fred Black, I don't always agree with his p.o.v. on some of the issues discussed here, but if I had a personal problem with him (Fred, I don't) I'd stand behind my name, or likely keep my animosity from becoming everyone else's beeswax. Howdy, I have yet to hear a compelling argument from anyone about why anonymity is necessary given the context of this site and its topics, but if what you have to say is actually substantive, then cool, let your imagination run wild in choosing a nom de plume. However, if your sole purpose is to belittle folks, do it face-to-face or, at the very least, sign your effin' name!! I'm assuming that you're an adult, so I would have thought that your 'nads dropped years ago.


Chief Thunderthud

Go check the salaries of AP teachers vs others. Check the registration/testing fees. Check the salaries of high school teachers against the salaries of preschool teachers. Look beyond the surface. Who said anything about ignoring the gifted education issue? All I said was that there are other important issues that need to be addressed as well. Jeez, you've turned everything around...again. I'm through with this discussion.

SkyWriter--at least Gloria signs her full name and takes responsibility for her opinions.


What's the long term economic tradeoff of providing such an extensive selection of AP courses in the high schools and not providing early education programs? ......... someone asks......

You would have to go to another school district to find out the answer to this question, as CHCCS does offer preschool programs.

And I would like for someone to explain the math in the comment about the cost of AP courses....... There is a certain number of high school students. They each need to sit in a classroom for each period of every day. Whether they are sitting in a regular classroom, or an AP classroom, in the end, the cost is the same.

And not only that, but we have been told repeatedly that all children are gifted. Therefore, we should all be talking about gifted education, constantly and incessantly, every time we talk about schools. To fail to talk about gifted education would be to ignore every child in this district.

I would like to take this opportunity to invite all of you to do commentaries on WCHL. Obviously, there is a large group of very involved, very well informed people here. And some of the comments I read on here are incredibly insightful. I would love to get some of those opinions on the radio.

Local people...local issues...90 seconds maximum..each one airs a total of 5 times on a particular weekday...and then they all air on the weekends. If you want more information, pease get in touch with me. I'm always looking for fresh voices and fresh opinions.

Don't forget: tonight from 7 to 9, we'll have the replay of hours one and two of last week's Forum. These 2 hours are being presented together, since they're so closely related. The disucssion will feature James Moeser, Cam Hill, Bill Strom, Roger Perry, and several others..talking about Town/Gown Relations..and then

Carolina North. Moeser said the Town is stiffarming...Cam admitted that many people don't trust UNC. If you missed it the first time, be listening tonight, from 7 to 9. Thanks!


I didn't read Gloria's comments as criticism or as demagoguery--merely as suggestions for the future. Her statement "There is a wide range of questions/issues facing schools and that range of parental views were not sufficiently covered" meant to me that we need to think and talk about something other than gifted education.

On another thread you asked why we don't provide earlier services to kids who are at risk. It was a good question and I'm sorry no one responded. The research supports programs like HeadStart and early literacy programs affiliated through the school systems. Why don't our schools offer early education programs? I don't know the answer for sure, but I imagine it's money. What's the long term economic tradeoff of providing such an extensive selection of AP courses in the high schools and not providing early education programs? Again, I don't know the answer, but my point is that there are strategic decisions made by our school districts every day--around issues other than gifted education. Unfortunately, many of those who are impacted by those issues are not vocal or political. And yet, if we want to have an informed, public discourse on "Are Our Schools Good for Our Kids" we need to find those voices and encourage them to speak up. I believe that was Gloria's suggestion and one that I wholeheartedly endorse.


WCHL could never have put together a panel that satisfied everyone. The biggest issue was that they tried to tackle too many education-related issues in one hour. Each could have had its own hour. For the discussion of differentiation/revised AG plan, the panel was a good mix.

Incidentally, anyone who believes that parent skeptics of the revised AG plan are a shrill and small pocket of racists and elitists would have been disabused of that idea after attending the Board of Education meeting last Thursday (5/20/04). The dozens of speakers who expressed reservations about this revised plan included:

-- African-American parents

-- Hispanic parents

-- South Asian parents

-- East Asian parents

-- Parents who DO NOT have academically advanced children

-- Parents who have academically advanced children AND grade level children

-- Parents not born in this country

-- Parents who grew up in the school lunch program

-- Parents who are not rich (they brought their kids because they could not afford babysitters)

-- And one very average hick who is stunned that he has children reading above grade level!!

I just hope that Gloria Faley was actually informed on all issues, when she was actually VOTING as an elected school board member . As she has proven, it is very difficult to form accurate and viable perceptions when you skip the step of actually learning something about the topic you are going to comment on-or vote on.

There were a couple of topics covered in the forum that could have been the subject of an all-day forum themselves. One of those was the hour on our public schools. We had hoped to touch on several topics relating to the schools, but we had very little time to get to even one topic following the opening statements, something we will alter in our next forum.

We invite people with differing views to be members of our panel. However, the one thing we cannot control is who is available at that particular time.


I don't have any problem with inclusion. I was just amused that Ms. Faley felt qualified to take down a show she didn't listen to. I don't think that helps the community discussion, especially when it comes from a community leader.

And let's say you're a radio programmer, and you're trying to find someone to present the "other" side of the AG issue, for instance -- where do you find them? The school system representatives have already been lined up to present arguments in favor of their own differentiation and AG policies, so inevitably you're going to have to go into the ranks of parents who have spoken against the AG decisions to find someone to talk about the "other" position. Otherwise, who's going to present it? Neil Pedersen? Gloria Faley?

The panel as a whole was more than balanced, but yes, the _parents_ on the panel were of a particular point of view regarding AG and differentiation issues, and there weren't other parents to counterbalance them. But there were plenty of other people to respond to their points, and as a listener I came away with a good understanding of the issues at hand.

If it makes people feel better, perhaps they could have added two _more_ parents to the panel, and everyone could have had even less time to talk. Or they could have eliminated parents altogether.

(Not that it matters, but I happen to be developing into a fan of differentiation, certainly in the early grades. I've gone back and forth on the issue, but I seem to be settling in on that side, with the proviso that teachers are given the time and training to work the system properly. So I'm not ideologically opposed to Ms. Faley's position on those issues, and I'm certainly not opposed to inclusiveness. I _am_ ideologically opposed to cant and demagoguery, though.)

WAY TO GO, DUNCAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think Gloria's suggestions were right on the mark. I did listen to the session and it focused exclusively on CHCCS issues, mostly the gifted debate. We need to start hearing from the parents who are willing to admit that their children are not "gifted" and what the impact of this community debate is having on those children. Duncan--weren't you the one who was shocked/dismayed to learn that local teenagers feel the need to de-stress with alcohol? Surely you can't object to a suggestion, that clearly stated it was based on (accurate) reports from others, to be more inclusive!

Gloria Faley wrote:

"I would like to make the suggestion that the next time that you have a forum about schools that you reach out to wider community of parents."

(Trans: I have no earthly idea whom you _did_ reach out to, but I'm assuming that your search wasn't wide enough.)

"Sadly, I did not hear the WCHL program."

(Trans: But this will not stop me from commenting on it.)

"However, I have talked to many folks in the community. The general infomation that I have recieved was that the parents that you selected were aimed at a particular audience (the two CH parents were focused completely on the opposition of differentiation and AG program)."

(Trans: Sure, I'm ignoring the fact that the two parents were outnumbered almost 2-to-1 by school system representatives, including the gifted program specialist and the superintendent, and that those representatives did a pretty good job of explaining, defending, and presenting a good argument for the system's differentiation policies and it's AG decisions. I prefer unanimity in my debates.)

"There is a wide range of questions/issues facing schools and that range of parental views were not sufficiently covered by any means."

(Trans: Since I didn't listen to the show, I have no idea what you talked about, but because the "many folks in the community" who talked to me tell me so, I'm willing to say that whatever it was you talked about, it wasn't sufficient.)

"I do not know if you had or did not have a minority parent (either Latino or African American) on the panel."

(Trans: But I'm assuming you didn't.)

"This might be something that you consider next time."

(Trans: Or, it might have been something you considered this time, and in fact it might have been something you actually accomplished. But I have a hard time believing that.)

"I do not know if you had a member of the PTA Council or it you had a member of any SGC. This might be something that you consider next time."

(Trans: I do not know because I haven't gone to find out. But let's assume you didn't, and that you let unaffiliated parents I haven't met, whose names I don't know, talk on your program about the schools their children attend. Please don't let that happen again.)

"It seems to me... "

(Trans: Even though I didn't listen to the show...)

"...and apparently a number of other folks..."

(Trans: Just because I use the vague words "many" and "a number" doesn't mean that there haven't been huge numbers of people contacting me. And you can bet it's been a "wide range" of people, too!)

"... that you did not contact enough parents..."

(Trans: I have no idea who you contacted, or how many people you contacted, but never mind. Tally ho!)

"... to get both an educated and an progressive conversation about the variety of issues facing both students and the schools."

(Trans: Based on my unfamiliarity with whatever was discussed on your show, something I spent a lot of time and effort not listening to, I've concluded that the two parents you selected were not acceptable, that they were neither educated nor progressive, and that therefore your whole show was worthless. Have a nice day!)

I was glad that you had a hispanic parent on the WCHL forum (Belinda Zayas). This was very enriching, but the format did not allow us to hear much from her.

I would love to hear from a parent in favor of differentiation if WCHL can find one.

Re Hear it again's Question -

We don't yet know whether the forum hours will be archived on the website. We'll let you know once that decision is made.

Thanks for your interest!

I would like to make the suggestion that the next time that you have a forum about schools that you reach out to wider community of parents. Sadly, I did not hear the WCHL program. However, I have talked to many folks in the community. The general infomation that I have recieved was that the parents that you selected were aimed at a particular audience (the two CH parents were focused completely on the opposition of differentiation and AG program).

There is a wide range of questions/issues facing schools and that range of parental views were not sufficiently covered by any means. I do not know if you had or did not have a minority parent (either Latino or African American) on the panel. This might be something that you consider next time.

I do not know if you had a member of the PTA Council or it you had a member of any SGC. This might be something that you consider next time.

It seems to me (and apparently a number of other folks) that you did not contact enough parents to get both an educated and an progressive conversation about the variety of issues facing both students and the schools.


Will the programs be available to listen to on line (the way you've archived your commentators)?

We hope to have all the FORUM hours posted on our website by the end of next week. That would be Friday, June 4th. That is actually an outside date..we hope to have them on there a few days before that. Also, FYI, we are in the process of making our WCHL website more current, and less generic....so that you can get specific topical information. It's just going to take a little time to work on that. Thanks for asking.

As I mentioned earlier, WCHL is planning to rebroadcast all the panel discussions that took place at our Chapel Hill-Carrboro-Orange County Forum on Wednesday, May 19th. We'll do them one-by-one, generally in the 7:00 hour at night.

We are the flagship station for Carolina Baseball, however, and with the ACC Tournament coming up, followed by NCAA play, we have to be somewhat flexible in the planning for these playbacks, because we're not exactly sure when the Tar Heels will be playing. So please bear with us.

I CAN tell you that we will air the first two hours of the Forum this Wednesday night, May 26th, from 7 to 9. The first hour was a discussion on Town/Gown Relations, in general, and the second hour was a closely related discussion of the Carolina North proposal. This hour's exchange was rather heated in some spots, with UNC Chancellor James Moeser, and UNC Board of Trustees member, Roger Perry discussing plans for the project with Chapel Hill Mayor Kevin Foy, and Town Council members Bill Strom and Cam Hill. In this hour, the Chancellor accused the Town of "stiffarming" UNC. One of the Town of Chapel Hill reps said he didn't trust the University in these negotiations. You get the idea. So we decided to air these two talks back-to-back, because they're closely related.

Again, that's in the 7:00 hour and the 8:00 hour this Wednesday night, so if you're interested, please listen. I'm not really sure about our other replays yet, but will let you know as soon as decisions are made. Thanks!

Thanks, Christy.

Please don't take my comments as criticism--it was a very well-run event. I only suggested using e-mail as a mechanism to help get around the vagaries of full voicemail boxes, stacked messages,

and all that. Sorry if James and I were hard to pin down.



We're not exactly sure when all thse rebroadcasts will occur..and here's why. We plan to air the Forum, one-by-one, during the 7pm hour on weeknights. Howeer, we also carry Carolina Baseball games, and the Tar Heels have the ACC Tournament coming up + the NCAA Tournament after that. And we don't know about their schedule yet. That's the only reason for the uncertainty.

I will post the information here, including specifics about which discussions are airing which nights, just as soon as the schedule is finalized. Thanks for listening.

Thanks for all the suggestions! I will definitely put these promotion ideas in place next year. Keep in mind that next year's FORUM will most likely be in April. So start sending me any ideas you have in late Feb or early March!

I do hear what you all are saying about the introductory statements and the lengths of each Forum. It WILL be discussed in the planning for next year.

Also, anytime there is something going on in our community that you are not hearing about on WCHL, please call us.

Thanks again to you all for participating and/or giving us such great feedback.

I like arbol's idea of doing this kind of thing more often.....why wait until next april? Obviously, people really liked this thing

I constantly log on to this website, but I have to be careful about expressing opinions on subjects which we report on the news at WCHL. Since Ron and Christy are not 'officially' in the news department, they have more leeway. Nonetheless, I like to read what people are discussing here and think it's great that so many elected officials partake in these discussions.

The one thing I can do is express my thanks to those of you who participated in yesterday's forum and to those of you who listened. I particularly enjoyed the play-by-play of the first 2 hours. Some of the discussions held yesterday could have gone on a lot longer, although I'm not sure where they would have led!

Ruby, I enjoyed meeting you and hope to talk with you more at a later time.

Thank you again for your interest

why just once a year? I would like to see a mini forum once a month.

Christy asked "What else can we do without spending any $$ so we can pull the event off under budget?"

How about a press release or electronic announcement sent to local media and e-mail lists? It would have made it very easy for me to tell people about the forum, and it probably would have gotten forwarded around a lot by e-mail as well.

There was a great benefit which listeners may not be aware of, just bringing people together likely resulted in a lot of off-air meaningful dialogue and conversations in the corridors of WCHL.

Could you publicize through flyers at sites like the library and some local businesses which allow items to be posted. If you sent information to e-mail lists you might get some volunteers to distribute them.

Thanks to WCHL for hosting an excellent forum and being receptive to suggestions on how to improve the next one.

Thanks so much to WCHL for doing the forum yesterday.

As a participant I found it invigorating, though our session

on downtown was frankly a little dull by contrast to the

two-hour town-gown discussion that preceeded it.

I make two suggestions for next year. First make the opening

statements shorter. Our instructions were to prepare

a 2:30 statement, and I don't think anyone ran long. However

our last panelist finished his opening statement at 10:35 and the session ended at 10:55, so moderator D.G. Martin was right on when he said that we were just getting started when the time

ran out. Second, do fewer but longer sessions, perhaps two-hour

or 90 minutes so that there can be more interaction.

Thanks Jim,Ron,Eleanor,Christy, et al for the community


Ron (and Christy and Jim and everyone at WCHL), great job on the forum. I think it would have been better promoted if you had brokered a print media tie-in under which one of the local papers would have written a preview article. Display ads in the local papers do not come across in the on-line version (and sadly that is the only way I read the Herald). And as some have pointed out, you could have gotten yourself some free press through OP.org, too.

Regardless, I enjoyed participating in the Downtown Carrboro session.

In the age of media consolidation, WCHL stands out as the most powerful argument for diversified media ownership. Clear Channel will never do what WCHL did Wednesday, no matter how many radio stations they own. Our community supported non-profit radio stations are pathetic on local coverage by comparison - and not just on theone day a year that WCHL does this forum.

Keep up the good work WCHL.

-Mark Chilton

PS Have you noticed how many threads there are on OP.org about WCHL? A lot. Even if the comments are critical sometimes, it is high praise for WCHL to be the focus of so much attention. I think part of the reason that the commentary on WCHL is so extensive on this site is because many WCHL personalities post to this site. We seldom hear from the Herald staff and I think we pretty much never hear from anyone at the News.

Ponder this: would it not be reasonable to infer from the level of discussion on this site and elsewhere, that 'CHL's forum was a roaring success, if the primary purpose is to stimulate discussion and debate? I, for one found the discussion in the panel I participated in--the 'wrap-up'--dealing with the general application of principles of sustainability, to be lively and robust, yet civil.

I don't think that the organizational issues folks have raised are the result of any systemic or deliberate flaws, but should be taken as organizational critiques that could help the organizers in future events.--In that vein, two small suggestions: 1) have a single point of contact for participants, and 2),communicate via e-mail.(The phone-go-round to figure out where one was supposed to be and when, was dizzying--in my case at least).

Notwithstanding all that, What a great event--Congrats to Jim, Christy, Eleanor, Ron and all the folks involved. Hiccups and all, It's a shining example of what local media is all about.



Thanks to all of you for your comments. We will definitely keep all these things in mind for the next time. And there WILL be a next time. As Bartles and James used to say, "thank you again for your support."

I must echo Ron Stutts thanks to you all.

We try to make this Forum better and better each year. This event is primarily a news function, but because we do not currently have a News Director, I took charge of the Forum and asked Eleanor and Ron for help in pulling in the panelist by calling to confirm appearances. Alex, this is probably where you contact confusion came from. However, I was confused as well with my phone messages to you and James Harris not being returned. I sure am glad you made it though! You were a great assest to the panel.

Since the Forum is a yearly event, I would ask all of you to do what Mark Marcoplos did --- come see me. Tell me what topics you think are important and who you think should be talking about them. If you want to be on a panel as Mark did, let me know.

As for the publicity surrounding the event, here is the full list of what we did... any suggestions are welcome. Jim Heavner first posted information about the FORUM on this website when we were still talking about Air America. We started talking about the event on air last week. We ran a 1/4 page ad in the CHH on Sunday. We started running promos and live bits about the FORUM every hour on Monday. We ran a full page ad in the CHH on Tuesday. What else can we do without spending any $$ so we can pull the event off under budget?

Thank you all for your comments on the Forum today! I appreciate the compliments but also appreciate the criticisms.

To those of you who wanted more time for "back and forth"

you're right. Too much time spent on opening statements, and not enough remaining for meaningful dialogue. While the opening statements were sometimes really good, the part I enjoyed most was the "roundtable discussion."

Hey, the thing about Moses Carey and Margaret Brown/merger issue. You're absolutely correct. That was not intentional. We had calls out to so many people to participate in this all-day event that it just shook out that way. Our mistake...and thanks for pointing it out.

The Carolina North discussion with Chancellor Moeser, and Town reps Strom, Hill, and Foy was interesting, to say the least. And our hour on Seniors was especially rewarding. I'm hopeful some good will come out of that discussion.

Did anyone hear Ruby? I'm glad you made it, Ruby...you were terrific and we've gotta get you on the radio again! Your comments during the discussion on discrimination in our town were right on the money and it wouldn't have been the same without you.

You're right..we didn't do a great job getting this on the website and some other places. We did, however, run a full page ad in yesterday's Chapel Hill Herald, advertising the Forum (tried to get today, but couldn't) and we promoted it a lot on WCHL. The one thing that we all have to keep in mind, though, is that promoting it on WCHL only gets the people who are already listening! So point well taken.

Duncan, I didn't take your early comments as criticism...I was actually referring to Ruby's comments, but she and I have talked about it since then...and we're cool.

Finally, for the folks who wanted to know when these discussions would be rebroadcast....we're going to air them, one by one, during the 7:00 hour at night. As I write this, though, I'm not sure what night we're starting it...can't remember what we decided. I will find out tomorrow, and post that information. Thanks for listening...

Seems like after the long, interesting discussion about WCHL on this forum that they would have 'advertised' here.

The last forum on what sustainability is (not sure of the title--they've changed their website already!) was very good. Much more discourse. Interesting discussion on the relationship between affordable housing and local wages.

I second 'arbol's' feedback. Plus there were way too many panelists for the education discussion.

I saw Jim Heavner at the station today and he took exception to my claim that WCHL "forgot to tell the community" about the forum. He says they had a full-page ad in the Herald and some other similar promotion. That's nice, but I don't read print media. Sorry.

I looked at all the local papers' websites and scoured Google, and I found not a peep about this event. WCHL's own website didn't even have any mention of the forum until today's schedule was published this morning.

WCHL prides itself on openness to a wide variety of views. And I know they are really dedicated to amplifying a wide variety of community voices. But being open is easy when folks who might disagree don't even know you exist. As long as they act like old media, I don't think WCHL will reach many new audiences.

But anyway, kudos to everyone at WCHL on the forum! It would be great to get a schedule of when each topic will be re-broadcast so we can all catch the ones we had to miss.



Community Guidelines

By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.


Content license

By contributing to OrangePolitics, you agree to license your contributions under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.

Creative Commons License

Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by WeebPal.