WQEX-TV is gasping for air time
By Eric Heyl
Published: Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2001
If it means putting up with more pledge breaks, then it's hard to muster much enthusiasm for resuscitating Pittsburgh's poor little stepchild of public broadcasting.
Pittsburgh Educational Television last week mounted its latest offensive for the continued existence of WQEX-TV. The community group unveiled a business plan for operating Channel 16 should it successfully wrest control of its federal license from WQEX's parent, WQED-TV.
WQEX has operated more as a concept than a station since 1997, when WQED began simulcasting its own programming on the channel. WQED is attempting to get WQEX's license changed from educational to commercial, so its stepchild can be sold for $20 million to Texas broadcaster and Pittsburgh native Diane Sutter.
PET estimates reactivating WQEX would cost $2 million, with another $1.2 million needed to operate it during the first year. The organization thinks the $3.2 million could be raised through donations, a position I frankly find unrealistic.
But according to international standards first established at a Geneva summit in 1969, metro columnists must include tangible elements of objectivity or fairness at least once every seventh column.
Gosh darn it, I haven't done that in the past six columns. And since those standards recently were reaffirmed at a columnist conference in Malta, we will now hear from someone who believes a resurrected WQEX could be financially viable.
"Nobody said it would be easy, but it's not impossible. It's been done before in other cities," asserted Robert Bellamy, a Duquesne University communications professor.
He suggested the money to revive WQEX could come from a variety of sources, including the federal and state governments, private foundations and even independent filmmakers. But WQEX would be competing with WQED for much of this money.
And, of course, WQED would have the edge when it comes to pledge breaks - the annoying programming interruptions in which viewers who lack the ambition to change the channel are relentlessly bombarded with donation requests.
WQED can barter such souvenirs as Mr. Rogers slipper deodorizers or Sesame Street Elmo electrolysis kits for significant donations. Lacking these items from the PBS marquee players, WQEX pledge breaks likely would come up lacking.
("Learned people, without your financial support, we wouldn't be able to air this riveting documentary you've been watching on the language challenges facing migrant farm workers. Without your assistance, programs such as "Lingo de Gringos" would not find the audience they so richly deserve.
"That's why we're asking you to contribute, and that's why we're making it worth your while if you do. For a pledge of just $100, you'll receive this nifty Falun Gong coffee mug. Make it $200 and we'll include this special comic book commemorating the history of the California labor movement. You'll be the envy of your friends with this baby.")
With hundreds of viewing options in today's cable and satellite universe, it seems unwise to try to raise millions for a channel that couldn't offer much more than what is already available.
Except for more of those interminable pledge breaks.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.