Public Comment

A conversation with PBS CEO Paula Kerger.

When Paula Kerger was named president and chief executive officer of PBS in January 2006, she said she was looking forward to the opportunity to "realize the full promise of this medium" because public television's "greatest days lie ahead." More than half a century ago, the Ford Foundation invested in that promise and was instrumental in the development of public broadcasting. Over the decades, the foundation has continued to support the sector, most recently funding several significant efforts Kerger has championed: establishment of the PBS Foundation; the launch of PBS World, a digital public affairs network; and a major diversity initiative. A public broadcasting veteran, Kerger spent 13 years at the Educational Broadcasting Corporation and Thirteen/WNET in New York before joining PBS. She talked with Ford Reports about her key priorities.

How do you define public media?
Paula Kerger: I define public media as media that strives to serve people, not profit from them. That's exactly what we do at PBS, each and every day.

We live in a world where media are everywhere. Not only are there 500 channels on the television dial, but we have video monitors on our ATMs, at gas station pumps and airport baggage carousels—even in bathroom stalls. And in every case, these media are being used as advertising tools.

That isn't what we do in public television. We exist to use media as tools for teaching and learning, and we don't measure our success by the number of products we sell but by the number of minds we open and the number of lives we touch. It's why when you turn on your local PBS station, you see programming that you won't find anywhere else, whether it's an educational children's show, a documentary, an independent film or a performing arts special.

How has this definition of public media evolved since the creation of public broadcasting in the middle of the last century?

Today, PBS is more than public television. Our content is online and on iPods and cellphones. We're going where our viewers go. But no matter what method we use to deliver our programs and services, the word "public" will always come first in our name. That will always shape what we do.

What about content? There are so many channels providing all kinds of material, some of it similar to what people have been traditionally able to get from PBS.

Well, it's funny. A&E was created as an arts channel. Well, A&E's principal program now is [syndicated episodes of CBS's] "CSI." Bravo was created as the next iteration of a great arts channel. Their principal programs are a couple projects that I think are great. One is "Project Runway" and the other is "Top Chef," which are very creative. But it's a little different kind of art. I think what has happened with some of the cable channels is they're still driven by the marketplace. When you start out with a profit motive, it does take you down a slightly different path.

The other thing is access. When you think about channels like HBO, it's in a fraction of American households and so [the question is] should documentaries only be available to those that can afford premium cable television?

The other thing that makes us different and unique is that in most parts of the country it's the only local television left. I've traveled a lot in the last year in this job and I have looked at a lot of stations that are, in fact, the only local broadcaster left. And I think it has profound public service implications to not have someone that's on the ground, in a community, worrying about the issues of that community and reporting on them.

You went through some challenges with the Latino community over Ken Burns' "The War" documentary and the lack of representation of Latino veterans. Can you talk about that?

[Ken Burns'] original construction of the film was to focus the story of World War II from the perspective of four towns. It wasn't a deliberate oversight, it's just that [no one featured] from those four towns happened to be Latino.

I met with the organizations because, again, we're public broadcasting. And Ken did the same. It was his decision to go back and to produce some additional content, because he realized that he had a great documentary and that he could enrich it further.

For me it has been an interesting process. The work that comes out is stronger. I think Ken certainly would be the first to admit that. Working with a filmmaker, it's really important for us in public broadcasting to listen to communities, but it's also important for us to maintain the integrity of the filmmaker. At the end of the day, this needed to be his decision. Our role at PBS was to stand beside him. And I think that he's made a wonderful decision.

From my perspective, the thing that has been important about this whole experience is that it has given me an opportunity to develop relationships with organizations that I think, moving forward, will only make public broadcasting stronger in terms of really representing the multiplicity of voices in this country.

How has the experience with "The War" affected your thinking about diversity at PBS?
Diversity is a really big issue for me moving forward. It's an issue for me at PBS and in public television across the country. We're looking at several different things.

We can focus on PBS as an organization to make it a more diverse organization. But that is not going to, I think, move public television fully in the direction that it needs to go. In order to do that, we need to also look at our public television stations around the country. The leadership of those public television stations, both in terms of the staff as well as the boards. We need to look at the producing organizations that we work with. We work with a lot of producing stations who in turn work with a lot of outside producers. How do we really begin to pull our commitment to diversity through the entire enterprise of public broadcasting? How do we really think about having public television diverse both in front of the camera and behind the camera? That's the way that I've thought about it.

You came from running a local station in New York. Now that you're at PBS, how has your local experience informed what you're doing now?

Profoundly. I think it's why I have had, in some respects, an easier time in this job than my two predecessors. I have a bit more credibility, in some respects, with the managers of the stations because they know that I've walked in their shoes. They know that I have worried about how to put a budget together, how to put a schedule together, how to go out into the community and raise money, how to build partnerships. My two predecessors both were very smart people, had really great experience and I think intellectually really understood the nature of public broadcasting. But I think for this moment in public broadcasting, to have someone who has actually been involved on the ground level gives me a different understanding of the enterprise. I have a different sense of where the opportunities are.

You had some success in New York with fundraising. Can you talk about the PBS Foundation and raising money for PBS? The money is the biggest challenge. When people ask me what is the thing that keeps me up at night, it's the money. We get 15 percent of our funding nationally from the federal government and then we have to raise the rest. I think, in some respects, it's made us more creative in really trying to figure out how we knit all of our money together and also how we implement the work that we do.

PBS up until two years ago did not have a foundation. Our stations raised money at the local level, but we never had a way of raising philanthropic money at the national level.

(Ford has provided two grants to the PBS Foundation for start-up and general support.)

How have the demographics of your audience evolved over the years?
We have a very large audience of under 5, and we have a very large audience that's over 50. We do mirror the [racial/ethnic] demographics of the country. I think there is a perception by some that we appeal to a certain type of audience, and that's not true. We get Neilsons like everybody else. We do a lot of demographic overlays and look very carefully at who we're serving because we are here to serve all Americans. But we're somehow missing the 5 to 50 group.

I'm convinced that we have a lot of programming that is of interest to a wider audience. For example, for the last three seasons "Frontline" has been available in streaming video form. A lot of younger people are accessing "Frontline," a lot of college kids.

How will you define success during your tenure in this position?
I want public broadcasting to make a [transition] into the new digital age and to be a vital part of the communities that we serve, and I want to ensure that our stations are there. At the end of the day, if we can cross over and think about our work, not just as traditional broadcasters and not just as sort of nice public television, but as really critical pieces of our community, as catalysts, facilitators, then I will feel that I've been successful.