Every once in a while, I somehow find the Inside Olympia show on my KSPS TV Channel.
KSPS is the PBS (Public Broadcasting System) station based in Spokane, Washington. It is part of the TV cable package for residents in Alberta. I have donated to this organization.
Inside Olympia is a weekly broadcast about political issues in the state of Washington. Admittedly, I know very little about this state’s politics, so I cannot comment wisely on these matters. But I sure like the media format.
Host Austen Jenkins is a great interviewer. He is fair; he knows the questions that need to be asked; he knows how to frame them; and he is quick-on-his-feet to find new questions as interviews often go in directions no one anticipates. Things move fast in Austin’s interviews, and there is so much information being moved from program to KSPS viewers.
The interviews often have a Democrat legislator and a Republican legislator expressing their differing opinions on a particular piece of state legislation or direction the state should take. Austen lets one side talk for a bit, then the other. Often the “opponents” are quick to rebut something the other side said. Austen keeps the debate civil and respectful. As I am listening, I feel that both sides are making excellent points — and I can understand where they are coming from. And often, the two sides are quick to note on where they have agreement. With this kind of dialogue, I feel that better legislation will be forthcoming.
Similarly, the program might bring on two opposite sides of an issue, such as the forest industry and the environmental movement. Again, the two adversaries treat each other with respect. They listen well; the rebuttals are great. There are no ad hominin attacks when Austin is in charge. He makes them stay on the issues.
And often, Austen will give a lengthy interview with a senior civil servant about the challenges his/her department faces. Citizens can get a better understanding of how government really works with these interviews. Often civil servants know more about their department than the politicians overseeing them.
Austen is looking for facts and perspectives, not trying to score points.
All in all, Inside Olympia is a great way for citizens to get a better understanding of the issues. I believe that when all the points have been made and listened to in such a respectful forum, we are better able to find the better solutions that we so need. But trying to find that balance with Foxx vs. CNN & MSNBC is probably impossible.
But here’s the problem. Inside Olympia probably has a much smaller audience in Washington state than the other mainstream media outlets. How influential can this PBS program be?
A Canadian Example
We need more news programs like Inside Olympia. Even in Canada.
In terms of helping Canadians find a better balance, I would regard CBC, CTV, & Global as superior media outlets than Foxx, CNN, & MSNBC. But the Canadian outlets are still dependent on commercials paying the bills, which then means they have to craft the discussion to keep viewers watching. So the discussion is “dumbed down.” That is why Canadian broadcasters can’t reach the journalistic standards of Inside Olympia.
In my opinion, we Canadians got a good taste of great balanced journalism in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. International political forces were moving towards a more proactive approach to dealing with terrorism. Somehow, the major news networks gave Canadians an in-depth, serious discussion about possible Canadian involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe Canadians really wanted this discussion — and that was a cue to move more into a PBS style of journalism.
Advocates from both sides of the two possible invasions and occupations were given a fair hearing in the media. Journalists were asking great questions. Many viewers learned new things about these two countries. They understood the difficult decision that was required. Politicians were waiting for the public’s mood. In the end and in my opinion, Canadians made the right decision: we participated in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. With many Canadians watching and learning from these discussions, this forum helped create our better societal decision. I haven’t seen such a high-quality Canadian national discussion since then.
Back to Inside Olympia
To better prepare this article, I have just watched a recent episode of Inside Olympia. Austen was interviewing a senior civil servant in Washington’s prison system.
With Austen’s clever interviewing, I got some insights into the complexity of running prisons. Decision makers are often solving little problems every day. They have to balance prisoner social life, safety, reasonable food and facilities, accountability, and rehabilitation. And there are people with severe mental illnesses in prisons. And limited budgets. Sometimes mistakes are made. There is no ideology that can run a prison. Those of us looking for simple answers would have been disappointed. Those of us looking at attacking a senior civil servant would have been disappointed.
My knowledge of prisons was improved with this interview. There were new perspectives that could be applied to Alberta’s prisons. While I really don’t want such a job, my understanding, as a citizen, is better than before.
I then saw the magic of Inside Olympia even though this show is not as widely watched as the other news broadcasters.
This show forces the various political actors to explain themselves in a logical way. With these explanations, the decision makers are showing their thinking and acting to Washington citizens. There is no need for spin, blame, or alternative facts on Inside Olympia. These actors cannot get this political training when they are being interviewed on other networks. By being on this network that gets less fewer viewers than the major networks, the political actors are being shaped for the better.
And I would not be surprised that Inside Olympia has also brought opposing advocates and partisans toward working together more rather than butting heads.
And just one more noteworthy point: I haven’t seen any foolish people on Austen’s show. Maybe they are not invited. Maybe they don’t want to appear. I don’t know.
Tiered Democratic Governance (TDG)
My loyal readers know that I like to dovetail most of my articles into my alternative democracy, the TDG. I shall be brief here.
Forums like Inside Olympia will be shaping elected TDG representatives, TDG advisors, and senior government officials on how to do their jobs better. This does not mean the forum will force the decision makers to take one stand or another. Rather, it will force them to think more deeply before they decide and act.
For those citizens who find themselves disagreeing with a TDG decision, they will be more willing to “let go” of their position when they realize their position had a lot of attention before the decision was made.
And if a TDG decision seems not to turn out so well, I can hear Austen Jenkins asking, “Look the decision of three years ago doesn’t seem to be working. When are we going to fix this?” Austen would not try to cast his interviewee in a bad light. Just ask the question, let the interviewee talk, let the TDG process take care of itself. That is balanced journalism.
Media forums like Inside Olympia will be useful for the TDG.
Published on Medium 2022
Myth of Political Accountability
