 Hello, everyone. I'm Michael Abadi. I'm the chairman of the board here at Orca Media and we just had a board meeting and learned that the Supreme Court of the United States is taking up a public access television court case. It's actually the first case that the newly constituted Supreme Court with Kavanaugh chose to to hear and it's a fascinating case and by great fortune, Dee Dee Halleck happens to be in Vermont. She has ties to this state. She's in New York City most of the time, but she is an Academy Award nominee. She started two different media collaboratives, helped democracy now move from radio to television and and thank you so much for being here, Dee Dee. Well, I love Vermont and I've spent a lot of time here and I've always admired the way that, for example, Chittenden County TV in Burlington has been run. Lauren Glendividian is an old friend and she was actually on the board of DeepDish when we were starting and the idea of DeepDish was to connect up all the different public accesses around the country and share programming and and we always have had programming from Vermont on DeepDish. That's been something I've noticed that our public access channels tend to be little islands and creating those connections so that there's sort of a shared culture is you saw that need years ago and built something to address it, huh? Well, also to what we would do is we would take shows about specific subjects, so example and to show that the issues that a lot of the excess producers were addressing weren't just local issues. For example, housing, there was one of our program first series we did was on housing and how there were homeless in Los Angeles but also homeless in Chicago and Philly and different people had made tapes about them. So we used both access tapes and independent producer tapes, little segments, but it was a way of kind of reconstituting and kind of clarifying what could be a local issue to see that it's a national problem. Right, so you could structure around themes and then draw connections throughout the country. That is a really good analysis of what public access needs and then applying a solution. So thank you for that. There was also a kind of exchange of techniques too because Paper Tiger had started before DeepDish and founded DeepDish actually and we were trying to use public access as a kind of artistic medium like television, like how can we utilize the fact that it's live, that there are like all these creative people who were involved and how can we change the whole culture of television? So a lot of our programs were very kind of experimental in terms of the art and in the art world sort of noticed that and we had exhibits in the Whitney Museum and the Wexner Center and various places around around the country and the world actually people picked them up. We were there was a Paper Tiger exhibit in Rotterdam and in France and so we were doing really cutting-edge television. So yeah, and you could work around the corporate gatekeepers because you had access to what was even more expensive and not so ubiquitous technology. Yeah, actually it was interesting because there was that was a time when editing was very when we first started to actually own an editing machine. You couldn't edit on computer at all. So it was all analog editing which need to do it well. You needed to have which is one reason that I think public access was utilized as a space where people could come to get access to equipment. Right, and speaking of editing, I just pulled you away from editing with Jerome, who's one of our excellent producers here locally, and what are you working on and maybe a little bit about your relationship with Brett and Puppet also? Well, I've made it the first film I made with Brett and Puppet is called Meadows Green and that was done in 1974 and actually that Museum of Modern Art just bought it actually and they restored it. And so we have it was done in 16 millimeter, but I'll make sure that Orca gets a really high It was such a different. Yeah, for sure. It was actually they were right up the road here They were in Plainfield at the time at Cape Farm. Yeah, and now they're up in Glover So I've had a long relationship with them and this summer my husband died in April who was Joel Covell was one of the founders of the eco-socialist movement and he they we decided to memorialize him at the theater because he loved the theater and and so we had a seminar to kind of Sauce around a lot of his ideas and friends of his came and so Jerome Did this a marvelous job of filming the whole thing which I didn't really expect and They hadn't he it was just amazing. So we have both because I was saving it also So we have the two cameras and and we're we're doing a little edit blending right now Yeah, yeah, I don't I don't know how he does it because red and public shows are such a live theater experience He somehow captures it on video. Yeah, that's not easy to do. I was real I think it's his long theater Experience because he worked with the living theater for many years to know where the shot But also the drama and attention and right and the way he zooms out in just the right moment It's like he anticipates That moment when you they're going to open their arms and he he has an instinct that is very unusual And I think he's it I don't I was really pleasantly surprised because I've seen I know a lot of people come with their iPhones to tape bread and puppet, but not in the professional way that yeah, I'm guilty about myself And I was like boy that did not capture the experience at all So we will actually Be able to that will actually be broadcast on on orca when it's when it's done and it's getting close, huh? excellent We probably ought to shift to this These monumental times we live in and how you continue to interact with the I guess it's the cutting edge of media and law right now So you have been working in new york city with Their access center is known as manhattan Neighborhood network here from here out. We'll say mnn. I guess that's what the The briefs and all the legal documents say and then it's Halleck and you have a partner My friend is papuleto Jesus papuleto malindas Who's a Puerto Rican poet and he's also kind of the unofficial mayor of the barrio because He's one of the every year they have a three kings pageant And he's uh, he's always one of the kings and he's uh One year he wrote on the camel So they have a big parade because the latinos celebrate Christmas on the sixth fifth of fifth or sixth of july The three kings come that night Yeah, and uh, and that's when kids get their presence and uh So he they have a big parade every year and papuleto was part of it. So he he was working at uh at union settlement doing a class with Seniors and and teenagers a very interesting Kind of mix of those two ages actually it was That was actually funded by Manhattan neighborhood network in the past. There were these grants community media grants. So The current director When he came on he cut those grants off. So the original Problem started when All of a sudden papuleto didn't have a job because they cut the grants So a group of us also who were also grantees Uh, they there was M&N has a very big budget. They have they get nine million dollars a year From time morning, right? They get a sort of a quarterly check maybe at around five percent of the cable That's similar to us with Comcast But they it's also Verizon so He was able to negotiate a contract to get lots of money So part so we wanted that those those grants so he had cut them off while they were negotiating Those grant I mean part of our mission is to you know, educate the public into how to use and produce Um, you know use media equipment to produce narratives. So that that those grants were targeting That aspect of the of the mission is that he was working with the the elderly? The idea the reason they gave the grants to Nonprofit community groups was to get the money out of the center because the center there was only at that time There was only one Studio and that was on 59th street and a lot of neighborhood people they they don't go out of their Milia, right? And so the idea was if you gave money to the neighborhood sure Yeah, then and train people there then they could make programming that can be put on so There was a paper tiger got grants and deep dish got grants and the asian synovision got grants and So there's a way to disperse access in a large city so that you wouldn't have to come to 59th street that Right physical location. So we got so we went we tried We we had a friend who was on the board and we decided we would go to the board meeting because we read the Bylaws which at that point were posted on the web. They're no longer posted on the web But the bylaws said that the board meetings are public So we went to the board meeting then we were told we couldn't be part of it that that was that they have closed meetings so So you were hoping to make the case to reinstitute the grant program, right got you and So the next morning papuletto was told that he couldn't come to the studio anymore and that he was Because he went to the board meeting and so papuletto so we went to We decided well, they're opening the the the center. So we went Papa went to the center and a second studio Yeah, a new studio up in the barrio, which he was very excited about because it was in his neighborhood And so I went there and I filmed papo talking about that they wouldn't let him in and that He was it's a funny tape. It's on youtube. It's called the one percent visits the barrio because all the people who came were the architects and the Politicians but the local people weren't invited it was invitation. Yeah, so gala so we So but it's papo talking about it and I thought well, I'll put this on Manhattan neighborhood network and I put it on which they have to put on it's first come first serve and they put it on without Previewing it right, but that's getting into the the case exactly Nice preview. Yes, and then they said that because I had made the tape that and they they interpreted one of the sentences as being threatening and that That I was banned from doing anything from coming into the studio or putting any tapes on or anything And and so both physically banned from the space and your access to the channel producing showing your produced materials channel was also So I was like wait a minute. You can't do that. It's like I was one of the founders of m&m And I feel that I was not threatened papo wasn't first of all it was papo saying that it wasn't me saying it That's a whole other thing if if somebody records somebody saying if he was threatening, right? Even so I shouldn't have been banned for his responsibility. There is so words were coming out of your mouth, right? Yeah So anyway, I was banned and but I what hit me most was that papo was banned forever And this was in his neighborhood and he felt Really upset about it. So we decided that we would We and I had a friend who was the lawyer Robert Perry who had taken another Case to the supreme court the Denver area case Oh, that's like mid 90s. Yes, and it seems as though from The the writing now There's some unresolved issues from that case Exactly So let's let's catch people up a little bit You're coming off a win the second circuit covers the new york city area And they determined that You were in fact denied your first amendment, right? Yeah, we well first he went to the I guess the local court or whatever District maybe and we it was the actually it was interesting the judge Basically said that he couldn't decide So that we should go to the second circuit So we ended up in the second circuit and so That he said there were unresolved issues And so we went up into the second circuit and Judge Newman who's an older? Guy who was a carter appointee actually and he was very He he he watched the tape. He said in the The transcript says I watched that tape and I didn't see anything threatening about it, which Was interesting as I didn't either see anything threatening So and he said that but their defense had been that they could They could censor because they were a private entity a private nonprofit would assume right and that they Um And that that the public access is not a public forum that was in their brief right and And and judge Newman said no public access is a public forum that that's what it's set up to be And so we were really happy and we were thinking we would now go back to emin and we could negotiate and And pavo could have a show and all kinds of plans to do a poetry series and whatever And we were thinking everything was resolved and then we found out that they were appealing And the only appeal is there's nowhere to go but the supreme court So there's one piece we ought to clarify here is that The first amendment Says the government shall not You know make laws that um censor individuals And the public access stations say well, we're not the government And there's this whole Body of law about who is an agent of the state Who is who who sometimes falls into governmental functions basically And that seems to be the core the the core of what of how the supreme court took it I think that they they could have taken There were other issues involved, but that seems to be the core at this point But if you look at things like if a developer comes and a private developer and develops a Housing area The and puts in roads those roads have to adhere to local To the to the rules and have to be accessible to all right. So we were thinking that it was like a um kind of like a public park That um, you it may be government, but it's uh, it may be a private entity That actually develops it But the it seemed to me that the the whole reason of having public access Which is in exchange for the rights of way the actual digging up the streets or the telephone poles that cause Either problems for the city or Or take up space on the roads or whatever that that it's that's what the payback is that they give you a channel And there's the 5% But also the that from From the very beginning it has been tied to some Obligation that you provide a public forum and um, and actually the Manhattan neighborhood network Their their handbook and also their website says That their mission and it's in their bylaws Their mission is to to to assist the public to exercise their first amendment rights So Right that's what we were trying to do right. So it seems as though MNN's lawyers in petitioning the supreme court to see if they'd take it up was arguing that The second circuit Was so broad in its interpretation of what a public forum is That it could affect social media The it does facebook have a quasi governmental function and Um, I Trump's twitter account. Is that a public forum? Can he ban someone from you know following him? Yeah, there are all these issues. There's all these larger issues That MNN's lawyers are saying You know if you if you follow the second circuit, you're going to open up a whole can of worms In terms of community moderation on all kinds of forums and then The briefs on your side are saying actually this is a very narrow Situation new york law specifically has a a first come first serve Rule it's not about the content. It's just you know, whoever shows up. It's kind of an open field So I don't I don't know if you've sort of lately had to become a legal scholar And digest all these complicated issues, but I'm I'm I'm really fascinated by the the back and forth Well, it turns out what I don't think the lawyers saw that coming actually even MNN's lawyers saw What happened was there was another case where Trump tried to close off some people who had um Who had critiqued him on twitter after his his and there was it was a legal case and and they Cited our victory in the second circuit as a reason That they so all of a sudden it opened up this floodgate to say oh my gosh This case is affecting um, not just Public access but twitter facebook anything So it and we're saying wait a minute How is that case found that there were people that said trump can't Stop us from following him. That is still working. It's way up to the case. I mean, we're That's one thing. I have that's been a rude arrekening to me Just howl slow the law is because our case started in 2011 right so that's seven years that we've been Dealing well, that was when we first tried to go to the board meeting and it's been like a long time so that's that's a Great idea to timeline this out again You experienced the the victory second circuit in the early spring. Yeah, and then uh, the petitioners are mnn the appealers Put in Basically pitched the idea of the supreme court. Hey, we think there's significant first amendment issues here And they picked it up just last week or the you know the thing was in october of 28 We were so we were shocked that it was picked up because Only one case out of a thousand that get brought up to the supreme court is ever they have to see a really significant constitutional issue That is unresolved and our lawyer said oh, it'll never happen. But you know we and We didn't even put in any amicus briefs because we were hoping to we we were happy with the second circus decision and we didn't need to Why you know rock to boat lean on their decision is the logic kato institute Which is a right-wing think tank behind the citizens united case, right? Yes, and the kato institute Is the coke brother? So it's um, it's you know, it they're very they have very deep pockets and so And I just have this one lawyer who's worked very hard on this case and for pro pro bono I haven't paid him anything and It's um, it's it's we're up against these giants. So once again, it's david and goliath So the timeline going forward is they'll they'll hear it this year maybe in the winter Well, what we heard is that they have to have their amicus briefs in by um by by the by thanksgiving by november 26th Friends of either side. Yeah throw in their opinions, right? Okay, and our response to their positions Have to be we get 30 days after that. So that would be December so actually but then the case will probably won't probably be adjudicated until like june something like that, right? So um, they I think there's replies or something that may go in but Sure, but but we're hoping that we would get some amicus briefs from people who who have loved and Feel the value of public access, which is really enormous We important I feel it's it's wonderful being here at work. I must say there's a lot of activity because it's election time Yes, that's and that is so important because You know, I I turned on the the television in the motel and all I get is burlington news There's very little local news and thank god for orca giving these Have being able to attend the candidates forums and stuff for all the different candidates it's What what are we going to do without public access, right? It's crucial. Yeah And I guess I think there is some trepidation in the public access world that what is this particular supreme court has configured um, potentially going to do with This case so We'll see it must be pins and needles. It's basically an early summer. They usually roll out their opinions, right? Well, also, there's there's a lot of fear In the public access community because for example um, the FCC is also putting pressure on and There's a feeling a pie. Who's the yeah, I do pie has. Yeah, and he's not a friend of democratic communications. He's Very in the pocket of the corporation. He's a Verizon corporate lawyer previously our executive director Rob Chapman. Let us know that he is Directing his staff to look at counting The actual channel space that public access has as an in kind of a combination of the public access channel and so they can put a price tag on it And then the check the channel would get to actually run the Channel would go down to zero or below zero. So um, see there's a there's a law that says five percent Is the maximum that the cable companies can be required to some come some cities don't even get the five percent right, but but um, but the the thing is that The the FCC has a rulemaking now that says that it can be in kind and that could be anything that they Dream it For the five percent, which is really ridiculous. So, um, I know our viewers know the value of public access and We'll we'll just we'll just have to wait and see here as um So I didn't say it's strange because so many norms in the last couple of years have been up You know unhinged that you know what was formerly unthinkable is now like is that possible Could there be some ruling where? um And it probably wouldn't be A single big ruling and probably be a chip away. I would imagine yeah. Yeah, that's the danger. It's very People are areas. Yeah, people recognize the value of what you've done and what orca does It may be we'll see we'll see fingers crossed. Um, yeah, if it's they may We'll just have to We are getting we're going to get an amicus brief from the american civil liberties union And other organizations and now by adding We I I haven't yet talked to but there is a number of organizations that deal with the social media or the internet like epic and Okay Consumer federation. So there yeah, there could be a whole swath of issues that they they have to contend with It's amazing Now in a supreme court situation, you're not called to the stand. It's just Lawyers talking to the justices explaining how they see the constitution So that you're behind you're you're behind that all of that type of Visits to court are over for you now. It's just but we're hoping to be able to make to have some press about it I think yeah I appreciate you doing I mean our our audience is going to be up to speed when this I think it'll make some news in june But it'll probably hit people like what was that about? So now we actually have a nice grounding On the facts of the case and the constitutional issues. So Thanks so much for making the time. Well, thank you for covering. We're beyond time And uh, it's been a real joy talking with you and uh have fun with the rest of your stay in vermont and um And editing we're looking forward to seeing um the results of your visit. Okay. Um night everyone