Blog · Page 3 of 20

The Double-Edged Gift: Managing Volunteers in Tech-Based Community Media

Trusting Serendipity & Instinct in Nonprofit Leadership

Volunteers are the lifeblood of nonprofits, yet managing them represents one of the most complex challenges in nonprofit administration. This paradox becomes even more pronounced in tech-based community media centers, where the intersection of public access obligations, evolving technology, and diverse volunteer motivations creates a unique operational landscape.

The Volunteer Spectrum: From Obligation to Passion

What drives people to volunteer at a media center varies dramatically. Many arrive fulfilling graduation requirements or court-ordered community service—motivations rooted in external obligation rather than genuine interest. Others come seeking personal fulfillment or resume-building opportunities. The rare gems possess both the technical aptitude and genuine alignment with our mission.

This diversity in motivation creates immediate challenges. How do you effectively onboard someone who doesn’t want to be there but needs community service credit? Another who is passionate about media justice but can not separate opinion from facts? How do you maintain quality standards when volunteers range from those who can’t achieve basic independence to those who outpace their trainers? How do you navigate a disrespectful tone or the avalanche of text messages from someone desperate to make human connections? How do you suggest someone can help or leave because you are facing a mountain of deliverables?

The Onboarding Reality Check

Every volunteer requires onboarding, regardless of their motivation or skill level. This conversation must align their interests (however reluctant) with organizational goals and available opportunities. It’s a delicate negotiation that sets expectations on both sides.

The math is often sobering: many volunteers require more time investment than the value they initially provide. Some will never achieve the independence needed for meaningful contribution. Others will quickly surpass what we can teach them and move on. The co-commitment of time is real, and it’s not always a positive return on investment in the short term.

Community Producers: The Heart of the Mission

In community media, we consider community producers to be volunteers in the truest sense. We’re obligated to help them meet their communication needs, regardless of their technical starting point. Their skill levels span from complete novices to individuals with extensive technical prowess.

The U.S. Supreme Court has deferred to operational policy as essential in matters of access to tools and platforms. Our free speech obligations require us to accept and schedule content, but our support level is defined by reasonable community need as codified in policy.

Our solution: producers who cannot achieve autonomy receive up to two hours of skilled support per week to produce their shows. For those with significant skills, we’ve developed a barter system that has evolved into residency service agreements—volunteers commit to larger projects in exchange for enhanced access to resources.

The Blurred Lines of Employment

Even our part-time staff function as “high-value” volunteers. They’re not paid industry-standard wages but remain involved because they believe in what we do. This reality reflects the broader challenge facing community media: how do you sustain professional-level operations on nonprofit budgets?

When Systems Fail: The True Test of Community

This summer, several volunteers became involved in critical system recovery efforts. Some of our current challenges stem from equipment reaching end-of-life. Others were created by the failure of volunteer “experts” to deliver on promises. All require specialized skills, sustained effort, and leadership involvement.

These moments reveal the true nature of volunteer relationships in community media. Helping each other maintain resources for the greater good becomes very real when systems fail and the community depends on restoration.

The Reality of Nonprofit Leadership

During a recent three-week recovery process, a volunteer observed my daily routine and asked, “I have been trying to get a handle on what an Executive Director does. You’re alongside me, but you’re also handling people management, multiple calendars, outreach, and other mysteries. You’re here hours before I arrive each weekend. Is this what you volunteered for? How long ago now?”

Absolutely not.

It’s been 15 years since I started, and like many nonprofit administrators, I fill or back-fill numerous functions. In a more perfect world, our organization would still be riding the funding high of 2015 with stability and employees. But our primary funding source has spiraled downward faster than my efforts to diversify can compensate. As a tech-dependent organization, we’re constantly approaching the end-of-life cycle on the tools we offer the community at no cost.

Every process and procedure I codified in my initial years has become obsolete. Even policies fall short, requiring updates for ADA compliance, AI considerations, and investment guardrails.

The Intrinsic Link

Our existence and value remain intrinsically linked to those we serve and who join in service to the community. This creates both vulnerability and strength. Volunteers who arrive to satisfy external requirements present challenges, but they also represent potential. Some discover genuine passion through obligation. Others contribute just enough to meet their requirements while remaining disconnected from the mission.

The art lies in mitigation and cultivation—recognizing which volunteers might transform from reluctant participants into committed community members, and managing the impact of those who remain disengaged while ensuring they still receive value from their experience.

Trusting the Process

Managing volunteers in tech-based community media requires trusting both serendipity and instinct. The volunteer who arrives with court-ordered hours might become your most dedicated technical support. The eager newcomer might struggle with basic concepts despite enthusiasm. The expert volunteer might overpromise and underdeliver at critical moments.

Success lies not in predicting these outcomes but in building systems flexible enough to accommodate them all while maintaining the organization’s core mission: serving the community’s communication needs through accessible media tools and training.

The double-edged gift of volunteers—their unpredictability paired with their essential contributions—reflects the broader challenge of community media itself: maintaining professional standards and reliable service while operating on volunteer passion and nonprofit resources. It’s messy, complicated, and absolutely essential work.

The Pivotal Penny: Era of the Penny Press

To truly understand the significance of Moses Yale Beach, one must grasp the transformative era in which he operated. As publisher and editor of the penny paper The Sun from 1838 to 1848, Beach navigated and capitalized on a period of unprecedented American growth. The U.S. economy was experiencing rapid expansion driven by three revolutionary forces: the transportation revolution connecting distant markets through canals, railroads, and telegraph lines; the early industrialization transforming the Northeast into a manufacturing powerhouse; and surging agricultural productivity as settlers pushed westward with new farming technologies.

Yet this explosive growth came at a cost. The era was marked by stark economic inequality, volatile boom-and-bust cycles that could devastate fortunes overnight, and an increasingly troubling dependence on slave labor to fuel the cotton economy that supplied Northern textile mills. Into this dynamic and often turbulent landscape stepped Beach, who would prove remarkably adept at harnessing these powerful economic currents to build a media empire.

Key Economic Drivers

The Transportation Revolution saw canals, steamboats and expanding railroads dramatically lower the cost of moving goods, connecting the agricultural West to eastern and international markets. The telegraph improved communications for businesses and railroads, revolutionizing the speed of information flow.

The Industrial Revolution was spreading rapidly, with urban industries, especially textiles, flourishing in the Northeast. The concept of interchangeable parts pioneered by Eli Whitney formed the basis of the “American System” of manufacturing, increasing efficiency and production capacity.

Agricultural Innovation was fueled by westward expansion and new opportunities, particularly in the Midwest, where wheat became increasingly significant. John Deere’s steel plow and Cyrus McCormick’s mechanical reaper helped transform agriculture in the prairies, dramatically increasing productivity.

Beach’s Business Empire

Beach acquired ownership of the New York Sun newspaper from publisher Ben Day, for whom he had been working, through a gradual partnership that culminated in 1838. He strategically leveraged every advantage offered by industrialization, expansionism, and advances in transportation and communications. As a newspaper publisher, he proved to be an exceptionally shrewd businessman and became one of the most successful newspaper publishers of his era.

By the Sun’s tenth year under Beach’s leadership, the newspaper employed 8 editors and reporters, 20 compositors, 16 pressmen, 12 folders and counters, and 100 carriers—a substantial operation for the period.

The New York Sun achieved a daily circulation of 38,000 for the penny newspaper and another 12,000 subscribers for the Weekly Sun, totaling 50,000 readers. This made it one of the largest circulation newspapers in the world, competing with major London publications for readership dominance.

During the era of the penny press, when newspapers sold for just one cent to reach working-class readers, Beach built a publishing empire. The financial landscape was complex, as large transactions were conducted through banks using bank notes, but counterfeiting posed serious challenges to this system. The instability of private bank currency remained problematic until the United States Treasury issued standardized currency during the Civil War.

Beach maximized emerging technologies and transportation networks to gain competitive advantages. He utilized the Adams Express service between New York and Boston, employed Samuel Morse’s telegraph system for rapid news transmission between Baltimore and Washington, and coordinated boat service from New York to Providence with rail connections to Boston. This integrated approach allowed the New York Sun to deliver news faster than competitors, a crucial advantage in the newspaper business at the price point of a penny.

Value of a Penny Over Time: America’s Evolving Monetary System (1838-1868)

The period from 1838 to 1868 represents a fascinating chapter in American monetary history, when the nation’s currency system was fundamentally different from what we know today. During these three decades, America operated on a coin-based economy where the penny—then called the “large cent”—played a central role in daily commerce, and even the smallest denominations carried substantial purchasing power.

The Purchasing Power of a Penny

During the 1838-1868 period, a single penny represented substantial purchasing power that would be difficult to comprehend today. The large cent, made entirely of copper until 1857, was the foundation of daily commerce and meaningful economic transactions.

When the penny press emerged in the 1830s, offering daily papers for just one cent, this represented a revolutionary breakthrough in information accessibility. To understand the significance, consider the earnings of working Americans during this era. A typical laborer in the 1840s-1850s earned between $1.00 and $1.50 per day for common work—meaning a daily penny paper consumed roughly 0.7% to 1% of a worker’s daily wage.

This would be equivalent to a modern American worker earning $150-200 per day paying $1.50-2.00 for a daily newspaper—making information genuinely accessible to the working class for the first time in American history. The “Penny Paper” revolution democratized news precisely because a penny still held meaningful value relative to earnings.

Before the penny press, newspapers typically cost six cents—representing 4-6% of a daily wage, effectively pricing out working-class readers. The reduction to one cent opened an entirely new market and fundamentally changed American media consumption.

The Half-Cent and Small Purchases

Even more remarkable was the half-cent, America’s smallest denomination ever minted. Produced from 1793 to 1857, the half-cent represented genuine purchasing power throughout the period. A half-cent could purchase small items like a piece of candy, a single apple, or contribute toward basic necessities. In terms of purchasing power, a half-cent from this era held the equivalent buying power of 15-20 cents in today’s currency.

The existence of the half-cent demonstrates how every fraction of a cent mattered in daily commerce. Merchants needed precise change for transactions, and customers expected exact pricing. This precision in monetary exchange reflected an economy where small amounts of money could still purchase meaningful goods or services.

What a Penny Could Buy: Daily Commodities and Services

Understanding the true value of a penny during 1838-1868 becomes clearer when examining what it could actually purchase. A single large cent represented significant buying power for everyday necessities and small luxuries:

Food and Beverages:

A piece of penny candy or a small sweet
A single apple or pear from a street vendor
A glass of beer at many establishments
A portion of crackers or biscuits
A cup of coffee at some establishments
A small portion of molasses or sugar

Reading Materials and Information:

A daily penny newspaper (the most famous penny purchase)
A cheap pamphlet or broadside
A single sheet of popular music

Small Services and Items:

A shoe shine
A small bar of soap
A single candle
Basic sewing notions like thread or a few buttons
A short omnibus or streetcar ride in some cities

Multiple Penny Purchases:

Two pennies could buy a loaf of bread in many areas
Three pennies for postage to send a letter anywhere in the country
Five pennies might purchase a pound of sugar or flour
Ten pennies could buy a substantial meal at a working-class establishment

The penny’s purchasing power extended beyond individual items to represent meaningful fractions of larger purchases. When eggs cost 8-12 cents per dozen and butter sold for 15-20 cents per pound, a single penny represented a significant portion of these staple foods. This made precise change essential for both merchants and customers in daily transactions.

The concept of “penny candy” originated during this era when a single cent could genuinely purchase a small confection. Unlike modern “penny candy” that costs far more than a penny, the 1850s penny candy represented true affordability for children and working-class families seeking small treats.

The Three-Cent Pieces and Postal Communication

The monetary system became more complex with the introduction of three-cent pieces in 1851, directly tied to the importance of letter writing in 19th-century communication. When postal rates decreased from five cents to three cents in 1851, Congress created the three-cent silver piece to facilitate mail transactions.

This connection between currency and postal rates illustrates how central letter writing was to American life during 1838-1868. With no telephones, telegraphs limited to urgent business, and travel difficult, letters were the primary means of maintaining relationships and conducting business across distances. The three-cent coin made postal communication more affordable and accessible.

For context, sending a letter for three cents represented about 2% of a daily wage for most workers—making regular correspondence feasible for middle and working-class Americans. This was revolutionary for personal communication, business transactions, and the spread of information across the growing nation.

The economic turmoil of the Civil War changed everything. Precious metal coins, including silver three-cent pieces, disappeared from circulation as citizens hoarded them during uncertain times. This created such severe shortages that Congress issued paper currency in denominations as small as three cents—an extraordinary measure that demonstrates how crucial small change was to daily commerce.

A Coin-Based Economy

Unlike today’s economy, where electronic transactions dominate and cash is increasingly rare, the 1838-1868 period operated almost entirely on physical currency. Every transaction required the actual exchange of metal coins, making the weight and size of currency a practical concern for merchants and consumers alike.

This coin-based system meant that the intrinsic value of the metal in each coin was closely tied to its face value. The large cent’s copper content, the silver in three-cent pieces, and the copper-nickel alloys all represented real material worth. Citizens understood that their money had tangible value beyond government decree.

Comparing Newspaper Costs Across Time

The evolution of newspaper pricing reveals dramatic changes in both currency value and media economics. During the 1838-1868 period, a penny newspaper represented exceptional value:

1840s-1850s: Daily penny paper = 0.7-1% of daily wage
1900s-1920s: Daily newspapers cost 2-3 cents = 0.5-1% of daily wage
1950s-1970s: Daily newspapers cost 5-15 cents = 0.1-0.3% of daily wage
1980s-2000s: Daily newspapers cost 25-75 cents = 0.1-0.2% of daily wage

The penny press era was actually when newspapers consumed the highest percentage of worker income, yet this was still affordable enough to create mass readership. The democratic impact was profound: for the first time in American history, daily news became accessible to working-class citizens.

Before the internet disrupted print media entirely, newspapers had become increasingly affordable relative to wages, yet paradoxically, readership began declining in the late 20th century—not due to cost, but due to changing media consumption habits and the rise of television and eventually digital media.

The penny of 1850 had purchasing power equivalent to roughly 35-40 cents today. A worker spending one penny on a daily newspaper was making a more significant economic choice than a modern worker spending $2-3 on a newspaper, yet the 1850 decision was far more democratically significant in terms of access to information.

Lessons from History

The monetary system of 1838-1868 offers valuable insights into how currency functions in society. During this period, small denominations carried real purchasing power, coins were made from materials that reflected their value, and the physical nature of all transactions meant that currency design had to balance practicality with economic efficiency.

The era’s diverse range of small denominations—half-cents, cents, and three-cent pieces—reflected an economy where precise change mattered and where the government was willing to mint coins for specific commercial needs. When postal rates changed, new coins were created. When war disrupted the monetary system, alternatives were developed.

As we consider the future of American currency, the lessons from this pivotal period remind us that successful monetary systems must adapt to practical needs while maintaining public confidence. The penny papers of the 1830s could succeed precisely because a penny retained sufficient value to make their business model viable—a far cry from today’s economic reality where the penny has become more symbolic than functional.

The transformation from the substantial, copper large cent of 1838 to today’s costly-to-produce zinc penny illustrates how profoundly American monetary policy and economic conditions have evolved over the past two centuries.

Better Than The Encyclopedia

Our Dilemma: How to stop the propagation of the incorrect date and …

In 2023, our volunteers corrected Wikipedia. However, our inquiry to encyclopedia.com about the procedure to correct their publication has had no reply. In addition to several incorrect references to Moses Yale Beach’s birthdate being published throughout history, the wrong date appears on two historic markers about him in our community.

How can 1) the propagation of the incorrect date by well-intentioned students and scouts be stopped, and 2) the errors on our community markers be corrected? Sadly, the 2024 historic marker and database entry prepared by a Wallingford Troop 5 Eagle Scout and the 2015 plaque in Moses Yale Beach School bear the wrong date. Ironically, the 2024 Heritage Marker was installed at the gravesite in a ceremony with Center Street Cemetery and Wallingford Historical Society representatives’ involvement.

Search. Do you see what we see? The discrepancy was documented and visible before the installation of the 2024 marker. We recently shared the story of the date error as a lesson about primary sources in The Check Minus with Moses Yale Beach Elementary School students.

About Our Book

“The Check Minus” is a classic lesson in Journalism 101. That is, check your facts and sources, and then double-check them before your articles, books and blogs are published or posted! Use primary sources when possible.

The children’s book, derived from Two True Wallingford Stories, is one of the pieces of content created by WPAA-TV Community Media Center volunteers within the Wallingford project — Moses Yale Beach Revealed. One not-so-young reader was reminded of this basic rule of journalism as reinforced in a famous rejoinder in 1950s late-night TV, Sergeant Joe Friday of Dragnet: Just the facts, Ma’am. But this journalist’s story suggests that ‘facts’ from secondary, reliable sources can be incorrect.

The story centers around fictional AP journalist Youssef Fam, the young protagonist, who is researching Moses Y. Beach for an elementary school project (while attending Moses Y. Beach Elementary School, named after the Wallingford native, born on January 15, 1800). Most of his classmates researched Mr. Beach using the town’s library encyclopedias. By happenstance, Youssef used multiple sources and included a primary source.

Youssef was staying with relatives in an apartment near the Center Street Cemetery. From an apartment window, he saw objects that reminded him of mosques in his homeland, Morocco. He decided to walk among these obelisks in his neighborhood to feel less homesick. In the story, he returns to the cemetery at night accompanied by his two cousins. On a mission of redemption, they assist him as he etched with charcoal from the grandest obelisk onto a large piece of brown butcher paper from his uncle’s shop, the gravesite inscription. What Youssef captured was “Born in Wallingford January 15, 1800 — Died July 19, 1868”.

When his elementary school teacher handed back the students’ biography assignments, there was a big red CHECK MINUS at the top. Youssef felt disheartened and discouraged looking at the big circle around the date of Moses Y. Beach’s birth. Youssef tried to explain to his teacher that he hadn’t made a mistake. She told him all the other students researching Moses Y. Beach found the correct birthdate – January 7 – in the local library’s encyclopedias. “Why didn’t you go to the library?” she asked him.

“I did!” Youssef replied. “But … I already had the dates. “How could that be?” the teacher asked. “I found a better source,” he answered. “Better than the encyclopedia?” she asked. And therein lies the twist in the story, which continues to this day.

In the nonfiction section of “The Check Minus” book, readers will find several nuggets of information about Moses Yale Beach: a brief biographical sketch and a timeline of key dates in his life. There is also a glossary and an explanation as to why this story could not take place today, when even elementary school students have access to smartphones. And most importantly, it tells the story of the printing and reprinting of an incorrect birthdate in encyclopedias, including the few that are still in publication today.

Notes: WPAA-TV is an #America250CT Affiliate committed to sharing ‘evolutionary’ stories and Doing History in the public Interest. This blog includes some content contributions by intern Scott Hayes. The notes below are from students participating in The Check Minus Story time. The book was read by Moses Yale Beach School para-professional and WPAA-TV Board Member Ben Negron.

Connection Made the Difference #GreatGIVE06492 2025

Earlier this month during The Great Give, five-hundred eighty people made 800 ‘Be The Seed’ gifts to seventeen (17) #greatgive06492 nonprofits raising $100,000. The Great Give is an annual community giving day hosted by the Community Foundation For Greater New Haven. The annual opportunity returns May 6-7, 2026!

The seeds you helped us plant will blossom for many to reap… The Sisters’ Project

The GreatGive raised 4.4 million for 574 nonprofits. Twenty-four (24) of the nonprofits have a Wallingford footprint. Seventeen (17) were part #greatGive06492. #greatGive06492 has involved 20 nonprofits since 2022, starting with 12 in 2022.

What is the difference between The Great Give and #greatGIVE06492

The short answer is #greatGIVE06492 happens within ‘The GreatGive’. It is a collaborative effort among local nonprofits with a Wallingford footprint. On behalf of people connected to their mission, these nonprofits formally agree to work together for this annual fundraising event. Each commit to asking for gifts as little as $5. WPAA-TV commits to supporting all nonprofits with video story production for the event and their mission.

Why as little as $5? – The Power of Connection

Sometimes Thank you feels inadequate. Often the bar to ‘giving back’ or ‘giving toward something” is too high. Sometimes you have already given and wonder if one more gift can make a difference. In the ‘Be The Seed’ campaign, a gratitude, or ‘I believe in you’ gift of $5 has the same ‘Be The Seed’ potential as all other gifts. This campaign puts being part of the solution in reach for nearly everyone. Matching is based on connections, not the amount given. Thirteen people gave $5 to all seventeen nonprofits. Three will be rewarded for this community commitment with swag that will show off their support all year long at Gratitude Event later in June.

Why do we call donating during The GreatGive: Be The Seed?

A gift received during the 36-hour window is a ‘seed’ to more revenue for participating nonprofits. There are connection-matching dollars, mission-centric matches, and random grant prizes. This year, The Wallingford Family YMCA and SCOW each received a random gift during TheGreatGive. The library’s gifts grew with a New Alliance Literacy match. WPAA-TV and the Wallingford Chorus received a boost for gifts received during ‘Raising the Curtain on The Arts’ Power Hour. This match was for Greater New Haven Arts Organizations receiving gifts in a designated hour. The Konopacke Fund added to the dollars raised by Friends of Wallingford Animal Shelter and Progreso Latino Fund amplified gifts to SCOW.

Be The Seed – A Greater Local Connection? THANK YOU

In response to the collaborative effort, the connection-matches of the Community Foundation For Greater New Haven have been amplified further with commitments of local sponsors. Annually since 2022, the James H Napier Foundation Trustees have approved a $5000 match to #greatgive06492. This gift has been the backbone of our success. Similarly, the foundation of the Wallingford Rotary provided $1000 each of the four years. The studioW advocacy Fund founder provided $11,000 in matching in the initial years. This year The Regan Foundation ($7,500) and The Elks ($1,000) gave to all based on connections. Locally $14,500 was raised in matches. The goal is $20,000. Our $5 connection goal is 10 x what we saw in this year’s campaign. 5,000 community-connections.

Why 17 nonprofits?

Changes in the make-up of local nonprofits and commitment to common values impact who is part of the ‘Be The Seed’ campaign. #greatgive06492 is a commitment beyond our individual missions. It is a belief that ‘Together We are stronger.” as our partner TriCircle’s branding suggests.

The Ulbrich Boys & Girls Club was among the original 12 collaborators. That organization, now part of Greater New Haven Boys and Girls Club, raised $103,000 from 339 community donors before the closing bell of TheGreatGive. As a larger organization with a broader strategy, the local fit was not easy to accommodate. As before, Wallingford friends supported them and the CFGNH amplified all gifts. Others in the original collaboration, like ARSC, had organizational changes as well.

In 2024, CT Stem Academy, Fostering Family Hope, TriCircle and WeCare participated locally for the first time and the Wallingford Chorus returned. A Kinder Ground and The Sisters’ Project were new in 2024. These nonprofits discovered the local initiative by way of collaborative promotion. Full-page Ads, contributed by the Record-Journal, now CT Hearst, as well as video promotion produced by WPAA-TV connected these nonprofits to the local effort.

Promotional stories help with the broader goal of community awareness and connection.

Nonprofit Stories? A Feature of Be The Seed

Sometimes the added boost of visibility can remind a lapse donor of the reason they gave. This was the case for Connecticut Foodshare the 1st year they joined the local effort. Promotion also heightens awareness of our missions. This is said to be the case this year for the Wallingford Family YMCA ‘Just Add Water’. This ongoing community campaign had an increase in visibility during TheGreatGive.

Nonprofits are constantly fundraising. What sets ‘Be The Seed’ apart is the storytelling. You get a closer insight into the work and the people committed to it. Every organization has a profile on The GreatGive giving portal. This profile is one place where you will find mission stories. In addition to TV and social media, videos produced by WPAA-TV are on the profile pages of Masters Manna Resource Center (Food Is Not an Option) and Connecticut Foodshare. Many of the video stories used in this year’s campaign can be found here.

Looking Forward Back | Outcomes

In 2022, $7,000 in local sponsor commitment helped raise $50,000 for 12 nonprofits. In the next two years about $100,000 was raised for a dozen slightly different nonprofits. This year, the amount raised was about the same but the number of people giving increased. Wallingford saw a higher community commitment than Greater New Haven as a whole.

Success was shared as “Our Best Year Yet!” by Wallingford Public Library. They use funds for The Wallingford Table. The Wallingford Chorus, not quite sure how to fit in, were delightful participants in the Be The Seed Launch event performance hosted by WPAA-TV. They described 2025 as “Beyond our expectations.”

WPAA-TV | More Than TV | (Behind the Scenes Sponsor), Recipient, Impact

Even though it is the only time WPAA-TV actively solicits donations, it is NOT a major revenue source. The built-in matches boost outcomes immensely. Active users at the time of the campaign, give $5. They are contributing to their own projects. The Board and staff donate, as do a dozen faithful supporters to bring up to four, free community performances to Wallingford including the Be The Seed launch each year. Food & drink is included. Community-minded performers (The Bargain Band) uplift what we do together. For refreshments, we buy local. This year’s supper included soup from ‘A Kinder Ground’, beverages from Soulstice Kombucha and Apple Strudel from Elizabeth’s Bakery.

Historically, funds WPAA-TV receives from people who also gave directly to SCOW helped to underwrite In2Languages. Unfortunately, WPAA-TV was in arrears with this content expense. It is the only content WPAA-TV pays for. The insignificant cross contribution activity jeapordes continuing this program started in 2013. At this time, it is scheduled to cease before next year’s campaign due to insufficient community financial support.

For years, we offered to help tell nonprofit stories. But, it was not until #greatgive06492 that it really began to happen. Assisting in the video production of non-profit stories is expected of community media organizations. How such stories come into being varies widely from community to community. This campaign features what is possible when community media is integrated into the fabric of a community. The level of free production support provided is over and above anything we have seen across the nation. Video production and campaign facilitation of #greatgive06492 is a 12-week, intense commitment to our mission by uplifting the mission of others.

Nonprofit representatives meet one last time next week to review outcomes, impacts and preparation for next year. The 2025 final Ad runs in the Record-Journal on June 7th. If you see it, take a look at what the local nonprofits do. Mark your 2026 calendar. May 6-7 THE GREAT GIVE portal opens again. Watch for campaign video stories like this one for Fostering Family Hope or Soups On beginning in March. Decide what you value with a gratitude gift as little as $5. Be The Seed.

Discovering Inclusive Values as studioW

From inception, community TV has existed to preserve ‘just, creative & individual’ expression and the freedoms that make it possible. When portrayed as an electronic-soap-box, public-access-TV reinforced singular ideas by individuals over the potential of a place-based hub for creative exchange and coalition building. ‘Bringing people together’ versus ‘allowing people in, to do their thing’ are very different dynamics.

Local culture hubs, third spaces, offer more than a platform. There are some essential dynamics for success as a hub such as community trust and flexibility. A gumby flexibility to pivot to meet immediate community needs is helpful. However, trust is vital. As a base for mutual aid, organizing, distributing information, building social connection, or advocating: hubs enable people to empower their communities of interest. Hubs remain open to people doing their thing, collectively.

In his 1989 book The Great Good Place, sociologist Oldenburg advocates that to live a balanced, happy life, people need engagement in three realms – at home, work, and in third places. Third places act as a core setting for informal public life, offering connection, community, and sociability (Oldenburg, 1989)…and transferable confidence.

Inclusive Events: Improv to multi-voice performance

Some of our best studioW moments have been with theater peeps. In 2011, the first studioW event explored the space as Black Box theatre sampling one-act plays, poetry, and music with fluidity and audience engagement. This eventually led to a formative residency with Connecticut Compass improv @2018-19 (Shawn Murray and crew) after a few engagements with more traditional albeit eccentric theater ensembles. Two off, off, off Broadway Fringe plays (Piece Theater) and an an occasional scene by Backyard Theater Ensemble (Their work is staged in the lovely Hole In The Wall Theater in New Britain) and Free At Last Theater. Storytelling was featured intermittently in homegrown efforts and visiting ensembles such as Ubuntu Storytellers. These occasions incorporated food & drink and engagement with the tellers. We are excited about the newest theatre company in Wallingford, Golden Fox Theatre Co, and its collaboration with Wallingford Grange for its community productions. (Our promotion collaboration.) And we look forward to more collaboration and audience engagement with The Puppet Village. More to come thanks to the New England Arts Foundation ‘Walking Together’ fund for folklife in communities of color.

Embracing studioW as our core purpose: Story > Conversation > CommUnity

Volunteers transformed what was once a cow barn into multipurpose media center; a place-based adaptive space for community meetings, theater, art exhibits, and special programs like film initiatives and media internships of various kinds. We bring creators together in response to the community’s needs for civic and digital literacy, and well-being. We are leaning into our mission: To provide a brave, safe, and creative space for a diversity of expression from within our community. #MoreThanTV We embrace our space and its tools for advocacy, understanding that Democracy Is A Creative Practice. We collaborate with other local nonprofits to help advance their missions. (#greatGIVE06492)

We may have started as a soapbox dedicated to TV made by, and for, the people. But as more people discovered what they did not know they needed, we discovered that at our core was the art of storytelling. A good story often leads to conversation. From there comes understanding and action to be the change we want to see.

I believe that our community media center with the tools & stage of studioW within, elevates the creative potential possible in a third space. Since inception, we have been #MoreThanTV. Story & conversation have been the heartbeat of our existence.

A Thing U Save

A few believed in the relevance of a platform for public speech when local government sought to eliminate the ‘public’ aspect of community media in Wallingford. In response, a handful of volunteers, me among them, evolved what creative empowerment could mean in our community. If a few continue to believe, we will be among the things “U save in a firestorm of tyranny”. Together, we will may make it to the other side of uncertain times. Susan~Adele

A Cultural and Evolving Process: Democracy as an organic, evolving culture that requires a commitment to cooperation, dialogue, and the recognition of diverse perspectives to flourish.

Active Citizenship: It requires more than just voting; it calls for citizens to actively contribute to shaping their society, much like an artist creates a work.

Weaving Culture into Civic Life: Involves integrating creativity into the fabric of policy and social infrastructure, recognizing the cultural underpinnings of various sectors like housing and education.

Leveraging Art and Culture: Artists, cultural workers, and community groups use creative methods, like storytelling, theater, and arts-based solutions, to foster civic engagement and community.

Building Community and Dialogue: Creative practices help bridge divides and foster a sense of togetherness by bringing people together to share stories, deliberate, and find common ground.

Fostering Innovation and Agency: It emphasizes imagination and the ability to conceive of alternatives to the present, giving citizens the power to drive change and create new futures for their communities.

Addressing Democratic Deficits: In a time of declining trust in institutions, arts and creative practices can help build agency, attract participation, and distribute power within communities.

All American Hot Dog Get Out The Vote

In a thriving democracy, community media’s existence would be joyful stories and transparency about incidentals in an imperfect union. Today, we need to be here for advocacy on a grand scale and the immediate needs of neighbors.

Four decades ago, at Yale’s International Day, a 25 year old homeless man, Samuel, hovered near the League of Woman Voters of New Haven ‘All American’ Hot Dog booth. The ‘$1 a dog’ fundraiser was in its fifth year. Several members were professors’ wives. Samuel asked many questions: Why do you think it is important to represent America at an international cultural event? Are your hot dogs made in America? Is voting at risk? Who are you trying to reach?

It was clear he had once done more than sleep in Sterling Library before his circumstances changed. As the day came to a close, some of the wives began calling out to people they knew, “Would you like a free hot dog?” A few accepted their offer before I scooped up the last three and officially met Samuel (not Sam).

His story would continue but on this first encounter he taught me the value of extending opportunities to those we are trying to reach. Sam gave me the quarter and nickel he had in his pocket and said “I believe in democracy. I am registered to vote. I am concerned about America in the world. My name is Samuel. Thanks for letting me contribute to (insert smirk) ‘the change you want to see in the world’

Contribute. Indeed he did. (Excerpt Community Media Maven)

For the last 10 weeks, as a WPAA-TV volunteer, I have gathered stories, recorded and designed promotions, and facilitated collaboration for #greatgive06492. All above and beyond managing the day-to-day of a 24 / 7 tech nonprofit providing free resources to whomever walks through the door, reimagining our existence post cable TV, and contributing substantive testimony in Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) dockets.

#greatgive06492 is the coming together of seventeen Wallingford-based 501 (c) 3 nonprofits in a fundraising collaboration. The goal is to raise $300,000 with a combination of 1) substantive support from friends, 2) grassroots support (as little as $5) from folks that have had needs met along the way, and 3) foundation sponsor matching. It is a local extension of #TheGreatGive hosted by the The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven.

Four years ago, I poised this question to nonprofit peers: We support each other in other ways, so why not come together when it is time to raise money and concurrently raise awareness? About a dozen agreed. This year will be a real test of connections to each other, friends & family and those we work to help.

Our ‘connection’ to those we exist to serve remains one-way. This is the first year we fully embraced ‘as little as $5’ in the campaign. The intention is to provide someone receiving free daycare, shopping at a food bank, unemployed, students, etc. an opportunity to express gratitude and hope by contributing to the solution at hand. It is also a way for friends of friends to comfortably give because the person that is committed asked.

Was Samuel right? Do the people we endeavor to engage with want to be part of the solution?

Be The Seed #GreatGive06492 2025

Members of the nonprofit collaborative #GreatGive06492 advised the Wallingford Town Council about the community-wide initiative that is being promoted in the Record Journal on April 26th and May 3rd.

Open Letter to PURA & OCC| The Annual Regulatory Process

Objection to Motion #1 Denial based on evidence presented within the Denial Document

An Objection was filed March 17, 2025 in Docket #25-01-06 Annual Support Review associated with per-subscriber fee funding for Community Media in CT. This filing was submitted by WPAA-TV Executive Director, the person most familiar with the details of Motion #1, on behalf of WPAA-TV. Motion #1 Filing asks sixteen procedural questions regarding alignment with CT Statutes that establish the post-franchise Community Media and the role of PURA. PURA Attorney denied the motion, requesting that they review the alignment of current practices with the statutes authorizing their role.

OCC & PURA

The Denial Document states that OCC is a separate agency from the Authority, and any questions regarding its role should be addressed to OCC.

Fact: This communication and the letter requesting a motion went to PURA and the OCC.

The 10-03-02 docket decision did not reference any input from OCC regarding the distribution of consumer fees outside of the community where cable TV is available. They were listed as an intervenor, but there was no evidence of participation in the 10-03-02 Docket. Consumers were not represented in the 10-03-02 Docket, a docket directly related to the fees they pay. Our opinion remains that PURA is responsible for ensuring that all stakeholders are represented in PURA docket outcomes.

Funding Vs. Regulations

Motion #1 was filed approximately 8 weeks before the DENIED response. It included several questions which align with requirements within General Statutes § 16-33 … In the denial document, PURA suggests the Annual Support Review is about funding. However, all Annual Support Review Dockets include orders about filing Annual Compliance Reports. Therefore, it remains our opinion that these dockets, inclusive of 25 01-06, are about the statutory compliance of all stakeholders. Subsequently, every question in Motion #1 is related to the Annual Support Review ‘process’.

Once again, the denial response ignores the intent of motion #1 to identify what can be improved or corrected within the current statute. Before 2005, franchising and transfer dockets provided communities with the potential to hold cable providers accountable via Advisory Councils and renewal Need Assessments. In the denial document, and on its website, PURA suggests its only responsibility is funding regulation: ‘PURA continues to regulate funding…” Then what is the purpose of compliance reporting?

There was a study of Community Media requested by the CT Legislature. It was handled as a Docket 22-06-26. As a stakeholder advocate on behalf of all community media stakeholders, WPAA-TV asked that Annual Compliance Reports be included as primary sources in the 22-06-26 study to provide data that could inform the Authority’s recommendations. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that these primary sources informed the study outcomes. Not one outcome referenced data in reports, and some contradicted the data. Guess what, the use of collected public data was denied by the Authority. This particular 22-06-26 study denial establishes the Authority’s lack of oversight related to compliance reporting. IMO, it also demonstrates a lack of understanding of the data and operations of community access facilities.

In Motion No. 7, Wallingford proposes seven modifications to the CAP interrogatories. The following are Wallingford’s proposed modifications with the Authority’s responses there to: 1. Expansion of the Authority’s October 6, 2022 Notice of Evidentiary Material (Notice) to include annual reports filed in Docket Nos. 18-01-32 and 22-10 02 for all entities and for-profit “Company Provider Reports” in Docket Nos. 19-02-15, 20-01-09 and 21-02-52. Id., p. 4.

The Authority declines to expand the Notice to include additional annual reports for administrative efficiency purposes and because not all community access providers (CAPS) consistently provide the information requested in the CAP Interrogatories in their respective annual reports. Additionally, in its responses to the CAP Interrogatories, a CAP may update the information provided in its most recent report as the CAP audits that information in preparing responses to the interrogatories.

This Denial Document provides insight into PURA’s lack of self-awareness

By example, in this denial, PURA infers a break with protocol to provide clarity in the section ‘Questions Regarding Website Topics. ’ It states, ‘… lists are maintained with regularity’. What does regularity mean? Certainly not annually. Today’s date is March 17, 2025, The website has a .pdf for Public Access Channels dated 10.18.2022, which is 29 months ago.

1. Among the questions that attempt to address PURA’s responsibility in maintaining the lists is: Does PURA update public lists with outcomes of the proceeding of transfer of responsibilities? There were transfers of responsibility dockets for Waterbury and Atlantic Broadband. PURA did not update the public lists with the outcomes. Websites, addresses, and telephone numbers in Annual Reports are not updated in the public lists. I tried several telephone numbers on the currently publicly posted list, including Cox. Many were out-of-service.

2. Does PURA provide public lists searchable by community (169 towns) to locate community media organizations? The simple answer is ‘no’. The inability of people to understand and find their community media resources is directly related to the current viability circumstances.

“There is also no easy way to search and find existing community TV channels and the affiliated cable
access providers and facilities.”

No. 22‐06‐26 | PURA
Q. 1 of 4 | WALLINGFORD PUBLIC ACCESS ASSOCIATION, INC | S Huizenga | 11.08.22

WPAA-TV is found by people all over CT. An intern created a by-town search tool because we receive several calls a year from people seeking internships, producer opportunities, and more. We validate the search outcome before making the referral to the person’s community. If they call back because they fail to receive a response or timely support, we help them. As a consequence, we have award-winning productions from people who live in North Branford, Hamden, Madison, and Berlin.

How Do Matters of Procedural Integrity Get Addressed?

This denial reply document states “While the Authority is not in the practice of addressing questions posed to it in this fashion, … It goes further to state: If there is something particular that WPAA-TV identified as a problem with any of these documents, WPAA-TV should bring that specific issue to the Authority’s attention. This part of the denial reply deserves an emoji.

How does the public, or stakeholders, bring to light concerns about transparency, accuracy, and accountability? Is there a tip line or process outside of dockets? What ‘specifically’ is the process to bring specific issues to the Authority’s attention? We have used petitions, motions, and detailed answers to questions in a study. We have testified at hearings. Concerns like the ‘definition of capital expenses’ which do not align with FCC’s definition have been raised in numerous PEGPETIA dockets. We write cover letters with the submission of Annual Reports with information about the state of our industry.

Every channel has the same number of hours for play, but every organization administers those hours differently. It takes the same amount of time to process content with a duration of 15 seconds as one of several hours. And post-production of short videos can far exceed the support used for gavel-to-gavel of a government, including virtual meetings. We have the potential to be more relevant with museums, water authorities and government departments and people turning to video to inform their neighbors. However, completing this report is a reminder of …how antiquated how we measure and represent our work.

WPAA-TV Annual Community TV Report DOCKET NO. 21-02-52

In conclusion, our relevance is our existence.

Every question in Motion #1 has one or more related concerns. Many represent the community at large. Most tie back to the crippling of community media in 2005 statutory changes which did not put a fair and accountable system in place.

The Authority has repeatedly denied a legitimate request to make our Comcast Branford CAP subscriber payments public. The challenges inherent in complying with that request suggest something is broken. Similarly, ensuring all community access providers receive CPI increases has been denied twice. The Motion #1 questions were submitted on behalf of all nonprofits providing community media and all people of CT. Taking them seriously has been denied.

PURA is a critical stakeholder in the existence of community media. PURA’s role extends beyond the summary in the denial document because all stakeholders submit compliance reports to PURA.

It appears all our avenues with PURA have been DENIED. Is it time for the courts, or court of public opinion? That will be on the agenda item for the next WPAA-TV Board Meeting.

Nonprofit Community Access Funding 2025

When there is so much to be concerned about, we go through the motions we knew to be appropriate before this precursor to a Golden Age. (satire)

March 12, 2025 HB5837 Testimony Submitted to Appropriations. There is no hearing scheduled on this matter. The Legislature has much on its plate.

Absent a Legislative Solution HB 5848, 5837 Community Media Bridge Funding

An active 7-day-a-week, 24/7 public digital media organization needs a minimum of 1.75 FTEs to provide services the community considers a ‘reasonable need’. Therefore, base staff costs with skill-level dependencies are $100,000 annually. This assumes a minimum of 12 hours of studio production time a week. This is bare bones; not competitive wages, benefits, training to stay current, or 9-5 hours. If a nonprofit station has less revenue, it cannot provide minimal services without relying on volunteers, grants, contracts, or municipal underwriting.

A decade ago, cable TV was in its stride. At that time our small town-specific community media station received $93,000 in cable revenue. Another approximately $22,000 went to neighboring towns (pass-through fees from Wallingford residents). Our anticipated cable fee revenue in 2025 is $58,000.

Even with all of Wallingford’s fees staying in Wallingford, revenue alone would not have been enough to thrive. To keep the doors open and invest incrementally in a permanent home, I have volunteered full-time since 2011. Wallingford is an outlier. It is also proof that a bare-bones investment can empower a community. I tell my community media story here.

Current State

With a new generation choosing not to subscribe, and cable TV subscription costs becoming prohibitive for many households, community media revenue is declining exponentially.

The current revenue model is restricted by statute. A 2022 PURA study confirmed any change in funding, or the provision of the public benefit, requires statutory change. A bill drafted by the Consumer Counsel with support from PURA failed in the last session. Heavily lobbied with a veto threat by former cable guy, the governor, leaves community media in limbo.

Backstory

Community TV was to be a public benefit. The benefit was local government, schools, and ordinary people would have access to resources for media creation and distribution. For the use of rights-of-way, cable companies were to cover the cost of this benefit. However, the 1960 lobbyists argued that the ‘new’ industry should only pay based on the number of hookups. This led to cable viewers paying for the benefit instead of the companies. Decades later, the now Fortune 100 and 500 companies use the same polls for several different business models BUT the only revenue used for public benefit is cable TV subscriptions.

Bridge to …

HB 5848, and 5837 were drafted for the 2025 session to allocate supplemental funding to keep nonprofit providers of community media afloat in locations where millions of dollars in capital investments have been made in the past decade.

How Much and for How Long

It is strongly recommended that this bridge allocation underwrites a need assessment* styled after the franchise renewal process of 1960-1995. Need assessments enabled communities to weigh in on the media needs of their communities and what should be provided in exchange for physical access to consumers and transfer capabilities. This would include the channel capacity question.

Cable TV companies have morphed into something ‘other than cable TV’. However, the results are the same: Content is viewed on screens. An infrastructure that has similar dependencies on rights of way.

At the moment, crafting the right balance for true accessibility within a stable funding framework is no one’s responsibility. We face an erosion of this public benefit at a time when ‘media’ is ubiquitous, in a constant state of transition, and unreliable. At a time when it is important to do more, we can barely do what we have been doing.

The question “How small or big (geography and population)?” is appropriate for community media. However, absent an assessment process, the current statutory legacy language mixed with a heavily lobbied push that community media is no longer relevant yields one thing: less community engagement, youth training opportunities, and an underutilized investment in technology across CT.

I encourage a simple approach to funding with the assumption that it will take at least 18 months to determine a ‘future state’. Provide all public access community media centers with the same baseline investment and see where that investment leads concurrently with a need analysis.

Thank you for considering how community media can provide resources in this time of uncertainty.

*A need assessment would include a comprehensive review of proprietary data. Enrollment in Basic Cable. Senior Discounts. Areas where the Internet is not robust. Geographic limitations in the infrastructure and the laws. Questions such as, ‘If an organization streams content on YouTube and Facebook is there value in supplying the content to a local channel especially if the ability to experience the content is delayed?’

For 20 years, WPAA-TV has scheduled local churches on the Same Day as the services. During Covid, we extended this service to more communities. They continue to share content with us. Why? Because a few members, assumed to be elderly, prefer watching TV over the internet or on their phones. Is this a reasonable community need? Can it be quantified? Are there more affordable alternatives for this diminishing population? Many other community TV stations are still not providing same-day content. Is this a reasonable need?

What is Next?

Our situation: End-of-Life for Cable TV

Our core function is ‘Make TV’ which is supporting the production of digital media content by, or for, the people for hyperlocal cable TV distribution. Providing this media agency to nonprofessionals is one component of P.E.G.: Public Access Community TV. Is it still a needed thing? For how long? What is Next?

Since 2005 media distribution options for content produced by people has expanded beyond community TV. In 2009, one of the most profitable YouTubers was homegrown at WPAA. The availability of social media platforms has helped, and hurt, the evolution of ‘equitable’ access to production & distribution resources for the people. Most users assume that social media platforms are free and free speech friendly. They certainly can be used that way but that’s not their purpose. Social media platforms are private company owned. They are not bound by the First Amendment. They can moderate, deny and inequitable influence content visability without violating users’ speech. Their primary focus is monetization. They will constantly encourage you to pay them to ‘promote’ your content.

For the most recent Supreme Court-level discussion on Public-Access as a Free Speech platform, check out this 2019 SCOTUSblog post.

How do you view Community Media?

For decades, regulatory restrictions limited the use of Cable TV public-access funding to content created for TV distribution. PURA affirmed in a Q&A (10.28.24) that PEGPETIA grant funds ‘… can be now be used to distribute programming on other platforms to increase viewer access to our ‘public benefit’ existence. It is conditional. The content must still be played on TV. There is an annual request and award process for capital funding. Awards are not guaranteed. Ideally, they are sufficient to cover bandwidth, website domain, and other public distribution expenses.

For nearly a decade, a local company, Discover Video, enabled WPAA-TV to provide on-demand internet access to our locally produced content. This tech donation kept us at the forefront of innovation. More importantly, it expanded access to a broader population. We are grateful for years of free support; however, underwriting has ceased. Now we provide this extended distribution as a customer. We submit the cost in PEGPETIA applications.

We do more than TV distribution. Our channel is simulcast in HD to the internet at wpaa.tv/watch 24/7. Videos with evergreen content are reformatted for Podcast and are available as As Told Here: WPAA-TV. Content produced by WPAA-TV is distributed on YouTube @WpaaTV. Short-form digital content is posted on social-media. Local producers use YouTube Channels to share their content. It belongs to them.

Our cable TV affiliation could disappear

Since 2012, our subscriber fee income has been in steady decline. It will continue to decline without statutory reform. It is intrinsically linked to cable TV subscriptions. Federal and State laws and regulations are anchored in archaic technical ‘cable TV’ language.

Wallingford (and the Branford Comcast franchise towns receiving a percentage of Wallingford subscriber fees) benefited from the AT&T and Frontier cable TV deployment because our town was their initial hub. In 2012, WPAA-TV received nearly $27,000 in revenue from this market competitor to Comcast. Our 2024 income from Frontier is projected to be $3000. The most recent quarterly payment for year-ending 2024 was under $1,000. Frontier no longer markets cable TV. They have partnered with AT&T to provide satellite using the last mile of fiber from the same poles. Instead of satellite dishes on the roof, people have a small converter box and remote control very much like cable TV subscribers. The result is fees are not paid for using the poles. Satellite TV does not include local content. There is no public benefit.

In summary, there are now several noncable users of the public rights-of-way who have no public benefit requirements for the use of ‘telephone’ poles along our streets. The landscape for providers and viewers is changing. Comcast is considering divesting to Verizon. Frontier has partnered with satellite. They are incentivizing cable TV customers to leave. There is significant and unpredictable change. Community TV is being cancelled by Fortune 500 companies have rebranded.

The Community TV Study Docket #22-06-23 affirmed

The current statutory framework, … is not designed for this new landscape… Under current statutes, cable companies must provide community access…
re-imagining the statutory framework for community access will require a balancing of interests.
there is no consensus among community providers who have different ‘In The Public Interest’ nonprofit models
there is consensus among the 10 cable providers in CT that there is no need for them to have this public benefit obligation.

At the opening of the 2025 CT legislative session, 555 Bills had been drafted. By the bill filing date a few friends of community TV drafted transitional funding Bills for community TV: House Bills 5833, 5837,5848 Rep. Mushinsky submitted HB5848

If not TV, what?

In the event that our TV affiliation becomes mute: Is it the intention of WPAA-TV to remain an art, humanities & culture organization? Would this include retaining an internet channel? If yes, should we embody the original intent of the public access television as a local democracy movement providing agency to individuals, civic groups, and non-profits at no or low cost?

This will be reviewed in the Board’s next strategic planning session.

ACTIONS To-date

Our mission statement is used in grants and public profiles including our website. In 2024, the mission statement was modified to be more ‘place-based’. Our mission image was colorized to represent inclusion. The image and brand tags are ‘TV’ and Wallingford-centric.

Mission: To provide a brave, safe, and creative space for a diversity of expression from within our community. Make TV |Watch TV|More Than TV – Join In. Discover what you did not know you needed.

(2024) Wallingford Public Access Association (WPAA), d/b/a WPAA-TV and Community Media Center facilitates the production of digital media by people and organizations and distributes the content as community access television. Our doors are open to all on a 1st come, 1st serve basis.

Goal: To empower the people of Wallingford and beyond to meet their communication needs, as they define them, by facilitating digital media creation and managing its public distribution. The use of WPAA-TV digital media tools and studioW stage can help inform, connect, and build community through the production of ideas, opinions, stories, news, information, or performance. Our tools & stage yield more than videos when U watch and share. Unity begins with U.

Community TV, an experiment in democracy, engages people in ‘Good Trouble’. This experiment has at its core, the idea that ‘We The People’ must sustain our democracy. What we do together is anchored in valuing free speech, individual expression, inclusion, and diversity.

WPAA-TV is an award-winning volunteer-run Art, Culture, and Humanities organization that focuses on #SocialActionArt: We use art to uplift, inform, or inspire. We believe performance speech is the richest kind of free speech.

Our core program is ‘Make TV’. However, WPAA is #MoreThanTV. It is a place-based adaptive space for community meetings, theater, art exhibits, and special programs like film initiatives and internships of various kinds. We also bring creators together in response to our community’s needs for civic & digital literacy and well-being. We collaborate with other local nonprofits to advance their missions.

WPAA supports, or produces, a limited number of ‘Mission Continues’ projects. These projects must have the potential for community impact for the underserved and/or youth.

Our 2024 Annual Report theme: ‘Democracy is a Creative Practice’.

Examining the Creative Practice

Story and conversation are the cornerstones of our nonprofit business. TV is merely a distribution platform. Story crafting, people gathering, and uplifting voices are the practice.

Fundamental to the practice of Making TV: Story

Before technology of any kind, there was story. Stories bring people together to entertain, learn, or take action. They play a crucial role in fostering connection, building shared identity, transmitting cultural knowledge, promoting empathy, and creating a sense of belonging. Storytelling leads to engagement by fostering opportunities for sharing experiences, perspectives, and values. Ultimately bonds are strengthening within a community. Stories can provide a common language for discussing complex issues and fostering open communication within a community.

Public Access content is predominantly comprised of recorded conversations, performances, and event coverage including spiritual services. All include some element of ‘story’.

Outside of the community TV sphere, several nonprofits are anchored in the Impact of Story. Change The Story Change The World sixdegrees.org StoryCorp Other nonprofits rely on powerful narratives to communicate their cause and inspire action. Recent misinformation research suggests the two biggest action-motivators are fear and inspiration. Some provide marketing support to nonprofits as a nonprofit MissionStory The StoryTelling Nonprofit or as business consultants. Some are shutting down. Socialbrite since 2011

For Strategic Consideration: Focus on the studio and legacy vs. TV

Is there value in rebranding away from our core function: TV? What building blocks are in place? Should we lean into the theme of our 2025 Annual Video Report: Democracy is a Creative Practice? Full Annual Report Video here.

Since 2010, studioW has referred to the area of our building used for TV production. The studioW graphic incorporated three words: Express + Show + Perform. One version appears over ‘We the People’. Our anchor show, CommUnity Conversation, produced since 2015, includes it in the animated opening. We provide full technical support for this theme-based, two-person conversation program.

Express + Show + Perform remains a viable tag; however, without the ‘We the People’ the connection to ‘democracy movement’ is lessened. Early advocates envisioned rigorous debate, exposure to distant cultures within our communities and stories as tools for change. Putting tools in the hands of the people could open doors, hearts and minds. Aspirational but possible.

The creative team’s proposal to the Board suggests leaning into our roots as a strategy for future sustainability. Building on what has come before, WPAA offers a physical space with video production technology tools that people do not have at home. In 2007, the initial strategic plan had the primary goal of ‘Seek New Home’ with the intention to purchase. By 2011, volunteers successfully purchased and completed an adapted renovation of an in-town structure. Being place-based has been an anchoring part of the vision. The studio is what makes our place unique.

The ‘W’ and the ‘play’ buttons are repurposed from the WPAA-TV logo. Orange is used in teentigerTV logo.

Green is suggested to align with sustainability. Green is the color of the new Endowment Fund page. An interactive version of the logo could have the 3^rd word spin through several words and land on community: advocacy, awareness, change, connect, educate, insight, justice, understand, community.

This brand design, its potential use and adoption are on the agenda for Feb. 5th.

Footnote: About the studio: No longer State-of-the-Art

Building on what has come before, WPAA offers a physical space with video production technology that people do not have at home. Our studio is very adequate for community TV; but much of our technology is no longer state-of-the-art. We are working on that.