WASHINGTON WEEK ON PBS SHOULD DROP BOEING AND MINING ASSOCIATION AS SPONSORS

What should a public affairs/"news" program do about reporting on companies that sponsor its telecast? That's the problem facing Washington Week with Gwen Ifill which is underwritten by Boeing Corporation and National Mining Association. If one of Washington Week's panelists wants to report on some misdeeds of Boeing or of the NMA, will Gwen Ifill or her producers at PBS allow it?

Or to say it another way. It is improper for Washington Week to take sponsorship money from companies like Boeing or organizations like NMA because there is an inherent conflict of interest.

Boeing makes weapons of war and is one of the big suppliers to the Defense Department of airplanes and other armaments. It has made millions of dollars from selling these things to the U.S. government in the War in Iraq. I would suspect that Washington Week would be sensitive and reluctant about having one of its guest reporters report on war-profiteering or maybe even on the anti-war movement.

The same goes for the NMA. Where are the stories about the Crandall Canyon Mine disaster in Utah or on other hazards of modern mining in the U.S. and in other parts of the world, such as Ukraine or Mexico, sites of recent coal mining fatal accidents?

Even if Washington Week claims it devotes sufficient air time towards these stories, the doubt will still remain among reasonable viewers that there is a conflict of interest biased against full disclosure and discussion.

Washington Week needs to re-think allowing certain companies and organizations, such as Boeing and the NMA, from sponsoring its telecasts. Otherwise the suspicion and appearance of improper influence will linger on every broadcast.