For related articles and more information, please visit OCA’s Genetic Engineering page, Millions Against Monsanto page and our Washington News page.

Anyone can file a complaint with the WSAG’s office and the Grassroots Coalition urges you to do so. As one activist so aptly put it, “KTCS 9 has taken the ‘P’ out of PBS, leaving us with the BS.” We are quite used to that by now, we just didn’t expect it from this quarter.

Today the Washington State Grassroots Coalition for Yes on I-522 are calling on their members and supporters of the Washington state Initiative 522 (label GMOs in food) to cancel their subscriptions to the Public Broadcast Station KTCS 9 and to refuse to donate during their telethons. And tell them why.

As reported here last week, KCTS 9 in Seattle changed their programming schedule to air a one-sided Quest program on genetically engineered (GE) crops called, “Next Meal: Engineering Food,” on Wednesday,Oct. 30, 7:30 PM. This program was originally scheduled to air on Wednesday, November 13 at 7:30 PM. Instead

it was switched with the program, “Lake Tahoe: Can We Save It?”.

The programming change was made despite hundreds of calls and e-mails in protest from the Washington State Grassroots Coalition for Yes on I-522. Then, despite the article, “Et tu, PBS?” which clearly outlined why the program is biased propaganda, and despite hundreds more calls and e-mails, KTCS 9

aired it again on Monday, November 4 at 7:00 PM

on the eve of the election.

There were no other PBS stations airing the Quest program this week. Most significantly, KCTS 9 broadcasted this one-sided program on the purported safety of GMOs, while every other PBS station in America apparently broadcasted “Antiques Roadshow.” Public Broadcast Station listings for Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Denver, Chicago, Boston, New York, Miami and Atlanta did NOT air the Quest program when KCTS 9 did its broadcasts. Why only in Washington? And why the switch?

Executive Director of Programming, Randy Brinson insisted that it was his decision to change the programming and that it had nothing to do with the election, though he has since regretted his decision. If it was his decision, and his decision alone, which he came to regret, then why not change it in the face of public outrage and the appearance of impropriety?