Broadcasting (Oct 1931-Dec 1932)

Whys and Wherefores of Radio Legislation (Continued from page 9) these have been salutary. There is not likely to be modification of them at this time. It is by no means certain, however, that an amendment should not be adopted permitting a merger of communication facilities in international communication. This would involve modification of Section 17 of the present Act. PRIORITY PROBLEM OTHER phases of radio covered and not covered by the law have provoked wide discussion. None is more interesting than the question of priorities. I refer first to the question of whether a prior use of frequency gives a licensee a right, legal or equitable, in that frequency as against the Government, or to be more precise, as against the Commission's judgment that the assignment of that frequency to another would better serve the public interest. The incorporation in the law of this principle of a superior right springing from a prior use, was urged by a committee of the American Bar Association, while the legislation from which came the 1927 act was pending in the Congress. This recommendation of the Bar committee was not favorably received. On the contrary, it was rejected. The committee of Congress working upon the legislation, while recognizing that prior use of a frequency was a proper fact to be taken into consideration with others by the Commission in determining the allocation of a frequency, were insistent that it must not be the basis of a right to the continued use of the frequency. There has been on this question also, a tendency on the part of courts, to disregard the Congressional purpose and to give to the licensee a larger right or interest in the assigned frequency than Congress intended should flow from its allocation and use. This question of priorities is significant in other particulars. At the time the present law was in the making it was insistently urged that a preference or priority should be given to certain groups or classes of radio users. For a time the organized amateurs felt that a legislative preference or priority should be accorded them through an assignment to them in the law itself of specific frequencies. I am happy to say that the officers of the amateurs, after full discussion of the principle involved, abandoned the position previously taken and I venture to assert that all amateurs are today thankful that the frequencies then sought are not those to which amateurs are today restricted. Our Land Grant Colleges or persons in their name, also demanded that the legislation should assure them a preferential status. Other requests of this nature were pressed upon those engaged in drafting the legislation. None of them was yielded to. The law accorded equal rights to all but gave special privileges to none. There are today suggestions of this nature. It is urged in behalf of one group that a definite percentage of the broadcasting band should by law be made available to it for its purposes. Similar requests come from others. It is important that those interested in the radio industry should make known to all the technical difficulties involved in such action and the unsoundness of the principle. Congress should keep its hands off this broadcasting band or it should make a complete distribution of it. This radio house cannot stand against divided administrative authority and action. Candor compels me to add that the action of the Senate in the last session and a knowledge of the general sentiment of the then membership of the House convince me that should the present Congress be persuaded that discrimination has been practised against any group of our citizenship, or that there has been a disregard of the public interest in the granting or the withholding of a license in a particular case, it would not hesitate to act. Its action would be intended not as a repudiation of the principle here stated but as a necessary exception to it. SUBJECT MATTER PRIORITY ONE other phase of this question of priority merits passing comment. It is not beyond doubt that either the Congress or the Commission will sooner or later be faced with the task of establishing can be doubt as to the right to revoke or to refuse to renew a license, and I express the opinion that in neither case is there obligation to compensate. Certainly the law was drafted upon this assumption. The authority of Congress to regulate radio communication springs from the Commerce clause of the Constitution. Congress has asserted that no one may engage in interstate or foreign communication by radio unless licensed so to do by the Federal Radio Commission. It has said to the Radio Commission that it may license only those stations whose operation will serve a public interest. Manifestly the Commission is obligated to refuse a license and to deny renewal of a license if the operation of the station will not serve the public interest. Clearly too, the public interest is not met by continuing a station in operation if a greater public service would come from the use of the frequency in question by another person, elsewhere, or for another purpose. If this is not so, then your broadcasting structure has become rigid and new conditions may not be met. INDIVIDUAL MUST LOSE AND no individual has just cause for complaint if his individual interest suffers in the public behalf. He makes his expenditure of time, of effort and of money in the knowledge that his license is limited in time, that his rights thereunder are, at the most, qualified and conditional. His situation is closely akin to that of one who builds a bridge across a navigable stream. The duty of the Government is to so maintain this stream that commerce may move thereon free from obstruction and interruption. And if in the course of events this bridge, lawfully built though it was, becomes an obstruction to navigation then it must be removed, and compensation for such removal is not paid by the Government for the sound reason that the owner built the bridge subject to this right in the Government to re iaced with the task ot establishing # quire its rem0val. Just so, the 1927 priorities as to subject matter. The Act contemplated the exercise of the power of revocation or of de increasing demand for an enlarged use of radio for governmental agencies, for educational purposes, the constantly increasing discussion of political and public questions, the reports of public events and the other uses of a public nature, are all bringing conflict of interest and confusion of desire. It may be of interest to you to know that in three bills introduced in previous sessions of Congress it was proposed to confer upon the regulatory body authority to prescribe the priorities as to subject matter to be observed by each class of station and of each station within any class. This language was omitted from the draft out of which grew the present law, but I am by no means certain that the enlarged demands upon the facilities available will not bring this question sharply before Congress and the Commission. I refer to but a single other underlying thought in the minds of those responsible for the drafting of the law. The question often arises as to the power of the Commission to revoke or to refuse to renew an existing license, and then as to the right of an owner whose license is revoked to comoensation for his loss. I do not think there nial or renewal of a license if the use of the frequency by the licensee blocked or impended the full flow of this form of commerce if by other persons, at other places and in other circumstances, a larger and more efficient use could be made of the frequency. And the The only chain affiliated station in Washington taking electrical transcriptions. SPOT YOUR SPOT BROADCASTING OVER WMAL Washington, D. C. SOO Watts 65© K. C. The station that completely covers that area of the United States that rates 4th in radio population percentage (U. S. Census). KMBC Firstly? the Heart of America Now // Becomes a Key Station of the Columbia Network Adding— Additional Prestige Listener Interest Value Midland Broadcasting Co. Pick WICK Hotel Kansas City,Mo. November I, 1931 • BROADCASTING Page 33