Broadcasting Telecasting (Oct-Dec 1963)

EDITORIALS Circus minimus AT THE behest of the American Bar Association, the Dallas judge in whose court Jack Ruby will be tried has decided to exclude radio and television. In the bar association's view, which has now prevailed in a state where trial coverage by broadcasters has often been permitted, the presence of television would endanger Ruby's rights. The ABA has stated that the "widespread publicizing" of the capture and confinement of Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused killer of President Kennedy, would have made it difficult to find unprejudiced jurors to try him if he had lived. In the trial of Oswald's killer, the ABA has said, "the judicial process must not be further impaired by additional sensationalism, which would inevitably result if television of the trial were permitted." In all this kind of reasoning, television gets the blame for acts of others. Does the ABA argue that if television had been prevented from reporting the story, no one would have heard of the assassination of a President? Must jury recruitment be confined to the illiterate, the deaf and the blind? It may be true that some officials talked too glibly about "evidence" and that they erred in moving Oswald through a crowd that had been inadequately screened, but television is no more to be accused of creating those conditions than the American Bar Association is. In other parts of the assassination story — the coverage of funeral ceremonies in a church and at a cemetery — -television proved that its presence need have no effect whatever on the most solemn of events. Maybe the bar has less confidence in its members than the Catholic church has in its priests. Good, but not good enough RADIO'S revenues keep going up and up, and yet people keep mumbling about radio's "problems." If that doesn't seem to make sense, it does reflect a general recognition that despite its gains, radio ought to be moving a lot faster. The fact of continuing growth was demonstrated again a week ago in this magazine's annual yearend survey of radio station business. It showed that gains in total revenues were about as widespread in 1963 as in 1962 — even though last year's measurement had been against a fair-to-middling 1961 while 1963's was against the best year in radio history. Those gains are good, but they need to be better. Altogether too many stations are still in the red. So why isn't radio moving faster? The reason offered most frequently by buyers does not question the medium's ability to move goods economically. Yet its economy is, oddly, a major point against radio. For the common complaint is that the paper work involved in buying spot radio is so great, and radio's prices are so low, that the agency commission hardly covers the agency costs. This argument, although frequently disputed, has survived for a long time. Instead of arguing against it, perhaps broadcasters ought to act as if it were true. The obvious thing to do, then, would be to increase the historic 15% commission on the purchase of radio time — and also the rates for the time itself. But that might be rash and perhaps pointless. For one thing, the agency is supposed to be obligated to buy what is best for its client, without regard to its own profit levels. Agency profitability is a problem for agency and client to work out together, and more and more they are evolving fee systems to supplement the commissions so that the agency will not have to lose money on an account. Perhaps in time the supplementary fees system will become widespread, and agencies will be able to "afford" to buy more radio — if indeed they cannot do so now. In the meantime, however, one of the most efficient of all media is growing more slowly than it ought to grow — though steadily by normal business standards — and the idea of a dramatic answer to the old low-profitability arguments offers a certain appeal, if only to see how the agencies would react. The trouble with radio is that it's in a rut — it's been too good for too long, and at too low a price. Without loss of a beat THE other day a significant change took place in the world of broadcast music. Carl Haverlin, the first paid president of Broadcast Music Inc., stepped inconspicuously into retirement at age 65. Robert J. Burton, the second paid president, stepped into Carl Haverlin's shoes without an audible squeak, at age 49. The transition was orderly because it was planned that way. Judge Burton, executive vice president for the past year, has been in training as unofficial president-designate. Carl Haverlin is a young 65. He grew up in broadcasting and, since 1940, except for a three-year hitch as vice president of Mutual, in music. Aside from being one of the most articulate men in business or letters, he is one of the nation's foremost authorities in Lincolnia. The lecture platform could be his third career. Judge Burton has been with BMI for 22 years, beginning as resident attorney. His growth in the organization has paralleled the growth of BMI itself. Unlike other associations in broadcasting (BMI is owned by broadcasters who participated in its formation in 1940) the music company has never been involved in intramural discords. This is a tribute not only to BMI's board chairman and chief counsel, Sydney M. Kaye, who has served it from the start and who is one of the country's foremost authorities on copyright, but also to the board of directors of BMI. Numbered among its members are such active broadcasting leaders as Paul W. Morency, John Elmer, John F. Patt, J. Leonard Reinsch, G. Richard Shafto, E. R. Vadeboncoeur, Leonard Kapner, Dwight W. Martin and Ward Quaal. When BMI observed its 20th anniversary in 1960 we commented that it has proved the greatest insurance policy ever underwritten by broadcasters. It is paying even handsomer dividends today. Carl Haverlin served his tenure with grace, integrity and ability. Judge Burton takes over a going concern with the sure hand of an executive trained for the assignment and with places still to go. Drawn for BROADCASTING by Sid Hix "We're off the air .... our new engineer took all the tubes down to the drugstore to test them!" 66 BROADCASTING, December 30, 1963