Sponsor (1964)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

PRESSTIME REPORT FROM OUR WASHINGTON -V S B July 3, 1961* Even as broadcasters came up for air after the double shock ol' cigaret rule and the NAP president's probably imminent exit for a gov. nvent post, they were girding to meet new onslaughts. _j__ ; :• ' ■ " heir rig:.' • :• ' ' :•■ •.•.-•".:• w. programing policies. During FCC's oral hearing on the revised radio reporting forms here last week, NAB's counsel Douglas A. Anello promised th : •. • .-•• challenge on its programing pressures "soon." He said the test involve the Fairness Doctrine. In previous month's hearings on tv program reporting forr . man E. William Henry had invited a court showdowr '■ • • :. ■"' j programing pressures by the Commission. Anello then said he wa ' ng for "good" broadcaster case. He explained last week that he did not mean "good" in the moral sense but in the sense that it is purely a programing issue. The NAB counsel — and the majority of 20 spokesmen fr • licensees — said broadcasters are still overburdened with detail in reoor' ing their check of community leaders. A list of other reporting requirements was put under the heading of "pressure" by NAB's Anello. He said licensees yield and ac^ • :•■' ___ gories and queries rather than face agency pressure. Pressure is implicit in required reporting of all programing c.'~ of network and or regular fare of entertainment, news and sports; jr. rer :••;•_ of any "significant changes'' in 1. •■ • ■ ' : _--•- -,_•; :. . ■ ■ :; :.'." x plain how his programing compares with tha f : •; • '. • rs : r. :.: :•• .. Phe broadcaster association spokesman found reporting of con -.Is less onerous in the revised form (a meld of industry and I compromises), than in the earlier proposals. But smaller stations, partic seasonal and daytimers with short winter days, object' in 1 --■ ■ ■: ■ • _-___. -. posite week basis was not bad, but they sa' : • :.e break i-wr. :r. r. : :' .r. utes of commercial broadcast per hour fror. none to over ' ••"-. • . ■"'•■_• each ho-; ^f -; -site week was unfair to them. ' '■' r?.gLr.g. FCC Commissioner Loevinger said he thought adherence to the • jde JLd be enough to answer the query on radio licensee's general poli maximum commercial time per hour. In its own stater :.• . • :.■ :'.:'.• return to its original decision to make rep~r* .r:g :' •• •' •' • '. •• ■ • 1 thing, rather than a three-rear scan at renewal. •• • •--..to build up a record of broadcast commerciali Mutual Broadcasting network said • . I .-• . .-. ■•. • • -■ .. •■ for radio. The forms' insistence on separate • •_•-.• CONTINUED ON NEXT MGf My 6, 1964