Sponsor (Oct-Dec 1964)

THE CONTEST In chess there is often a concentration of major pieces supporting a single pawn in a key position on the board. The vakie of the pawn — as compared to any of the other pieces — is negHgible. But the control of the area it holds is vital. Hence, all the power to its support. Some areas of broadcast advertising have the relative value of the above-mentioned pawn, but often are supported by intense and expensive techniques to make certain of an area's control by the advertiser. That area may be: share of market, geographic dominance, product prestige or even awareness, and the like. There are few new gambits in the merchandising game. The contest is one of the oldest. And there are masters of the contest technique, like the soap giants, the breakfast food brigade, the toytempters of tots and the mid-day Svengalis of the gals at home. But there are others who — far from being masters or even moderately schooled in contest strategy — find the contest a valuable tactic in salvaging a campaign suffering from mis-moves, weak beginnings and other malaise. The contest is no substitute for the best use of advertising on broadcast or other media. Nor is it so strong a chess queen that it can salvage all the errors that can be made in an opening or middle game. Bill Ruchti's report (page 31) on how the contest pawn is used by some masters and novices is a kind of player's manual, based on the actual game as used in the broadcast tournament, and giving examples from which both the master and the novice can learn from each other. Recess Over? Your article, "Back-to-School Snubs Air Media" [Sept. 21], may have started something! We have received a number of inquiries from advertisers — present and potential — all of whom have said in gist, "We always believed that the back-to-school period could be the most important advertising campaign of the year, but we could never figure out why it wasn't promoted more strongly. Do you have any ideas?" Like the vast majority who believe tipping is unfair but never organize, more intelligent back-toschool promotions have frequently caught the eye of skilled professionals but have rarely gotten the attention they deserve. Radio and television avails go begging in late August, yet the advertising dollar goes into space media even though the ultimate consumer — the child under 10 or 11 — either cannot read or spends little time with general newspapers and magazines. Congratulations to Sponsor for putting the spotlight on another of the industry's underdeveloped areas. Melvin Helitzer President Helitzer, Waring & Wayne, Inc. New York Editorializing Costly Thanks for Mr. McMillin's article refuting the "hot-eyed young man" who declared that broadcasters editorialize only to "make an extra buck," [Editorializing — What It Means to the Advertiser," Aug. 241. WBBF, which has been editorializing for almost six years, knows how right Mr. McMillin is. In just the last few months, our editorials, far from making us that extra buck, have cost us quite a few dollars. Examples: A wine company allowed its WBBF contract to lapse, then gave the business to another Rochester radio station. The wine distributor pulled no punches when he told us why: local liquor dealers had pressured the winery; they were up in arms about WBBF's repeatedly expressed support of Gov. Rockefeller's effort to revise state liquor laws. A furniture dealer who regularly includes WBBF in his radio buys pointedly left us out when promoting a late-summer sale. When asked why, he was quick to tell us — he didn't like WBBF's endorsement of President Johnson in this year's presidential election. Needless to say, WBBF will keep editorializing. We find the economic pressures flattering. Robert S. Kieve Vice President & General Mgr. WBBF, Inc. Rochester, N.Y. Coverage Patterns In your Sept. 8 issue, your article, "Why Not Get Technical," was indeed interesting and informative. Unfortunately, it was also misleading. The illustration on page 46 compares possible coverage patterns of a 5000-watt station at 600 kc versus a 50,000-watt station at 1400 kc. The coverage circumferences of the two stations could, and should in context, be reversed. As stated in the editorial . . . "stations at lower frequencies often get greater coverage than those with the same power at higher frequencies." Although the editorial mentions several influences of radio coverage, such as power, frequency, ionospheric and soil conditions, etc., it did not state how one can equate these factors. Perhaps it is just as well — with the myriad of data currently supplied by radio salesmen, it might be too much to ask for comparisons indicating the density of ionized particles or climate and soil conductivity. Douglas S. Flynn Media Supervisor Ogilvy, Benson & Mather New York 10 SPONSOR