Sponsor (Oct-Dec 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.

NOT THE BUTLER . The sponsor is the villain. The actor is the victim. In the estimate of the leadership of a major talent guild, television advertising's clients are to blame for the unemployment of actors and the permission of too much network control over every page of television programing. "To put it succinctly," reelected president Dana Andrews told the Screen Actors Guild, "an entertainment medium without a box office has captured the fancy of the public and has substantially replaced the motion picture theater, the legitimate theater and radio — and we, the actors, are the victims of this capture." But what Mr. Andrews seemed to deplore was that there are actors who work in commercials and there are just plain actors, because more money is made by actors in commercials than is made by actors in movies or television-entertainment film. In 1964, he disclosed, clients will pay $30 million to actors working in commercials, while actors working in television will collect $26 million. Actors working in theatrical motion picture films will earn $20 million. When you add (as Mr. Andrews didn't) the tabs for commercials and entertainment, you find that $56 million will go to actors from the television industry — almost three times what they will earn from movies. Or: Television entertainment movies will yield only $46 million. Do movies share the blame? Commercial tv supported solely by advertising budgets of "one percent per viewer per program," the guild leader said, "simply will not support the acting profession." His solution (perhaps in hope of siphoning off some of the commercials' $30 million): pay tv, plus government action on "network control of programing." CUAA, azfo^ Twice Patted In an item on growing advertiser interest in all-night radio in your Sponsor Scope feature, Nov. 9 issue, you say "advertiser interest could have been inspired by the success American Airlines has had with its Midnight to Dawn music program in nine markets. You should take some credit for stirring the renewed interest. In your Aug. 3 issue your excellent article on all-night radio was a major factor in the heightened advertiser reaction. The Petry Co. presentation "When the Sun Goes Down" fii'so the title of the Sponsor article] has played an important part, too. We are still getting letters about the presentation from advertisers who read the article. William H. Steese Vice President, Sales Promotion, Radio Edward Petry & Co. New York Hoot-and-a-Half Thought you might be interested in one of the entries* we received from our "Don't Give a Hoot about WFBM's 40th Anniversary" ad [Sponsor, Aug. 24]. I knew you went out a long way . . . but . . . really! Casey Strange Promotion Director WFBM-TV Indianapolis ED note: Following is from abovementioned letter to WFBM. * Yes, we know you are the best broadcast buy in the mid-Indiana market, but we still don't give a hoot about your 40th anniversary because we are so darned far away. It may surprise you to know that Sponsor, in which we read about your celebrations, gets such a long distance from your territory. Although we could not get it there by Sept. 15, we are still send ing in our entry. Reason wc are late is because Sponsor comes to us by sea mail, and we usually get a whole month's editions all at once . . . Brian Russ Tv Executive J. Iloii Limited Advertising Wellini;l(>n. New 7.caland Choice TOLd All of us here at WTOL-TV have read with great interest and pride your Nov. 9 article titled "Tv: The (Young) People's Choice." Steve Payer Promotion Director WTOL-TV Toledo \ ^ High Point I read with interest your article in the Nov. 2 issue entitled "Milk Additives Get Rich Results from Tv." I want to congratulate you on the thoroughness of your material. This is especially apparent in light of all the new products that are cropping up in the milk additive market. Your article hit the prominent high points in this field and made for interesting, as well as informative, reading. Alan D. Pesky Account Executive Papert, Koenig, Lois, Inc. New York Wi WE'VE MOVED . . . ■resi . . . but we'd still like '):o to hear from you. Address all letters to ' Editor, SPONSOR 1^ 25 West 45th Street isle New York, N.Y. 10036 12 SPONSOR Hi