Television digest with electronic reports (Jan-Dec 1959)

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.

3 Sure, there are problems — lots of them. There's still no quick way to make duplicate tapes. Most stations still don't have VTRs. Tapes are heavy for shipment. And what's to stop a station engineer from making his own duplicate on old tape to send back to the syndicator, while keeping the new tape? Yes, there are problems — but those of faint heart, those who missed the boat on TV in the first place, will be first to attest to the fact that in this industry problems are licked, and fast. "Syndication by microwave" is a proposition which has occurred to programmers. The idea; lease network lines during off-time in wee small hours, transmit programs to stations, let them re-tape them off the line for later use. Though there's been some active investigation of this delivery method, nobody is planning to use it now — but you'll be hearing more about it. For other stories on tape and syndication, see pp. 6 and 10. OUTLOOK FOR FEDERAL AID TO ETV-ROSY: Clear sailing for the first federal program to provide direct financial help — |51,000,000 worth — to the country's slow-moving, money-starved educational-TV system now seems assured. It's good news not only to educational broadcasters but to equipment manufacturers. Top priority for govt. ETV subsidies has been marked on the legislative calendar of the powerful Senate Commerce Committee. It held swift hearings this week — and is expected to stamp unanimous approval next week — on proposal by Chairman Magnuson for up-to-$l,000,000 in grants to each state & territory (see p. 6). No legislation introduced at this session of Congress has had earlier — or faster — treatment. And there are no reports that the program v/ill run into trouble in the House Commerce Committee. Unlike last session, when similar ETV proposals ran up against a last-minute House logjam after clearing the Senate (Vol. 14:34), the momentum already started should carry through to final passage this time. Problems of activating more ETV stations (only 36 are on the air for the 257 non-commercial channels reserved by FCC) won't be solved by federal aid, of course — $51,000,000 isn't enough for that. But the sum should at least get things started toward fuller attainment of ETV's vast potentials. As Westinghouse Broadcasting Co. pres. Donald H. McGannon put it at Senate hearings: "The longer this is delayed, the longer these vital frequencies are unused, the longer will the American people de deprived of [educational] opportunity." FCC MOVES TO OUST NETWORKS FROM REP FIELD: Suddenly and with no dissents, FCC this week started rule-making to consider the concept of kicking CBS & NBC out of the rep business (ABC isn't in it). Though action was unanimous at this stage (Ford absent), it should not be presumed that Commission's mind is made up — although lack of any kind of dissent is good indication the majority is in favor of idea. Though CBS & NBC are expected to fight to keep their spot sales activities, which are profitable, it's common conjecture that they would pull out in a minute if they had any assurance that this concession would allow them to keep their stations and option-time. Networks already have given in on minimum buy, which Justice Dept, and FCC's network study staff termed "monopolistic" (Vol. 14:49, 15:2). Commission discussion of the rule-making proposal was brief, we're told, and its official order isn't illuminating. It merely notes that its staff concluded that "national spot and network TV are competing forms of national TV advertising and that there is a potential if not actual conflict of interest when the same party engages in both activities." As for Commissioners themselves, FCC said: "On the basis of the (staff) report oh network broadcasting and the testimony presented in the hearing in docket No. 12285, the Commission is of the view that a rule-making proceeding should be instituted to consider the adoption of a rule prohibiting TV station licensees from being represented in national spot sales by an organization which also operates a TV network. This proposed rule does not apply to the representation in spot sales of TV stations licensed to the organization which operates a TV network;" The last sentence means networks cOuld rep stations they own.