Weekly television digest (Jan-Dec 1960)

4 JANUARY 25, 1960 is up to 677, a rise of 57. Applications for new AM stations total 711, up from 645 July 1, and requests for changes in AM facilities hit 757, up from 636. There are 105 FM applications pending vs. 67 six months ago. Herewith are the yeor-by-yeor totals since end of World War II: AM FM Year Licenses & CPs On Air Year Licenses & CPs On Air 1945 1056 913 1945 288 48 1946 1579 1027 1946 684 140 1947 1961 1586 1947 1010 374 1948 2131 1877 1948 976 687 1949 2246 2045 1949 791 728 1950 2351 2199 1950 706 672 1951 2410 2306 1951 654 640 1952 2516 2377 1952 648 612 1953 2644 2451 1953 602 550 1954 2782 2662 1954 583 549 1955 2941 2814 1955 557 536 1956 3140 3024 1956 559 528 1957 3289 3180 1957 588 537 1958 3423 3318 1958 686 571 1959 3527 3456 1959 839 677 Networks More about BACKGROUND OF DOERFER PLAN: FCC Chmn. Doerfer was taking no chances when he discussed his publicservice plan with the networks, making sure to clear all anti-trust angles with the Justice Dept. He dealt with Robert A. Bicks, acting assistant attorney general in charge of the anti-trust div., telling Bicks in a Jan. 20 letter : “I discussed [the plan] on a confidential basis with some well-informed affiliates whose interests do not always coincide with the networks’. They agreed that this plan, providing for ‘option time’ rather than ‘prime time,’ would get the cooperation, in their judgment, of all the affiliates. “The informal discussions with the Commissioners indicate that they, too, are of the same mind. In addition there are indications that the old concept of ‘sustaining’ (not sponsored) & ‘sponsored time’ for public-affairs programming will be abandoned. There does not seem to be any intelligent relationship between high-level programming & sustaining programming. Experience with highgrade informational, cultural and educational programming during the past few years demonstrates the opposite.” Bicks promptly assured Doerfer that he saw no “antitrust objection” and he wished Doerfer bon voyage with “best of luck in your endeavor.” The summit conference at the Harvard Club, N.Y. Jan. 18, was attended by Doerfer and Frank Stanton & James Aubrey, CBS; Robert Kintner & David Adams, NBC; Leonard Goldenson & Oliver Treyz, ABC. The agenda, as outlined by Doerfer in a memo: “The problem is how to get ‘public affairs,’ ‘informational,’ ‘educational’ and ‘cultural’ programs during prime time on all of the networks for at least 4 days out of the period from Mon. through Fri., with affiliates programming on local basis during prime time at least one day between Mon. & Fri., exclusively. “Object is for networks to program national & inter national problems, news documentaries, or news in depth, which would include the possibility of educational & cultural programs. Agreed that these were hard to define, but nonetheless understandable by experienced broadcasters.” Then, pencilled in: “Could be sponsored.” The Doerfer Plan Described The first plan discussed was titled simply, the “Doerfer Plan.” Here’s how the memo describes it. “The Doerfer Plan was that one network, say ‘X,’ would program the first week on Mon., Tues., Thurs. and Fri. between 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Wed. would be reserved for local affiliates to put on local programming between 7:30 & 8:00. Thus, the networks would handle, among other things, informative programs regarding national & international matters, as well as high-grade cultural & educational programs. The affiliates with a smaller budget, but nonetheless an important problem, could program matters of local importance, plus local educational or cultural matters. The next week the same format except a different network, say, network ‘Y.’ The following week, network ‘Z.’ This would bring between Mon. through Fri., inclusive, the following advantages: “(1) 150 min. (30 min. x 5 days) of public affairs programming that the public would get. “(2) The public could rely upon a definite schedule — would soon learn that 7:30 to 8:30 each week is this type of program. “(3) Justifies the use of option time, with exceptions, on the ground that it is a local program of the same type but of more importance in the eyes of the local broadcasters, using their own judgment. There must always be some leeway for a reasonable variation, but no leeway for a subterfuge to program light entertainment. “(4) Although network ‘X’ for the first week might suffer because of the attraction of other programming, it will regain that the following 2 weeks — when it cuts down its competition on a network basis 50%, i.e., it will compete against only 1 network whereas it continually competes against 2. Affiliates also would be in the same position.