Weekly television digest (Jan-Dec 1963)

Record Details:

Title:
Weekly television digest
Date:
Jan-Dec 1963
Publisher:
Washington D.C. : Television Digest, Inc.
Volume:
Weekly television digest (Jan-Dec 1963)
Leaf #:
00046
Language:
English
Subjects:
Television -- Periodicals, Television broadcasting -- United States -- Periodicals.
Collection:
Broadcasting & Recorded Sound
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
University of Maryland, College Park
Sponsor:
LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
A weekly digest of brief reports tracking recent developments in the U.S. television marketplace. Published out of Washington, D.C. with much more focus on the retail of TV sets than the other D.C.-based trade paper, BROADCASTING. -- Eric Hoyt, 2015
Date Added:
March 28, 2024
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.

2— TELEVISION DIGEST JANUARY 28. 1963 where there has been faith, to divert the personnel & resources of these stations from their broadcast duties to the development of defenses against imknown charges & implied wrongs." "We demand," Collins concluded, "that the FCC, if it has just cause to question the capability of any broadcaster, or his good fcdth in serving the public interest, place that license squarely on the line in a proper renewal or revocation hearing, and to stop impugning & embarrassing & handicapping the moss of good broadcasters for what may be the sins of a very few." A study of the list of more than 125 witnesses reveals that stations will get vastly more kudos than knocks, possibly damping FCC's enthusiasm for more such sessions elsewhere. Neb. legislature also jumped into attack on FCC, voting 38-0 for resolution denouncing the hearing. Strong words similar to Collin's were offered at end of NAB's board meeting in Phoenix by NAB Govt. Aif ah^ vp Paul Comstock who asserted : "The growing pressxure the govt, is exerting against programming is the one issue that transcends all else. [FCC] is piirsuing a dangerous & unwarranted course when it seeks to manipulate & exploit expressions (from the public) that ore not spontaneous. Govt, inspired letter-writing campaigns, public hearings unconnected with license considerations, and other efforts of the Commission to enlist segments of the public are beyond the scope of its responsibility." Such statements by Collins and his aides may mark a cooling-off turning-point in Collin's relations with FCC & govt, generally. It may also gain him greater broadcaster support for his less-popular needling of industry with demands for greater "self discipline" & "responsibility" and reduce from anger to irritation the industry reaction to such things as his attacks on cigaret commercials appealing to youth. FCC Comr. Ford last week added his objections to Omaha-type hearings. In speech before National Religious Bcstrs. convention in Washington, he stated that FCC's job is to make sure station determines its obligations to a community and then lives up to them. However, he said, when FCC holds hearing in a community it is, in effect, conducting its own survey of area's needs & evaluating them for stations — thus overstepping boimds. He voted for Chicago hearing, against Omaha. TV OUTSHINES PRINT MEDIA: New stress is being placed this season on effectiveness of TV as ad medium in comparison to printed media, notably mass-market general magazines. By all indications, TV has powerful story to tell. Trend marks "research maturity" of TV medium. In earliest competitive days, TV adherents stressed sheer home circulation of TV. Then came era of push on program ratings and overage-audience figures, and related cost-per-thousand data, mainly to toss around big numbers. Magazines, meanwhile, emphasized circulation & total ad exposure. Now, TV is reaching bedrock of direct inter-media comparison. Major new study from CBS-TV was im veiled late last week in N.Y. Showcased in 14-min. animated color film, study was developed by network's TV research department under direction of Jay Eliasberg, with field work conducted by Audits & Surveys Co. Objective of CBS study was to compare advertising impact of TV & magazines by measuring audience response "under normal conditions of exposure" to closely-paralleled print ads & TV commercials for 13 nationally distributed products. Study was not confined to CBS in choice of TV programs which were showcases for commercials. Product list included Bayer Aspirin, Campbell's Soups, Dial Soap, Ford, GE, Goodyear, Kellogg's Com Flakes, Marlboro, Sunbeam Shavers, among others. Commercials were seen in 15 CBS shows, plus 10 on ABC and 5 on NBC. Magazines in which ads appeared were Life, Look, Reader's Digest, SatEvePost. Key results of probe, conducted by some 6,000 interviewers: • Awareness of brand increased 25% more through TV commercials than through magazine ads (TV : 122 people per dollar vs. magazines 97.9 people per dollar). • Belief in advertised values of brand was 42% higher in TV than magazines per ad dollar spent. • Margin of 102% in number of people who increased evaluation of brand was scored by TV vs. magazines per ad dollar.