Broadcasters’ news bulletin (Jan-June 1932)

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.

7 DIGEST OF REPORT OF ERG (Continued) "It should he home in mind that if restriction permitting sponsorship hy n^nne only should cause a number of advertisers to discontinue the use of radio facilities as a medirm for coraraercial advertising, such non-use would iimnediately ■^nd inevitably he reflected in a decrease both in the quantity and quality of pro¬ grams available to the public. "As a matter of fp.ct, the situation should have its own cure within its self. There should be a keener appreciation by both the broadcaster and the ad¬ vertiser that radio facilities not only offer perhaps the greatest opportunity for ree-chino’ the greatest number of people but that their use imposes upon them a very grc-^t responsibility for the manner in which prorrams are presented. "The employment of national surveys of pre.-’-ram and station popularity, better shcwmanship °nd ta.ct by advertisers, aud a strict supervision of all pro¬ grams by the licensees of stations should develop a technique that would be more satisfactory to the listening public and beneficial to the industry." The Commission's answer to this question was supported by information re¬ ceived from numerous advertisers, advertising agencies and the American Associa¬ tion of Advertising Agencies. 7. AEY imommioii available concerniug the investments and net income of A NUI'ffiSR OF REPR33ENTATIVE BROADCASTING COIVIPANIES OR STATIONS. The capital actually invested by 55S stations w^s ;'iven by the Commis¬ sion in the following table: ZONE 1 2 3 4 5 NO. OF STATIONS REPORTED 97 S8 119 139 n3 593 INVESTMENT $7,375,270.67 5,639,692.33 6,329,103.82 10,690,437.88 6,260.490.74 $36,345,045.94 APPROXIMATE PER' GENT 21 16 17 29 1I 100 The approximate average capital investment of stations of various classes wa,s miven as follows: Under 100 watts, $8,700: 100 watts, $21,500: over 100 and under 5OO watts, $44,400: 500 watts, $54,100: 75O watts, $20,500: 1000 watts, $104,100: over 1000 v/a,tts, $50,100: 5*100 watts, $l68,400: over 5,000 wa.tts, $310,000. For the network companies the following was shovra to be the capital in¬ vestment : (continued next pa^ge)