Broadcasting (Oct 1931-Dec 1932)

Proposed New Canadian Allocations EXCLUSIVE CHANNELS (Now held by Canada and to be retained) 1. On 690 kc. a 50 kw. station would be established at Toronto. (It is agreed that NAA, Arlington, which has been using this channel to broadcast time signals, will relinquish the channel.) 2. On 730 kc. a 50 kw. station at Montreal. 3. On 840 kc. a 10 kw. station in western Ontario (probably near Windsor), with right retained to increase to 50 kw. when deemed necessary. 4. On 910 kc. a 50 kw. station in Manitoba (probably near Winnipeg). . 5. On 960 kc. a 10 kw. station m northern Ontario, with right retained to increase to 50 kw. when deemed necessary. 6. On 1030 kc. two 5 kw. stations synchronized to this channel in Alberta (probably at Calgary and Edmonton), with the right retained to increase to 50 kw. when deemed necessary; also allocated to this channel would be a 500 w. station in New Brunswick. ADDITIONAL CHANNELS (To be newly acquired for the Canadian system). 1. On 540 kc, now used by U. S. military aircraft services, two 5 kw. stations, synchronized to this channel, would be established in Saskatchewan, with the right retained to increase to 50 kw. when deemed necessary. 2. On 1050 kc, at present a U. S. clear channel, a 500 w. station would be established in Nova Scotia. Now assigned to it in U. S. are KNX, Hollywood, and KFBI, Milford, Kan., limited time. 3. On 1100 kc, at present a U. S. clear channel, a 50 kw. station would be established in British Columbia. This channel is now shared bv WPG, Atlantic City, and WLWL, New York, each with 5 kw., and used daytime by KGDM, Stockton, Cal., 250 w. SHARED CHANNELS (To be retained by Canada of the 11 formerly held) 1. On 600 kc. a 1 kw. station to be established at Montreal. 2. On 630 kc. a 500 w. station on Prince Edward Island. 3. On 780 kc. a 1 kw. station on the northern shore of Lake Superior in the Port Author-Fort William area. 4. On 880 kc a 1 kw. station at Ottawa. 5. On 930 kc. a 1 kw. station in Quebec city. 6. On 1120 kc. a 500 w. station in Toronto. SHARED CHANNELS RELINQUISHED Canada agrees to give up the present use of 580, 890, 1010, 1200 and 1210 kc, which is interpreted here as meaning that the former limitation in the U. S. of 500 watts maximum power on these shared channels may be lifted, making way for increases in powers for U. S. stations on those channels provided there are adequate geographical separations between them. PRIVATE LOCAL SERVICE The following statement by the Hon. W. D. Herridge, Canadian Minister at Washington, in his exchange of notes with Acting Secretary of State W. R. Castle, Jr., is interpreted here to mean that Canada proposes to make use of its shared channels and up to 20 other channels in the regional and local categories for the 100 or more private local stations of powers up to 100 w. which it proposes to authorize supplementary to the foregoing — but with the agreement that adequate geographical separations must exist between Canadian low power stations and those of the U. S. : "In order to secure satisfactory local broadcast service throughout Canada, it is proposed that stations, limited to a maximum power of 100 watts, be erected where necessary, and that they should be operated on shared channels. It is considered that 100 or more such stations may eventually be required in Canada, and that twenty channels should be available for this type of service. In establishing such stations, it is proposed to maintain the same geographical separation between Canadian and United States stations as is maintained between United States stations of the same power." and the American stations on those channels logically stand to gain horizontal increases to 1,000 watts provided they will not interfere with Canada or with one another. Then, in addition, Canada relinquishes five of the previously shared channles, so that the same possibilities of increased power (provided geographfcal separations within the U. S. are adequate) reside on those channels, namely, 580, 890, 1010, 1200 and 1210 kc. With regard to the 20 additional channels to be shared for local low power services, all possibility of mutual interference is precluded by Canada's agreement "to maintain the same geographical separation between Canadian and United States stations as is maintained between United States stations of the same power." In other words, the Federal Radio Commission's geographical separations between stations, designed to allow of a minimum of interference between stations using the same wave lengths by spacing them far enough apart geographically from one another, are accepted as a reasonable yardstick. American officials professed to be highly gratified with the turn the Canadian wave negotiations have taken, since it entails the surrender of practically no American facilities to Canada and yet enables the Dominion to satisfy its own needs as it sees them. Naturally, they are not concerned with Canada's domestic structure except with regard to the mutual use of frequencies; that Canada should decide upon a quasi-governmental system is no concern to them. " In accepting the principle of advertising revenues to help support its broadcasting structure, Canada definitely adopts a semblance of the America Plan of radio. Unlike the United States, however, and like European systems, Canada pro range might be slightly affected by the carrier wave from the 500 watt Nova Scotia station. More likelihood of interference exists on the 1100 kc channel as between a 50,000 watt station in British Columbia and the 5,000 watt WPG and WLWL. But no restriction is imposed upon the F3deral Radio Commission to increase the powers of these American stations to over ride such interference, and that is the logical course to be expected. With respect to the Canadian shared channels that are retained, Canada proposes to use them for stations of powers chiefly of 1,000 watts. The United States hitherto has limited powers of American stations using those channels to 500 watts. Canada's example automatically removes this limitation, poses to derive much of its revenue from radio set taxes, which inevitably must be boosted above the present $2 scale to support so ambitious an undertaking. In American broadcasting circles, the limitation of radio advertising to 5 per cent of the program content is not seen a serious handicap. It is estimated that American sponsored programs run well under' 5 per cent in advertising content, and that enough sales messages can be crowded into such a period to warrant advertisers using the air. On the other hand the danger of advertising censorship cannot be gainsaid; Canada at best is a limited market, and any restrictions upon the advertising message may serve as a deterrent to the use of radio by advertisers. What of Mexico, Cuba? THE ONLY fly in the ointment, sc far as the United States is con cerned, is the probable attitude o: Mexico and Cuba toward this nev wave agreement. The channel sharing arrangement was mad' without consulting those countries It is satisfactory to the America) and Canadian governments largel; because Canada retains enough ex elusive channels to provide higl power services to rural and remot areas. It is possible further to crowi the regional and local wave length with Mexican and Cuban station; with proper power restrictions without adding to interference. Bu should Mexico and Cuba deman clear channels for higher powers a dilemma will be faced. Unde the proposed setup, those clea channels could not be obtaine without taking them away fror the United States or Canada o both — and the United States stand to be the biggest loser because i retains most of the clear channel: Canadian Radio Proposal is Challenge To IL S. Broadcasters, Dill Tells Senate Senator Sees Way Opened for Simultaneous Operatio Of East-West Coast Stations in This Country EXISTENCE of a governmentowned broadcasting system will be a challenge to American radio station owners, giving the public a direct comparison with the American system Senator Dill of private enterprise, Senator Dill, (D.) of Washington, leader in Congress on radio matters, declared in the Senate May 11. If the Canadian plan succeeds in satisfying the people of Canada and in meeting popular approval of American listeners along the Canadian border, he said, it "may easily lead to a nation-wide demand for government operation of all radio stations in the United States." Senator Dill had no criticism to make of the tentative wave division agreement between the United States and Canada. It points the way, he indicated, to the simultaneous operation of east-west coast stations in this country on the same wave lengths, in view of the fact that two U. S. clear chan nels are thus to be used under tr agreement. The Radio Commi: sion, he said, has agreed to this d vision with Canada, whereas it h* hitherto refused to consider dupl eating clear channels in the Unite States. "The new plan of the Canadie government for the operation ( radio stations wall be watched wii great interest by the American pe> pie," he said. "It will consist i nine high power cleared chann stations connected by the cha system with one cleared chann station in each province, and tv smaller stations, one at Montre and one at Toronto, together wi whatever number of 100 watt st tions may be needed for local pu poses. To be Watched in U. S. "THE LICENSE fees of $2 p year for receiving sets and t: limitation of 5 per cent of any pr gram for advertising, and all u der government operation, w make a most interesting compai son with our privately owned sy tem in the United States. If t. (Continued on page 34) Page 8 BROADCASTING • May 15, 193