Broadcasting (Oct 1931-Dec 1932)

IROAIDCASTDINie of THE NEWS MAGAZINE THE FIFTH ESTATE MARTIN CODEL, Editor SOL TAISHOFF, Managing Editor F. GAITHER TAYLOR, Advertising Manager Executive and Editorial Offices: National Press Building, Washington, D. C. Subscription Price: $3.00 a Year 15c a Copy Copyright, 1932, by Broadcasting Publications, Inc. Published Semi Monthly by BROADCASTING PUBLICATIONS, Inc. • National Press Building Washington, D. C. Metropolitan 1022 A Welcome Step "IT'S A WELCOME step in radio's emergence from advertising adolescence." In sum, this pertinent comment by Ben McCanna, radio director of a leading agency, just about expresses the general feeling among agencies handling radio accounts toward the decision of the networks last month to permit a limited amount of non-comparative price-quoting in their sponsored periods. Hardly a dissenting note from the public has been heard, not even from the arch-critics of radio. This should be gratifying alike to the advertisers, the agencies and the station managers. Nor has anyone objected to the restrictions placed around these price announcements by the networks, which retained the right to reject what they regard as objectionable use of the privilege. The limitations are simple and fair: in a word, only a certain number of price mentions per period and no competitive price-quoting. We believe, with many of the agency executives who replied to our telegraphic inquiry, that this new policy on the part of the networks will attract hitherto recalcitrant advisers, still dubious about radio, to our medium. We believe that the quality of network programs will in no wise be impaired by deftly handled price quotations, which really are an integral part of any sales offering. Before long, the advertisers will have developed a technique of price mention that will fall in with the fast-developing tendency toward making all commercial announcements as interesting as the program itself. Had the networks not announced their new policy about prices, it is unlikely that any but the advertisers and their agencies would have noticed the difference. Those advertisers, who are the fiscal support of the finest radio system in the world, have every right to expect a fair return from their radio expenditures. Most of them have been getting that return, else they would not have stayed on the air this long. But here is a chance they have fairly earned to put the final — and necessary — touch to their radio sales appeals to stimulate the movement of goods. We have enough faith in the agencies and the networks to feel confident that the abuses Acting Chairman Lafount warns against will be avoided, in the interests of radio as a whole. One Year Licenses BROADCASTERS will fall solidly behind the proposal of Acting Chairman Lafount that the Radio Commission issue station licenses for one-year terms instead of six months. While it is our view that the fuU three-year period allowed in the law should be exercised, even the doubling of the existing term will add sta bility to an industry now subjected to more governmental regulation than any other private enterprise. The short-term license has been the root of most of the evils in radio regulation. Stations have existed virtually on a month-tomonth basis, many of them in mortal fear of what the Commission would do with their renewal applications. They have been vulnerable to attack from all sides and forced to waste time and money to defend their franchises at hearings which almost invariably have proved futile for applicant. As far back as 1927, Congress saw fit to authorize the issuance of licenses for three years after a preliminary reorganization stage. It was only last year, however, that the Commission extended license periods from 90 days to six months. The benefits that have resulted are known to every broadcaster. With a one-year license there will be further stabilization. But the three-year license we believe, is needed to give broadcasters an opportunity to settle down and work out their own problems with reasonable assurance of protection. They then can quit worrying about what is happening down in Washington on their license renewal every few months. Mills Maneuvers WHAT'S the game of E. Claude Mills and ASCAP? We were naturally suspicious after Mills had driven his bargain for the new copyright scale upon threat of infringement suits. With the agreement, however, we had supposed that he would be satisfied to deal with the situation above-board. Maybe he is, but there certainly are indications of efforts on his part, not only to play little broadcasters against the NAB, but also to play the newspaper-owned stations against all others and the NAB. We don't like to accuse him of trying to woo the newspaper-owned stations — 18 of them — by offering to curtail or even eliminate their sustaining fees under the new copyright scale. Yet that is one interpretation that is being placed on his latest gesture — that of offering a more "favorable contract" for newspaper-owned stations "in view of admitted newspaper contribution to music exploitation." On another page is a news story of the copyright situation which relates that, at Mills' suggestion, a letter has been sent to the 18 newspaper stations on the matter of adjusting their sustaining fees. It has the earmarks of a deliberate attempt to split the industry. On the other hand, it may be that newspaper stations are entitled to preferential treatment, although we can't see it now. A station is a station, whether owned by a newspaper or a department store. But, we admit, a newspaperstation can do a double-barrelled job of mould The RADIO BOOK SHELF A PROFUSELY illustrated and well-bound handbook, detailing essential facts about the Yankee Network and its 11 stations and well indexed for reference, has just been issued by the Shepard Broadcasting Service. The handsome 47-page book, opening with an animated map of New England showing pictorially the products of each section, is divided into five parts: I, Market; II, Coverage; III, Listeners; IV, Results; and V, Service. Maps of the service areas of each member station are carried, showing population, radios, listeners, income tax returns, savings deposits, telephones, automobiles, retail stores, retail sales and wired homes. The data, comprehensive in every detail, was compiled with the cooperation of the U. S. Department of Commerce, the New England Council, District 1, of the Federal Reserve, Prof. Robert Elder of M. I. T., and John J. Karol, market research director of CBS. It is a book that should be in the files of every agency contemplating the New England market. "TALKS PROGRAMS," as the British Broadcasting Corp. calls its lectures and regular commentaries of the William Hard-Frederic Wile and educational types, are fully outlined in periodical booklets issued in London. The latest, a 64-page booklet, covers "talks" from September through December, and announces that the BBC news bulletin service will be supplemented this autumn and winter by foreign news comments brought to BBC listeners via a "wandering microphone" carried by Vernon Bartlett on a tour of Europe. He will speak fortnightly from Various European capitals. ing public opinion, and it would be nice, from Mr. Mills' point of view, to cultivate their friendship. We can't conceive of newspapers countenancing a proposition designed to induce them to support Mills either against other broadcasters or against other entertainment enterprises using copyrighted music. Of course, the movies, hotels, dancehalls, barbershops, etc. are next in line, after broadcasting for upward revision of their royalty payments. But Mills is operating on other fronts in the radio situation. Without discussing the whys or wherefores of the new scale, it seems apparent that he is trying to prevent any unity of action by broadcasters through the NAB. He recognizes that a strong trade association eventually may gain as much legal strength as his own organization which lives under laws that never contemplated broadcasting. The NAB is growing stronger almost daily. It gave the first demonstration of power at the last session of Congress on copyright legislation. Playing ostrich, however, Mr. Mills, buries his head in the sand, and says, in a statement to Broadcasting: "No existing organization represents even a majority of the broadcasters and none has as yet been authorized so far as we are informed to definitely deal for all of or any of the broadcasters to the extent of committing them. There has been much talk of 'plenary powers' and all that sort of thing, but a singular lack of definite authority conferred in any organization or individual." There are numerous other little slap-backs and innuendos that have come to our attention which tend to prove that Mills would like to destroy the NAB. Like the legend about the bundle of sticks, he knows he can break them individually. Tied together, it can't be done. Page 16 BROADCASTING • October 1, 1932