Broadcasting (Jul - Dec 1944)

WAC War REGARDLESS of what excuses have been given for leaving radio out of the current advertising campaign for WAC recruiting, one conclusion is indisputable: radio was left out'. It was no oversight. Representations had been made both from within and without the War. Dept. as to what might be expected if radio were excluded. OWI stated the position of stations in unmistakable terms: That radio preferred to contribute time to the campaign but if paid advertising were to be used radio wanted its share. Radio is not mourning the loss of whatever revenue it might have received in the initial phase of the WAC campaign. Far from it. It is glad. It is glad because at long last, thanks to the courageous action of the OWI Domestic Radio Bureau in pulling its WAC allocations, radio has let it be known in a way that cannot be misunderstood that its generosity wdll not be abused. No other medium — and we can say this without reservation — has given so magnanimously and so effectively in behalf of the war. No other medium has joined with our Government in a plan in which its facilities are regularly allocated every day of the year for war messages. No other medium can be relied upon to reach so many people in so short a time whenever Uncle Sam beckons. To those who are responsible for leaving radio out of the initial outlay of the $5,000,000 WAC advertising windfall, despite all such talk about summer listening ratings, network and station policies, we make this flat accusation: radio was left out because it was expected to contribute anyway. So why pay for it? That's been the traditional attitude whenever there has been money to spend for war campaigns. We do not wash to imply that the exclusion of radio was deliberate. But we do contend that the willingness shovm by advertisers, netwoi'ks and stations to contribute their facilities for war campaigns has resulted in failure to appreciate that radio lives on advertising. Can anyone imagine asking the press to contribute free space for Government messages which are being paid for on radio? For the edification of the War Dept. a quick calculation is timely. In omitting radio from its WAC advertising it brought upon itself one week's loss of OWI allocations to network programs and another week of station announcements worth, in time and talent, approximately $380,000. Who is going to pay for that? Radio has never asked for Government money for advertising. It has consistently opposed advertising subsidies for press or radio. But it rebels against discrimination of the kind manifest in the handling of the WAC account. What Price Prices? WONDERS never cease. The FCC, after approving some three dozen station transfers in recent weeks involving in excess of 10 million dollars, out of a clear sky asks the Senate and House Committees charged with radio for policy guidance. Actually, the FCC seeks Congressional direction "after the fact". It! already has sanctioned the most controversial of the transactions, inflated prices and all. Moreover, it was the FCC's duopoly regulation, banning multiple ownership of stations in the same or overlapping areas, invoked during wartime, that really provoked the brisk activity in station sales and skyrocketed prices. Agitation over prices isn't new. Years ago the Commission decided against a "bare-bones" policy on the ground that it was without Congressional authority to do anything about it. We think the Commission properly interpreted the law. It has approved transactions, irrespective of price, and will continue to approve them unless there is a specific Congressional order to the contrary. If the proposed purchaser meets the requirements as to character, integrity and financial responsibility, the Commission is left with no recourse but to grant. Should the new owner fail to meet minimum requirements, the Commission always has recourse to renewal or revocation proceedings. It is our guess that the request for legislative guidance is designed to head off inquiries from Congress about station transactions. Rep. Wigglesworth (R-Mass.), a member of both the Select Committee to Investigate the FCC and the Independent Offices Appropriations Subcommittee, for years has asked the FCC to supply detailed data on station transtransfers and has fulminated against purported "trafficking" in station licenses. It's refreshing to have the FCC, hat in hand, now ask Congress for advice on station transfers when prices appear "inordinately high". For years, or in any event for the last five, the Commission has gone blithely on its way deciding important questions of policy involving ownership, programs, business and other practices without once seeking Congressional direction. In fact, it has opposed moves toward legislation which would define its authority. Now that the Commission has broken the ice, we respectfully suggest that it elicit from Congress its judgment and guidance on such matters as newspaper ownership and operation of stations; dual ownership of standard, FM and television stations by the same licensees before heavy investments are made; extent of its authority over business operations of stations and networks; what, if any, control it may exercise over programs; whether it can collect annually statistics on radio business without specific authorization, and a host of other controversial questions on which Congress, as the creator of the FCC, should express itself. On second thought, since the FCC feels on the matter of station transfers that the law is not clear, and since questions have been raised as to the Congressional intent on other even more fundamental points, we think it behooves the Commission to seek a full-scale set of interpretations of the Communications Act of 1934. The easier way would be to write a new radio law. But the FCC opposes that. Out HENRY RUTHERFORD TURNBULL IN 1942 when Thomas E. Dewey was running for Governor of New York, he made 18 radio campaign addresses. Seventeen of his broadcasts ended on the nose; one ran over by 18 seconds. Gov. Dewey will adhere to the same sort of timing in his radio talks during the 1944 Px-esidential race, according to Henry Rutherford Turnbull, who directed the Dewey gubernatorial radio campaign and who, at the Governor's request, has taken leave until Nov. 8 fi'om his regular position as chairman of the plan board of Duane Jones Co. to serve as radio director of the Republican National Committee. "No broadcaster scheduling a Dewey address on his station need fear that the Governor will run over his allotted time," Mr. Turnbull declared, "and the same applies to Gov. Bricker. We appreciate the problems of the broadcaster. We realize that in many cases he is cancelling a regularly scheduled commercial program to carry a campaign broadcast, so the latter means no extra profit to him. We also know that when a popular radio show is replaced with a political broadcast the change will not meet with 100% audience approval. "Therefore, we consider it a duty to do all we can to make the broadcaster's job of cooperating with us as painless as possible. We shall not ask networks or stations to clear 30 minutes and then put on a speaker who will talk for 45 minutes. We shall not ask for the same time period two weeks in succession from any sponsor or station. We shall, whenever possible, make use of sustaining time instead of asking for clearance of time already sold to a commercial sponsor." Mr. TurnbuU's statement comes naturally from a key executive of an advertising agency which has majored in radio, so to speak, with about two-thirds of its total billings going into this medium. It is also natural that he intends to apply to his current task of producing votes for Republican candidates at the ballot box the same radio techniques that hav« successfully produced sales of advertised merchandise over the counter. Although Mr. Turnbull won't know his campaign advertising budget for a fortnight hence, he asserted that radio expenditures would comprise the "biggest single item" of the appropriation. Henry Turnbull was just about old enough to cast his own first vote when he entered {Continued on page 36) Page 34 • July 31, 1944 BROADCASTING • Broadcast Advertising