Broadcasting (Apr - June 1950)

Whistlers in the Dark PERHAPS the most artful shell game of our generation is the way in which the printed media have spread the word that television spells the doom of sound radio but that printed media will go on undisturbed. They've spread the word so effectively that even some broadcasters believe it. But do the publishers, notably those without TV, believe it? Every week that passes makes it clear that the newspapers and magazines in their public derision of television are in fact whistling past the graveyard — with nervous lips. In the privacy of their own lodge meetings they are treating seriously, as indeed they are wise to do, the medium which they publicly deride. In New York, for instance, the American Newspaper Publishers Assn. last week studied television's cut-in on newspapers and magazines — a subject not incorporated in the proceeding for laughs. And take a look at the agenda for the 20th annual convention of the National Newspaper Promotion Assn., May 14-17 in Milwaukee. The first item is a session on newspapers' relationship to TV, with NBC President Joseph H. McConnell as the keynote speaker. There'll be discussions of TV's effect on newspaper circulation and on newspaper advertising, its use to promote newspaper circulation, and its effects, as shown in a two-year study, upon sports attendance. We venture there will be little fun-making at television's expense in Milwaukee. But the most revealing reaction came from Marshall Field, an older hand in radio than in newspapers. Expressly recognizing television's evening audience hold, his Chicago Sun-Times cut out afternoon deliveries to concentrate on morning-only, "for the greater convenience of our readers." Rival newspapers set up an immediate howl. Some claimed their own circulations have increased during television's development, and that television actually helps afternoon papers by keeping people at home nights. But we wonder whether Mr. Field hasn't set a pattern for times to come. The printed media's public attacks on TV are really an extension of their campaign against aural radio. Yet radio's circulation has continued upward, despite "plug-ugly" campaigns. And radio continues the least commercial medium. Instead of moping about these oblique attacks, radio should sell itself as the most influential selling force extant. Instead of talking rate reductions, radio should talk rate adjustments upwards in those categories where audience and tune-in have increased. Instead of giving accounts 12 months' rate protection, radio should take a leaf from the book of the printed media and cut the protection to three or six months. As TV grows, there are bound to be changes. But they won't be out of radio's pocket and into TV. The extent to which TV has tapped "new money" was convincingly told by the FCC in its latest revenue report [Broadcasting, April 24]. The advertising dollars will be spent in direct ratio to results. Advertising isn't bought on habit or tradition alone. TV's growth, amazing as it has been, is just beginning. Radio's growth may be less rapid, but it hasn't stopped. With 95% of American homes covered, it has only 5% to go. FCC, We Agree— But LIKE FCC Chairman Coy, we find ourselves in an anomalous position over the anti-gambling movement now on foot. Testifying against a Justice Dept. bill (S3358) which he felt would give the FCC too much authority, Chairman Coy conceded that the Commission's "reluctance to accept broad delegations of authority" is not in keeping w:'th "the role that is commonly expected of a bureaucrat." Our own anomaly is that, examining FCC's substitute bill, we find ourselves for once in agreement with the Commission — at least up to a point. Certainly we agree the Commission's bill is better than the Justice Dept's. The Justice Dept. would forbid interstate transmissions (broadcast, telecast, or otherwise) of "gambling information" and would define "gambling information" so broadly that FCC rightly thinks no line could be drawn squarely between that and legitimate news. I CC would be handed the job of drawing the line anyway. And in the case of horse races, broadcasters could carry no more than one a day and would have to delay for at least an hour the news of results of all others. FCC's approach is more to the point. It would simply ban interstate transmission of data on bets, betting odds, and prices paid. Broadcasters and telecasters would be free to carry as many races as they please, and to announce the winners of others without delay. Radio and newspapers would have equal footing. We fear, however, that we cannot make our anomaly complete by going all the way with the Commission. In racing, which seems to be the prime concern, pari-mutuel betting is legal in a number of states. Fans in those states would seem to have a legitimate interest in odds and prices information whether they are at the tracks or in their homes. Further, as Sen. McFarland observed, non-bettors have a sincere interest in the odds and prices on major events, such as the Kentucky Derby, the World Series, or a world's championship fight. The answer, it seems to us, is more diligent enforcement of anti-gambling laws at the state and local levels. The Congress certainly should think long and hard before it acts. In no event should it act until it has conducted a searching overall investigation and found that the menace cannot be curbed without federal action of the severity and scope now proposed. Wave Cargo THE DECISION of most New York television stations to install their transmission facilities in a common location, unquestionably the best in Manhattan, points up an important variation between radio and television. Unlike the wide differences in power and frequency — and hence signal coverage— that prevail among AM stations in any multiple station city, VHF television stations cover about the same ground. It is to the advantage of all within any community to select the best site for transmission and use it jointly. Competition among stations is then pretty much centered in their programming, a very healthy circumstance. No television station in a multiple station area can hope to attract audiences on the basis of signal strength alone. There is bound to ensue an invigoration of creative program thinking. In television, audience size will not be determined so much by the power of waves as by the cargo the waves carry. SARKES TARZIAN ASSOCIATES of Sarkes Tarzian, electronic engineer, manufacturer and station operator, describe him as a man who "is going places." He is the enterprising Philadelphian who became an adopted "Hoozier" and who, in six years, hurdled the electronic rungs of the success ladder to become a leader in his field. Today, Mr. Tarzian and his wife, Mary, head up a million-dollar television manufacturing corporation — Sarkes Tarzian Inc., a young giant in the TV tuner, rectifier and tube producing industry, employing more than 1,200 persons in three cities with a payroll that exceeds $2 million annually. In addition, they own and operate WTTS Bloomington, Ind., a 5 kw regional AM station serving Southern Indiana, and its sister, WTTV (TV) — "Indiana's second television station." Mr. Tarzian also is known in the electronic engineering world as a man with creative and inventive ability. His most enterprising work in the broadcasting field is his high fidelity and high frequency method of AM transmission, called HIFAM. A fortnight ago, the FCC approved license renewal of his experimental HIFAM station, KS2XAP Bloomington, Ind., which first went into operation in 1946. Sarkes Tarzian was born in Philadelphia Oct. 5, 1901. He attended public schools in the Quaker City, being graduated from the North East High School in 1920 as class valedictorian. He was awarded a Simon Muhr scholarship to the U. of Pennsylvania where he obtained his B. S. in Electrical Engineering in 1924. Equipped with classroom knowledge, Mr. Tarzian put his know-how to work in the practical phases of electronics. He joined the Atwater Kent Corp. as design and development engineer. At the Kent firm, Mr. Tarzian helped perfect the gang tuning condenser now in universal use. He also developed the all-metal radio cabinet that was used by the company exclusively and which reduced the cost of radio sets to the public. In recognition of his keen approach to the radio industry technique, Atwater Kent in 1926 awarded the young engineer a graduate fellowship at his alma mater. A year later, he rejoined the corporation with an M. S. in Electrical Engineering and further knowledge in the field which was to become his life's labor. By 1932, Mr. Tarzian's craftsmanship had earned him the post of chief design and deve1opment engineer with the firm. Four years later, he was at RCA in the role of chief engineer of the company's subsidiary in Buenos (Continued on page 38) Page 36 • May 1, 1950 BROADCASTING • Telecasting