Broadcasting (Oct - Dec 1950)

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.

HOOPERECORDING NewOe^ceS.^ AN AUTOMATIC system of broadcast audience measurement capable of delivering reports on today's lisItening from 6 a.m. to midnight at : 11 tomorrow morning, or of reporting on any particular program J audience immediately after the end II of the broadcast or even while it is I still on the air, was described Tuesjday by C. E. Hooper, president of !C. E. Hooper Inc., at a news conJference in New York. System begins with a tuning j switch installed in a broadcast receiver, which can be AM, FM or jTV, although at the outset plans call for measuring only AM and jTV program reception, Mr. Hooper isaid. Switches can be installed in up to five receivers in a dwelling I unit, home or apartment, from which wires (flat tapes to run iinder rugs) lead to small transmitter 'boxes (9" by 5" by 6") installed in ,ja closet or some other inconspicuijous place. From the transmitters in up to ifour apartments in any building, l| wires run to the basement where i'they connect with lines to the ' central office of the telephone comIpany. Lines from up to 32 buildHngs in any phone company zone ' can be handled at the central office, where the reports of dial tunings of 200 sets (an average of 2% sets 1 to an apartment and 2 Vz apart■ ments to a building for 32 build;ings) are transmitted to a Hooper ' office and there recorded on a tape. Continuous Reporting |j To scan and report on the dial tuning of a set takes 1% seconds, ' so the complete zone report on 200 ' sets is completed and recorded at Hooper headquarters in five minutes. Then the scanning-reporting process starts all over again, delivei'ing a continuous tape record 'that covers tuning at five-minute intervals for each set throughout the hours the system is in operation. With one recorder for each zone, the number of recorders in the Hooper office would correspond to I the number of phone company zones in the city in which the audience measurement is being made — ■ nine in New York, for example. jAt the end of each five minutes the figures on the various recorders 'are totaled on a totalizer, showing the number of sets in the sample tuned to each station or not in operation during the five-minute period. In New York, Mr. Hooper plans to measure radio and video set operation for 1,800 sets in 720 dwelling units. The installations , will be made so as to provide a sample of various types of family groups making a cross-section of the city. In that way, the rating figures for the sample will be projectable to the complete radio and ' TV audience of the city, he pointed out. Sample changes will be made at the rate of 2% a month to keep the sample representative, Mr. Hooper explained. The Hooperecording system is a "servo mechanism," Mr. Hooper said, resulting from expeinments started in July 1943 when the use of radar in World War II was first reported, and perfected during the past two years under the direction of John Lyman Bogert, vice president in charge of development of the Hooper organization. The various mechanical devices utilized in the system are made of stock parts, readily available, except for the keys which print the figures on the tape in the recorder, Mr. Hooper said. He explained that the use of the system, not its parts, is what is patentable and stated that broad patent applications for the system were filed last March. Negotiations for the installation of reporting equipment in homes in New York and Los Angeles already have been completed with the telephone companies in those cities, Mr. Hooper said, and the first installations probably will be made there, extending gradually to other metropolitan centers. Incidentally, he said, the service is not limited to telephone homes as the wires connecting the homes with telephone company offices are not telephone wires but those used for special services, such as fire or burglar alarms. Beginning with a service area confined within the city limits, the system eventually will be extended to cover complete metropolitan service areas, Mr. Hooper explained, covering homes within a 50-mile radius of the city for a TV-only service and perhaps twice that distance for a combined radio and TV service. An advantage of the Hooperecording system over the telephone calls used in the regular Hooper service, he noted, is that sets can be installed in small communities where telephone interviews would be annoyingly repetitious. Mr. Hooper is meeting today (Oct. 23) with the TV broadcasters of Los Angeles and tomorrow and Wednesday with the TV group of the Chamber of Commerce in that city, he said, adding that it is quite possible that the first installations of his new mechanical reporting system will be made in that city, although he hopes to have it in operation both there and in New York by spring of 1951. Low Cost Cited Stating that a month's reports of this system would equal 4,700,000 telephone calls, Mr. Hooper said that the cost would be less than 1/lOth of a cent per call, a remarkably low unit cost. However, he added, the overall cost is not low. He estimated that if a dozen stations contracted for the service in New York, it would cost each one about $1,500 a month, while if it were limited to TV stations only the cost would be $1,750 a month apiece. Comparing the service with the semi-automatic Radox, he said Hooper's new automatic, instantaneous recording device. ^ ❖ ❖ that "it is estimated that Hooperecorder service costs $4,000 less per month than Radox for the first year in New York, assuming all equipment and installation costs of both were written off during the first year, and $9,500 per month less than Radox beginning the second year and thereafter." In presenting the new mechanical automatic reporting system, Mr. Hooper made it plain that he has no plans for discontinuing any of his current reporting services utilizing the coincidental telephone interview method and that they will be continued as long as they are needed. Eventually, it. is possible that they may give way to the new system, but that is something for the future to detei-mine, he said, emphasizing that for the immediate future all Hooper subscribers may be assured that the service they are currently receiving will be forthcoming without change. In SCOTUS Review broadcast in a "conspicuous manner in the newspaper or on the broadcasting station as were the statements claimed to be libelous" within 20 days after "knowledge of publication or broadcast of the statements claimed to be libelous," the person libeled can recover only special damages. If a correction is asked but not published, the libeled (if the matter is proved to libelous in court) may recover general, special plus exemplary damages. Latter damages may be recovered only if "actual malice" in publication or broadcast is proved. In considering the case, the State Supreme Court had ruled in a split (5-2) decision that the state can substitute a retraction for money damages. In its opinion, the court said : Plaintiff contended ... a person who defames another must be fully responsible for any damage caused thereby, and that the substitution of a retraction for all but special damages is an unconstitutional attempt to relieve newspapers and radio stations from full responsibility for the (Continued on page 78) UBEL DAMAGES ISSUE QUESTION of how much protection the state can give newspapers or broadcasters when libelous matter is printed or broadcast is expected to be answered by the U. S. Supreme Court which last week agreed to hear argument and rule on the issue. The case involves California's libel law, which applies to both newspaper and radio, and grew out of a suit against the Southern California Associated Newspapers by Erwin P. Werner, former city attorney of Los Angeles. Point of contention is the Constitutionality of a state law excusing the broadcaster, or publisher, from paying general damages providing a retraction is broadcast, or printed. In the California case, Mr. Werner failed to demand a retraction of an allegedly libelous newspaper story, thereby barring a damage suit unless he could prove specific damages to his business or property. Last April, the California State Supreme Court had ruled the statute as not violating the State Constitution and as not failing to give equal protection under the Federal Constitution. A month later, the court refused a rehearing. The originating court also had ruled the law constitutional but was reversed by an appeals court. Charging libel per se, the plaintiff (Mr. Werner) contended that while California grants a person the right to write or speak his mind freely, he can be held liable for the printed matter or words spoken. Abuse of that right, Mr. Werner's attorneys argued, subjects the violator to penalities. Legal Questions Raised It was argued further that the state can't remove money damages nor substitute a retraction for the right to general damages for injuries incurred. Also challenged was whether the state may "constitutionally destroy" the legal protection of one's "good name and one's reputation." Damages, totaling $100,000, were asked. According to California's law on libel: If a retraction is printed or BROADCASTING • Telecasting October 23, 1950 • Page 25