Broadcasting Telecasting (July - Sept 1951)

Open Mike (Continued from page 16) about NBC's new code of radio and television broadcast standards, as unveiled by NBC Executive Vice President Charles R. Denny, you quote the code as follows: "NBC seeks to have such backdrops or properties used judiciously (showing the sponsor's name, name of his product, etc.). • ." Item : Three days prior to this release, NBC-TV carried a summer replacement show called Juvenile Jury. This was sponsored by the Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Corp. for Scotch Cellophane Tape. The five moppets who constituted the panel were introduced through a giant Scotch Cellophane Tape Dispenser. Each of the moppets spoke his or her witty saying into a small individual microphone, made in the form of a Scotch Cellophane Tape Dispenser. Jack Barry, mc, spoke his lines into a larger microphone made in the form of a Scotch Cellophane Tape Dispenser. Behind Mr. Barry's head, but fully in every camera shot, was a large, overbearing replica of the Scotch Cellophane Tape trademark. And not only that but one of the questions which the cute little tykes grappled with had to do with the needs of a subject for various uses of Scotch Cellophane Tape. This little model also stepped through the giant size Scotch Cellophane Tape dispenser. NBC says this is incidental background . . .? Richard Krolik Project Supervisor The March of Time New York Enough is Enough EDITOR: After reading the editorial of June 11 entitled "FM's Aches, TV's Balm?" ... we are writing as representatives of the FM listening public. We wonder why your publication continually persists in knocking the best means of sound broadcasting — FM . . . Bruce Elving Richard Gottschald Duluth, Minn. * * * EDITOR: ... I have noted with interest your replies to Ed Wheeler and Mr. Adams [Open Mike, June 25, 18] in regard to defending your statement, attributed to engineers, that FM could be accommodated on two megs. You state in only the densely populated areas such as their markets are it might not work. Please then explain what would happen in our area (Washington population 12,000) to the 15 or 16 FM stations that are listened to with regular consistency by the people of this area. . . . You say, with a twang of bitterness, there are only 700 FM stations on the air. How many AM's were there on the air five years after the advent of radio? How many TV's after five years? What industry or business can invest what we have in a new business, speaking of the FM broadcasters, and expect it to give an immediate return ? We who have stuck it out for three or four years are getting on our feet, much to the consernation of those who like to see us die. . . . Please don't try to add insult to injury by stating that anyone who thinks your publication is opposed to FM hasn't read it very closely. I have long defended you of these charges, but now it is so obvious that it is indeed an insult, even though we have shown our lack of intelligence by staying in FM, a thing we believe in, and even some of us making it pay. Robert E. Williams Station Manager WFML (FM) Wash., hid. EDITOR: I am sorry to have to say that Broadcasting • Telecasting certainly does discriminate against FM broadcasting. Invariably, Broadcasting e Telecasting calls aural broadcasting AM instead of Rad:o. The letters AM mean amplitude modulation and so exclude the frequency modulation segment of the broadcasting art. Your reference to radio as AM is grammatically wrong, too. This is of course a calculated deliberate, cutting slur of the superior FM medium. Richard F. Lewis Jr (licensee) WRFL (FM) Winchester, Va. % Ifc % v EDITOR: . . . Upon carefully re-reading your editorial ["FM's Aches, TV's Balm?". June 11] and the comments given to Edward Wheeler's letter [Open Mike, June 18], I agree with you that in substance Broadcasting • Telecasting has not come out against FM. However, in effect you have. You are actually denying that there is any future to FM; that someday there might be broadcasters clamoring for space on the FM spectrum. The suggestion is a bit far-fetched, perhaps, but you know what I mean. There are broadcasters who are making money by providing a listener program (as contrasted with Storecast, Air Music, etc.) on strictly an FM basis. WBIB, WABF and several others can be cited as examples. Sol Chain and Ira Hirschman and others have the hope that someday others will join them. By reducing the FM band, they are denied that chance; for once lost, the FM spectrum will never be regained. FM growth may be slow, but it's steady. Let's plan for a brighter FM future, and leave 88 to 108 mc intact. George W. Hamilton Maplewood, N. J. [EDITOR'S NOTE: We're glad that Mr. Hamilton's fears for our scuttling FM, as expressed in his letter published in OPEN MIKE last week, have been relieved by a re-reading of our editorial. To Mr. Hamilton and to other avid FM partisans who misinterpreted the intent of the editorial, a final word: BROADCASTING • TELECASTING desires no end to FM but believes the fact that the FM spectrum is not fully occupied justifies a consideration of the question of diverting some spectrum space to TV]. ♦ -.♦<♦ Old Wheeze EDITOR: As a theatre operator [The Georgetown Theatre in Washington] and as a public relations adviser on films and television, I can't quite agree with the premise you outline in your editorial, "Theatre TV No Knockout" [June 25 issue] . . . And frankly what makes television so sacrosanct that you, in your omnipotence, can blithely, and carelessly, insist that "the retail price of a radio or television set should be the total admission charge to all the programs on the air?" Especially when you know that the customer is paying for the show in the form of a pitchman's approach to "hurry, hurry, hurry," to buy a sponsor's product? . . . Al Sherman Washington, D. C. [EDITOR'S NOTE: No viewer of commercial TV is obliged to buy a sponsor's product unless he wants to. The difference between that and buying a ticket at a box-office before being admitted to a show is obvious.] 'I Perennial Chisel THE summer planting se;,j son has brought a new flowi J offer from a perennial perei I nial offeror, National Rac I Adv. Co., Seattle. In a lett<§ to stations, Edward A. Krai I manager, wants to buy tvij five-minute periods a day, f j six days. That adds up to a I hour of broadcasting so tl j agency says, "We want tl one-hour rate to apply Product is a collection of 2 perennials plus a rose bus)! "The offer is presented vei •! well on a five-minute trai scription," the letter e>] plains, adding, "We will ser. you our check covering th first week's broadcasts phr transcription and shipping ir structions if you will agre to the foregoing and will as sist in every way to mak the account pay out." AMA CONFERENC Marketers Meet in Det SEVENTEEN "circles of in : mation" climaxed the three: conference of the American } keting Assn. at the Hotel Sta' fortnight ago in Detroit. This novation made the last day of conference into an open for where those with specific questi ". and problems could take them rectly to a table containing thre<~, jj five experts in a particular c: gory. Two of the "circles" were voted to radio and TV proble At the table headed "Radio ;l TV as a Source of Marketing | formation" were: Robert J. / derson, ABC; Warren Middlet WLS Chicago; Donald L. Mil.j Crosley Broadcasting Corp., ; Edward Shurick, of CBS. Under "Measuring Advertis. Effectiveness on Radio and T, questions were being answered Thomas Coffin, NBC; Sydney R low, The Pulse Inc.; E. E. Sub quist, A. C. Neilsen Co., and Maxwell Ule, of Kenyon & E'[ hardt. The success of this new idea w measured by the fact that well ovj half of the 400 delegates took ; vantage of one or more of the I roundtables. The theme of V meeting was "Marketing For Ti morrow," with future techniqu being discussed in the light of }■ day's indications of future coiii tions. Advertising's place in marketii was well covered at one mornii, session, when the delegates we j addressed by John L. McQuigg, Geyer, Newell & Ganger; H. . (Ken) Jones, vice president ai; director of research for Brook Smith, French & Dorrance, ar Walter B. Booth, account exeol tive for Campbell-Ewald. read ads, too, And so advertising in Printers' Ink is read by the leading only because they are interested in the 'B mWPI anc* markets they, might use, but also because they have a professional interest in your copy, layout, etc. Page 86 • July 2, 1951 BROADCASTING • Telccasth