Broadcasting Telecasting (July - Sept 1952)

editorial 4 Commercial .... AT FIRST GLANCE, the 1951 financial record of television, as reported a fortnight ago by the FCC, looks extremely favorable, especially for so young an enterprise. As a whole, telecasters made a profit of just under 18% (before federal income taxes) on their $235.7 million business volume last year. But first glances can be misleading. Of the 106 TV stations covered in the report, 14 lost money. Indeed five of them that were on the air throughout both years lost more in 1951 than they did the year before. Where were the losers situated? Eight were in the two markets where the most vigorous competition within television exists — in Los Angeles and New York, each of which has seven TV stations. Two were in three-station markets, three in two-station markets and only one in a monopoly market all to itself. To judge by these statistics, it would seem that television is its own toughest competitor. If this continues to be so, and if the television population increases as much as is now anticipated, some people may lose their shirts. The gamble becomes particularly hazardous in those secondary markets to which, because of geographical conditions, the FCC has allocated several channels each. In such communities television overpopulation can prove unfortunate. It is not, of course, the FCC's business to decide how many stations a market can support economically. Happily, that decision still resides with the businessmen who want to risk their money in this new and fascinating art. It will help these businessmen, in evaluating the risks involved, to read closely the loss as well as the profit sides of the 1951 TV financial report. TV is not a gold mine where the nuggets lie around waiting only for the picking. It is a big business and will be an infinitely bigger one. And it will be rewarding to skillful management. .... and Sustaining AS NOTED ABOVE, it is not within the FCC's authority to restrict the number of television channels in a given community because of economic considerations. In fact it is the Commission's duty to allocate the absolute maximum of channels that good engineering standards will allow — not only to allocate these channels but to make it possible for them to be put to early use. We cannot help but feel that it is not carrying out this duty. It is being distracted from its principal job — enabling the television system to grow normally— by the insistent effort of at least two Commissioners to find educational institutions able and willing to occupy some of the 242 channels reserved for non-commercial use. If the same amount of effort was being used in expediting the handling of commercial applications already on hand, the processing lines would, we are sure, move more rapidly. Both Chairman Walker and Comr. Hennock have been busier than bird-dogs trying to flush educational telecasters. They are even engaging in fund-raising activities, lending the pres Page 48 • September 1, 1952 sure of the federal government to appeals for money to build and run the stations which, as far as the FCC is concerned, can be had by any educational institution just for the asking. Chairman Walker has made three trips to the White House in three months, a record unmatched by any former chairman, for the announced purpose of keeping the President informed of the tremendous job the FCC is doing for education. So eager is the FCC to avoid the embarrassment of winding up with 242 unused educational channels on its hands that it has discarded its own rules in granting eight stations of the 14 for which applications have been made. In at least one of these cases, no showing whatever of financial ability was made. And in all seven cases, the financial resources seem extremely dubious. Yet a primary rule for any applicant for a commercial facility is that he must prove he has the money on hand to build and run the station. In their zeal to create a non-commercial, educational television system, the Commissioners are failing in their obligation to assist the expansion of the system that already exists and is, by the vote of 18-odd million TV set owners, eminently satisfactory. . Colorful Topic THERE'S MAGIC in the word color. Last week there was printed far and wide a story about the FCC being called upon to consider standards for a new color system. It even had the experts stumped. Calls came from the manufacturers themselves — the men who know where things stand. They know, moreover, that color is about as far from the minds of the FCC as smellovision. The facts: An enterprising feature writer of the United Press went after a routine story on the status of color. She called the RTMA and was told there wasn't anything new since the NPA pulled the plug last year, after a Supreme Court decision upholding the FCC's approval of CBS's field sequential system. She was referred to Dr. W. R. G. Baker, GE vice president and chairman of the National Television Systems Committee. He reported on the experiments with compatible methods evolved by RCA and participated in by others. The tone of the news story that came out of this interview indicated that the NTSC was on the verge of requesting a reopening of the color case before the FCC. The truth is, of course, that the committee has not reached that point. It is progressing with its experiments and one day will be ready to submit its color system to the FCC. That day, however, is not at hand. Reports to the contrary can only mislead the public. At the moment, the non-viewing public is interested in getting TV, black and white or yellow and chartreuse. Look at what's happened in Denver, where KFEL went on the air last month as the first post-freeze TV station! Television dealers popped up in mortuaries and jewelry stores and hotel showrooms. Sets were moved in by plane, truck, train and bob-sled. Antennas were installed at scalpers' prices. Anything that would work was sold. For a quarter-century prior to the advent of commercial TV, video was "just around the corner" in the language of the laboratories and the manufacturers. And for the foreseeable future, compatible color will be "just around the corner." our respects to: STANLEY RANDALL PRATT AS THE Presidential campaign approaches the customary election-eve agitation, a calming influence at Eisenhower headquarters will be Stanley Pratt, president and manager of WSOO Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. No broadcaster around NARTB District 8, including Michigan and Indiana, was surprised last July 30 when word went out that the district's director had been named personal representative of the Republican National Chairman assigned to Gen. Eisenhower. Nor was it was news around the upper and lower peninsulas of Michigan when Arthur E. Summerfield, GOP chairman, announced his selection of Mr. Pratt for this key campaign assignment. After all, Stanley Pratt is no novice at politics, as any Michigan politican can testify. This is the second Presidential campaign in which he has been active, the first dating back to 1948 when he was active on behalfof the Dewey forces as assistant to Mr. Summerfield, then Michigan state chairman. He later became campaign manager for the Republican State Central Committee. Mr. Pratt isn't what you would call a professional politician. His interest goes far deeper than the breast-beating harangues of the legislator or the glad-handing of the office holder. It's a sincere interest in the problems of government and politics, and despite his active work in Michigan campaigns he doesn't seek public office. Right now he's about the most active politician in sight as he flits from Denver to Washington to New York and then westward again. The 8 a.m.-midnight strategy planning gives him little time for his favorite occupation — reading. Stanley Pratt reads constantly, in more normal times. He reads books and periodicals on government, politics and economics whenever he is away from his desk at WSOO. Combining business, politics and serious reading, this smiling broadcaster from the north brings a refreshing influence to the GOP campaign. "His experience, excellent judgment and integrity recommend him to serve as my representative in Dwight D. Eisenhower's headquarters," Chairman Summerfield said in announcing the appointment. There were a number of other traits the chairman didn't mention — traits familiar to fellow broadcasters, his close friends and his political competitors. He's the friendly sort, and has the knack of making everyone around him feel at ease. This type of approach is the (Continued on page 53) BROADCASTING • Telecasting