Broadcasting Telecasting (Jan-Mar 1956)

BROADCASTING TELECASTING February 27, 1956 Vol. 50, No. 9 ARE THE AD PROTESTS FROM THE PUBLIC OR POLITICIANS? Records indicate it's only a vociferous minority, but key government figures convey these admonitions on overcommercialization: • McConnaughey warns state groups to clean house • Lee tells N. Y. executives of Capitol storm warnings • Magnuson may question monitoring of commercials • Monroney and Heselton charge advertising abuses THREE TIMES in recent weeks government leaders have sounded off on alleged radio station overcommercialization. Coming after renewed FCC activity regarding "program imbalance" [BeT, Dec. 5, 1955], outspoken dissents in two relatively recent station license renewals and a bill in Congress to empower the FCC to require program-commercial time ratios (HR 5741), the drive against excessive commercialization seems to be coming to a head. How did this concern with the advertising content and length of radio commercials (for the accusing fingers have most often pointed at the aural medium) come about? Is there a ground swell of public protest against commercialism? If there is it isn't apparent in the FCC's own official figures. In fact, quite the contrary; the number of complaints against commercial abuses has not increased materially in recent months. To find out what has motivated government viewers-with-alarm, B«T went to the sources. This is what it found: Item: FCC Chairman George C. McConnaughey warned state broadcast association presidents in Washington last week to clean up their houses or face the threat of government regulation. "The Commission is very sensitive to inept advertising," the FCC chairman later told B*T. "We hear a good deal about it. People keep needling commissioners. The subject is brought up time and time again. People say, 'Why don't you do something about this?' It's an old story, a couple of bad eggs spoil the whole carton." Item: Comr. Robert E. Lee advised radio-tv salesmen and agency timebuyers at the RadioTv Executives Society meeting in New York last week to raise the standards of broadcast advertising or face federal regulation. "We've been hearing more and more about this from Capitol Hill," Mr. Lee told B*T. "For instance, just this week I received a letter from a congressman from a small town out West. He related a sad tale sent him by a local hardware merchant. This merchant was complaining about a crew of storm window salesmen who plastered the city with advertising — especially on the air. You know, they talk it up big, and then they don't produce. They saturate the market, then move on. And the local hardwareman is left holding the bag." Item: Sen. Warren G. Magnuson (D-Wash.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee inveighed against what he called "false and fraudulent" advertising on the radio three weeks ago during the committee's hearing on television mjtters [B»T, Feb. 6]. " I was home sick some weeks ago," the Washington Democrat told B«T, "listening to the radio. Some of those offers . . . everything for free. You know people can't . . . It's like pu'ling teeth to get them to take something back once you've ordered it. A lot of people a'e sadly disillusioned when they take up those offers. We've got to slow up this sort of thing." Others who have spoken up on the alleged overcommercialization had much the same answers. Letters from hometown friends. People at cocktail parties. Listening while driving to work. Listening while driving across the state (Sen. A. S. Mike Monroney [D-Okla.] claimed that all he got was "three minutes of program for every 15 minutes of commercials"). One point is made by all who discuss this matter. It's the minority who cause the complaints; by and large radio and tv stations are free from such taints. And there is another point that is made by those who have spoken out on this matter. It is that the FCC should not have, does not desire, the task of policing stations. Nor should the federal government legislate along these lines. It is the broadcasters themselves who must clean up their own house. The subject won't down. In fact, Sen. Magnuson told B»T that he would bring up the question of monitoring commercials when the Federal Trade Commission comes up before his Senate Appropriations subcommittee on its 1957 budget. Sen. Magnuson had written the FTC regarding this complaint, and had been told what the federal agency does [B»T, Dec. 20]. This interest in so-called overcommercialization started a long time ago. In fact, without stretching things too thin, it can be fairly stated that it started back in 1946 — when the FCC issued its controversial bombshell, the Blue Book (Public Service Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees). More recently it cropped up in two radio station license renewals — one in April last year, when Comrs. Lee. John C. Doerfer and Frieda B. Hennock dissented to the renewal, and another last September, when Comr. Doerfer dissented. The FCC is far from unanimous on the "overcommercialism" or "imbalance" approach. Older members, who have been through the Blue Book era, are not disposed to go along with the complainers. apparently recognizing that consideration of program content treads dangerously close to censorship. The statute specifically excludes program censorship by the FCC. but permits it to take an overall look at station performance under the "public in terest" clause in considering renewals. Comr. Lee, speaking for the three dissenters in the first case, had this to say: "The excessive number of commercial spots presently used by this station causes me concern. In addition, inquiry should be made into the station's practice of 'bait and switch advertising.' Advertisers such as vacuum cleaning establishments are permitted to offer a vacuum for 'the ridiculously low price of $14.95' or thereabouts, with a complete set of attachments, and a set of aluminum ware or steak knives thrown in for free if the prospective purchaser is one of the first 20 to call. The purchaser is VOICES RAISED AGAINST AD 'ABUSES7 Wimmmm mm McConnaughey Lee Magnuson Monroney Doerfer Heselton THESE are the government officials who have been sounding the tocsin. The enemy? — what they call overcommercialization, excessive commercials, false and fraudulent advertising in radio broadcasting. What do they warn? — if broadcasters don't get the alleged offside stations in line, government may do it for them. However, the big contradiction to all the hue and cry is the relatively small number of complaints that have been officially lodged with the FCC. Broadcasting • Telecasting February 27, 1956 • Page 31