Broadcasting Telecasting (Apr-Jun 1957)

EDITORIALS Toll Gate Closed SOMETIMES questions can be almost as helpful as answers in clarifying a subject under debate. This was certainly so when Rep. Oren Harris (D-Ark.) sent a series of questions to the FCC on the subject of subscription television. Rep. Harris' letter, reproduced in B«T last week, adroitly raised all the important questions there are to ask about subscription television. The FCC's answers, if responsive, will add up to a statement of policy on toll tv, but they will not add up to a final FCC ruling. Until Mr. Harris wrote his letter of April 19, it appeared that the FCC might be heading in the direction of approving toll tv on at least a trial basis. It can no longer proceed uninhibitedly toward action on toll tv. It must first disclose its intentions to Congress. We venture that once the FCC has answered Rep. Harris, the Congress will wish to undertake a study of subscription tv on its own. Certainly the subject is important enough to warrant the most serious Congressional inquiry. As we say, all of the questions that Mr. Harris asked were pertinent. Among them we were especially pleased to note his request for information on the nature of communications which the FCC had received from the public either supporting or opposing toll tv. We can supply part of that answer. Many of the pro-subscription communications now in the FCC's file bear the marks of organized letter-writing. Though written by the general public, they are obviously the inspiration of the professional advocates of toll tv. A careful study of these files will show, we are sure, that the advocates have been far more artful in their public relations than the opponents have been. It has been only recently that those who object to toll tv have begun to assert themselves effectively. Yet the opponents have by far the more impressive case. There can be no doubt that if subscription television is authorized on broadcast frequencies, it will be only a matter of time before a box-office is installed for all important television programs. The free service to which the public has become accustomed will disappear. These are prospects which have not been made clear to the public. If they were, we venture that the public would inundate the FCC with mail, all of it opposing toll tv on the airways. Nickels, Dimes, Millions THE story of F. W. Woolworth Co. and radio demonstrates once again that the taste test is one of the most convincing factors in the sale of radio time. Until two years ago, Woolworth had never tried network radio. Then the five-and-dime giant signed with CBS Radio for a weekly hour of live music, to be presented with dignity and showmanship. A fortnight ago, as The Woolworth Hour approached its 100th broadcast, Woolworth officials let it be known that, having tasted radio, they were finding it savory indeed. The savor that they especially relish is one which is peculiar to cool green dollars, heavy black ink and improved earnings statements. During the approximately two years since The Woolworth Hour was launched, Woolworth's annual sales have gone from $721.3 million to more than $806 million and stockholders' net earnings from 79 cents a share to $3.57 a share last year. When several are used, no one medium can claim credit for all the good fortune that ensues. But Woolworth officials make clear that they see considerably more than happenstance linking the healthy gains in sales and profits with their concurrent use of radio. From their two years' experience they know that The Woolworth Hour "pre-sells" their products and "directly stimulates over-thecounter transactions." They didn't say so, but they must be sorry, now, that they waited Drawn for BROADCASTING • TELECASTING by Sid Hii "Oh, I've been mobile ever since the boss added toll tv to his theatre chain!" so long to take the plunge. A lot of other advertisers might feel the same way, if they'd just give radio a trial. Until they do, they'll go on missing sales and have only themselves to blame. Everybody knows radio goes everywhere. Smartly used, it can sell more products than even Woolworth's carries. THE Woolworth company is not alone among big retailers to discover the value of the air media. Indeed many discovered it many years ago. Take the nation's third largest grocery chain, for example. More than 20 years ago the Kroger Co. saw in radio's mass circulation and personal appeal a chance to promote the Kroger name and merchandise. Kroger stores have used radio consistently since then, and with conspicuous success. Kroger was among the early important users of television. As of now, television and radio are both major media for the chain. Newspapers still dominate the Kroger budget, but the newspaper share lately has been diminishing and the radio-tv share rising. Kroger's skillful use of both radio and tv is a definite factor in the chain's current rate of growth. Kroger's sales curve is rising faster than the curves of A&P and Safeway. The full story is told in the first of a series of B»T business profiles, published this week. Thankless Job THE chairmanship of the Television Code Review Board is a job guaranteeing little glory, much work and an excellent opportunity for the incumbent to make a fool of himself and of television. If a code chairman talks too much, he can impart the impression that tv is rife with immorality and greed. If he talks too little, it will be said that he is suppressing news of code violations or of condoning them. To be effective, the chairman must be alert to code offenses but discreet in dealing with offenders. He must, in short, be a business statesman. The first code chairman, John Fetzer, and the second, G. Richard Shafto, fully measured up to the demands of the job. It may confidently be expected that the new chairman, William B. Quarton, will maintain the standards of his predecessors.