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.
TRADE ASSNS. continued
Touchdown!
OKLAHOMA CITY g^g„s
for ABC Fall Line-up!
EXCLUSIVELY ON
KGEO-TV
FULL POWER 100,000 WATTS 1,386 FT. ABOVE AVERAGE TERRAIN GEORGE STREETS, STATION MANAGER CHARLIE KEYS, SALES MANAGER
REPRESENTED BY B L A I R 7^^^ ASSOCIATES inc.
Page 50 • October 14, 1957
Tv Program Standards Off, AT AS Forum Feels
Tv censorship, agency "interference," the decline of live programming, the cost of dramatic shows and the role of writers' agents — good or bad — came in for considerable discussion last Tuesday night as the Academy of Tv Arts & Sciences conducted its first open forum of the 1957-58 season at CBS-TV Studio 51 in Manhattan. The general feeling appeared to be that tv standards are declining.
Most of the evening's give-and-take session between leading producer-writers and the audience — all ATAS members — dwelt on censorship, with Studio One producer Herbert Brodkin taking the position that while censorship is deplorable "it is not organized . . . planned . . . deliberately done to prevent creativity." He felt it "requires the most intelligent kind of behavior to keep a network going" under constant fire from outside pressures. Censorship, he maintained, "grows through fear . . . fear of bad ratings, fear of government agencies . . . fear of pressure groups." The worst thing that could happen to tv today, he said, "is for the producers and writers to become so intimidated that they will begin thinking like they [pressure groups] do."
Playwright Rod Serling carried the topic of censorship a step farther. Billing himself as "tv's angry man," Mr. Serling called for "the same kind" of program control by the producer and the writers as is accorded the sponsor and agency. He wondered why no one has ever clearly defined "controversy" in black-and-white terms and why there isn't "a clear line of demarcation" between the commercial and the program content. With such a demarcation, he said, there would be no need for censorship.
Studio One director Norman Felton added that too many producers "compromise much too easily." Writer Irve Tunick questioned the qualifications of "those who set the standards . . . those who set themselves up to speak for all viewers." Messrs. Brodkin and Serling agreed that multiple sponsorship, as on Playhouse 90, might strengthen the writer's and producer's causes because it dilutes the "dictatorial" stand of one agency or a single advertiser.
Speaking for the agencies, Mary Harris, of the tv department of McCann-Erickson, agency for Westinghouse Electric Corp. and Studio One, felt no panel member had pointed to the difference between censorship and self-regulation and defended the agency's tightrope position by pointing to the sponsor's "pride" in a series it has retained more than nine tv seasons.
Where Mr. Tunick deplored the "shrinkage" of live shows, Mr. Brodkin felt this is "just another trend that will be offset by yet another trend." He predicted a "swingback" to live programming.
The topic of live vs. "canned" programming led to a discussion on script costs and a shortage of new writers. Addressing Evelyn Burkey, executive secretary of Writers Guild of America, East, Mr. Brodkin said that where once he and his associates could sit down with a writer and develop the latter's
Broadcasting