Broadcasting Telecasting (Oct-Dec 1957)

EDITORIALS Let's Break Out the Bottle WE think broadcasters ought to reappraise one of their oldest and most rigid taboos, the rejection of liquor advertising. Like many taboos of primitive tribes, the interdiction against liquor advertising was imposed and has been cultivated by fear. Broadcasters fear that the acceptance of liquor advertising would evoke an outcry from die-hard drys that could lead to tightened government regulation. This fear, we believe, arises from an unrealistic estimate of prohibitionist power. To be sure, dry elements flourish in some U.S. communities and even in some U.S. states, but their influence on the national scene is unimportant. No session of Congress passes without the introduction of bills which in one way or another would limit or outlaw the sale and advertising of alcoholic beverages. No one would be more surprised than their authors if any of these bills became law. The bills are introduced only to make a show for a few Congressmen whose constituencies contain substantial blocs of prohibitionists. Where liquor is legal, which is to say most parts of the United States, the advertising of liquor on the air is equally legal. Why shouldn't broadcasters accept their legal rights? There are moral problems involved in liquor advertising, to be sure, but they are no more perplexing than the problems involved in many other kinds of advertising now using radio and television. No broadcaster in his right mind would accept a liquor commercial which, directly or by subterfuge, urged children to take to drink or suggested new ways for alcoholics to acquire and conceal a bottle. A study of the liquor ads in national magazines will show that distillers, as a group, are using extreme moderation. There is no reason to believe that this moderation would not extend to radio and tv. At appropriate times and with appropriate content, liquor commercials would be perfectly proper on radio and tv. It remains for courageous broadcasters to defy the old taboo. If they use discretion and obtain the cooperation of distillers, they can perform a valuable service not only for themselves but for all broadcasters. A New Voice in the Stratosphere MOST thankless assignment in Washington these turbulent days is the direction of the international propaganda organization — the United States Information Agency. For some months under Arthur Larson, "modern Republican" apostle, the USIA has been on dead center or worse, hampered by starvation appropriations, opposition in Congress and low esprit de corps within its staff. Mr. Larson now has moved to the White House to serve as an advisor to President Eisenhower on the word war with the Soviet. To take over the rugged USIA assignment, the President has called back to Washington an experienced career diplomat and troubleshooter, George V. Allen, ambassador to Greece. He had the same assignment nearly a decade ago, when the unit functioned as an arm of the State Dept., and he was assistant secretary. Four years ago, USIA became an independent agency. The biggest operation in USIA is the Voice of America, which maintains world-wide shortwave communications, beaming broadcasts in the native tongues of the populaces, both in front of and behind the Iron Curtain (when those broadcasts can break through Soviet jamming). To assist the Voice, there has functioned over the years a broadcast advisory committee of some of the nation's leading broadcasters. Little publicity is given this advisory activity. And it may be just as well because during the past year the committee barely had become acquainted with Mr. Larson, whose interests apparently ran in other directions. It should be different under the seasoned Mr. Allen. He knows the outside world. And he knows government and Congress. Chances are that instead of a one-third cut in budget, Congress will give him a substantial increase over the $96.2 million dollars appropriated for the 1958 fiscal year. Mr. Allen can be expected to work closely with the broadcast advisory committee — a group of experts selected because of their knowledge of operations, programming and organization. We hope Mr. Allen also will look into possible use of standard broadcast stations to supplement shortwave. It has been suggested before that a sort of reverse lend-lease might be worked out, whereby government-owned systems (many of which are now commercial) would handle Voice broadcasts, with credits to be given on what Page 130 • October 28, 1957 Drawn for BROADCASTING by Sid Hix "/ suppose they're trying to compete with all those pocket books!" those governments may owe us. Such arrangements, of course, could not be made with the Soviet satellites, but in Europe, where distances are short, many Western stations can be received on cheap receivers behind the Iron Curtain. There are no known statistics on Voice reception by shortwave. Shortwave receivers are expensive and it is likely that only the well-to-do and the foreign offices make up the primary audiences for these transmissions. Much better results have accrued from the uninhibited broadcasts through Radio Free Europe and Voice of Liberation, privately endowed operations. With the Russians capitalizing on sputnik and their claimed scientific and military superiority in the missile and satellite fields, a step-up of our own information services to offset this propaganda should have first priority. The Majesty of NCAA ONE of the more interesting public spectacles in recent history played to an audience of 40,000 in the U. of Maryland stadium Oct. 19 instead of an entire continent because a little group of little men within the National Collegiate Athletic Association's Tv Committee decided not to allow live telecasts of the sellout Maryland-North Carolina football game and its distinguished guest, Queen Elizabeth. Asa Bushnell, NCAA Tv Committee program director, conceded to this publication that sellout games can be presented if "appreciable damage" is not done to another game in a 90-mile radius. The only game fitting that description was between two Negro colleges, Morgan State Teachers College and Howard U., and they weren't even contacted by NCAA. Instead, Mr. Bushnell telephoned his six-man administrative subcommittee, providing ample room for fast buck-passing. Again NCAA's bureaucratic monopoly has done a disservice to the public. One of the most disappointed figures in the incident was George F. Hartford, vice president of WTOP-TV Washington, who tried to arrange the telecast for his station and CBS-TV with the help of Maryland U. officials. After watching the game, the Queen and the program of special events, he said, "This would have been one of the greatest sports spectacles in history, with one of the world's great personalities as guest star. Television and the nation were deprived of an important program. Imagine the thrill of watching the Queen at an American football game." Obviously, NCAA, controlling an amateur sport often charged with professional taints, hasn't learned an important lesson in the operation of monopolies — don't twist necks too hard or too often. Mr. Bushnell and his little coterie blew that one. It may have been a serious mistake. Broadcasting