Broadcasting Telecasting (Oct-Dec 1959)

ture but the sheet glass would show some distortion). The result? Absolutely successful, he said, noting that it was on the basis of this test that the series of some 18 commercials comparing one piece of glass with another was produced. Tv Graphics subsequently shot film on this theme in and around New York City, in Florida and elsewhere "whenever the weather was good." Cameras were mounted in various GM cars and in other-than GM cars which were not identified as to make. Tv Graphics this season has produced further commercials for L-O-F but not of the nature of those under FTC's fire. Used Last Season • The series of commercials alluded to by FTC were produced in the 1957-58 tv season and seen on Perry Mason on CBS-TV. That series, according to the agency, proved to be unusually effective and earned a "success" label by the advertiser, the agency and by competitors. The commercials also were seen during NCAA football which L-O-F was sponsoring in that same season. They did not appear in spot tv. (L-O-F now is participating in Bourbon Street Beat on ABC TV). Libbey-Owens-Ford is the sole glass supplier to General Motors. A substantial percentage of the glass manufactured by L-O-F goes to GM. L-O-F in a prompt denial of the FTC complaint alluded to "complaints" made to FTC as prompting the commission's charges, and described these complaints — presumably from competitors— as constituting "an attack on the power of advertising effectively employed rather than a challenge of the facts which were actually presented in that advertising." The company, stated L-O-F, "denies that its advertising was in any way false or misleading or that it rested upon camera trickery or deceptive photographic techniques," the advertising in question being "true and perfectly proper." L-O-F asserted the issue as a "purely private controversy which resulted in the initiation of the commission proceedings." The statement continued: "Objects viewed through safety glass made of sheet glass often appear distorted because of the surface waviness which is characteristic in such glass. On the other hand, this characteristic of waviness is not inherent in safety glass made of plate glass because the surfaces in plate glass are mechanically ground and polished." The glass manufacturer said the advertising under questions "has done no more than to depict accurately and to compare the visual distortion in safety sheet glass with the lack of such distor 58 (SPECIAL REPORT: QUIZ CASE) tion in safety plate glass." L-O-F accused other parties, which it did not identify, as promulgating "various efforts to bring about the discontinuance" of the comparative glass advertising. Concluded the firm: "No one challenges the fact that safety plate glass is better than safety sheet glass." The objection by the complaints, L-O-F charged, "seems to be only the graphic and effective manner in which these facts have been portrayed." Concluded the advertiser, "to silence us would serve only the self interests of those complainants." NBC is doing some quizzing of its own NBC last week confirmed reports that it had asked all its top television executives to file depositions outlining the knowledge they might have about the rigging of quiz programs. Though spokesmen declined to discuss the signed affidavits, it was believed the objectives were to enable NBC to "voluntarily supply" the House Subcommittee on Legislative Oversight with evidence, as a sign of the network's cooperation and also to enable NBC to dismiss summarily any executive who perjures himself on his deposition. The depositions were circulated to all NBC vice presidents, department heads and station managers. Each executive was asked to list his name and position at NBC. The questionnaire continues: "Please note that your answers to the following questions are to be sworn before a notary public. "Return the completed questionnaire in attached envelope to the NBC legal department ... as promptly as possible and in no event, later than Nov. 6, 1959. Apart from information you may have received from press reports and other public disclosures of quiz show riggings, did you at any time learn or know, or do you know now, of the following: "1. Secretly giving contestants in quiz, panel or audience participation or contest programs questions or answers or any other individual assistance to help them win (yes or no). "2. Giving a winning contestant in such programs less than the full prize which the program announced he won (yes or no). "3. Receipt by anyone connected with such a program of anything of value from a contestant on the program (yes or no). "4. Charges by contestant or any other persons connected with such programs, relative to any of the foregoing points (yes or no)." Complete details were requested on any of the four answers made in the affirmative. NBC spokesmen said they had knowledge if any of the replies were affirmative, since all envelopes were sealed. A CBS official said the network has not asked its top employes to execute a similar affadavit. CBS clarifies record on $64,000 shows CBS-TV Network President Louis G. Cowan did not sell his stock in Entertainment Productions Inc. to his wife, and CBS did not know about any rigging of $64,000 Challenge six months before it dropped the show, CBS-TV declared last week. It also indicated that Revlon, sponsor of Challenge, had known six months before CBS did that the question of rigging had been raised. The assertions came in answer to a column by Drew Pearson. Thomas K. Fisher, network vice president and general attorney, denied the charges in a telegram sent to Mr. Pearson Monday night and made public by the network. "You said that when Louis G. Cowan disposed of his interests in Entertainment Productions Inc. [which produced $64,000 Question and $64,000 Challenge] it was merely a paper transfer with his wife retaining a large share of the same," Mr. Fisher said. "The fact is that Mr. Cowan sold all his shares back to Entertainment Productions Inc. and none of it to his wife." He said CBS started its investigation of quiz shows "immediately upon learning on Aug. 8, 1958, of a possible irregularity on one of our quiz programs. When we had sufficient evidence to act against any program, we did so promptly." Mr. Fisher also told Mr. Pearson: ". . . You said that as early as March 1958 CBS discovered that Wilton Springer had been given the winning answers [before his appearance on Challenge] that the program producers had so admitted to both CBS and Revlon. "This is not so. CBS received its first information concerning the Springer matter on Sept. 6, 1958; it was not until that date that we learned the Springer matter had come to the attention of Revlon six months before. "You said that Revlon tried to drop its sponsorship in September; that I urged the company to wait until the network had investigated; and that CBS threatened to sue if Revlon broke its contract. "This is not so. The facts are these: there were two remaining scheduled telecasts in the $64,000 Challenge series as of Sept. 6, 1958— Sept. 7 and Sept. 14. We had insufficient proof on Sept. 6 to cancel the Sept. 7 telecast and we pre-empted the final telecast. . . . "The $64,000 Question was sched BROADCASTING, November 9, 1959