Broadcasting Telecasting (Jul-Sep 1960)

West request A trip to Pasadena, Calif., was requested by the FCC Broadcast Bureau last week to hold the license renewal hearing of KRLA of that city "on location." The bureau told the commission that it will "be very likely" that several witnesses residing in the Pasadena area will be called and that as the hearing progresses it will be necessary to have "available records which at the present time cannot be specified." The commission has designated KRLA's renewal for hearing because of past programming, contests and promotions (Broadcasting, July 4). A STRING ON JERROLD DEALS Catv acquisitions must be court approved lator on ch. 75. The grant was made to People's Tv Inc., Leadville, Colo. Mt. Marston Tv Assn., Trego, Mont., will operate a translator on ch. 70 to serve Trego, Fortine and Stryker, all Montana, by repeating programs of KHQ-TV Spokane, Wash. Two translator grants were made to J. R. Karban, Rhinelander, Wis., to operate on channels 71 and 76. The ch. 71 station will repeat programs of WFRV (TV) Green Bay, Wis., and the ch. 76 facility will translate television programs of WSAU-TV Wausau. Wis. FTC makes 102nd payola complaint The Federal Trade Commission has issued four more payola complaints, charging that the following record companies made under-the-counter payments to radio-tv disc jockeys and other station personnel to have their records played over the air: Dot Records Inc., Hollywood; John Kay Distributing Co. and Cadet Distributing Co., both Detroit; and Prestige Records Inc., Bergenfield, N.J. This marks 102 such complaints issued since the FTC began its campaign last fall. Meanwhile Capitol Records Distributing Corp., Hollywood, expressed "surprise and shock" at the FTC's payola complaint, issued two weeks ago (Broadcasting, July 25). Glenn E. Wallichs and John K. Maidand, chairman and president respectively, said the FTC complaint names no names, no dates, no cities, nor does it state what form the alleged payola took. "We have always taken great pride in the integrity of our operation," these officials said. "As a matter of company policy, we have not and do not indulge in the practice of 'payola'. . ." A federal judge last week found Jerrold Electronics Corp., Philadelphia manufacturer of community television equipment, partially guilty of antitrust violations. Most of the company's practices between 1951 and 1954 were upheld as "not unreasonable" in the early days of the community antenna business. U.S. District Court Judge Francis L. Van Dusen issued two principal injunctions, meeting in part the government's requests. These forbid Jerrold from insisting on a "veto" clause on other equipment in its sales contracts, and also prohibits the Philadelphia manufacturer from acquiring any additional catv systems without the court's approval. Jerrold now owns nine cable companies— in Ukiah, Calif.; Ventnor, N.J.; Flagstaff, Ariz.; Pocatello, Idaho: Dubuque, Iowa; Richland, Wenatchee and Walla Walla, all Washington, and Florence, Ala. The court refused to order Jerrold to divest itself of its present catv ownership. No statement was issued by Jerrold in connection with Judge Van Dusen's order. Attorneys for the company were said to be studying the decision. The antitrust suit was brought by the Dept. of Justice Feb. 15, 1957. Hearings were held before Judge Van Dusen for five weeks beginning Nov. 9, 1959. Attacked as restraints of trade were three Jerrold practices in the 1951-54 period: (1) A "full package" contract requirement that refused to sell Jerrold catv equipment without also hiring the company to design and supervise installation; (2) a contract provision which forbade a purchaser from using any equipment other than Jerrold's without the company's approval; and (3) extracting a promise from the purchaser that if a system were to be expanded Jerrold would get the job. Early Practices "Reasonable" ■ Judge Van Dusen found the first two requirements reasonable in the early days of cable company growth because of the newness and rapid changes in the burgeoning catv industry. He found the third practice a violation of the antitrust laws. Jerrold ceased the disputed practices in 1954. The court found that during the 1 95 154 period, Jerrold signed more than 120 contracts for the construction of catv systems. Its income from this source, the judge determined, amounted to $870,000 from 1952 to 1957. He also disclosed that Jerrold's income from its nine catv systems (it owned 10 at one time) for the fiscal year ending February 1959 was 62% of its total profit after taxes. These systems, he noted, bought $426,338.85 worth of equipment from Jerrold during the three years, 1956-59, with "no significant" purchases from Jerrold's competitors. The nine Jerrold catv systems do not constitute undue concentration. Judge Van Dusen held. They amount to between 1.5% and 10% of the total market. Divestiture, therefore, would be too harsh, he said. The injunction against Jerrold acquiring any more catv companies without court approval Tuns for three years, from April 2, 1959. Jerrold refused to comment on reports that it was negotiating with an unidentified group to sell three of its catv systems. The report was dubbed "premature" by a spokesman. Judge Van Dusen found, also, that the vice president of a Jerrold subsidiary threatened potential customers with "outside" competition unless they bought Jerrold products. He found also that Jerrold made no attempts to acquire a monopoly through its patent holdings. Oral argument set on idle uhf permits At least 23 idle uhf permittees are scheduled to appear before the FCC Sept. 23 to explain why they have not started construction of their stations and why they should be allowed to retain their television construction permits. Date for the oral argument before the commissioners was set last week following an announcement early in June that 21 uhf grantees faced deletion (At Deadline, June 6) for failure to build. Plans for the oral argument were disclosed at that time and the 23 stations named last week filed timely notices of planned appearances. A commission spokesman said that undoubtedly some or all of the remaining eight stations also filed notices within the allowed 20 days after the June announcement. The FCC began a "get-tough"' policy with uhf permittees last February when it ordered 54 uhf stations to report on their failure to build (Broadcasting, Feb. 22). Delay in construction has 88 (GOVERNMENT) BROADCASTING, August 1, 1960