Broadcasting Telecasting (Jul-Sep 1960)

EDITORIALS The great uninformed THE 1960-61 television season is just beginning to get started and already the critics are beginning to bury it. "The tragedy of tv that has been going on behind the scenes this summer is beginning to unfold in public," one of the most widely read newspaper critics wrote last week in a review that otherwise was devoted to a single program. The reviewer didn't attempt to explain how one program could foredoom an entire season to tragedy, but his comment does show that the ground rules for criticism didn't improve much during the summer, either. Despite such outbursts of uninformed omniscience, we do not hesitate to say that the 1960-61 season will be marked by a maturity and responsibility far beyond anything that television has undertaken before. To be sure, we are not talking about the weekly "entertainment" schedule, which, as a schedule, promises to be amply "entertaining" but does not seem to offer any startling innovations to excite us; but we are not forgetting, as so many critics do, that "entertainment" is what most of the people want most of the time, and without it there wouldn't be any money for more stimulating fare. When we speak of mature and responsible programming in unmatched dimensions we are thinking of the information programs scheduled for this fall and winter. As reported in this journal a week ago. there will be considerably more than twice as many as there were last year (Broadcasting. Sept. 12), a statistic that becomes even more meaningful when the actual figures are examined: 190 hours of prime network time — worth $22 million for the time alone — against 84 such hours in the year just past. We are not talking about the "Sunday afternoon intellectual ghetto," but about prime evening time; not about politics, but about other national and international issues and problems and subjects which need the widest possible public awareness and understanding. There will be much of politics on the air this fall, both free and bought, both partisan speeches and non-partisan efforts to explore and clarify the issues, and it is entirely possible that when it is over the next President of the U. S. will have been elected because of exposure on television. But forget the campaign and there remains a lineup of major information shows that is impressive by any measure: add what used to be "the ghetto" and the other programs in important but non-prime time and "impressive" becomes "formidable." No matter what the critics say, this promises to be television's most informative year. A matter of standards As REPORTED in this publication two weeks ago, KYA San Francisco, a Bartell station, has volunteered as a laboratory to test whether it can adhere to high commercial standards and still make money. The station announced a trial of a 16-point policy including, among other features, prohibitions against barter, per inquiry advertising, time brokerage and multiple-spotting. Several stations have protested that the 16 practices are already in wide application and have been ever since radio became an important medium. This, of course, is true. But it is equally true that in the intense competition among the growing number of radio stations in recent years some stations have favored expediency over principle. They have explained that they would have gone broke by doing otherwise. Maybe so. Yet some of the most successful stations we know of are also the most highly-principled. In their dealings with advertisers they have adhered to standards that are at least 120 equal to those that KYA has begun to test. For them, the test has already been conducted in the years of their own operation. It has proved that adherence to standards can have its rewards in both money and respect. But if KYA is serious in its intentions, its application of commercial standards could well lead to an upgrading of practices among other stations that heretofore have felt they could not afford the risk of standing on principle. If that happens, all radio will benefit, including the stations that have stuck to standards when some competitors were selling almost any kind of time under almost any kind of conditions to almost any kind of advertiser. What it might have been THE nation was stunned by the havoc wrought last week by what the Weather Bureau called the most destructive hurricane in history. From Florida to Maine there was death and devastation. Ghastly as it was. Donna's toll in lives and property could have been infinitely worse. Radio was there, around the clock. No other direct contact was available to the public in the areas in Donna's path. Newspapers couldn't do it because of power failures and no means of delivery. Many telephone lines were out. It was in Florida, which bore the brunt of the storm, that emergency radio planning paid off. There was minimal loss of lives. All had been forewarned by radio and television through the operations of the new Fm Defense Network which actually had been set up as a by-product of Conelrad to alert the populace against attempted air attack. Fm stations in the Defense Network carried some 150 bulletins each day for relay to the am (and tv) stations of the state. Stations devoted some 25% to 30% of their time to bulletins on the approach and progress of the storm, and to essential information after it struck. Thus the Fm Defense Network, which had been on a teststandby basis for a year proved its value in the saving of lives and in minimizing property damage. Stations remained on the air through use of auxiliary power supplies needed for the Conelrad installations made at their own expense. There are Fm Defense Networks established in 30 states. They are primed to go into action in any emergency, whether caused by nature or by the enemy attack we hope will never come. Donna proved the effectiveness and the indispensability of this service. The saving of a single life would have made it worthwhile. And they talk about a dearth of public service. Drawn for BROADCASTING by Sid Hix "You're looking for a tv western star with a brand new gimmick, right?" BROADCASTING, September 19, 1960