Broadcasting Telecasting (Jan-Mar 1962)

THE PROGRAMMING PAID OFF WBC's past performance outshines parent's sins; FCC renews 14 licenses, but issues a warning The past performance of Westinghouse Broadcasting Co. has been "uncommonly good," the FCC said last week in renewing the licenses of 14 of WBC's 15 broadcast stations. At the same time, the commission waved a club over the corporate head of WBC and the parent Westinghouse Electric Co., warning that any future antitrust violations by the parent company will raise "grave questions." Last week's FCC action renews WBC's licenses without reservation and technically they are good for three years. They are not considered short term licenses, although WBC stations in Oregon will be up for renewal again in 1 1 months and Boston stations in April 1963. Commissioner Robert T. Bartley dissented and voted for a hearing. Chairman Newton N. Minow and Commissioner Frederick W. Ford favored renewals but for one year only. The WBC stations fell under an official FCC cloud after the conviction a year ago of Westinghouse Electric INCREASED i POWER COMBINE TO MAKE KPOL LOS ANGELES A BETTER BUY THAN EVER! New Power, 50,000 Watts for KPOL AM 1540 and 100,000 Watts for FM 93.9 is ringing the cash register louder than ever for KPOL advertising. Phone WEbster 8-2345 for facts. REPRESENTED BY PAUL H. RAYMER CO. 78 (GOVERNMENT) Corp. and certain of its officers for criminal antitrust violations. Westinghouse and several other companies, including General Electric Co., were found guilty of conspiring to rig prices on heavy electrical equipment. How They Stack ■ As noted by the commission, the antitrust conduct involved a product not related to broadcasting and executives in an organizational line different from that controlling the broadcast stations. The highest placed official convicted was a divisional vice president, three organizational tiers below the president of Westinghouse Electric, the FCC said, and WBC has its own board and officers at a level two tiers below the president of the parent company. The broadcast operations and personnel were not involved in the antitrust cases and neither was the management of the parent company, the FCC noted. The commission spared few adjectives in its praise of the past broadcast record of Westinghouse, beginning with KDKA Pittsburgh in 1920. The FCC's review of the pending applications revealed the following: WBC devotes a larger percentage of total expenses to programming than most stations; overall programming shows balance, and there are some programs in every category type; promises have been substantially met through performance. "The inquiry has gone beyond conventional processing [of renewal applications] and marks the Westinghouse broadcast performance as uncommonly good," the FCC said. Especially praised by the commission were WBC programming efforts relating to quality, encouragement of new talent, education, editorializing, public affairs and news. The Dark View ■ On the debit side, the FCC said "Westinghouse has a long history of antitrust involvement." Misconduct outside the broadcast field is weighed against an applicant according to a commission policy statement in March 1951. Pointing to previous antitrust and monopoly investigations of WBC by the FCC in 1952 and 1955, the commission said its "concern with the meaning of this policy in relation to Westinghouse punctuates broadcast history." On the other hand, the commission said, past violation of antitrust laws is not absolutely disqualifying. In WBC's case, there were found to be other favorable facts and considerations which outweigh the record of unlawful con duct in non-broadcast matters. "Having deliberated at considerable length, we are moved to leave undisturbed the broadcast status of Westinghouse," the commission said. After describing Westinghouse Electee's background at length and the promises made in the renewal proceeding, the FCC said: "If . . . Westinghouse again engages in such significant, widespread antitrust violations, in spite of . . . the new programs and new assurances, then obviously a grave question would arise whether Westinghouse's most important and most seriously undertaken commitments can be credited. The judgment for renewal . . . would have to be re-evaluated in the light of this serious question." The Dissenters ■ In voting for a hearing on the renewal applications, Commisioner Bartley said that a determination should be made as to who has ultimate and definitive responsibility for the broadcast stations — Westinghouse Electric or Westinghouse Broadcasting. If the parent company does have this obligation, than antitrust activities may creep into broadcast operations, he said. If not, then serious auestions are raised as to the extent of delegation of power to subordinate operating officials, Commissioner Bartley said. "Accordingly, I believe the record should include a searching inquiry into what extent decisions by officials of WBC are, or have been, changed or over-ruled by Westinghouse Electric," he concluded. Chairman Minow agreed the WBC stations should be renewed, but thought it should be only for 12 months. "We face a fundamental problem of corporate schizophrenia — a large, respected American corporation found guilty of serious crimes in a non-broadcast area of activity, yet possessing a solid record of broadcasting in the public interest. ... In its devotion to public service in broadcasting, Westinghouse has few peers and no superiors." But, Chairman Minow continued, WBC cannot be thought of apart from its own parent. The questions posed turn on the meaning of licensee responsibility in the case of a large, publicly held corporation operating different businesses, he said. "We can draw little comfort from the character of those who operate such a company's broadcasting stations if the actions of their superiors in non-broadcasting fields show them to be basically unreliable," he stated. He said the FCC has reasons to both trust and at the same time doubt Westinghouse and, therefore, WBC should not get off with a warning. The commission should review WBC's licenses on its own motion in 12 months "to test our present conclusions as to the company's responsibility against further BROADCASTING, March 5, 1962