Broadcasting Telecasting (Jul-Sep 1962)

GRANT TO WTSP-TV STAYED FCC reopens record, wants to study programming of Rahalls' WLCY since tv proceedings ended be paid back more than he spent. The sale of WLWA is part and parcel of WIBC's agreement to withdraw, the bureau said. "How the price for the Atlanta station was arrived at and how much the fact that WIBC was dismissing its application in this case entered into the final price are intangibles which the commission should not be required to resolve," the bureau said. In any case, it concluded, sale of WLWA was a "consideration" paid to WIBC by Crosley above the $100,000 and therefore WIBC is being paid more than it spent. The bureau said the commission had no choice but to reject the entire WIBC-Crosley package. WGAL-TV wasting time In rules move-WLYH-TV WLYH-TV (ch. 15) Lebanon-Lancaster, Pa., a Triangle station, told the FCC last week that WGAL-TV (ch. 8) Lancaster is misdirecting its energy in asking the FCC to rescind a rulemaking proposal and that WGAL-TV should be content to file comments. The proposal, requested by WLYHTV and opposed by WGAL-TV, suggests reassignment of ch. 15 from Lebanon to Lebanon-Lancaster (Broadcasting, June 25). WLYH-TV has FCC permission to identify with both cities but the channel is assigned to Lebanon. WGAL-TV told the FCC that the proposal would serve no public interest purpose; that it is a move by WLYH-TV to establish grounds for deletion of ch. 8 by deintermixture. WGAL-TV has every right to comment on the proposal, which the FCC has found to be in the public interest in its notice of rulemaking, but not to oppose issuance of the rulemaking, WLYH-TV said. As to WGAL-TV's objection to the "time, cost and expense of rulemaking," WLYH-TV claimed that station's "concern would be more persuasive had it not filed a succession of multifarious pleadings addressed to the commission's [rulemaking] notice." The FCC announced plans last week to place the radio programming of WLCY St. Petersburg under the microscope to determine if the tentatively successful applicant for ch. 10 TampaSt. Petersburg has the character qualifications to be a broadcast licensee. On its own motion, the commission stayed its January grant of ch. 10 to WTSP-TV Inc. (Broadcasting, Jan. 22) and reopened the record for further testimony on the operations of WLCY since the tv hearing record was closed in May 1960. Brothers N. Joe, Farris E. and Sam G. Rahall each own 25% of WTSP-TV and they also own WLCY. The tv grant to the Rahall combine (which includes 22 other stockholders) was made on a 3-2 FCC vote, with two commissioners not participating. Five other applicants had sought the facility. Four of the five losing applicants asked the FCC to reconsider the grant and two — City of St. Petersburg (ch. 38 WSUN-TV) and Florida Gulf coast Broadcasters Inc. — asked that the record be reopened to consider the WLCY operations. They charged that live, public service programming was placed on WLCY during the ch. 10 comparative hearing and was dropped after the tv record was closed (Broadcasting, Feb. 26). Other ch. 10 applicants include Bay Area Telecasting Corp. (which did not seek reconsideration). Suncoast Cities Broadcasting Corp. and Tampa Telecasters Inc. While it reopened the record on its own motion on the same issues sought by City and Florida Gulfcoast, the commission denied their petitions seeking the same thing. The FCC further said it was holding in abeyance petitions for reconsideration by the four applicants requesting same. The New Issues ■ The new ch. 10 hearing issues will include (1) the nature and programming of WLCY since the close of the tv hearing record May 16, 1960 and the extent to which the programming differs from that during the hearing; (2) the reasons underlying the choice of programming of WLCY during the tv hearing and since the hearing; (3) whether WTSP-TV Inc. has the requisite character qualifications to be a licensee, and (4) whether and in what respects the original final decision should be modified. Commissioner John S. Cross dissented to the new hearing and Commissioners Rosel H. Hyde and Frederick W. Ford did not participate. Examiner recommends KPSR (FM) revocation Finding that the principals of KPSR(FM) Palm Springs, Calif., showed a "callous disregard for the truth," FCC Hearing Examiner Elizabeth C. Smith recommended in an initial decision last week that the station's license be revoked. As grounds for the proposed revocation. Miss Smith ruled that there had been three unauthorized controls of the station during 1958-59; that deliberate misrepresentations had been made to the FCC and that no first-class operator was employed by the station. She said that Richard T. Sampson, the original applicant, did not have control of the station at any time after it went on the air in November 1958. The examiner said the first unauthorized transfer occurred in October 1958 from Mr. Sampson, sole licensee, to a partnership composed of Mr. Sampson and Maxwell, George and Hyman Shane. The second transfer was the formation of a corporate entity composed of the same principals Nov. 7, 1959, Miss Smith found, and the third later in 1959 through an employment contract. Although Mr. Sampson, as a consulting engineer who has practiced before the FCC for several years, is well aware of FCC rules, the examiner said, "at no time after his initial application did he make truthful representation to the commission . . ." She said the conduct of George and Hyman Shane and Howard Morris, who at one time was president and 30% owner of the station, "evinces a complete lack of candor in reporting facts to the commission." FCC asks: are two too many for BIythe? Can BIythe, Calif., with a 1960 population of 6,023, support two am radio stations? This is one of the questions the FCC wants answered in a hearing, ordered last week on the application of Geoffrey A. Lapping for a new station on 1260 kc with 500 watts in BIythe. KYOR BIythe had asked the FCC to deny the Lapping application on the grounds the city could not economically support two stations and, as a consequence, the public would suffer through a degradation of service. In addition, KYOR challenged the financial qualifications of Mr. Lapping and charged that he had made misrepresentations to the FCC on the proposed transmitter site for the new station. The FCC also made both of these questions issues in the hearing and made KYOR a party. Voting for the economic injury hearing were Chairman Newton N. Minow and Commissioners T. A. M. Craven, Robert T. Bartley and John S. Cross. Dissenting were Commissioners Rosel Hyde, Robert E. Lee and Frederick W. Ford. 36 (GOVERNMENT) BROADCASTING, July 2, 1962