Broadcasting Telecasting (Oct-Dec 1963)

Baker to direct Broadcast Dr. Kenneth Baker, media research consultant widely known in broadcasting, has been named executive director of the newly incorporated Broadcast Rating Council Inc., effective Jan. 1. The appointment wras announced last week by Donald H. McGannon of Westinghouse Broadcasting, chairman of the research committee of the National Association of Broadcasters and also of the council. Mr. McGannon said Dr. Baker will have an assistant, probably with primary experience in the accounting and auditing field to complement his own extensive research background. While offices for the council are being sought in New York. Dr. Baker will work temporarily from the NAB research department offices in the Time-Life Building there. Dr. Baker was NAB research director from 1946 to about 1950, set up the NAB research library, represented the NAB on the committees of the old Broadcast Measurement Bureau and finished BMB's second and final study. He left NAB to open Standard Audits and Measurement Services Inc. (SAMS), which conducted a national radio coverage study in the early 1950*s. He subsequently was a vice president of Market Research Corp. of Rating Council Dr. Baker America, served with William B. Smullin's Cal-Ore TV Inc. stations on the West Coast for five years and was in charge of media services for MRCA before opening his consulting firm a few months ago. The rating council will meet Jan. 8 in New York. gan July 1. The appropriation was signed by President Johnson on Dec. 21. ■ A report on sex and violence on television awaited from the Senate Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee since May 1962. is being held up for another round of hearings to bring the record up to date early next year (Broadcasting. Dec. 23). ■ The House refused to lift a rule that, unlike Senate procedure, bars cameras and microphones from public committee sessions ( Broadcasting. March 11). The Commercial Clash ■ From the standpoint of many broadcasters, their major work on Capitol Hill was to head off the FCC"s foray into setting standards for the length and frequency of commercials. In a year when more than half the 49 state broadcaster associations sent representatives to Washington to discuss their problems with state congressional delegations, most of this effort was to keep the FCCs hands off commercials. The work bore dividends. Powerful support came from the two House members most concerned with broadcasting legislation — and FCC matters. Representatives Harris and Walter Rogers (D-TexJ. the Communications Subcommittee chairman, made critical speeches and challenged the commission's claim of authority. Representative Rogers introduced HR 8316, a bill later passed by the committee, that would prohibit the FCC from making rules on the very points the commission had proposed. Representative Harris backed up his chairman with a ringing speech to the .Arkansas Broadcasters Association that not only criticized the FCCs stand, but predicted the commission "may verv well drop this matter' (Broadcasting. Sept. 9). And from the Senate came more support. The appropriations committee warned the FCC to encourage selfregulation by broadcasters. Another Look ■ Now that the FCC has concluded its oral argument, it appears to be giving the matter a very long second thought. In fact, Chairman E. William Henry now refuses to discuss the issue at all (Closed Circuit, Dec. 23). HR 8316 has been cleared for floor action, but where it goes next may be up to the FCC. Broadcasters also went to Washington to explain their feelings about editorializing. Many testified that the practice was vital if broadcasters were to truly serve the public interest. They cited the demise of newspapers competition as further proof that licensees should continue to provide outlets for local views. But the discussion of editorializing quickly broadened. A Senate hearing on Section 315 suspension became a forum for charges by Senator Strom BROADCASTING. December 30, 1963 Thurmond (D-S. C.) that networks slanted news — especially on race. Other Southern lawmakers echoed the charge. The FCC, trying to provide some guidelines, issued a public notice July 26 that seemed to add to the controversy, by telling Broadcasters to go into their communities to seek out opposing views, the FCC said the fairness doctrine "looks to substance rather than to label or form . . . whether . . . [it] is presented under the label of Americanism." 'anti-communism* or "states" rights"."". There was also an impression that the FCC would require stations to give free time to groups that said they could not pay for the opportunity to express their point of view on the air. The FCC has said it advises stations this is not necessary if a station is satisfied it has aired opposing views. The House Communications Subcommittee plans further hearings, although it went on record as favoring editorializing "if conducted fairly"" (Broadcasting. Dec. 16). The FCCs rulemaking to levy charges for the filing of applications for licenses (Broadcasting. May 6) earned it more attention from Representative Rogers, who offered legislation to prevent the initiation of fees without specific authority from Congress. The commission turned down his request to suspend its fee schedule until hearings could be held on his bill, but court action by nonbroadcast licenses in Chicago may block the fees yet. No Section 315 Relief ■ Broadcasters appeared to have easy sailing when they sought suspension of Section 315 for the presidential and vice presidential races earlier this year, but after the legislation cleared the House in June and the Senate in October HJ Res 247 bogged down at the House Commerce Committee where it needed only a final check for two minor Senate amendments. Since then, however, the entire question of joint television appearances bv presidential contenders was raised anew by the assassination of President Kennedy. He had backed a suspension of Section 315. but his successor. President Johnson, has made no statements about his 1964 campaign plans. The bill remains on the House committee's agenda. Senator Vance Hartke's (D-Ind.) proposal to strike Section 315 from the 33