Education by Radio (1932)

[1] Loss to farmers of farm night lectures. Farmers cannot tune in for daytime broad¬ casts, except for noon hour, and for short mar¬ ket periods. Professors of the College of Agri¬ culture are employed in classrooms until 5:00 pm. Extension agents cannot get in for 5:00 to 7:00pm talks. The hours between 5:00 and 7:00pm are valuable for entertainment pro¬ grams, but are not desirable for educational programs. The primary object of WEAO’s service to the farmer is educational. [2] The following lecture series now scheduled for evening hours cannot be moved to daytime hours, because — [a] professors are employed in class until 5:00pm, [b] adult audience cannot be counted upon for daytime educational programs: French and Spanish lessons prepared for adults — Economic discussions — Medical lec¬ tures — Business and employment — Engineering — Debates. i[3] The following general items now scheduled for evening hours cannot be moved to daytime hours: WEAO Players [conflict with classroom] — Sun Dial [conflict with classroom] — Basketball [all games played in the evening], [4] Loss of music department concerts, including : Band — Symphony orchestra — Glee Clubs — Chorus — Salon orchestra. Student organizations, comprising a large number of students, cannot broadcast on day¬ time programs, because of classroom conflicts. In general the taking away from the leading educational institution of Ohio of all her even¬ ing hours which for nine years have been used by the Ohio State University with consistently good programs, educational and entertaining, is directly against the public interest, conven¬ ience, and necessity and contrary to law. In the case of Chicago Federation of Labor vs. Federal Radio Commission, 41 F. [2d] 422, the court held as follows: • It is not consistent with true public conven¬ ience, interest, or necessity, that meritorious sta¬ tions like WBBM and KFAB should be de¬ prived of broadcasting privileges when once granted to them, which they have at great cost prepared themselves to exercise, unless clear and sound reasons of public' policy demand such action. The cause of independent broadcasting in general would be seriously endangered and public interests correspondingly prejudiced, if the licenses of established stations should arbi¬ trarily be withdrawn from them, and appro¬ priated to the use of other stations. The only policy which would authorize such a procedure would be the policy of taking away the most dominant service to be ren¬ dered by radio, to wit, education. [E] Conclusion No. 5 is contrary to law. The examiner concludes that the pub¬ lic interest, convenience, and necessity will best be served by authorizing the division of time contained in his recom¬ mendation. It is true that the radio act does not specifically define “public inter¬ est, convenience, and necessity,” but it is submitted that it has the same signi¬ ficance here as elsewhere employed in legislation which grants a special privi¬ lege to one person or class of persons that is denied to others. The term has so often been interpreted and clearly defined by the courts that the matter is no longer subject to debate. It requires a showing that the privilege is to promote the pub¬ lic good. No contention is made that the public good is advanced by educational programs alone, but it is equally untrue to say that the public good is best served by the almost total exclusion of educa¬ tional programs and the devotion of substantially all time to commercial broadcasts Shall this be the Commission's conception of the public good? The exam¬ iner's final conclusion and recommenda¬ tion is obviously predicated upon this assumption. Station WEAO of Ohio State University is the one and only out¬ standing station of the state of Ohio primarily devoted to educational pro¬ grams, and even it has so balanced its programs as to contain ample diversifica¬ tion with respect to entertainment fea¬ tures. Section 89, Title 47, U. S. C. A., pro¬ vides inter alia as follows: It is hereby declared that the people of all the zones established by Section 82 of this chapter are entitled to equality of radio broadcasting service, both of transmission and of reception, and in order to provide said equality the licens¬ ing authority shall as nearly as possible make and maintain an equal allocation of broadcast¬ ing licenses, of bands of frequency or wave¬ lengths, of periods of time for operation, and of station power, to each of said zones when and insofar as there are applications therefor; and shall make a fair and equitable allocation of licenses, wavelengths, time for operation, and station power to each of the states, the District of Columbia, the territories and possessions of the United States within each zone, according to population. The licensing authority shall carry into effect the equality of broadcasting service hereinbefore directed, whenever neces¬ sary or proper, by granting or refusing licenses or renewals of licenses, by changing periods of time for operation, and by increasing or de¬ creasing station power, when applications are made for licenses or renewals of licenses. [Italics in original.] This policy as between zones and states within zones is equally applicable to stations within states. It is submitted that an adherence by the Commission to the report of the ex¬ aminer would result in effectuating a gross inequality of broadcasting service directly contrary to the public interest, convenience, and necessity, and contrary to law. The Commission’s attention is respect¬ fully directed to the fact that Ohio State University, altho perfectly justified in view of the record in this case in asking that there be allocated to station WEAO more than half of the time, is in fact only requesting equality. In fact the time re¬ quested in WEAO’s application for re¬ newal is even less than half of the time. The public interest, convenience, and necessity can only be served by an equal division of time between these two sta¬ tions giving to each its just share of eve¬ ning hours as well as daytime hours. Conclusion — It is respectfully submitted in conclusion that the recommendation of the examiner is erroneous, misleading, not sup¬ ported by and directly contrary to the record, prejudiced in favor of commercialism in radio programs, substantially excludes educational programs, and is directly contrary to the pub¬ lic interest, convenience, and necessity of the people of Ohio. The report and recommenda¬ tion takes from the state of Ohio her greatest natural educational resource and gives it to a small commercial concern to use locally in one corner of the state for private gain. Wherefore, it is respectfully urged that the Commission reverse the examiner with re¬ spect to the matters and things to which ex¬ ception is herein taken, and find that the pub¬ lic interest, convenience, and necessity will be served by granting to the state of Ohio her application for the renewal of her Univer¬ sity station WEAO’s license with the division of time herein requested. Motion for oral argument — Now comes the Ohio State University, station WEAO, by its attorney, and requests permission to appear before the Federal Radio Commission or a quorum thereof and offer oral argument in the support of its foregoing exceptions to examiner’s report No. 318 heretofore entered in the above entitled causes on the following grounds: [ 1 ] Station WEAO has served the public interest, convenience, and neces¬ sity consistently and efficiently for nine years. [2] The examiner’s report so materi¬ ally curtails the service heretofore ren¬ dered and now rendered by Ohio State University along educational lines as to take from the state of Ohio her greatest natural educational resource. [3] The examiner’s report inade¬ quately presents the facts and law in¬ volved in this case. [4] The basic questions involved in this case are so vital to the state of Ohio, farreaching and of such tremendous mag¬ nitude with respect to the future of radio in America as to make it necessary that the Commission have the benefit of a full and complete presentation of the issues prior to passing thereon. [5] This case will establish the pre¬ cedent as to whether radio with its potential educational and cultural possi¬ bilities, shall be debauched by commer¬ cial interests and prostituted upon the altar of financial gain. This case will establish the turning point in a national policy and the state of Ohio should be heard. [24]