Education by Radio (1932)

Predicts Still Lower Standards For Radio Programs Walter Neff, assistant director of sales, station WOR, Newark, New Jersey, predicts that breweries, distilleries, and famous rendezvous will broadcast if the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment is accomplished. Writing in the Sep¬ tember 15, 1932 issue of Broadcasting, the outspoken organ of commercialized radio, p7, Mr. Neff says: Breweries and wineries are polishing up their apparatus against the day when Congress lifts the embargo against the sparkling beverages that exhilarate or damn according to one’s personal lights. . . . Thus far, the managers of major stations have been reluctant to declare their position as to whether they plan to carry commercial pro¬ grams setting forth the merits of the several brews and wines. It is known, however, that certain independent stations, including WOR, are studying the problems involved. . . . There is no question that every famous rendezvous, or at least its modern counterpart, will spring into existence with the repeal of Volsteadism and they will want to get on the air. And the concensus of opinion in broadcasting circles is that they will get on the air; that the breweries will broadcast, and the distilleries as well, if the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment is accomplished. With all the disgusting, false, and harmful advertising now on the air, we find commercial broadcasters already looking for¬ ward to further polluting it. Even in England, where all sorts of intoxicating beverages can be legally purchased, the radio listeners are protected against having it brought into their homes thru the radio. Here in America, will we next be hearing the announcer say, “Drink a quart of Sap’s Beer twice a day and visit your neighborhood whiskey shop at least twice a week”? It is the opinion of many that before many years, advertising by radio in the United States will be prohibited, as it is in Eng¬ land. How soon that will be, will depend on whether adver¬ tisers, advertising agencies, and commercial radio operators continue to insult the intelligence of the listeners. Radio Chains Fail at Chicago Public service could not compete with the opportunity to earn $50,000 an hour, so listeners depending on the Colum¬ bia Broadcasting System or the National Broadcasting Com¬ pany to furnish them complete radio accounts of the Demo¬ cratic National Convention, were disappointed. Station WGN, Chicago, was the only major station having the courage to can¬ cel its commercial programs between 7 : 30 and 9pm and broad¬ cast the platform as presented at the convention. No doubt station WGN needed the revenue it might have derived from the sale of the time as much as did the “chains,” but its inter¬ pretation of the doctrine of “public interest, convenience, and necessity,” was much broader than theirs. Station WGN, be¬ ing owned by a newspaper, operated on the theory that broad¬ casting is a public service and that the paramount duty of a radio-broadcasting station is the publishing of news and events, rather than the selling of time. Did the advertisers using the hours between 7:30 and 9 on that convention night, derive any benefit? Most people would be inclined to say, “no! ” With the listeners all over the country at a fever heat to hear the platform, they could not help but be resentful when all they could get was commercial “clap-trap.” Surely no advertised product is benefited by a forced and un¬ timely presentation. The present radio problem is even deeper than this. The power to select what the listener gets, confers enormous powers on radio stations and “chains.” Select the better things and there will be a general elevating of the educational and cultural level of the people. The opposite effect can, and is now, in many cases, being secured by a conscious selection of the cheap and tawdry. One cannot but praise the high purpose of WGN, in “carrying on” in spite of heavy financial loss, but can he blame a radio system dependent on selling advertising, when it does its best to fatten its own coffers? The ultimate solution is, no doubt, a system of radio, sup¬ ported by those who receive the benefits — the listeners. How soon that will come will be determined by the farsightedness of the American people. Meanwhile, we should protect a rea¬ sonable amount of radio broadcast frequencies for the use of states for purposes of education and government. Radio Abroad Contrasting with the depression in the radio trade in this country— a depression so severe that the annual Radio World’s Fair in New York and similar expositions in other cities have been called off — is the apparent flourishing condition of the radio trade in England and other European countries. More than 200 exhibitors and 300 exhibits, strung out into five miles of radio equipment valued at $5,000,000, were in evi¬ dence at London’s National Radio Exhibition at Olympia in August, the greatest of its eleven shows to date. Germany’s International Radio Exhibition on August 19 also was a record affair. . . . Television is commanding considerable attention at the Euro¬ pean shows, as it did at the more recent American shows. Short¬ wave sets and tone control on broadcast receivers were much in evidence at London’s Olympia show. From the meager reports from London, it appears that nothing radically new, at least to American radio fans, was on display there, but the fact remains that the holding of the show indicates a buyers’ interest that seems to be lacking in this country at a time when only the midget-set market seems to be active. England, of course, has less than 5,000,000 radios and Germany only recently passed the 4,000,000 set mark, whereas latest census computations place the number of American homes with radios at 16,000,000. — Washington Star, September 4, 1932. The broadcasting medium in Canada should be protected against being reduced to the level of commer¬ cial exploitation as it has been reduced in a neighboring country. — Sir John Aird in testimony before Canadian House of Commons, April 14, 1932. [98]