Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1960)

VOICE OF EXHIBITION I Can Be Defeated, — Marling (Continued from Page 9) about to adjourn without taking any action on Bills which would outlaw Pay-TV, the entire coin-in-the-slot television situation is at a much more critical stage today than it was when I spoke to you last. Due to the recency of its application, Mr. Zenith and Mr. RKO General have focused the eyes of the entertainment world on Hartford. There they have declared they are going to spend FORTY MILLION DOLLARS to make a test of Pay-TV thru the air. I will not minimize that FORTY MILLIONS will be spent, nor will I minimize that a test can be made. It might appear to an outsider that the mere spending of the money would insure success of the test. I do not believe this. I have always maintained and will maintain that Pay-TV is not inevitable, as some proponents claim. I further maintain that with our proper diligent and sincere efforts, Pay-TV will never become a success, and that we will continue to have a very fine motion picture industry. Paradoxically, if an application for a test is granted, and Pay-TV should prove economically profitable to its backers, it must then follow that PayTV will not be in the public interest, because Pay-TV will deprive the public of the right for Free TV which has been in existence since the invention of television. mmBEBSBaam Let me emphasize with all the sincerity at my command that the fate of Pay-TV now lies in the hands of the Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives, chaired by Oren Harris of Arkansas. This House Committee is the root, the source, the fountain, for the salvation of our Motion Picture Industry. This Committee has lent a willing and sympathetic ear to our problems, and sees eye to eye with us that Pay-TV is not in the public interest. Never forget, my friends, that it is legislation backed up by public opinion, wherein laws come to be enacted. It is through this democratic American way of doing things that we may effect our salvation, and it must be through these means that all our efforts must be directed in our fight against Pay-TV. The late Justice Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court laid down a principle that no group or individual had the right to destroy or obliterate an industry if such destruction opposed the public interest. These words should be of great comfort to us, because they point up that it is the public who are the final arbiters in the matter of PayTV, and if the public feels that the destruction of Free-TV, which must occur if Pay-TV succeeds, is contrary to its interests, Pay-TV cannot endure. While I am not minimizing the danger that lies before us, let the record indicate that as of today there is no television operating in the United States with a Pay-TV system. This is a fact. If we are diligent and persevering in our efforts, this condition can remain. It was my pleasure, just two months ago, to be in the home state of our good friend, and very able Congressional Representative, Harris, of Arkansas. I feel personally that in Congressman Harris, our nation has a Legislator who is making a tremendous contribution to the welfare of our country. In Mr. Harris I feel that all of us in the motion picture theatre industry, are immensely lucky to have such a sincere friend, so genuinely interested in and attentive to our problems, and having a keen desire to do something constructive for the common good. This is real statesmanship, and is something rather rare in these trying times. I believe it will be only a matter of time before he drops the title of "Mr. Congressman" for even more important things. It is to him, and his Committee, that we must direct our efforts. I am firmly convinced that were not for Exhibition's efforts on a national scale, the spectacular support given by Parent-Teacher, labor, educational, religious, free TV, and other interests, plus the enlightened leadership which Congressman Harris has furnished in Washington, Pay-TV would be established in the United States today. Certainly if it were not for these factors, Paramount's Telemeter system would not have gone across the border, into Canada, to test its costly coin-in-the-slot Pay-TV; would have run the test right here the United States. But Paramount wouldn't take that chance, because knew it could be knocked right out the box by legislation. Jack Gould of the New York Times to the contrary: I still maintain that the American public will never allow itself to be forced to pay for entertainment it now receives free of charge. I am equally certain, however, that if PayTV were ever tested on a broad scale in our Country, literally thousands theatres would be put out of busine before Pay-TV itself was proved un economical. This is why our Committ has worked so hard for so many year to oppose these impractical, grandiose schemes to try and put motion picture boxoffice in every living room. CANNOT CO-EXIST I have never minimized the value o statistics. Let me cite some very impor tant figures indicative of the fact tha Pay-TV and Free-TV cannot live gether, and why I say that Paywould destroy Free TV. In the LJnited States today there 124 cities which still have only or television channel. What would happ if Pay-TV were introduced in the cities? In the United States today the: are only 67 cities which have channels. There are 59 cities havir three channels — just enough for eac one of the coin-box operators — Par mount, Zenith and Skiatron — to cut u evenly. There are 12 cities which hav four channels, and only two, Los Ar geles, and New York, which ha\ seven. Although there are today 51 stations in 264 cities, nearly one half— the one-channel communities could lc Free TV if Pay-TV took over. ild Film BULLETIN