Heinl radio business letter (Jan-June 1940)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

May 28, 1940 TELEVISION COMI^RCIALIZATION BY FALL FORECAST An agreement within the infant television industry that will pave the way for complete commercialization by Fall wa.s fore¬ cast in quarters close to the Federal Communications Commission following the release of the FCC decision that visual broadcast¬ ing would remain "experimental" until the industry agrees on uniform transmission standards. The FCC, which was put on the spot six weeks ago when it abruptly rescinded its previous order allowing limited commer¬ cial television on September 1 next, apparently had turned the tables on the industry by putting it in a position of holding up commercialization by internal discord. The Radio Manufacturers' Association will take up the FCC challenge at its annual meeting in Chicago, June 11-12. How¬ ever, the Allen B. DuMont Laboratories, Inc. , which is the chief rival of the Radio Corporation of America in the television field, is not a member of the RLIA. Consequently, further conferences at which Duli^ont is represented doubtless will follow the RMA meeting. The FCC decision 29 mimeographed pages in length was largely devoted to a defense of its previous action and was interpreted by part of the industry as a face-saving move before giving television a full "green light". Cn the other hand, it was admittedly a shrewd ruling that shifted the responsibility for delay from the FCC to the industry. While the Commission made no specific promise that it would authorize complete commercialization as soon as the major¬ ity of the industry is in accord on transmission standa.rds, the implication was plain. The FCC press release, in fact, was even stronger than the Commission' s own decision in this respect. "Full commercialization of television was today promis¬ ed by the Federal Communications Commission as soon as the engi¬ neering opinion of the industry is prepared to approve any one of the present competing television systems", the press release stated. 2