NAB reports (Jan-Dec 1937)

“The cases of many broadcasting companies before the Internal Revenue Bureau have been approved within the following ranges of serviceable lives; the depreciation deduction including both depreciation and normal obsolescence, the latter being recognized as a substantial factor in this particular industry: “Studio control, speech input and transmitter equipment, 8 to 10 years. “Antenna equipment, 10 to 12 years. “Towers, 10 to IS years. “Buildings, 25 to SO years. “Furniture and Fixtures — Office, 10 years. “Furniture and Fixtures— Studio, 5 years. “Pianos and other musical instruments, 10 years.” Members will observe that allowance for depreciation cannot be predicated upon a general average. Each broadcaster should pro¬ duce all the facts pertinent to his own case and press for a decision thereon without reliance upon general practices. COPELAND REINTRODUCES FOOD BILL Senator Copeland of New York has reintroduced his pure food bill (S. S) which will be found, together with a statement on page 1860 of this issue. CULKIN LIQUOR BILL A bill has been introduced in the House (H. R. 13) which would prohibit the advertising of liquor by radio. The bill which has been referred to the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce will be found on page 1857 of this issue. DRYS PROTEST BROADCASTING Organized “drys” of the United States are using a “bootleg” radio station, barred from this country in the interest of public health and welfare, as a propaganda medium, is the charge made in a complaint filed with the Federal Communications Commission by C. D. Cecil, secretary of the National Institute of Manufacturers and Distributors, Inc. The complaint specifically asks investigation of an announce¬ ment by Miss Ethel Hubler, editor and publisher of “The National Voice,” of Los Angeles, Calif., of “dry” broadcasts from Del Rio, Texas, by means of Station XERA, which is located in Villa Acuna, Mexico, “and over approximately 60 other stations in 30 different states.” The XERA Station is operated by Dr. John R. Brinkley, whose station, KFBB at Milford, Kans., was closed by the Federal Radio Commission about six years ago after a public hearing on charges that its broadcasts were “inimical to public health and wel¬ fare” and the nature of its programs conflicted with the law pro¬ hibiting the broadcasting of “profane, obscene, or indecent” utter¬ ances. The complaint made by the National Institute of Manufacturers and Distributors, Inc., which is an organization of industrialists opposed to Prohibition, contends that the broadcast as announced by the “dry” publication, indicates violation of United States Law. It quotes Miss Hubler’s statement that her broadcast will emanate from Del Rio, Texas, and be transmitted by Station XERA, and declares : “This announcement would indicate violation of the Federal ‘Communications Act of 1934’ (Public Law No. 416). The radio broadcasting station named XERA, is located on foreign soil, at Villa Acuna, Mexico, and the Communications Act of 1934 spe¬ cifically prohibits transmission of programs from the United States to foreign stations which can be heard in the United States. “Further, this announcement by The National Voice suggests that this foreign station, XERA, one of the so-called “bootleg” sta¬ tions along the Rio Grande, which seriously interfere with the operation of stations in the United States licensed by your Com¬ mission, has been made an integral part of a broadcasting chain in this country which includes 60 stations in 30 states.” The complaint also cites that the action of the Federal Radio Commission in closing the station operated by Brinkley in Kansas, was upheld by the United States District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in a decision which quoted the Biblical in¬ junction: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACTION Complaints The Federal Trade Commission has alleged unfair competition in complaints against the following firms. The respondents will be given an opportunity to show cause why cease and desist orders should not be issued against them. No. 3021. Charging unfair competition in the sale of soap, a complaint has been issued against Allen B. Wrisley Company and Allen B. Wrisley Distributing Company, also trading as Regal Soap Company, both of 6801 West 65th Street, Chicago, and Karl Mayer, George A. Wrisley, and Wrisley B. Oleson, copartners, trading as Karl Mayer & Co., all of' Merchandise Mart Building, Chicago. The respondents are alleged to have advertised certain soaps as olive oil soaps, when in fact the oil or fat ingredient of these products was not entirely olive oil, according to the complaint. In genuine olive oil soap, the complaint points out, the oil ingredient is olive oil to the exclusion of all other oils and fats. Such product is in demand as a high quality soap, free from sub¬ stances harmful to the skin or to delicate fabrics. No. 3022. Unfair trade representation in the sale of radio receiving sets, radio tubes, and supplies, are alleged in a complaint issued against Sun Radio Service & Supply Corporation, 938 F. Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. Advertising its products as “Newest R. C. A. Licensed Auto¬ matic Featuring the New Metal Tube,” the respondent company, through its representations, is alleged to have deceived buyers into believing that its products were those of the Radip Corporation of America and its subsidiaries, and that its glass tubes were metal tubes in which the technical elements were sealed in a vacuum of steel, when these were not the facts. Thirteen wholesalers and distributors of sponges in interstate commerce, said to constitute a large and important part of such wholesale trade in the United States, are named respondents in a complaint alleging practices which have the effect of monopoly and unreasonable restraint of trade. Nos. 3024 and 3025. Principal respondents are The Sponge Institute, of Washington, D. C., its officers and members, in¬ cluding the thirteen companies, and the Florida Sponge Packers Association, of Tarpon Springs, Fla., its officers and members, including six packing firms located at Tarpon Springs, Fla. The Commission has also issued a complaint against the Tarpon Springs Sponge Exchange, Inc., of Tarpon Springs, Fla., charging conspiracy and restraint of trade by member sponge pack¬ ers and producers. They are alleged to have combined to prevent all purchases of wool sponges, in or outside the exchange, between February 15, 1935, and May 1, 1935. One effect, it is alleged, was an increase in the price of wool sponges to wholesalers, re¬ tailers and the public. All respondents named in the complaint against The Sponge Institute are charged with entering into an agreement, combination and conspiracy to create monopoly in themselves in the sale of sponges to wholesalers and retailers throughout the United States. The packers, comprising the Florida Sponge Packers Association, are alleged to have1 agreed with the institute and its members, to whom they furnished sponges for wholesale and retail distribution, that such packers would not circularize any trade outside of the “bona fide sponge houses” regularly established by the institute, and would either confine their sales to such bona fide houses or would make a price difference of 20 per cent to other houses not designated as bona fide. The packers are alleged to have agreed to sell to such other houses, even at the 20 per cent increase, only if they received the order unsolicited or placed by personal call. The packers are alleged to have adhered to this plan, and, by concert of action, to have failed and refused to sell sponges to dealers not listed by the institute as bona fide. Pursuant to the agreement, the institute is alleged to have fur¬ nished its members with a list of the packers who were cooperating in the plan to restrict sales, causing them to confine their purchases to such cooperating packers, and according to the complaint, whenever the institute discovered that a packer had made a sale contrary to the agreement, its name was taken off the list and such packer was blacklisted and thereafter denied the business of institute members. Stipulations and Orders The Commission has issued the following cease and desist orders and stipulations: No. 1863. Lancaster Cigars, Inc., Red Lion, Pa., agrees to stop using on labels attached to containers the word “Havana” to describe cigars not composed of or manufactured from Havana tobacco grown in Cuba, and to cease employing the word “Havana” in any way to imply that such cigars are made entirely from Havana tobacco. The expression “Havana Blend” will not be printed on labels, implying that the cigars so marked are composed in substantial part of Havana tobacco, when such is not a fact. 1850