"Radio Channels for College Stations" Education by Radio (July 30, 1931)

Commission back up the assertion. Ten minutes later the same broadcasters will be arguing for increased time and power, or better channels, on the ground that a large percentage of their time is devoted to educational programs, and the Com¬ mission lets them get away with it. They state publicly that educators fail as broadcasters, and at the same time put forth every effort to make their com¬ mercial stations the exclusive radio out¬ lets for state departments of education, and for colleges and universities. The station manager and chain official who spoke so disparagingly of educators at a recent meeting in New York is the same man whose station used its power of censorship with such outrageous ef¬ frontery that a state university discon¬ tinued cooperation with the station. And an official of the Federal Radio Com¬ mission, yielding to this man’s plea that his station was rendering indispensable educational service, recommended that his station be granted an increase of 40,000 watts in power, while the Com¬ mission denied the right of a high school in the state to use two watts power to broadcast interesting school events to parents and taxpayers within the district. College stations have not reached the acme of perfection in putting education on the air, but the reaction of listeners to radio advertising indicates that com¬ mercial broadcasters are just as open to criticism. Records of the college stations show they have rendered useful service to large audiences more interested in education than in mere amusement, and that the service is appreciated. Status—The present radio situation is, as Judge Robinson of the Federal Radio Commission told us last year, one that threatens the foundations of our government. Would we be willing to have the printing presses of our country con- troled by commercial concerns having power to determine what should and should not be printed? Would we be will¬ ing to have our public schools, colleges, and universities in the hands of commer¬ cial groups having power to determine what should be taught, and when these institutions should be used for public purposes? That is exactly similar to what the commercial broadcasters and certain members of the Federal Radio Commis¬ sion advocate we do with education by radio. Recently we heard a distinguished scientist, professor of an outstanding university, tell us over a national chain of broadcasting stations: Any talk of the loss of liberty thru the monopolistic control of the ether at this time in the United States is too grotesque to need to receive more than a line in an address like this. Any high-school boy knows that it would be very simple now, and increasingly easy as research moves on, to break such a monopoly if there ever appeared to be the slightest danger of its being created. Only a few days before, the parent corporation which owns that chain had been finally adjudged guilty of monop¬ oly, and of violation of the antimonop¬ oly laws of the United States. Why did he ignore this fact, and the fact that the Attorney General of the United States had instituted a suit against this same great corporation following investiga¬ tion of its activities by the Interstate Commerce Committee of the United States Senate? Vested rights—The effort to secure vested rights for commercial radio sta¬ tions is a further step toward monopoly of radio. Congressional foresight has kept control of radio channels, theoretically, in the hands of the federal government. The Federal Radio Commission issues licenses to broadcasting stations for short periods. Every license holder has signed a waiver, agreeing that he has no rights to the use of a channel beyond the period specified in the license. Never¬ theless, if the Commission attempts to restrict or withdraw from a commercial station the privileges granted by a broad¬ casting license, the owners usually take the case into court on the plea that their property is being confiscated. If such a case should happen to go to a court which believed that protection of an investment of money was more of a sacred duty than protection of the rights of citizens to keep their channels of edu¬ cation free from commercial censorship, a precedent might be established which could be set aside only by an amend¬ ment to the Constitution. This possi¬ bility has been foreseen, and a Senator who has done much in shaping present radio laws stated that he will introduce such an amendment if necessary, and work for its adoption. He points to the fact that the Eighteenth Amendment, although it affected the value of many millions of dollars worth of property temporarily, gave the owners of such property no right to claim damages on the plea of confiscation. College broadcasting stations, which seeme^ to be in a desperate situation a few months ago, have now some new hopes. Station WCAJ, Nebraska Wes¬ leyan University, attacked by a commer¬ cial station which wanted to take away its rights, received a favorable decision from the Federal Radio Commission after a long and expensive struggle. Its brave fight under adverse conditions won the support of the state government of Nebraska, the state delegation in Con¬ gress, and influential organizations. Wired radio will take away many lis¬ teners who tire of sales talks on the air if its owners deliver the service claimed, free from advertising, while making a moderate monthly charge to the listener, precluding the necessity of purchasing expensive equipment. Newspapers, which brought radio broadcasting to the attention of the pub¬ lic and made it popular before the radio group revealed its purpose to enter the advertising business and sap the life blood of the press, are organizing to force advertising off the air. They are powerful and may succeed. They must succeed or many of them will die, for, according to their reports, already fifty- nine percent of their advertising income has been diverted to radio. United action—Educators also are organized on a national basis, with head¬ quarters and a service bureau in Wash- ington. Key men and women in govern¬ ment, business, and the professions are receiving information, and many of them add their influence to the cause of un¬ censored education by radio as they be¬ gin to realize its significance. If advertising is driven from the air, broadcasting must be supported as it is in all other countries—by appropriations from public funds, by philanthropy, or by a combination of the two. Already institutions of learning are so supported. When public funds are allotted for edu- /'N cation by radio, what could be more logical than that broadcasting stations maintained by those institutions should be preferred to those that have been operated for private profit? Anyone who has faith in our demo¬ cratic form of government must believe that its citizens, when the facts are be¬ fore them, will prefer to have education by radio controled by men and women whom they elect to represent them, rather than by corporations which, while their aims and business may be perfectly ^ legitimate, are interested mainly in using the public domain for private profit. Education by radio is published weekly by the National Committee on Eduction by Radio at 1201 Sixteenth Street, Northwest, Washington, D. C. [94]