NAEB Newsletter (Apr 1947)

- 2 - >'THE AMERICAN FAY” "Translating into action their growing irritation v^dth the (Ohio) Institute" (Variety, March 5) the national networks are reported to be cool toward the May 1947 session. ]®C delegation is reported to be cut from 25 to 5, and CBS from 19 to 3. The gripes are that they don’t want to talk about the "evils" of advertising, or hear somebody lambasting the industry. One N.Y. Exec, is quoted as saying, "I guess the boys think they've heard McCarty’s speech". That the disadvantage, imposed by the huge attendance lessens the attraction of the Institute for those vjho come with a purpose cannot be denied. Many of the old timers long for the return to the conditions which prevailed in the days when Dr. W. W. Charters played the gracious host on the campus. MEMBERS DIN VARIETY AVARDS KUOM, of the University of Minnesota, and WNYC, New York City municipal station, won 1946 Showmanagement Awards given by VARIETY for outstanding performance.. Fourteen awards were made, and two went to non-commercial stations. That is a good average, considering the fact that the commercials outnumber the educationals by a score of about 40 to 1. KUOM, under the direction of Burton Paulu, received its,.- recognition for "Expanding Radio's Social Usefulness" by its programming during the polio epidemic last summer. It expanded the kind of programs which have long made it a leader locally, and so won the national recognition, WNYC, under Director Seymour Siegel, won the Award for "Responsibility to the Community" by its airing of the controversy over the five-cent subway fare, and for "other notable services to the citizens of Nev; York". It is called "The most intelligently operated non-commercial radio station in America", TEST THE BLUE-BOOK For more than a year, raucous echoes have been floating up and down the columns of the press of this country. Freedom of speech, the "Am.erican way", bureaucratic dictatorship, censorship, and other equally emotionally appealing terms have been carelessly used to discredit the Federal Communications Commission and its now famous "blue-book". The Social Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees. Privately many station operators admit the validity of the blue-book charges, and see in its recommendation the basis for sound and profitable operation for themselves, 9.S well as better listening fare for their listeners. But the "industry" continues to picture itself as the persecuted martyr. After thirteen months this theme is no longer convincing. The industry has had ample time to instigate a test case to find out for itself whether or not the FCC is overstepping its rights, and just what the public’s interest in radio is. A test case might cost some small station (guinea pigs are used instead of elephants in laboratories) its license-but what is that in comparison to the pictured horrors attendant to the "government regulatioh"feared by broadcasters? Observers believe that there is lacking the strength of conviction which would precipitate a once-and-for-all test and decision in the matter. Might it be that this brave big noise is but whistling in the dark? Can it be that despite the call for a show-down there is no real desire to have one? Might a Supreme Court decision upset the status quo by deciding that the public has a greater stake in broadcasting than it has been allowed to believe it has? The public is interested. The broadcasters are concerned. In the interests of both the Federal Communications Commission should precipitate a test case—inasmuch as the "industry" lacks the temerity to do so.