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.
- 4 - ! EDITORIAL ! j I STRAWS IN THE WIND j I The storm warnings are upl j i Echoes emanating from a recent radio conclave indicate that the 1 barometer is falling fast. Broadcasters 9 flushed with the strength of ; business success, are ready to demand that they be freed from virtually j all governmental program review 9 and that the Federal Communications Commission become merely a traffic policeman for the technical aspects of radio. In the hysteria of the occasion, this doubtless sounded good to opportunists who refuse to tone down the cash register clatter for the sweeter music of programs truly in the public interest. To the critical j observer s who recalls that the air lanes are public property used license™ j free through the grace of the people, the broadcasters' new defiant attitude is a warning. One is reminded of the words of Spencers "It is a dark sign when the owner is seen growing poor, and his steward is found to be growing rich". "Self-rule" is the cry, as the industry proposes to ram through | Congress a measure to divest the FCC of practically all control over what may be broadcast. The industry would have carte blanche to follow its own dictates. Listeners would be left without recourse in the event of recurring abuses. This is not "The American Way". It smacks of special privileges j for the few favored with license-free grants on the public domain. Why j ‘does the steward demand to be the master? What evidence have broadcasters ■given that they are capable of responsible self-rule? A new code is proposed* but it—-like earlier versions which bloomed to stem criticism of abuses before fading-is doomed before it is adopted. j Already it is being openly opposed because of conditions it prescribes. ! Adherence to the code with its non-definitive provisions would be purely I voluntary, and without compulsion, general compliance would be contra¬ dictory to human nature. Can better compliance be expected of a voluntary •code than is shown by the record of conformity to the Radio Act, under which stations are licensed to operate? The quasi-public aspects of broadcasting cannot be ignored. The I public has a larger stake than it realizes. Huffing and puffing phrases j isuch as "freedom of speech", "censorship", "free enterprise", "dictator- i ship" and other propagandists terms are intended to becloud the j real issues. This is a time for straight thinking and straight talk. The storm warnings are upl j Harold A. Engel I President, NAEB