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.
CLEAR CHANEL ARG t 1CTT ENTERS FINAL PKA g F-^FCO DECISION IS IN SIGHT Last Rounds up ? January 19 opened the final stages of the "bitterly-fought, 3-year old clear channel case before the full Commission* Oral argument began and concluded, and scores of parties to the case who listened to the final week of argument took stock and won¬ dered whether they were pointed "down the homestretch” or ”headed for the last round-up. ” Channel Break-up? The arguments on the clear channel proceeding, which will determine whether some, all, or no clear channels will be broken down and whether power above 50,000 watts will be permitted, also included testimony on daytime skywave transmissions, their effect, and what, if any, rulings in this respect should be made. Late ftf Decision Federal Communications Commission authorities would not speculate on the date, a decision might be reached, but pointed out that U, S, proposals for the revision of the Forth American Regional Broadcasting Agreement (FAR3A) will defend on the outcome of the clear channel case, and that 1TARBA proposals must be submitted to other signatory nations by May 1, because of the FARBA meeting August 1, Should the FCC 1 s decision involve any change in the status quo of clear channel broadcasting, the Commission will have to first take up its decision with the State Department, and then in turn, with U. S. delegates to BARBA. Decision Fill be Final ' The decision in the case will be final, that is, the Commission will omit the usual procedure of rendering a "proposed” decision in order to save time and meet the May 1 deadline. The decision with respect to skywave transmission, which may decide the fate of hundreds of daytime 1-A and 1-3 channel stations and applicants, may come at the same time as the clear channel deoision or be issued separately. U-A-B-B MEMBER STATION KOAG Oklahoma A & M College Station KOAG, applicant for 10 kilowatts day¬ time on the 840 channel, gave special testimony with respect to daytime skywave interference. (KOAG applied for and was granted 10 kw on 840 kc. An objection by the dominant station UBAS, Louisville, precipitated the whole sequence of questions on daytime sky-wave interference.) The Oklahoma station stated that its operation caused daytime skywave interference only at sunrise and sunset and only on 10^ of the days of the year with the interference questionable on Bp?! of these days and consequently saw no need in a rule requiring protection to % the 100 uv/m contour. KOAG said it was not sure that the TJHAS signal is listen- able at the point of alleged interference. N-A-3-B Brief Marcus Cohn (Cohn & 'arks) presented the final memorandum brief and oral argument for the national Association of Educational Broadcasters, urging that ”the duality of program service should be the determining factor (in deciding on channel usage) rather than the technical and arbitrary yardstick of protecting the coverage of clear-channel stations to unreasonable limits f Upon this basis, there would be an improved broadcast service to rural (and local) audiences with programs designed for their special needs,”