NAEB Newsletter (Nov 1958)

I960 CONVENTION AWARDED TO SAN FRANCISCO The 1960 Convention of the NAEB will be held in San Francisco, California. San Francisco was rec¬ ommended by the Convention Site Selection com¬ mittee, and unanimously approved by the conven¬ tion, after adoption of an amendment to the By-Laws providing that conventions be held in the Mid-West in odd-numbered years and in the West, the East and the South, in that rotation, in even-numbered years. As previously announced, the 1959 convention will be held in Detroit, Michigan, and further details about this convention will be forthcoming from the Convention committee which consists of Mrs. Ivay Lardie, chairman, Lee Dreyfus and Frank Bouwsma. MEMO FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR —Harry Skornia Post-Convention greetings! It was one our finest! And it was a real pleasure to see and chat with so many of you in person. Those of you who couldn’t get to Omaha missed some excellent talks and discussions, and the best business sessions I can recall in years. Convention site rotation was clarified (every other year in the Midwest; e.g., 1959 in Detroit; 1960 in San Fran¬ cisco; 1961 in the Midwest again); several other wordings and conflicts in wordings were resolved; and Associate status was granted to CCTV appli¬ cants who meet the criteria to be established by the Membership Committee and the Board. The ma¬ turity and statesmanship displayed on the floor, under President Schooley’s firm but fair hand, made me more proud than I have ever been before of our NAEB. The success of the convention was a tribute to the thorough and careful devotion of the local ar¬ rangements committee: Jack McBride of KUON- TV, Reverend R. C. Williams of Creighton, Dr. Aid- rich Paul of the University of Omaha, and their staffs; it was also greatly assisted in its planning and ex¬ ecution by Bill Harley, Harold Hill, Richard Hull, and Frank Schooley, who comprised the National Program Advisory Committee. I was also most proud of the mind-stretching challenges given us by some our speakers. After read¬ ing many of his articles and his fine magazine, Ex¬ plorations, and hearing him at our Washington Con¬ ference, I had suggested Dr. Marshall McLuhan of the University of Toronto as one of the speakers for the convention. This was roundly seconded by Father Williams of Creighton who had studied under Professor McLuhan, and the rest of the committee. The closing session, in which Professor McLuhan (as one of two speakers) challenged us to re-examine and try to understand the nature of these electronics media, was, according to many who spoke to us after¬ wards, the most stimulating session we have possibly ever had. Professor McLuhan reminded us that educational methods are based on linear disciplines and tools (like print: word by word, in a straight line, with meaning coming gradually and not all at once in an all-en- gulfing impression) whereas we are living in a nuclear age, and working with a nuclear instrument, in the case of television: nuclear meaning that the impres¬ sion, as in a photograph, or painting, hits you as a whole, all at once. Even films, being a succession of still “shots”, are essentially linear in concept—there¬ fore in their nature have little in common in their nature with television. Another idea he developed: that the medium it¬ self is (a large part, at least of) the message in radio and television. That is, the overall common effects of television, however used (commercial TV, ETV, BBC TV, USSR TV, or whether for drama, talk, or whatever other purpose) far outweigh the messages or contents, collectively, in their impact on our civil¬ ization. (I was interested to note in a little volume, Broadcasting and Society, by Harman Grisewood of the BBC, that he too sees many of the same dangers in monopoly (BBC) TV that we find in commercial TV, irrespective of content or system). These are only a few of the basic and “upsetting” ideas Professor McLuhan hit us with. No less challenging, but more difficult to para¬ phrase or provide a teaser of, since it was a combined lecture-demonstration, was the contribution of Dr. David S. Ruhe of the University of Kansas Medical School. The remarkable balance provided by these two fine minds, coming from wholly different disciplines, made this session, in the opinion of many, the best we’ve had in many a year. In order that those of you who couldn’t get to the convention, as well as those who had to leave early, may read these fine presenta¬ tions, they are scheduled to appear in the December issue of the Journal. I hope you’ll all take time to read both of them, as well as the many other fine articles which the Journal is offering more and more. But a word of warning: some of the things we need to be learning these days are tough going. They can’t be gotten by reading “once over lightly.” In this column we would also like to express our pleasure at the fine “bosses” you’ve given us for the year ahead, in the election at the convention. Be sure you cast your vote whenever you have an opportu¬ nity. Only by your exercising your ballot can the NAEB be kept responsive to the needs you feel it should be serving. NOVEMBER, 1958 3