Sponsor (Oct-Dec 1959)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

I We had a bunch of | j /^V^ the boys^l 'local advertising agency men, and ocal advertisers. . . . they watched ABC's CLOSED CIRCUIT PREVIEW . . . heard just a word or two about KVII-TV and agreed ... the TV picture in Amarillo has changed! LOCALLY THEY'RE SOLD ON KVII-TV^ (Our local sales prove it . . . fall nighttime is virtually sold out!) Take a tip from the local boys who really know the market . . . buy K-7! Get the whole K-7 picture from your Boiling man. KVII-TV amar i llOy texas C. R. "Dick" Wottx Vice-President and General Manaser Represented nationally by the Boiling Compony Commercial commentary {continued) If you attempt to overlook or minimize these differences, or if,| you fail to understand that they often produce real conflicts of in'I terest, you are grossly oversimplifying the problem. I think it would be lovely if we could get the lions to lie down with the lambs, and have the creators, critics and censors of advertising all snuggled up together in the same cosy bed. But look, fellows, let's be realistic. , The chief, and often the only, reason for the appearance of: offensive commercials on tv screens is the fierce competition within the industries which originate them. I'm told, for instance, that the drug industry — the fountainhead of "personal products" — has been under tremendous pressure from the AMA and other groups to change its tv treatments. So far, though, with the notable exception of Miles Laboratories, a long-time champion of decency in advertising, most drug companies have been afraid of giving a copy edge to their competitors. Do you think that under these circumstances their agencies — including such giants as Bates and Y&R — are going to be moved by a polite suggestion of "common sense rules" frorh an NAB committee? Don't you think they may even resent being told how to create commercials by people who are not professional admen? As a matter of fact, advertisers often resent hearing that they "owe" something to tv — over and beyond paying their bills. Last year. Bart Cummings of Compton. stuck his neck out with a suggestion that networks and advertisers cooperate in donating prime time to public service shows of importance. i There were howls, growls and complaints (though not public ones) from big budget advertisers who felt they had no such responsibility. If you talk with agencies and ad managers these days you'll find many thoughtful men who wish that the tv industry would set up and police its own rules — and free them of all public obligations. The two alternatives Perhaps this is a feasible idea. Certainly it is one of two alternatives for solving the problem. In the field of "personal products" commercials it means setting up a tough, specific, no-nonsense code — and administering it absolutely with the unanimous support of all networks and principal tv stations. Can this be done? Maybe, but it is going to require more iron in the broadcasting industry tfian I've seen so far. (At present, for instance, only four of New York's seven stations accept the Tv Code.) Furthermore, I'm not at all sure that it is the right approach. I believe that the only lasting solution to the problems of offensive tv commercials must come from the advertisers themselves. Top managements in "sensitive industries" ( you've got to go higher than ad agencies and "creators" of tv copy) must be made to recognize that, for the privilege of using tv, they must accept its responsibilities. This is a hard doctrine to sell. It will require a brand new kind of effort. It will be resisted at every turn. Many in the industry will be afraid that it will drive advertisers away from tv and toward other media. But sooner or later I believe that tv must turn on its clients and demand that they share its 'obligations. I think the NAB committee has made a fine start. But there's a long rough road ahead. t^ 16 SPONSOR 10 OCTOBER 1959