Sponsor (July-Sept 1961)

In fact a close stud\ of the speeches If the two men discloses such striking similarities in tone and feeling, particularly in their appeals for mine responsibility" in broadcastthat some hyper-suspicious • roadcasters have accused Collins of [onspiring with Minow in a vast administration plot." I 3. Opposition to the Minow-Colins philosophy. Despite a great deal i industry bitterness over Minow ■ itatements and actions, and much nside-the-familv criticism of Collins fcy certain NAB members, vigorous, nd intelligent opposition to the principles of the Minow-Collins philsoph) has crystallized very slowly. Early objections to the statements 'f the FCC Chairman and the actions or lack of action I of the NAB head •ndfd to sound like merely selfish. eactionary attempts to justify the •at us quo, and were promptly landed as such. (Governor Collins ailed them "draping the honorable ags of free speech and free enterrise around the shaky shoulders of hose who abuse liberties in their own selfish interests.") Recently, however, criticism, of the Minow-Collins viewpoint has been gaining in maturity and vigor, and an examination of the arguments advanced against the FCC program reveal both stature and intelligence. Veteran broadcaster. Rex Howell, owner KREX, Grand Junction. Colorado, voiced the unspoken fears of many in the industry when he accused Minow of "Failing to differentiate between the rightful expression of his personal tastes and what has become generally regarded as the expression of an official position of the FCC." Howell noted that Minow had made references to "specific program types of which disapproves" and pointed out that ''evaluating the overall service of a licensee and expressing personal opinions are two entirely different things." John W. Guider, president WMTM-TV, Poland Spring, in a speech which was later put into the Congressional record by Senator Styles Bridges (Rep.-N. H.) attacked other points in the Minow philosophy. According to Guider. Minow had indicated in an article in Life Magazine that he did not believe that restricting one form of programing in favor of another is censorship. Said Guider "It is the very essence of censorship. It is censorship when Rig Brother in Washington decides what \ou shall see and hear regardless of your personal preferences." Guider also ripped into the FCC for what he "Censorship by fear of subsequent punishment." He said that "Time and time again dining the past few weeks we have heard plainly voiced threats that station licenses may not be renewed unless stations conform to current Washington thinking. ' I'ci haps the most comprehensive rebuttal yet voiced to the Minow7 position, however, was delivered three weeks ago in Chicago by W. Theodore Pierson. senior partner. Pierson. Ball & Dovvd. Washington, an attorney with 23 years of experience in broadcast law. I Please turn to ]>age 52) Jitterness of the Growing Battle Over Broadcast Censorship . THEODORE PIERSON Attorney, Washington, D. C. ll submit that the rea of Commission consideration of overall programing is but a vast wasteland tf withered liberties that should not be preferred to the vast wasteland Mr. ^iinow found." iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii tOSCOE DRUMMOND Syndicated Newspaper Columnist "It is not censorship or the FCC to insist that every tv station fulfil its commitments ... or, within eason, enlarge its public service programing in education, news, discussion." OHN W. GUIDER President WMTW-TV "Dontbe misled by people whodeny ihe intent to censor ... it is censorship when Big Brother in Washington decides /hat you shall see and hear regardless of your personal preferences . . ." 'ONSOR 21 AUGUST 1961 35