Sponsor (Apr-June 1962)

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.

ONE of the many stations in this country which has been entangled in the Section 315 equal-time web is WPIX, New York. During the 1961 mayoralty election, equal time was given to four minority-party candidates in addition to Mayor Wagner (r) and GOP challenger Louis Lefkowitz WHEN MUST I GIVE EQUAL TIME? ^ Does Section 315 apply to on-the-air editorializing? Many broadcasters and most admen do not know! ^ Here, as a service to the industry, is an explanation of the ground rules of political and opinion programing I he electrifying U.S. Supreme Court decision two weeks ago favoring WMCA in its stand against New York State on apportionment in the legislature has focused national attention on the growing practice of broadcast editorializing. The practice shares the wide misunderstanding, and is often confused with, broadcasts of political candidates. Many broadcasters are confounded by the regulations and interpretations of Section 315 of the Communications Act which deal with candidates and by the Fairness Doctrine which deals with editorializing and other political broadcasts. It is a certainty that the confusion will be manifest this fall when congressional, senatorial, and numerous state and local elections get underway. Section 315, although widely disliked, is in itself not too often misunderstood. The Fairness Doctrine, however, because of its lack of hard, set-down dogma, induces the greatest number of puzzlements. Although this may be so, an NAB official pointed out. it "is to be preferred to a system containing a strict set of guidelines which would then deprive a broadcaster of his own judgment in editorializing." With practice, the mud puddle will clear, he predicted. In addition to the fuzziness, an intangible fear exists in the minds of some broadcasters that in the course of editorializing, let us say, and while being "fair," they may be run to earth by a capricious, axe-grinding government agency. The purpose of this article then is to try to clarify the rights and duties of radio and tv licensees while broadcasting programs of a political nature or when editorializing, about politics or otherwise. Two categories of "ground rules" exist to guide radio and tv broadcasters in handling political, candidates and their followers, political editorials, non-political but controversial editorials, and other ("Motherhood") editorials. Section 315 is invoked when — and only when — a candidate himself, and not a spokesman, is seen or heard on a program. The details are given in the chart on page 36. All other usages of air time for reasons mentioned above are gov SPONSOR 25 june 1962 35