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.
a fair to good profit. I'm e<]uall\ doubtful that radio rates have increased in any proportion to sets, population, or total purchasing power of the audience.
There are probably few ways to compare media effectiveness. This was brought home the other day in appraising the gross billing of the top nine media in which the magazine Life topped \BC. the largest of the networks. This is astounding in light of some of our knowledge. Life is a weekly of some 100 pages with a circulation of 5,200,000 — CBS, according to their estimate of last year has a total weekly audience of 99 millon.
If a network carried nothing but talk for 6 hours daily out of 18 hours I probably not uncommon considering soap operas) something' like 250.000 words alone would be carried per week against some 3.000 in Life.
But is there any question about which could influence the most people for good or evil? Those 18 hours of radio appeal to emotions, not intellect. Can one imagine Roosevelt appealing to the masses thru Life to win a 4th term? Are readers ever likely to feel they are part of the magazine's family as they do with radio talent? Would readers of Life send in $6,000,000 direct to Life for War Bonds instead of buying locally? They did to WHO. just one radio station. Could a magazine influence people to send 400 tons of clothing at their own expense to needy Europeans? WHO, one radio station, did.
In my own feeble way I just can't imagine one issue of a magazine doing as much to make life worth while for so many people as one network can in a week. Whether you consider education, general or specific information, amusement, etc.. or just killing time pleasantly, radio should get an easy nod.
Concluding this somewhat rambling discussion of rates is hard to do. I can think of many more reasons why the people would rather retain their radio (lots of surveys) than any other socalled modern convenience. Of one thing I feel sure — that the advertiser on radio is buying something he cannot procure in other media and is busing it at a most reasonable rate.
Paul A. Loyet
Vice-President
WHO
Des Moines, Ion a
8 MAY 1950
WE
DON'T MIND
# It's okay with us if advertisers want to test their TV on WTTV. In fact, we love it, and we get ".itters" of results. Because our's is a true test market, advertisers have found if TV pulls on our station (where rates are lower) it'll do the job elsewhere. Look at this ideal, Bloomington test market: low cost . . . balanced audience (rural, industrial and urban population). And, remember, WTTV is a pioneer in small-town TV operation.
THE
WTTS
For Information
Call or Write
ROBERT LEMON
Sales Manager
SARKES TARZIAN STATIONS
WTTV 4.
Represented Nationally by
BARNARD and THOMPSON, Inc.
299 Madison Avenue
New York City
BLOOMINGTON INDIANA
11