Sponsor (July-Dec 1952)

Radio I::::::-::::::-::-: •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:■:•:•:■ .and now a message hom oui sponsoi ■:•:•:■:•:■:•:■:•:■:•:•:■:■:•:■:•:■:•:•:■:•:•:•:•:•:•: TV by Bob Foreman A lthough the mantle oi seer is sure to hang loosel) on my shoulders, 1 lliink the time of year is such that a look ahead is appropriate. But to do so, perhaps we should first count our present achievements, if any, before moving into tomorrow. The critics notwithstanding. I'd -,i\ that television programing over the past year has improved tremendously. To the roster have been added many new programs of the situation species and while none has revolutionized the medium nor even perhaps broken new ground, the general caliber of these is higher than the programs which they replaced. Certainly their audience appeal will be greater— thai we know from radio -and alter all, lhi> is an important criterion in a medium intended a> mass entertainment as well as a sales-vehicle. On the other side of the pro graining ledger, the industry certainly can point with pride to Omnibus, the CBS Ford Foundation effort that has utilized other-thanadvertiser money to reach for goals the salesminded seldom dare attempt. Uneven as it has been and is bound to be. Omnibus has beyond a doubt demonstrated how the monster we have by the horns can be tamed and even put through some definitely aesthetic paces. Leaving the realm of art and salesmanship and turning to Television-the-Reporter, the past year has unfolded some new chapters worthy of perusal. Riding closely behind the Kefauver investigations which demonstrated the probing eye of the new medium and demonstrated the unrehearsed eloquence possible in it, we came even farther in 1952. We saw the first political conventions ever to be televised and a good part of our country was able to witness PABST DRESSES UP ITS WELL-KNOWN THEME WITH IMAGINATIVE CARTOONING the rather startling, very puerile, and extremely exciting shenanigans it takes for two major parties to decide upon Presidential candidate-. Only a few months later, we went to the polls, climaxing a campaign that set new television records once again — new in the sums spent as well as in the techniques used to present politicos to the public. It is quite disconcerting (to my knowledge) that no important research organization had the foresight to make a comprehensive survey 24 hours after the election was over and thus determine which TV-techniques as well as which campaign appeals served to win voters, especially those who went up to the wire undecided. Knowledge of this order, of course, would be worth millions of dollars to the candidate of tomorrow. What about 1953? We still will be badgered by the two major problems of 1952 — high cost and no time. Until these factors can be licked or at least alleviated, the medium will achieve only a fractional part of what its destiny is certain to be. More film shows are in the laboratories than ever before and their prices, it's encouraging to note, are not still climbing. On the other hand, these prices have not descended. Spot time is opening up slowly. ABC's merger will help to create new network availabilities. New stations will be making some new slois available. Still the SRO signs are very prevalent at NBC and CBS while the cost-picture continues to I e such that more and more advertisers arc programing on alternate weeks or becoming participants in the lengthy, highpriced epics. Daytime is still in a state of flux. Ratings have slipped -on the other hand, the earl) morning Oariowa\ opus after a shak) start proved the soundness oi the lime, program, and concept h\ reaching good-sized audiences and racking up some exceptional sales-results lor a \ aried number and t\ pe oJ sponsors. 62 SPONSOR