Sponsor (July-Dec 1954)

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.

FALL FACTS I have just finished looking over the SPONSOR issue of Jul\ 12. There certainl) is a lot of useful information packed in this 268-page issue. I am enclosing a check in the amount of $4 for which I would appreciate eight copies of the Jul) 12 issue, if they are available. George D. Coleman General Manager WGB1-TV, Scran ton • Extra ropics of the 12 July SOc rath. UHF Your issue of July 26 has a very fine article on "How well can uhf sell?'" and we appreciate the mention of \\ \FB-TV in Baton Rouge. However, we are wondering if it would be possible to correct the erroneous information given about Baton Rouge becoming intermixed in September. The channel 2 owners have just finished t tearing their property and are planning to start the building. As yet the\ Jo not have approval of their tower. It is expected that they will be on the air sometime early in 1955 and not in September. Would appreciate it if there is any way you can get this across so that the advertiser will not think they can get a vhf station in Baton Rouge next month. Tom E. Gibbens Vice President & General Manager WAFB-TV, Baton Rouge I was very much gratified to see the uhf story article in your excellent publication and was exceedingly interested in reading it. I felt for a long time that with few exceptions the broadcasting trade press has given uhf a pretty raw deal. It is obvious that where conversion is the major problem uhf faces an almost insurmountable barrier. On the other hand, in areas where uhf is predominant the problems are more psychological than real. Our own area is typical of this situation. We have more uhf signals available, and for the most part, the uhf pictures are better than vhf. In such areas the technical disadvantages and all other problems facing uhf fade into insignificance as compared to the great psychological barrier which confronts us. I know there are vhf stations in other parts of the country which have onl) a fraction of the set circulation which we can count in our area but they are getting the business mil of New ^ oik. We have to be satisfied with little more than mail order accounts. On the other hand, isn't this proof iii itself that a uhf station is a good bin for a client when mail order accounts placed at card rates can be made to pa\ out for the agency or client'.-' Aside from the fact that there is rarel) if ever am interference or variation in quality of a uhf signal. 1 have never been able to detect any difference in a good picture from a vhf station and a good picture from a uhf station. The fact that a uhf signal will not travel as far as vhf makes little difference to people living in the immediate area of the station. . . . In reading the trade press I sometimes get the impression that the author of the particular article never saw good uhf reception. There is so much half-truth, and sometimes outright ridicule, that it borders on absurdity. These stories usually wind up by damning uhf with such faint praise that it is remarkable that any uhf stations anywhere have ever been able to get any business at all from N. Y. . . . Under present conditions, even I have little hope for new uhf television operations surviving against the competition of several well established vhf stations in the same area. This is a tragic situation and drastic action should be taken to create a remedy. However, in areas where conversion is not a major problem this biased attitude about uhf should be eliminated. I am sure the trade press did not set out to deliberately create this prejudice against uhf but it has permitted it to grow to its present proportion. A firm editorial policy in the broadcasting press generally could have quickly reversed this wave of anti-uhf sentiment. One very influential trade publication, instead of taking timely and constructive action, can only bewail over and over the fact that an organization of uhf operators have appealed to the United States Congress for relief. . . . Congratulations on the uhf feature story in SPONSOR. It may be a little late but it is at least a start in the right direction. Julian F. Skinnell Operations Manager WLBRTV Lebanon, Pa. I <2 l CO <. c 6 SEPTEMBER 1954 17