Sponsor (July-Dec 1954)

a torn 111 on question* of current interest to air advertiser* and their agencies Iht radio find tv iteetl ci belter system of ttirttrds THE PICKED PANEL ANSWERS SINGLE AWARD BENEFITS l(\ Mark Goodson Goodton-Todman Productions I n ord e r I ii l awards in television and i adio to mean an\ thing, it •^ "• may eventually be necessar) for % ^. tin-in to be nar ^k rowed dnw ii In a v *^ m single one. \\ith m great prestige, rather than a flock <>f them, some of which amount to nothing more than institutional promotion for a firm. Emulating the Hollywood ^cademj awards is a desirable, hut difficult, ambition In realize. Aside from the fact thai there are so man) small competitive awards whicl I\ serve to water down the larger, more meaningful presentations, there are other problems inherent to radio and television. First, the imlii-liN does not present new piodiii t as regularl) as the motion picture trade does. This means that after a show has 'made good," although it continues to he aired and ma) even gain in popularity, perhaps improve despite the fad that it has ahead} won an award, it must he ignored in favor nt newer, if nol necessarily better or freshei fare! For the much-needed constancy, each m;u awards should be considered lor new shows, a well .1 Foi those thai have been on the aii foi some time. \i [east one well-known award has evolved a ver) successful category sell < linn, which maj \ ei j well be pei feci for award-giving. It is important thai the u: 1 < > 1 1 j > are nol too wide and nut too n.11 row. \\ hen the promoters nf various prodi* ts, events and organizations move in with plaques and statuettes, scrolls and <le-k doo-hickeys, there is no limit to their imaginations . . . a State Fair annuall) presents awards to ever) show on the air ("For the hot -hew mi \YZ network on \liuiila\ at eight!'" I in the hope of a cross pluji on the air! While tlii ma\ not fool anyone in the trade, its effect on the public i miK to add to the confusion. Another \ ital element of awardui\ing must be the board of judges. They must come, not necessarilv from circles of critics of industry people, but certainly from groups who are conversant with the medium. The) must be individuals who do watch television and know what shows are on the air: people who have seen these shows over a period of main months, rather than in screening rooms over a scant few da) s. If all this can be worked out properly and intelligently, everyone in broadcasting will naturallv benefit from one good, important award — not 37 1 count "em I different ones of assorted shapes and sizes! OPPOSED TO SINGLE AWARD By Thomas A. Mr ivity \ . I', in charge of tv network program* \IU \u two of the well established awards competitions for television and radio have identical criteria, but the goal of all the systems is the -a in e* the improvement nl broadcasting. It i the ver) diversit) ol rule> governing the various awards that insures due recognition to outstanding programs in all categories. It would be impossible for an) one competition to give clue credit to all worth) programs, ■ oncepts and tei uniques. The recognized awards in this indii-lr\ have developed systems based on \ears of experience. They are generall) given b\ non-profit, national organizationor foundations and are based on competent and unbiased decisions. Broadcasting is designed to ser\e all segments cultural, social and economic— of our population. B) this token, the wide variet) nf points of \ iew brought to bear by the awards systems is of indispensable value in spurring the industry to improvement in all phases of its operations. Occasionally the suggestion is heard that what broadcasting needs is a single award system corresponding to the \c aih m\ Awards for motion pictures. To this I am opposed, and so are most of us in this industry. I feel strongly that the various awards s\stems in broadcasting are doing a fine job. and that the wide range of criteria gives broadcasters a wide range of target in the quest for recognition and leadership. It i obvious that not ever) top-notch program can win in am »iven year, no matter how man) competition there were. But it i certain that the programs which do win for one reason or another are representatives of the best and most forward-looking in our indu-lr\ . K E Y 1 s s U E Shou d there be a cl Kill ge to a single sys em of awards spi HIS ored b\ the inch; -tr\ ? The . •oiiunents on these take up the (iio and 1 oii of a single aw aid -\ stem. 66 SPONSOR