Television digest and FM reports (Jan-Dec 1946)

station, we'll do that. Until then, we don't want to put up a peanut v/histle." Crosley says it will stick to Ohio. For other applicants, see Supplements 14A-14G. At pre-hearing conference Thursday, counsel for the 12 agreed to submit program data in accordance with FCC report on "Public Service Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees" (see story in this issue). They also agreed to submit ?*Ionday all program formats and staff organizations so that applicants heard first won't be at disadvantage as against those heard later. Application for an FM in Washington's suburban Silver Spring, Md. , v/as filed this week by Tri-Suburban Broadcasting Co., headed by John VI, Kluge, paper products dealer, but it does not become party to hearing since it asks only for a Community Station. FINALS ON TWO-BAND m? What may be the last broadside fired by proponents of 2-band FM (unless Congressional pressure is brought to bear, which looks unlikely at this moment) v/ent off this week when Comdr. E. F. McDonald Jr. of Zenith and Maj . Edwin H. Armstrong vigorously dissented from the FCC's opinion, issued this week, on its decision turning down the Zenith-GE petition to widen the FM band. Said McDonald; "Commission itself requested Zenith to file petition.... Commission ignores first actual field tests of FM on 50 and 100 me .... Commission ignores advice of 7 distinguished scientists (Dellinger, Stetson, Burrows, Beverage, Pickard, Bailey, Armstrong) and accepts theories of its own employe (Norton).... Commission has strengthened the relative monopoly that now exists in broadcasting ....It is universally conceded that the farmer and the rural resident will not get television. This decision means that they will not get FM either." Said Armstrong; "Commission report virtually admits that its engineering department has made one of the colossal mistakes of radio history. ... In addition to the refusal of Commission engineers to face the implications of the tests, the report is full of technical mistakes. ... It is now in order to challenge responsible members of the FCC engineering department to appear at the Broadcast Engineering Conference (at Columbus, 0., March 23) to substantiate their f indings . . . . Only way facts can be suppressed is by shutting down present 40 me band before comparative performance of 2 bands can be observed in actual practice by engineers and public." FCC conclusions were predicated on: (1) Sporadic E interference in 50 me band; none in 100 me band; (2) F2 interference in low band; does not affect service in high band; (3) Low-band coverage is not substantially greater than coverage in high-band; (4) Low band shows no substantial advantage over upper band with respect to coverage within expected service areas of FJA broadcast stations ; (5) Service to farmers living at great distances from cities must continue to come from AM. FCC BSPOET ON FROGEAFiMNC: While our Standard Broadcasting brethren writhe at the roasting they take in the 139-page FCC report on "Public Service Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees." issued this week, it behooves FMers as v/ell to look sharp. There's plenty of meat in the report, available from the Commission, applicable to new as well as old radio services. Nor can it be blinked away as merely another "left v;lng" attack on broadcasting, for it bears the unanimous imprimatur of the commissioners including ex-Chairman Porter. NAB President Miller commented: "The report overlooks, completely, freedom of speech. ... reveals a lack of faith in the American system of free radio. ... indicates a reversion to that type of government control and regulation from which our forefathers struggled to escape." It's being sent to all licensees, but if you haven't received one you should by all means see that you do, and read it carefully. Major item in the report is the new breakdown of program structure required to be filed with applications for new stations as well as for license renewals. It also compares promises and performance, discusses "specialized" stations and goes into length of commercials in chapter on advertising excesses. The com.missi oners hold they have legal authority to take program structure into consideration but disclaim any intention of dictating program content. i