Television digest and FM reports (Jan-Dec 1946)

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.

But the joint FCC and CPA statement Friday served at least to ameliorate the blow, indicated that much construction can go forward as planned, roused strong hopes that restrictions will be only temporary. It was apparent that the FCC was taken unaware by the CPA order, had not been consulted in advance, for its members confessed their puzzlement over their next step during the several days elapsing between issuance of the CPA order and their stateme^nt. Nor was the NAB apprised of the proposed restriction until it was issued to the press. On Friday, A. B. Willard Jr., NAB executive v.p., said NAB would file a brief with CPA asking it "to consider the problems created for the various phases of radio broadcasting by the CPA order virtually prohibiting commercial construction." NAB will explain that predicted broadcast expansions, expected to provide 25,000-50,000 jobs directly and many more thousands indirectly in radio manufacturing industries, cannot be expected if the order sticks. NAB forsees curtailment of the 100 new TV stations predicted by the end of 1947 and the 2,000 FMs expected v/ithin 3 years, said Mr. Willard. FULL TEXT OF FCC STATEMENT ON ORDER VHP-1, MARCH 29 The Federal Communications Commission today, issued the following statement concerning the relationship of the Civilian Production Administration’s Veterans’ Housing Order VHP-1 and the radio licensing policies of the Commission : During the war the Federal Communications Commission in cooperation with the War Production Board and the Board of War Communications adopted certain policies which substantially “froze” civilian radio production and installation. This freeze was essential because the same materials, factories and personnel were essential to the war effort. The Civilian Production Administration and the Federal Communications Commission believe that the situation is now materially different and that except for the actual housing structures and facilities (e.g. transmitter houses, studio buildings, etc.) the construction of radio stations would* have no adverse effect on the Veterans’ Hoitsing Program. It is pointed out that the CPA limitation order does not halt the construction of radio towers, panel boards, transmitters and other similar apparatus or equipment and that the erection of nev/ buildings can go forward if the new construction does not cost in excess of one thousand dollars. If the cost exceeds one thousand dollars, the program must be submitted to the nearest CPA office for authorization where it will be measured by the yard stick of essentiality and non-deferability. The one thousand dollar figure is the ceiling also for building repairs and alterations. However, there is no cost ceiling on repairs to mechanical equipment. In view of the above the CPA and the FCC further believe that by limiting the housing plans for radio stations to absolutely essential construction a considerable number of permittees will be able to operate satisfactorily until materials for more elaborate structures become available. Therefore, the FCC proposes to continue processing applications with the understanding that the final decision as to whether construction will be authorized remains with the CPA. The CPA wishes it emphasized that the issuance of a permit by the Commission does not mean that the required construction will be authorized. The FCC also stressed that requests for the interpretation of Housing Order VHP-1 should be addressed to nearest Civilian Production Administration construction office and not to the Commission.