Television digest with AM-FM reports (Jan-Dec 1951)

Commission to fail to make some provision for education on VHF in these “closed cities.” The same is true, for reasons stated above, in those cities with less than three TV assignments for which no reservation at all has been made. In both situations, the effect of the Commission’s action may very well be to forever deprive the people of educational television. The record is replete with evidence as to the need for educational television in the “closed cities” and with solutions offered to meet this obvious problem. Yet despite such evidence, and its own recognition of the public policy requiring a reservation, the Commission completely ignores this question — makes no mention of it, nor any attempt to meet and solve it. No one can be unaware of the substantial difficulties involved in this problem, but I cannot believe them to be, with attention and effort, incapable of solution. The Commission improperly provides that it will review the general situation of the reservation “from time to time . . I believe, however, that the reservation of television channels should be stated unconditionally without any suggestion at all of a possible time limitation. There is no question that the Commission may review its action to determine if adequate use, in the circumstances, is being made of reserved facilities. It is equally true that the Commission may review any of its prior actions, including this very allocation plan in full; but while it makes no express reference to this power elsewhere in its decision, it singles out educational reservations as a subject for further scrutiny. For the Commission to expressly state the intention to review the educational reservations as a basic condition of its action, gives the reservation the flavor of being temporary as well as invites pressures on educators, as well as on the Commission, which would make the reservation a short-lived and abortive policy. In view of the practical dynamics of the broadcasting industry, the Commission’s attachment of an implied time limitation to the reservation is not a complete fulfillment of its statutory obligations. I do not suggest that the Commission will be lax in its responsibility to afford education a full opportunity to use the reserved channels. I hope, however, that the Commission’s disposition to give the reservation a temporary character does not indicate a basic attitude of disbelief and distrust towards education. Education must not be given the giblets of the television turkey. Ill The Commission now faces the same problem which was presented to it in 1935 with respect to the reservation of standard broadcast radio facilities for educational and other non-profit institutions. The Commission, pursuant to a Congressional directive, held a hearing after which it recommended to the Congress that there was no need for Congressional action to reserve radio frequences for such purposes. It should be noted that the Commission’s recommendation was based upon the expectation that Commercial broadcasters, “under the direction and supervision of the Commission,” would cooperate with educators and make facilities available to them for service to the public. Yet, it is well known that the Federal Radio Education Committee, which was set up soon afterwards to effectuate the Commission’s purpose, was, whatever its good intentions, largely unable to achieve the hoped-for objectives concerning educational broadcasting. Its effectiveness ceased long before it became moribund, which, as evidence of the untenableness of the entire arrangement, was due to the withdrawal of its financial support by commercial broadcasters. The Commission, in its 1935 Report to Congress, went on to say: “The Commission feels, in particular, that broadcasting has a much more important part in the educational program of the country than has yet been found for it. We expect actively to assist in the determination of the right ful place of broadcasting in education and to see that it is used in that place.” The slightest familiarity with the history of radio since that time makes clear the error of setting up committees for cooperation instead of providing the necessary channels for education. It establishes beyond question that education requires its own broadcasting facilities and that it cannot, with any assurance of success, be left solely to the bounty of commercial operations. It is to this Commission’s credit that it makes provision for education on television and does not repeat the grievous error of 1935. Yet, I am forced to conclude that the Commission is again selling education short in its current allocations plan, and I believe that the future vdll similarly prove it short-sighted in its failure to provide sufficient channels for a nation-wide system of educational TV. In a democracy such as ours, particularly one in crisis, there is nothing deserving of higher priority than education, nothing more important than a full understanding of the processes that nourish and sustain our form of government. Knowledge made men free; more and greater knowledge is needed to keep them free. This Commission today holds the power of insuring that our newest and most powerful mass medium — television— is placed at the service of our educators to provide a future America with a modern and effective educational system. Television has brought to broadcasting the wonderful gift of sight — we must have the vision to make full and proper use of it. OPINION OF COMMISSIONER WEBSTER, DISSENTING IN PART: Ido not agree that on the basis of the record so far made a reservation of channels for non-commercial educational purposes should be made. In my opinion, such a reservation is warranted only if a specific showing is made that there is a reasonable probability that if an educational channel is reserved it will be utilized in the reasonably near future. As I understand the action of the Commission, such a showing can be made on a community-tocommunity basis in the hearing which is being held with respect to specific assignments contained in Appendix C. If a sufficient showing is made in such hearing, I would be in favor of making reservations for educational institutions in those communities as to which such a showing is made. OPINION OF COMMISSIONER JONES, DISSENTING IN PART: COMMISSIONER Jones, for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in the Matter of Yankee Network, Inc. (F.C.C. 48-631, decided March 22, 1948), dissents from paragraphs II-B-2 and II-B-3 of Appendix A which require rule-making proceedings in order to make changes in said Table. OPINION OF COMMISSIONER STERLING, DISSENTING IN PART: I concur in the action of the Commission in reserving channels for non-commercial educational television stations in the UHF band, subject to review from time to time as to their demand and utilization. I doubt the wisdom of making a reservation of VHF channels for noncommercial educational television stations except in the territories and island possessions where VHF channels are in ample supply. The representatives of educational institutions have requested a reservation of channels until such time as they can obtain funds to proceed to establish a station, whereas industry is prepared immediately to build stations in the VHF band and a limited amount of transmitting equipment is available and receivers for this band at this time are not in short supply. It would seem to me that it is in the public interest to make available the greatest number of VHF channels at the earliest date possible so 6