DOCSLIB.ORG

POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICIES of Ka DIO and TELEVISION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICIES of Ka DIO and TELEVISION SOME ASPECTS OF . * / 'POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICIES OF Ka DIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial -Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By ■ , i r i c h a r d M e r r i l l m a l l , b .s ., m .a . The- Ohio State University 1952 • • Adviser TABLE OF CONTENTS CnAFTER PAGE I. THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL BROADCASTING .... 1 II. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS AFFECTING POLITICAL BROADCASTS IN THE UNITED STATES . 37 III. POLITICAL rOLlCIES OF NATIONAL RADIO AND TELEVISION NETWORKS ........................ 105 IV. A oTUDY OF POLITICAL POLICIES OF REPRE­ SENTATIVE STATIONS ...................... 117 V. TILE BASES ON WHICH RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS MAKE TIMS AVAILABLE P'OR POLITICAL BROADCASTS ............. 137 VI. TEE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD POLITICAL SPEAKERS AND TYPES OF POLITICAL MATERIALS ........... 174 VII. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD THE HANDLING OF POLITICAL SCRIPTS AND THEIR CONTENT ................ 212 VIII. MISCELLANEOUS EXPRESSIONS OF POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICY INCLUDING THOSE RELATING TO C O M M U N I S T S .............................. 242 IX. SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ..................... 264 SloLIO j-RAPHY ......................................... 283 APPENDIX 292 ii £>2.1744 LIST OP TABLES TABLE NO. PAGE I. CHARACTERISTICS OP THE SAMPLE OP AM RADIO STATIONS WHICH REPLIED TO THE POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICY QUESTIONNAIRE ......... 132 II. CHARACTERISTICS OP THE SAMPLE OP TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH REPLIED TO THE POLITICAL BROADCAST POLICY QUESTIONNAIRE .......... 123 III. RADIO AND TELEVISION STATION EXECUTIVE POSITIONS OP RESPONDENTS WHO ANSWERED QUESTIONNAIRES ........................... 136 IV. PROPORTION OP RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH DO SELL TIME FOR POLITICAL BROADCASTS ................................ 140 V. PROPORTION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH DO GIVE FREE TIME FOR POLITICAL BROADCASTS ........ .............. 144 VI. PROPORTION OP RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH RESTRICT TOTAL AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE POLITICAL T I M E ........................... 146 VII. PROPORTION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH DO CANCEL REGULAR COMMERCIALS IN FAVOR OP POLITICAL BROADCASTS ......... 158 VIII. PROGRAM TYPES WHICH RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WILL NOT CANCEL FOR PRESENTA­ TION OP POLITICAL BROADCASTS ......... 163 ill LIST OF TABLES (continued) iv ABJjE w o . p a g e IX. SALES PRACTICES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH SELL TIME FOR POLITICAL BROADCASTS ............................... 168 X. INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS TO WHOM RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WILL SELL POLITICAL BROADCAST TIME DURING CAMPAIGNS .... 177 XI. INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS TO WHOM RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WILL SELL POLITICAL BROADCAST TIME BETWEEN CAMPAIGNS .... 178 XII. TIIE BROADCAST OF FORUM DISCUSSIONS ON POLITICAL ISSUES BY RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS .................................. 188 XIII. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD THE BROADCAST OF "REPORTS" BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS DURING CAMPAIGNS . 194 XIV. THE POLICIES OF iiADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD THE BROADCAST OF "REPORTS *' BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS BETWEEN CAMPAIGNS . 195 XV. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD THE BROADCAST OF CERTAIN POLITICAL MATERIALS DURING CAMPAIGNS . 200 XVI. THE POLICIES OF RAiXEO AND TELEVISION STATIONS DURING CAMPAIGNS TOWARD POLITICAL STANDS BY NEWS COMMENTATORS AND RELIGIOUS SPEAKERS .................. 207 LIST OF TABLES (continued) v C”a f t e r p a g e XVII. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD THE ADVANCE SUBMISSION OF POLITICAL SCRIPTS ..................... 215 XVIII. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TOWARD REQUESTING CONTENT ChANGES IN POLITICAL SCRIPTS DURING CAMPAIGNS ............................... 221 XIX. THE EFFECTS OF STATION AGE ON THE POLICIES OF FULL-TIME STATIONS TOWARD REQUESTING CONTENT CHANGES IN POLITICAL SCRIPTS DURING CAMPAIGNS ......................... 224 XX. THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS DURING CAMPAIGNS WHEN A POLITICAL SPEAKER REFUSES TO MAKE oCRIPT CHANGES ....................................... 230 XXI. PROPORTION OF n^DlO AND TELEVISION STATIONS vVKICH CARRY POLITICAL LIABILITY INSURANCE 233 XXII. PROPORTION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS WHICH USE DISCLAIMERS PITH LOCAL POLITICAL BROADCASTS .................... 237 XXIII. THE POLICIES OF AFFILIATES TOWARD CERTAIN NETWORK POLITICAL BROADCAST SITUATIONS DURING CAMPAIGNS ......................... 250 a XIV. THE POLICIES OF RADIO AND TELEVISION STATIONS TO'WARD POLITICAL BROADCASTS BY COMMUNISTS DURING CAMPAIGNS.............. 253 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL BROADCASTING Broadcasting in the United States is usually con­ sidered to date from November 2, 1920, when Station KDKA, Pittsburgh, broadcast ■‘■he Harding-Cox election returns. The only receiving sets in the hands of the public in those days were largely confined to amateur telegraph operators. The audience for this first broadcast was probably limited to fewer than five hundred or a thousand persons. Both sides in the election had predicted victory, but everyone knew either candidate mlgfcit win and public interest was at fever pitch. As the returns were reported that night, they were flashed across the country by tele­ graph. Crowds stood for hours before outdoor bulletin boards to see the returns, many of them forced to endure driving rains. In Pittsburgh, however, Station KDKA had a man read the telegraph reports into a microphone and his voice was transmitted over a radius of hundreds of miles. While most of the anxious population had to endure relative dis­ comfort to get the election returns, many pioneer radio fans were hearing the same returns in the cozy climate of their own homes. Unlike the millions who depended on bulletin boards and successive editions of newspapers, 1 the small audience of radio listeners knew what was happen­ ing as it happened. The KDKA experiment was Tar from a national sensa­ tion, but it did receive some attention from the press and stirred an interest in radio among the people. It marked the beginning of a type of regularly scheduled programming. Prom three stations In 1920, the number rose to over 500 In 1923, and the sales of radio receivers rose from $2,000,000 to $136,000,000 in the same three-year period.^- In 1923, half of the stations were less than 100 watts in power and very few were more than 500 watts. The number 2 of receiving sets had grown to 1,500,000. Within a little over three decades, radio broad­ casting and receiving grew from a plaything of amateurs into a giant industry and a most significant vehicle of communication. It grew so much that Brigadier General David Sarnoff, chairman of the board of the Radio Corpora­ tion of America, In his year-end statement for 1951, de­ clared: ^"Giraud Chester and Garnet R. Garrison, Radio and Television. (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1 9 5 0 p. 22. ^Herman S* Hettinger, "Broadcasting in the United States," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social^Science. T^7:l, January, l6&>. By election’ day ... in 1952 ... there will be approximately 18 million television sets in the Uni*ted States -with a potefhtial audience of more than 60. million persons - exceeding the total popula­ tion of the United States when Grrover Cleveland cam­ paigned f or *'the presidency in 1884. For the first time coast-to-coast* network facilities will be available for the national campaigns .... ** ? * • Today there are 2,400 AM and 680 FM stations in the United States. ^aily broadcasts cover 95^> of the country. Approximately 12 million new radio sets were sold by the industry in 1951, lifting the total in this country close to the 100 million mark, including About 24 million automobile radios. There are’ 43 million radio equipped homes ... On -the threshold of 1952, it is difficult to imagine a .world without radio, or homes without broadcast receivers and television sets . ...^ Thus in a little more than thirty years, radio has .become a tremendous industry and its companion, television, is just beginning a career which seems likely to show a comparable expansion. The next few years will unques­ tionably see a growth in the number of television stations - some say as many as two or three thousand. The number of stations and people engaged in the transmission of radio and television programs is powerful evidence of the important role broadcasting plays in our society. Broadcasting, by giving new force to the spoken 3"Sarnoff,a Broadcasting. 38:47, December 24, 1951 word, has become an uncommonly powerful medium to do good or evil In American society. Radio'a persistent command of our attentions tends to make it an Important creator of our values, desires, and tensions, . Radio achieves its * • greatest Intact on the public as a'source of,information, persuasion, and entertainment. For public speakers, radio and television broad­ casting has magnified the potential audience enormously ■ and personalized the communicative bond. A single speaker and a great audience, spread over vast areas, divided into family units, yet intimately affected by the sound of the human voice, is the essence of the broadcast situation. It allows one individual to bring to bear, in a. single moment, the full force of his vocal persuasiveness upon a nation of listeners. In enslaved countries, radio Is an arm of govern­ mental policy. In many free
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Producer's Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER CHALLENGES A PRODUCER’S HANDBOOK by Kathy Avrich-Johnson Edited by Daphne Park Rehdner Summer 2002 Introduction and Disclaimer This handbook addresses business issues and considerations related to certain aspects of the production process, namely development and the acquisition of rights, producer relationships and low budget production. There is no neat title that encompasses these topics but what ties them together is that they are all areas that present particular challenges to emerging producers. In the course of researching this book, the issues that came up repeatedly are those that arise at the earlier stages of the production process or at the earlier stages of the producer’s career. If not properly addressed these will be certain to bite you in the end. There is more discussion of various considerations than in Canadian Production Finance: A Producer’s Handbook due to the nature of the topics. I have sought not to replicate any of the material covered in that book. What I have sought to provide is practical guidance through some tricky territory. There are often as many different agreements and approaches to many of the topics discussed as there are producers and no two productions are the same. The content of this handbook is designed for informational purposes only. It is by no means a comprehensive statement of available options, information, resources or alternatives related to Canadian development and production. The content does not purport to provide legal or accounting advice and must not be construed as doing so. The information contained in this handbook is not intended to substitute for informed, specific professional advice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of Broadcasters' Public Interest Obligations*
    SPECTRUM POLICY PROGRAM POLICY BACKGROUNDER March 29, 2004 The Decline of Broadcasters’ Public Interest Obligations* The Communications Act of 1934 and its predecessor, the interest obligations, but they didn’t necessarily object to Radio Act of 1927, mandates that the Federal their codification because it provided them with more Communications Commission regulate broadcasting in the certainty about the standard by which they would be judged “public interest, convenience, or necessity.” This at renewal time. And, of course, they continued to use continues to be the mandate of the FCC, and the “public prime broadcast frequencies free of charge. interest” part of the phrase appears 40 times in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. What broadcasters really hated, however, was the prospect that they might lose their licenses. Licenses to use the The “public interest” mandate is notoriously vague. airwaves were hugely valuable. In one famous phrase, they Contentious debate over its meaning has been almost were described as a “license to print money.” Thus, continuous since passage of the Communications Act 70 incumbent broadcasters did everything they could to reduce years ago. the threat that at the end of their license term they might lose their license. In other words, they attacked the essence For purposes of this historical account of the public interest of the public interest standard, which was fundamentally mandate, we give it the meaning: “compensation to the procedural rather than substantive in nature. public for the use of the public airwaves.” This interpretation provides a simple framework to explain how Their lobbying was highly successful. Over time, the the public interest mandate has evolved since it was first duration of broadcast licenses was increased from 3 to 5 to embedded as the foundation of broadcast law.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: the Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 49 Issue 3 Article 2 4-1997 Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman Covington & Burling Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Goodman, Ellen P. (1997) "Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 49 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol49/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman* I. INTRODUCTION ................................... 517 II. ORIGINS OF THE DTV PRovIsIoNs OF THE 1996 ACT .... 519 A. The Regulatory Process ..................... 519 B. The FirstBills ............................ 525 1. The Commerce Committee Bills ............. 526 2. Budget Actions ......................... 533 C. The Passage of the 1996Act .................. 537 Ill. THE AFTERMATH OF THE 1996 ACT ................ 538 A. Setting the Stage .......................... 538 B. The CongressionalHearings .................. 542 IV. CONCLUSION ................................ 546 I. INTRODUCTION President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act or the Act) on February 8, 1996.1 The pen he used to sign the Act was also used by President Eisenhower to create the federal highway system in 1957 and was later given to Senator Albert Gore, Sr., the father of the highway legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) 2014 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 14-50 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) 2010 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 09-182 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) Promoting Diversification of Ownership ) MB Docket No. 07-294 in the Broadcasting Services ) ) Rules and Policies Concerning ) MB Docket No. 04-256 Attribution of Joint Sales Agreements ) in Local Television Markets ) ) Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014 -2- Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 I. Background ......................................................................................................................... 4 A. The DOJ Asserts That Local Broadcast Television Advertising Is a Relevant Antitrust Product Market ........................................................................................ 4 B. The DOJ’s Position Lacks Empirical Support ........................................................ 5 II. Empirical Evidence Is Inconsistent with the DOJ’s Definition of the Relevant Product Market ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 1996 Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Communications Law Commons Recommended Citation Lili Levi, Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 29 Conn. L. Rev. 243 (1996). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Liu LEvi In 1969, public outrage derailed a bill providing that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC" or "Commission") could not con- sider competing applications for broadcast licenses unless it first found that renewal of the incumbent's license would not be in the public interest.' Citizen groups claimed that eliminating comparative challenges to incumbent broadcasters was "back-door racism" and reinforced the under-representation of minorities in broadcasting.2 They decried the bill as a "vicious ... attempt to limit the efforts of the black community to challenge the prevailing racist practices of the vast majority of TV stations."3 When the FCC thereupon issued a policy statement adopting a similar reform of the comparative renewal process, it was reversed by * Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020
    Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020 March 2020 This primer provides detailed guidance on the television station license renewal process.1 Please have those involved in the license renewal process at your station take some time to review these materials. Stations must begin their post-filing announcements on the date that their renewal application is filed. Note that we are happy to set up a call with our clients to walk through this process and answer any questions. We are also glad to handle the mechanics of filing renewal applications through the FCC’s “new” Licensing Management System (“LMS”). SECTION I: THE BASICS The deadline by which a station is required to file its license renewal application is determined by the state in which the station is licensed. Attachment A contains a state-by-state list of license renewal application filing dates and license expiration dates.2 After filing its license renewal application, a station must air post-filing announcements for one month.3 Pre-filing announcements are no longer required.4 Section II of this memorandum provides detailed guidance on the required post-filing announcements, the specific text required, and sample statements for certifying compliance with the public announcement requirements (Attachments B-E). The license renewal application must be filed electronically through the FCC’s Licensing Management System (LMS) platform using FCC Form 2100/Schedule 303-S (“Form 303-S”). A sample copy of the Form 303-S from LMS is available at Attachment F, along with the FCC’s instructions for the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Television and Media Concentration
    •• IRIS Special Edited by the European Audiovisual Observatory TelevisionTelevision andand MediaMedia ConcentrationConcentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level TELEVISION AND MEDIA CONCENTRATION IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2001 ISBN 92-871-4595-4 Director of the Publication: Wolfgang Closs, Executive Director of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Editor and Coordinator: Dr. Susanne Nikoltchev (LL.M. EUI and U of M) Legal Expert of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Partner Organisations that contributed to IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration IViR – Institute of European Media Law EMR – Institute of European Media Law Rokin 84, NL-1012 KX Amsterdam Nell-Breuning-Allee 6, D-66115 Saarbrücken Tel.: +31 (0) 20 525 34 06 Tel.: +49 (0) 681 99275 11 Fax: +31 (0) 20 525 30 33 Fax: +49 (0) 681 99275 12 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] CMC – Communications Media Center MMLPC – Moscow Media Law and Policy Center New York Law School Mokhovaya 9, 103914 Moscow 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10013 Russian Federation USA Tel./Fax: +7 (0) 503 737 3371 Tel.: +1 212 431 2160 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax: +1 212 966 2053 [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] Proofreaders: Florence Pastori, Géraldine Pilard-Murray, Candelaria van Strien-Reney Translators: Brigitte Auel, France Courrèges, Christopher
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Historical Understandings of the “Public Interest” Standard of American Broadcasting: an Exploration of the Fairness Doctrine
    International Journal of Communication 7 (2013), 89–109 1932–8036/20130005 Restoring Historical Understandings of the “Public Interest” Standard of American Broadcasting: An Exploration of the Fairness Doctrine CHRISTINA LEFEVRE–GONZALEZ University of Colorado, Boulder The “public interest” standard is a phrase that American broadcast regulation has not clearly defined throughout its history. Media scholars have attempted to locate the “true” meaning of the public interest standard by historicizing its use through broad analyses of broadcast regulation, but this approach has provided inadequate frameworks for understanding how the public interest standard has informed broadcast policy. By centering its historical analysis on the Fairness Doctrine, this article uncovers four dominant definitions for the public interest standard: first, as an enforcer of structure and efficiency of the spectrum; second, as part of the trusteeship of licensed broadcasters; third, for social justice and reform; and fourth, for the tastes and preferences of the public. The “public interest” is a phrase that, in the words of Richard Weaver (1953), possesses a “charismatic” quality. Political scientist Frank Sorauf (1957) described the concept as reflecting “the highest standard of governmental action, the measure of the greatest wisdom or morality in government” (p. 616). Some scholars believe that this idyllic phrase, an important rhetorical feature of American broadcast policy, possesses an indiscernible meaning that is susceptible to political will. Legal scholars Krattenmaker and Powe (1994) describe the standard as “either an empty concept or one that is infinitely manipulable” (p. 143). Zlotlow (2004) argues that the poorly defined standard “was both an empty concept and infinitely manipulable” (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Accountability in Public Service Broadcasting: the Evolution of Promises and Assessments
    Accountability in Public Service Broadcasting: The Evolution of Promises and Assessments NAKAMURA Yoshiko Today, the world’s public service broadcasters, including NHK in Japan, are increasingly called upon to define their remits and make them public, and to present the assessments as to whether they are indeed being carried out. Since public service broadcasters throughout the world operate with funds collected through license fees (receiving fees in Japan) or public funds such as govern- ment subsidies, they are obliged to be accountable to the audiences and citi- zens paying for the service. Until now, public service broadcasters have sought to ensure accountability by meeting institutional requirements such as publication of mandatory annual reports and accounts, handling of audience complaints, and responses to audience needs through broadcasting commit- tees. Public service broadcasters obviously need to be accountable in order to maintain trust with their audiences. This basic assumption is shared by European media scholars and researchers. Cultural Dilemmas in Public Service Broadcasting, by Gregory Ferrell Lowe and Per Jauert (Lowe and Jauert, 2005), which not only focuses on public service broadcasting quality, performance assessment, and the need for accountability but also suggests possible strategies for public service broadcasters in the face of a changing media environment, offers valuable thought on these issues. This paper will present case studies of the initiatives taken by public broadcasters in Sweden, Denmark, the U.K., and Japan regarding accountability and discuss mainly institutional reforms for strengthening accountability. REASONS FOR STRENGTHENING ACCOUNTABILITY Since the 1990s, advances in cable television technology and the availability of satellite broadcasting have made it possible for broadcasters across the world to provide multiple channels.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clark Howard Radio Show.Xlsx
    The Clark Howard Radio Show State City Time Call Letters Frequency AK Anchorage MoFr 9A-11A KFQD-AM 750 AK Anchorage Sa 10A-12P KFQD-AM 750 AK Anchorage MoFr 6:15A-6:30A KFQD-AM 750 AK Anchorage MoFr 2P-3P KFQD-AM 750 AK Fairbanks MoFr 6A-7P KWLF-FM 98.1 AL Foley MoFr 6:15A-6:30A WHEP-AM 1310 AL Daphne/Mobile Su 2P-5P WAVH-FM 106.5 AL Foley MoFr 12P-2P WHEP-AM 1310 AL Daphne/Mobile Sa 2P-5P WAVH-FM 106.5 AL Fairhope/Mobile MoFr 12P-2P WXQW-AM 660 AL Fairhope/Mobile MoFr 2P-3P WXQW-AM 660 AL Florence/Mus Shoals Su 3P-6P WBCF-AM 1240 AL Florence/Mus Shoals SaSu 4P-7P WBCF-AM 1240 AL Florence/Mus Shoals MoFr 6A-7P WBCF-AM 1240 AL Tuskegee MoFr 9P-10P WQSI-FM 95.9 AL Tuskegee Sa 12P-3P WQSI-FM 95.9 AL Tuskegee MoFr 12P-2P WQSI-FM 95.9 AR Bearden Sa 2P-5P KBEU-FM 92.7 AR Bearden Su 4A-7A KBEU-FM 92.7 AR Hot Springs Su 3P-6P KZNG-AM 1340 AR Farmington/Fayettvl Sa 6A-8A KFAY-AM 1030 AZ Mesa/Phoenix Sa 2P-5P KFNN-AM 1510 AZ Mesa/Phoenix Su 3A-5A KFNN-AM 1510 AZ Mesa/Phoenix MoFr 5:45A-6A KFNN-AM 1510 AZ Mesa/Phoenix MoFr 6:15P-6:30P KFNN-AM 1510 AZ Mesa/Phoenix MoFr 6P-9P KFNN-AM 1510 AZ Prescott Su 10P-1A KYCA-AM 1490 CA Los Angeles Sa 10P-1A KEIB-AM 1150 CA Los Angeles MoFr 5A-7P KEIB-AM 1150 CA Banning/Beaumont MoFr 6A-7P KMET-AM 1490 CA Ventura MoFr 6A-7P KVTA-AM 1590 CA Banning/Beaumont MoFr 6A-8A KMET-AM 1490 CA S Bernardno/Riversd MoFr 10A-12P KKDD-AM 1290 CA Santa Rosa MoFr 6A-7P KSRO-AM 1350 CA Santa Rosa Su 3P-6P KSRO-AM 1350 CA Mendocino/Ukiah MoFr 6A-7P KUNK-FM 92.7 CA Oakland MoFr 12P-3P KKSF-AM 910 CA Oakland Su 7A-10A KKSF-AM 910
    [Show full text]
  • Public Service Broadcasting in Transition: a Documentary Reader
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Other Publications from the Center for Global Center for Global Communication Studies Communication Studies (CGCS) 11-2011 Public Service Broadcasting in Transition: A Documentary Reader Monroe Price University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Marc Raboy Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications Part of the Broadcast and Video Studies Commons Recommended Citation Price, Monroe and Raboy, Marc. (2011). Public Service Broadcasting in Transition: A Documentary Reader. Other Publications from the Center for Global Communication Studies. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/1 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cgcs_publications/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Public Service Broadcasting in Transition: A Documentary Reader Abstract This is a book of documents, comments, and cases that has been prepared, at the request of the European Institute for the Media, for the use of government officials and citizens interested in strengthening public service broadcasting in transition societies. In this book we try to provide a small chest of tools and background information that will be of assistance. We start, in Chapter 1, with an overview of some of the general principles of public service broadcasting, and include pertinent comments on each of them. Here, as throughout the book, we concentrate on issues of governance and financing, with some attention as well ot issues surrounding programming. In Chapter 2, we turn to current issues in the European-level debate, partly from the perspective of European expectations and standards that are employed in evaluation and accession processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Not Confine the Discussion in This Report to Those Specific Issues Within the Commission’S Regulatory Jurisdiction
    television, cable and satellite media outlets operate. Accordingly, we do Overview not confine the discussion in this report to those specific issues within the Commission’s regulatory jurisdiction. Instead, we describe below 1 MG Siegler, Eric Schmidt: Every 2 Days We Create As Much Information a set of inter-related changes in the media landscape that provide the As We Did Up to 2003, TECH CRUNCH, Aug 4, 2010, http://techcrunch. background for future FCC decision-making, as well as assessments by com/2010/08/04/schmidt-data/. other policymakers beyond the FCC. 2 Company History, THomsoN REUTERS (Company History), http://thom- 10 Founders’ Constitution, James Madison, Report on the Virginia Resolu- sonreuters.com/about/company_history/#1890_1790 (last visited Feb. tions, http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_ 8, 2011). speechs24.html (last visited Feb. 7, 2011). 3 Company History. Reuter also used carrier pigeons to bridge the gap in 11 Advertising Expenditures, NEwspapER AssoC. OF AM. (last updated Mar. the telegraph line then existing between Aachen and Brussels. Reuters 2010), http://www.naa.org/TrendsandNumbers/Advertising-Expendi- Group PLC, http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/ tures.aspx. Reuters-Group-PLC-Company-History.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2011). 12 “Newspapers: News Investment” in PEW RESEARCH CTR.’S PRoj. foR 4 Reuters Group PLC (Reuters Group), http://www.fundinguniverse.com/ EXCELLENCE IN JOURNALISM, THE StatE OF THE NEws MEDIA 2010 (PEW, company-histories/Reuters-Group-PLC-Company-History.html (last StatE OF NEws MEDIA 2010), http://stateofthemedia.org/2010/newspa- visited Feb. 8, 2011). pers-summary-essay/news-investment/.
    [Show full text]