72-4421
BENNETT, Sandra Williams, 1942- ASCERTAINMENT OF COMMUNITY NEEDS BY PUBLIC TELEVISION STATIONS: A STUDY OF KPBS, WOSU, WVIZ, WETA, AND THE ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1971 Mass Communications
University Microfilms, A XEROK Company. Ann Arbor, Michigan
<§> Copyright by
Sandra Williams Bennett
1971
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED ASCERTAINMENT OF COMMUNITY NEEDS BY PUBLIC TELEVISION
STATIONS: A STUDY OF KPBS, WOSU, WVIZ, WETA, AND THE
ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Sandra Williams Bennett, B.S. in Ed., M.A.
* * * * *
The Ohio State University
1971
Approved by
Department of Speech Communications PLEASE NOTE:
Some papes have small and indistinct print. Filmed as received.
UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The successful completion of this study was to tally dependent upon cooperation, encouragement, assis tance, time and devotion--of others. For their coopera tion in freely and openly talking with me, I thank the men and women at each of the stations I visited. For their encouragement and assistance, I thank my graduate professors, and especially my committee members and ad viser. A special note of thanks for their continued en couragement and assistance throughout my graduate studies goes to Dr. Robert Hilliard and Allen Myers at the Federal
Communications Commission. And especially to my husband
Dick, and son, Richard Daniel, who cooperated, encouraged, assisted, gave of their time, but most especially remained devoted— I thank you.
Sandra Jean Williams Bennett
ii VITA
May 27, 194 2 ...... Born - Norwalk, Ohio
1964 ...... B.S. in Education, With Distinction Otterbein College, Westerville, Ohio
1964 - 1967...... Teacher of Speech and English Reynoldsburg High School, Reynoldsburg, Ohio
1968 - 1971 ...... NDEA Title IV Fellow, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1969 ...... M. A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Mass Communication
Studies in Broadcasting. Professors Walter B. . Emery, Joseph M. Foley, and James E. Lynch
Studies in Education. Professors I. Keith Tyler, John C. Be Hand, and Jack E. Douglas
Studies in Communication Theory. Professors Galen R. Rarick, Robert R. Monaghan, and Franklin H. Knower
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... ii
VITA ...... iii
LIST OF TABLES...... vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...... viii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION...... 1
Purpose of the Study Significance of the Problem Delimitations of the Study Materials and Methodology Review of the Research Pertinent to This Study Organization of the Remainder of Study
II. REGULATORY HISTORY...... 31
Federal Radio Commission Decisions A Decade of Decisions in the Public Interest Report on en banc Programming Inquiry Fairness Doctrine Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems Policies for Renewal Applicants
III. KPBS-TV — SAN DIEGO...... 78
The Station License Statements of Purpose Ascertainment of Community Needs Barriers to Ascertainment Page
IV. WOSU-TV — COLUMBUS, OHIO...... 100
The Station License Statements of Purpose Ascertainment of Community Needs Barriers to Ascertainment
V. WVIZ-TV — CLEVELAND, OHIO...... 169
The Station License Statements of Purpose Ascertainment of Community Needs Barriers to Ascertainment
VI. WETA-TV — WASHINGTON, D.C...... 202
The Station License Statements of Purpose Ascertainment of Community Needs Barriers to Ascertainment
VII. ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION...... 242
The Stations Statements of Purpose Ascertainment of Community Needs Barriers to Ascertainment
VIII. THE STATUS OF COMMUNITY NEEDS ASCERTAINMENT...... 29 7
Summary and Interpretation Conclusions Suggested by Research Recommendations for Further Research Recommendations to the Federal Communications Commission For Licensees to Consider
APPENDIX
A. MINORITY EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES OF EDUCATIONAL BROADCASTING STATIONS.... 345
B. FCC FORMS 301 AND 340, SECTION IV.... 348
C. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION "PRIMER’'...... 351
V Page
D. INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 36 4
E. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS DECISION, JUNE 11, 1971...... 365
BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 396 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. WOSU-TV— TYPICAL W E E K , 1 9 7 0 ...... 138
2. WETA-TV— TYPICAL WEEK, 1969...... 221
3. STATIONS OF THE ALABAMA ETV NETWORK 251
4. AETN— TYPICAL WEEK, 1970...... 2 80
vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AETC . . Alabama Educational Television Commission
AETN . . Alabama Educational Television Network
APBE . . Association for Professional Broadcasting Education
BEST . . Black Efforts for Soul in Television
CCC . . Citizens Communications Center
COE TV . Central Ohio Educational Television
CPB . . Corporation for Public Broadcasting
ETAMC . Educational Television Association of Metropolitan Cleveland
ETV . . educational television
FCBA . . Federal Communications Bar Association
FCC . . Federal Communications Commission
GWETA . Greater Washington Educational Television Association, Inc.
NAB . . National Association of Broadcasters
NAEB . . National Association of Educational Broad casters
NET . . National Educational Television
PBS . . Public Broadcasting Service
RTNDA . Radio-Television News Directors Association
STA . . Special Temporary Authority
TTI . Television Training Institute (WVIZ) UHF . . ultra high frequency
WEST . . Western Educational Society for Telecominunica tions CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The regulators of broadcasting in the United States have set out to expand freedom by re strictions and guidelines. The result is a tangle of contradictions George Orwell would appreciate. Restriction is freedom. Stepping back is going forward.^
1. Julian Goodman, quoted by Stephen Grover, "Running Scared," The Wall Street Journal, April 28, 1971, p. 17.
That statement by Julian Goodman, President of the
National Broadcasting Company, seems to exemplify the atti tude of many broadcasters. There has been a great deal of concern about the way in which the Federal Communications
Commission has attempted to make the air-waves truly public domain.
The following pages report an investigation which focused on one segment of the broadcasting industry and one fundamental concept. The investigator studied non-commer cial educational television and its responsibility to assess the needs, problems, and interests of its various communi ties.
1 Purpose of the Study
On February 23, 1971, the Federal Communications
Commission released two important statements. The Report
and Order on Docket No. 18774 gave broadcast applicants a
"Primer on Ascertainment of Community Needs" which had been
under study at the Commission for more than a year. The
Commission also issued a Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Proposed Rule Making on the formulation of rules and poli
cies relating to the renewal of broadcast licenses, speci
fically to "...promote the fulfillment of public interest
obligations by the licensee."2 Educational broadcasters
2. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Notice of In quiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 71-156. In the Renewal of Broadcast Licenses, Docket No. 19153, Feb ruary 23, 1971, p. 1.
were excluded from both of these discussions, but they were
assured that they had not been forgotten. in the course of
commenting on the proposed Primer, several parties sug
gested "...that all new applicants, including educators,
should be required to ascertain community problems in the 3 manner described in the Primer." The FCC maintained,
3. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Report and Or der , FCC 71-176. In the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants, Part I, Section IV-A and IV-B of FCC Forms, Docket No. 18774, Feb ruary 23, 1971, p. 3. however, that "...given the reservation of channels for 3
specialized kinds of programming, educational stations
manifestly must be treated differently than commercial
stations"4 and indicated that "...proposals regarding
4. I b i d .
revised requirements for educational broadcasters will be
forthcoming shortly."
5. FCC 71-156, February 23, 1971, p. 1.
While the Commission defers action on proposals for
educational broadcasting, the public broadcasters them
selves are attempting to anticipate their obligations.
During the spring of 1971, for example, The Office of
Minority Affairs of the National Association of Educational
Broadcasters surveyed its membership to determine what was being done for ethnic minority communities in terms of
£ local minority programming. The results (see Chapter VIII)
6. Lionel Monagas, Private interview. National Association of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C., March 22, 1971. seem to indicate that very little has_been accomplished in this area.
This investigator undertook an independent study 4 of ascertainment policies and procedures of public broad casters. An historical-descriptive-analytical study was conducted, using four public television stations and one state educational television commission, to answer the question: What are the procedures being utilized by non commercial educational television stations for the ascer tainment of community needs?
Significance of the Problem
A study that questions the needs and procedures for ascertaining community problems by non-commercial, educa tional broadcast stations seems justified.
Seventy-one percent of the United States population 7 is within the range of an educational television signal.
7. Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., "The Viewing of Pub lic Television— 1970," November, 1970, p. 8.
Its potential audience is getting larger each year. Eleven million households view educational television each week.®
8. John Macy, speaking at Annual Convention of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 10, 19 70.
With a larger public to serve there are more problems to be solved, more needs to be met. This subject is not isolated to one rural county or a single school system. It is a problem that touches nearly every American— how public broadcasting serves the public interest.
As can be seen by the flurry of activity cited in the following chapter, ascertainment of community problems is an important, current issue in the broadcasting industry.
It is being deliberated in many circles. The investigator discussed the issues with numerous members of the commercial and non-commercial broadcast fields, as well as with members of the FCC staff. The problem of ascertainment of community needs and the matter of the Fairness Doctrine are very much a part of the current scene in broadcasting, including edu cational radio and television.
At the Forty-Sixth Annual Convention of the National
Association of Educational Broadcasters, William G. Harley,
President, told the membership that there was an urgent
"need for local, community-based programming." He said that member stations must be "educational, public, and community oriented.And yet, at that same convention, an
9. William G. Harley, speaking at Annual Convention of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 9, 1970. educational broadcaster in the Alabama Educational Televis ion Network told the investigator, "We do not ascertain 6
community needs because we do no local programming."^
10. The investigator wishes to protect the anonymity of the respondent, Washington, D.C., November 10, 1970.
The concluding business session of the convention
(November 11, 1970) provided several examples of the ur
gency of serving community needs, especially in terms of minority employment and programming. Dr. Dave Berkman,
author and professor of communications at the American
University, for example, soundly criticized the NAEB for
its failure to censure the Alabama ETV Commission "for its blatant racism. Ma;iy educators feel that they cannot
11. Dave Berkman, "Statement and Resolution," Presented at General Membership Meeting of NAEB, November 11, 1970, p. 1. afford to be apart from the current problems of the in dustry and society. It is being said that if one is not part of the solution, he is part of the problem. Public broadcasting faces the same precept for its actions.
Generally, educators have been able to protect their broadcast frequency reservations. As multiple interests make new demands on the radio spectrum, however, educa tional broadcasters will have an increasing need to serve community needs in order to justify their proprietary 7 interests.
The public today seems to be reaching a maturity of social awareness that requires involvement. Politicians are giving top priority to the social, economic, and en vironmental problems of their constituents. There is much discussion about community needs and finding the leadership to satisfy them. It would appear that the academic com munity should not be exempt from this process.
James R. Killian, Chairman of the Carnegie Commis sion on Educational Television has said, "While all of television has made the citizens increasingly aware of the problems our society faces— in race, politics, war, pollution, urban decay— only Public Broadcasting, among all the communication media, has the time untrammeled by rigid program schedules and other commitments to help un ravel and explain the complexities of issues that must come to be understood by our people if this nation is to survive."12
12. The National Citizens Committee for Public Broadcasting, The State of Public Broadcasting, A Report to the American People, July, 1968, pi 5*1
Delimitations of the Study
This study covers non-commercial educational 8
television stations licensed to two institutions of higher
education; two non-profit, community organizations; and
one state commission. It was not feasible to survey all
educational stations. Those selected met two major cri
teria: (1) they represented a wide range of geographic
locations, potential audience demographics, and organiza
tional patterns; and (2) one or more visits to each sta
tion to interview administrators and producers were feasible
within the investigator's schedule and finances.
The television stations selected were: KPBS, San
Diego, and WOSU, Columbus, Ohio (a college and university
station, respectively); WVIZ, Cleveland, and WETA, Washing
ton, D.C. (the community stations); and the Alabama Educa
tional Television Commission, Birmingham.
The stations are located in each of the four major
sections of the country: west, midwest, east, and south.
San Diego has a significantly large Mexican-American popu
lation as well as active and retired military personnel.
Washington, D.C. has the largest percentage of black per
sons in its urban population of any U.S. city while the entire state of Alabama is thirty percent black with many
isolated rural areas. The Cleveland area has a major con centration of black persons as well as many of Slavic origin. Columbus and central Ohio seem to typify "middle 9
America," as a network television series recently charac
terized it.
Materials and Methodology
The research procedures in this study included an
investigation of several primary sources and the use of
interviews. The primary sources were: the individual
station files at the FCC, which include the statements of program service filed with the construction permit applica
tions and the renewal applications, and pertinent corres pondence between the Commission and the licensee, or between the public and the Commission concerning the licensee; the
FCC Rules and Regulations concerning the ascertainment of community needs and other official actions on the subject; public records of pertinent dockets on file at the FCC; printed materials from the individual stations, which in clude public relations brochures, newsletters, public survey questionnaires, program schedule analyses, and program logs; public statements and explanatory materials of Black Efforts for Soul in Television, Citizens Communica tions Center, and the National Mexican American Anti-
Defamation Committee.
Interviews were conducted with staff members at various personnel levels of the stations as well as with 10
staff members of the Federal Communications Commission, the
National Association of Broadcasters, the National Associa tion of Educational Broadcasters, the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting, and practicing communications attorneys. (See
Appendix D .)
Review of the Research Pertinent to This Study
Recent research in the field of broadcasting has focused on the areas of station histories or issues in com mercial broadcasting, relative to such as the Fairness Doc trine, challenges to the First Amendment, and Section 315 of the Communications Act.1^ Much research on problems in
13. Typical dissertations dealing with issues in commercial broadcasting include: Mary Ann Cusack, "Editorializing in Broadcasting"* (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1960); Ruane B. Hill, "Political Uses of Broad casting in the United States in the Context of Public Opinion and the Political Process" (unpublished Ph.D. dis sertation, Northwestern University, 1964); Darrel W. Holt, "Public Service Broadcasting: A Contextual and Historical Search for the Construct" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Northwestern University, 196 8); Jane N. Magruder, "Develop ment of the Concept of Public Interest as It Applies to Radio and Television Programming" (unpublished Ph.D. dis sertation, The Ohio State University, 1960); Richard M. Mall, "Some Aspects of Political Broadcast Policies of Radio and Television Stations in the United States" (un published Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1959); Milan D. Meeske, "Broadcasting in the Public Inte rest: The Supreme Court and the First Amendment" (unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Denver, 1969); Joseph M. Ripley, "The Practices and Policies Regarding Broadcasts of Opinions About Controversial Issues by Radio 11 and Television Stations in the United States'* (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Ohio State University, 1962). educational television specifically has centered on the effectiveness of television in the classroom and the myriad problems that surround that activity. There are major re search efforts, however, which are particularly pertinent to this study.
In 1960 Robert Lacy surveyed 2300 community leaders in
Oklahoma to determine the needs of television and radio audiences in that state.Then in 1964, Richard Lawson
14. Robert P. Lacy, "Determining the Needs of Television and Radio Audiences in the State of Oklahoma" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1963). wrote his doctoral dissertation, "The Role of Socio-Econo mic Environment in the Development of Educational Tele vision: A Descriptive Analysis of Educational Television in Alabama and Illinois.
15. Richard Gene Lawson, "The Role of Socio-Economic Environment in the Development of Educational Television: A Descriptive Analysis of Educational Television in Alabama and Illinois" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1964).
Lacy selected for his survey the leaders and members of organizations suggested by the list of interest groups in the FCC Report and Statement of Policy Re: Commission 12 en banc Programming Inquiry. T h e purpose of the survey
16. FCC 60-970, July 29, 1960. was to find out which radio and television program types these leaders considered important to the best interests of (1) their own organizations, (2) the state, and (3) the general public. The groups selected were clergymen, col lege professors, school teachers and officials, elected officials, business and professional men, labor leaders, farmers, farm wives, and members of the American Association of University Women. His questionnaire was developed to get responses concerning the program types which the FCC had termed desirable. He developed the entire concept of
"needs of the community" on the respondents' rating these program types in terms of importance to the people of the state.
In his analysis of responses, Lacy revealed that
"...the group identification of the respondent seemed to dictate strongly his interest in and desire for more 17 programming of a particular type." That is, educators
17. Lacy, "Needs of Audiences in Oklahoma," p. 92. thought educational programs were the most important and 13
wanted more; ministers felt the same for religious program
ming. Self-interest showed among labor leaders who con
demned editorials and political leaders who were negative
about political programs. Lacy concluded, "The Federal
Communications Commission has, in effect, found a number
of programs that it considers desirable and then recom mended that the stations seek the attitude of persons
(community leaders) who will most likely support these views. Interestingly enough in the case of labor leaders 1 8 and politicians, this circle of reinforcement is broken."
18. Ibid., p. 93.
Several of Lacy's recommendations are especially per tinent to more recent action of the FCC and the current study.
"The Federal Communications Commission should re consider its rigid adherence to certain program types as desirable. The study also suggests that the FCC should broaden the number of interest groups to be consulted 19 on the 'needs' of the service area."
19. Ibid., p. 96.
Recommendations for future research included: 14
(1) reidentification and definition of community leader
ship— develop other criteria for determining leadership;
(2) personal interviews are more desirable than lengthy, 20 large-sample marl questionnaires.
20. Ibid., p. 97.
This study indicates that Commission sanctions of the function of a station as a discoverer and user of local talent is not so completely accepted by audiences. The Commission's insistence upon pro grams for minority groups also was at variance with the opinion of the sample.
The study uncovered a desire of audiences to im prove television programs which may be turned to to good advantage by the stations. Criticisms of television programs showed sufficient constructive points of view to indicate a desire by the respon dents to have a hand, in an advisory capacity, con cerning the programs on television. Willingness to participate in programming by community leaders could be very useful to a station.
Even though the broadcaster does not organize a formal advisory panel, he should devise some method for seeking information from all leadership groups in his listening area. He might have a station official call on selected community leaders regu larly to discuss actual and potential service of the station.21
21. Ibid., pp. 99-100.
Lacy also recommended consulting many other types of
leaders in addition to the traditional ones cited and urged that "...those consulted be allowed more freedom in 15 making their own classifications and definitions of 22 needed program types." *
22. Ibid., p. 101.
The 196 4 dissertation by Lawson is based on the premise that "...the direction and emphasis of educational television was shaped more by [the socio-economic] environ ment than by individuals and groups which established 2 3 it." The environmental factors in Alabama and Illinois
23. Lawson, "Role of Socio-Economic Environment," p. 2*. studied were: geography, history, people, economy, in-
A j t dustry, politics, and education.
24. Ibid., pp. 7-9.
Lawson found that the executive bill creating the
Alabama Educational Television Commission was:
...the legislative solution to a series of con tinually pressing problems. The very need which created the Alabama Educational Television was the direct outgrowth of Alabama's unique history. Not only was the signing of Act No. 81 the begin ning of a new development which thrust Alabama to the forefront of educational practices among the states of this nation, it was also the result of Alabama's Southern h e r i t a g e . ^5 16
25. Ibid., p. 14.
States throughout the south were among the first to
develop educational television because they discovered it was "...an economical means of quickly upgrading [their] 2 fi educational system."
26. I b i d ., p. 23.
The AETC was given almost complete autonomy. It had broad discretionary powers to supervise and control the use of the reserved channels given to Alabama for noncoin- 27 mercial, educational use.
27. Ibid., p. 54.
The creation of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, discussed by Lawson, was of particular importance to this study. The activities in Alabama since Lawson's research in 1964 and the particular changes in attitude are pre sented by the investigator in a later chapter. Lawson's discovery is included at this point for emphasis.
The Commission established a Citizens' Advisory Committee which was composed of twenty-eight citi zens from every walk of life throughout the entire State. The intention of the Commission in estab lishing the committee was clearly set forth by the General Manager: 17
'To serve as a contact and liaison body within all levels, strata, organizations and segments of society in discovering and helping to meet the needs which might be supplied through edu cational programming. 'To provide, through its membership, listening posts for the AETC Program Board; to give atten tion to public reaction to educational television programs; and to make reports from time to time to the AETC Program Board. 'To give thought to ways in which the Alabama Educational Television Commission program might be improved as well as to submit new ideas for programs. 'To serve as interpreters of the possibilities of this new medium in the field of education.' There certainly was another reason for estab lishing such a committee....By having a committee which would function in an advisory capacity only, many people who might otherwise remain disinterest ed, were actively engaged in the work of the Com mission without encumbering its operations.28
28. Ibid., "Statement of Purpose of the AETC Program Board1s^Advisory Committee" as of March 30, 1962, the General Manager's Biennium Report (7th and 8th Annual) to the AETC, October 1, 1961, p. 56.
In discussing the problems facing the AETC in 1964,
Lawson drew two specific conclusions which this investi gator found to be still quite critical in Alabama in 1971 and which is further discussed in a later chapter. One problem concerned the basic organization of the AETC and its programming agencies. The Commission is the sole licensee of nine transmitters and contracts with seven agencies to produce the programming. 18
Most problems found in educational television in Alabama will be partly a direct outgrowth of this dichotomous structure. On the one hand there was the AETC, the licensee, directly responsible to the FCC for the content of the programs broadcast through the assigned channels, but functioning only in an advisory capacity to the agencies. On the other hand the autonomous programming agencies which, by contract, were responsible in fact for the material broadcast had no direct responsibility to the FCC.29
29. I b i d ., p . 58.
Lawson indicated that all studios feed directly to the
state network and that all programs are simulcast through out the entire state, presenting another major difficulty in the AETC's ability to serve the local community needs.
As Lawson puts it,
There were many problems which cities like Birming ham, Montgomery and Mobile faced which were not state-wide in scope: local tax and government problems, municipal improvements, labor and indus trial expansion in the local and area level, and local exhibits and cultural events.... As of 1964 such problems had no way of being aired except through the local commercial sta tions or by making them statewide in scope and thus generalizing them to the extent that the real issues were often not f a c e d . 20
30. Ibid., pp. 88-89.
Raymond D. Hurlbert, General Manager of the AETC, expressed three areas needing further attention in the 19
Alabama state network, as of 1964:
(1) need for a greater unity of purpose and per spective in the selection of program material... (2) there was a need for a means of broadcasting programs of local and area interest that would not be disruptive to the concept and functioning of the state wide network; and (3) a greater em phasis on continuing education through cultural enrichment programs broadcast both locally and through the network was needed.31
31. Ibid., p. 86.
The details of the operation of the Alabama Educa
tional Television Commission are not riven at this point
because of its basic repetition. However, some of Lawson's
observations are noted later to contrast the situations
and problems as he perceived them in 1964, as the AETC
and others concerned about educational television in
Alabama have presented them in statements to the FCC during the current license renewal proceedings, and as the
investigator perceived them during interviews with the
AETC staff. Lawson also discussed the socio-economic en vironment of the development of educational television in
Illinois and returned to his basic premise that it was
those factors— geography, history, people, economy, in dustry, politics, and education— which shaped the unique development in each state. 20
Three additional studies have dealt specifically
with license renewals and the station's community
service.
Thomas F. Baldwin and Stuart H. Surlin reported on
"A Study of Broadcast Station License Renewal Application
Exhibits on Ascertainment of Community Needs." They con
ducted a systematic random sample of one hundred tele
vision licensees and two hundred radio licensees to study
their renewal applications on file at the FCC. The final
reports were narrowed to eighty-four television stations,
ninety-nine AM stations, and forty-four FM stations.
Their conclusions about the ascertainment of community
needs were:
(1) Only 30% of the licensees mention a canvass of
the general public.
(2) Survey techniques were not reported in detail.
"Where methodology was reported extensively enough for evaluation, the report almost always betrayed unsound .,32 practices.
32. Thomas F. Baldwin and Stuart H. Surlin, "A Study of Broadcast Station License Renewal Application Exhibits on Ascertainment of Community Needs," on file in FCC Docket No. 18774, January 1970, p. 18.
(3) Some form of formal community leader study is 21
done by most stations; however, 15% have no systemmatic
procedure for contact with those leaders.
(4) Only 7% reported how the community leaders were
selected and very few reported the frequency of the con
tact with the leaders.
(5) "Some stations interpret ascertainment of com munity needs as the process of making time available to 33 community agencies for publicity."
33. i b i d .
(6) In 82% of the renewal applications "...no direct
reference was made to specific needs identified by the general public or community leaders."34
34. I b i d . , p. 19.
(7) Eighteen percent made a direct relationship be tween the needs identified and program plans.
Baldwin and Surlin further concluded, "The data do not show that programming plans based on systematic iden tification of community needs are better than those that 35 are generated intuitively from within the station."
35. I b i d . , p. 20. 22
In April through June, 196 8, FCC Commissioners
Kenneth A. Cox and Nicholas Johnson evaluated the program ming of a sampling of the 101 Oklahoma radio and television stations by studying their license renewal forms and ques tioning the individual broadcasters. Three of the purposes of the study as articulated by Cox and Johnson were:
...to evaluate a sampling of American communities and the role of broadcasting and other mass media in the lives of their citizens, and to test the validity of the local service assumption of our present national system of commercial broadcasting; — to report and analyze the ownership of local outlets of information and opinion in this country, and uncover any patterns of statewide domination; — to examine the adequacy and practical impact of the Commission’s requirement that licensees sur vey the needs and interests of their listeners or viewers, and consider alternative ways of en couraging local participation in programming judgments....36
36. Kenneth A. Cox and Nicholas Johnson, Broadcasting in America and the FCC's License Renewal Process: An Okla homa Case Study, 14 FCC 2d 1 (1968) , p. T~.
The Commissioners found the results of their study to be "...extremely disquieting.” Among other things, they found
...that the local surveys are, almost without ex ception, useless to the broadcaster, the community, and the Commission, and that the listening and viewing public is almost totally excluded from, 23
and uninformed about its rights in, the sta tion's program selection process....37
37. Ibid.
The remarks made by Cox and Johnson throughout their report provide further elucidation for the inves tigation discussed herein. The rationale for the present system of commercial broadcasting was highlighted.
A system of locally based stations was deemed necessary to insure that broadcasting would be attentive to the specific needs and interests of each local community. It was also considered a guarantee to local groups and leaders that they would have adequate opportunity for expression.* Ultimately, our broadcasting system is premised on concern that the very identity of local States and cities might be destroyed by a mass communications system with an exclusively national focus. In order to make sure that these objectives were realized, Congress decreed that broadcast licenses should expire after 3 years. On their expiration, it instructed the FCC to review the past and pro posed performance of the licensee to see whether renewal would serve the public interest, conven ience, and necessity. As defined by Congress, and refined by the FCC, the public interest has always been understood to require licensees to offer some "balance" in their program format. To serve the public interest, it is necessary for broadcasting to answer to minority as well as majority interests, and to provide time for infor mation and discussion of national and, especially, local issues of public importance. These goals have been faithfully reflected by each of the land mark declarations of policy which the FCC has is sued since its birth in 1934.3®
38. Ibid. , p. 8. 24
Cox and Johnson were, nonetheless, critical of the Commission posture which allowed the process of re view to become merely a ritual.
The licensees describe the more-or-less unscien tific method they have employed to divine the needs of their community. These needs are often not specified. When specified, they often have little relation to the programming decisions the licensee had made. This entire ritual, which is a burden on broad casters and a boon for the Washington, D.C. com munications bar, has no real point. It is a sham. The Commission staff, acting on delegated authority, routinely grants all the renewal applications ex cept for the few whose draftsmen were inexper ienced and hence made technical mistakes in fil ling them out. Engineering and financial defi-. ciencies revealed by the applications, survey de ficiencies, high commercial levels, and certain unresolved complaints are also causes for delaying a grant. But programming deficiencies, even the most flagrant indifference to the local service obligations imposed by the Communications Act, raise no eyebrows. The Commissioners themselves play almost literally no role at all. We simply note that the staff has completed its processing of the ap plications, doing little more than nod to the sketchy memoranda as they pass our desks. Grass roots organizations from the communities them selves rarely participate; what efforts have been attempted in this vein have not been welcomed by the Commission or its staff. We do not believe this state of affairs serves the public. Nor, we believe, does it serve the Federal Communications Commission. Certainly it does the Commission no good to have the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit declare that 'The theory that the Commission can effectively represent the listener interests in a renewal proceeding * * * is no longer a valid assumption which stands up under the realities of actual experience.* Cer tainly the interests of the broadcasting industry 25
are no better served when the same distinguished court remarks, 'After nearly 5 decades of opera tion the broadcast industry does not seem to have grasped the simple fact that a broadcast license is a public trust subject to termination for breach of duty.'39
39. Ibid., p. 9.
Describing the needs for a local broadcast service,
Cox and Johnson further argued:
Today, America's greatest needs are local needs. Virtually every city in this country has found itself engulfed by incipient rebellion. What these cities discovered, in effect, was that a substantial minority of their residents had lived in the city, but had never been part of the community. They discovered that there had quite literally been no communication between the blacks and whites of their jurisdiction. The future of this country hinges on the ability of individual cities to create communication where it has never existed before. Only local media can serve that need. And indeed, in large part only local broadcast stations can serve that need. For polls show that most Americans get most of their information about public affairs from radio and television. For many Americans, if it is not on radio or television, it might as well not have happened at all.
The greatest challenge before the American people today is the challenge of restoring and reinvigorating local democracy. That challenge cannot be met without a working system of local broadcast media actively serving the needs of each community for information about its affairs, serving the interests of all members of the com munity, and allowing all to confront the listen ing public with their problems and their proposals 26
40. I b i d ., pp. 10-11.
The analysis and evaluation of broadcast practices
in Oklahoma focused on news and public affairs, network
clearances, amount of local programming, types of local
programs, preemption, and local programming other than
news. The major and necessary conclusion Cox and Johnson
drew from their study was: "Either the Commission and its
licensees must make local service a reality, or else con
sideration will have to be given to revising our commit ment to the concept of the local station.
41. I b i d ., p. 13.
The Institute for Policy Studies undertook a study of television in the Mid-Atlantic states. Its report is contained in the publication, Television Today: The End of Communication and the Death of Community. The book could be a useful text for citizens who feel that their local stations are in some way negligent of their local responsibilities. Those citizens would find relevant information on challenging a license renewal. The text is comprised of four sections. The first constitutes a theoretical examination of television in general. The 27
second contains the quantitative research on the Mid-
Atlantic states.
Our empirical study, statistical in nature, limited itself to an examination of two criteria. First, the mandatory survey of local leaders to ascertain the needs and interests of the local community, as required by the F.C.C Secondly, a statistical history of the performance of a licensee, measured against his earlier p r o m i s e .
42. Ralph L. Stavins, ed., Television Today: The End of Communication and the Death of Community (Washington, D.C.: Communication Service Corporation, 1969), p. 1.
The Institute outlined what it considered to be the
two grounds on which the survey requirement can be used to
challenge a licensee. The researchers used both avenues
for gathering data about the selected television stations.
First, the survey could be found to be inade quate in that the licensee may have failed to consult with enough of the leaders of the local community. Here, a petitioner who sought to deny the license renewal, could take his own survey to determine who the leaders are, thus questioning the selection of leaders by the licensee.... Next, the leaders alleged to have been con sulted by the licensee may have, in fact, not been consulted.42
43. Ibid., pp. 1-2.
The researchers argued from the data they collected that the VHF stations in Washington, D.C. failed in their 28
survey of community leaders on the grounds outlined
above.
The examination of the licensees' performance was
gauged according to the amount of public information and
locally produced programming that was broadcast. Sixty-
one tables present the statistical data used by the Insti
tute in its evaluation. The Mid-Atlantic stations were
selected for monitoring "...because they serve an impor
tant segment of the United States population. We have
every reason to believe, however, that the failures in
community responsibility documented by this study are
duplicated in other parts of the country."44
44. Ibid., p. v.
- ----
The third section of the text contains transcripts of discussion with and among blacks from the District of
Columbia. The Institute saw this as:
...a yeoman effort designed to uncover the needs and interests of the Blacks in an urban area where they constitute the overwhelming majority of the population, but are treated as if they are a distinct minority. Here, the Blacks speak for themselves, without any attempt to elaborate or analyze what they have said and felt.45
45. Ibid., p. 3. 29
Television Today concludes with four appendices ,
"...the relevant documents which must be thoroughly
understood before one begins the arduous task of chal
lenging a l i c e n s e . " ^
46. Ibid.
Organization of the Remainder of Study
Before presenting the case studies the investigator, in Chapter II, delineates the legal and regulatory history of the ascertainment of community needs and its related issues.
Chapters III through VII report the field studies of each of the selected licensees. The results of the nume rous interviews are presented to the reader only as an . indication of what was said, not necessarily what was.
The responses reveal a great deal about how the broad casters and educators feel about the subject. It proved to be an emotional and very sensitive area for discussion.
Each chapter is organized in the following manner: presented in the introduction are descriptions of the organizational structure of the licensee and its desig nated authority, the station facilities, and the community of service; then the investigator lists the various formal 30 and informal statements of purpose that the licensee has made; the third section of the chapter focuses on the specific problem at hand— the ascertainment of community needs— by presenting the station's philosophy and concepts of its legal and ethical responsibilities, the formal procedures outlined by the station personnel, the methods of informal acquisition of information about community problems, and the procedures, information, and programs desired by the personnel; the final section of each chapter indicates the barriers to complete ascertainment.
In the eighth chapter, the investigator summarizes the findings and draws several conclusions about the status of community needs ascertainment in public tele vision today. The'recommendations are directed to those interested in further research in this area, the Federal
Communications Commission, and the individual licensees.
Appendices and a bibliography are included for the interest and convenience of the reader. CHAPTER II
REGULATORY HISTORY
The question of serving community needs and the in
herent ascertainment thereof has received attention from
the Federal Communications Commission since its inception.
The terminology changes from one ad hoc decision to
another, but the thrust has always been to see that the
broadcasting industry continues to meet the "public
interest, convenience, and necessity."^ Early reports and
1. The Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
decisions focused on balanced and fair programming, as
determined by the station management. More recently, how
ever, the Commission has emphasized community involvement.
The following regulatory decisions reflect this progres
sion.
Federal Radio Commission Decisions
The components of public interest programming have been given attention from the first renewal forms created by the Federal Radio Commission in 1927.
31 32
The first duty of the Federal Radio Commission, created by the Act of 1927, was to give concrete meaning to the phrase 'public interest' by for mulating standards to be applied in granting licenses for the use of practically all the then available radio frequencies. From the beginning it assumed that program service was a prime fac tor to be taken into consideration. The renewal forms prepared by it in 1927 included the fol lowing questions: '(11) Attach printed program for the last week. (12) Why will the operation of the station be in the public convenience, interest and necessity? (a) Average amount of time weekly devoted to the following services (1) entertain ment (2) religious (3) commercial (4) educational (5) agricultural (6) fraternal.'2
2. FCC Report of the Commission: Public Service Res ponsibility of Broadcast Licensees, Documents of American Broadcasting^ ed. by Frank J. Kahn (New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1968), p. 141.
In the Great.Lakes decision (1928) the Commission described a well-rounded program service as consisting of: entertainment, religion, education, instruction, important public events, discussion of public questions, weather, market reports, news, and matters of interest to all members of the family. The Great Lakes decision
3. Ibid. also said, "The entire listening public...is entitled to service....In a sense a broadcasting station may be re garded as a sort of mouthpiece for the community it 33 serves.
4. Ibid., p. 146.
The standard formulated by 1929 by the Commission was a program service that would meet, in fair propor tion, "...the tastes, needs and desires of all substan tial groups among the listening public."^
5. Ibid., p. 142.
A Decade of Decisions in the Public Interest
In the Supplemental Report on Chain Broadcasting
(1941) the FCC noted:
It has been the consistent intention of the .Com mission to assure that an adequate amount of time during the good listening hours shall be made available to meet the needs of the community in , terms of public expression and of local interest.
6. Ibid. , p. 173.
The various community interests were outlined in more detail when "The Blue Book" was issued in 1946. Be fore that time, in the filing of construction permits, prospective licensees had made pledges "...that time will be made available for civic, educational, agricul- 7 tural and other public service programs." However, at 34
7. Ibid., p . 125.
renewal time it was clear that often performance was vastly different from promise. Nonetheless, by the FCC's own admission, renewals were nearly automatic regardless of this disparity. In the development of the report,
Public Service Responsibility of Broadcast Licensees, popularly referred to as "The Blue Book," the Commission proposed to compare promise with performance and to
Q strengthen renewal procedures.
8. Ibid., pp. 125-126.
The concern for balanced programming was given al ternative outlets.
In several metropolitan areas where the listener has his choice of several stations, balanced ser vice to listeners can be achieved either by means of a balanced program structure for each station or by means of a number of comparatively special ized stations which, considered together, offer a balanced service to the community.*
9. I b i d ., p. 148.
In discussing significant minority tastes and in terests, Professor Charles Siepmann, the consultant on the development of the Blue Book, said, "It has long been 35
an established policy of broadcasters themselves and of the
Commission that the American system of broadcasting must
serve significant minorities among our population, and the
less dominant needs and tastes which most listeners have
from time to time."*0
10. I b i d ., p. 153.
The summary and conclusions of the Blue Book pre
sent several possible solutions to the problems of im
proving program service, one of these solutions being
listener councils. "First, they can provide a much
needed channel through which listeners can convey to broad
casters the wishes of the vast but not generally articulate radio audience. Second, listener councils can engage in much needed research concerning public tastes and atti tudes."** This advice reappears later in this report as
11. I b i d ., p. 197. other leaders in the industry today come to the same con clusions expressed by Professor Siepmann.
The final thrust of the Blue Book is exposed in its concluding summary.
...the Commission proposes to give particular consideration to four program service features 36
relevant to the public interest. These are: (1) the carrying of sustaining programs, in cluding network sustaining programs, with par ticular reference to the retention by licensees of a proper discretion and responsibility for maintaining a well-balanced program structure; (2) the carrying of local live programs; (3) the carrying of programs devoted to the discussion of public issues, and (4) the elimination of adver tising excesses.^
12. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Twelfth Annual Report, June 30, 1946, p. 4.
The Report of the Commission In the Matter of Edi torializing by Broadcast Licensees (1949) concluded
"...that overt licensee editorialization, within reason able limits and subject to the general requirements of
fairness detailed above, is not contrary to the public 13 interest." In coming to that conclusion the Commission
13. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Report of the Commission In the Matter of Editorializing by Broad' cast Licensees , Docket No . 8516, June 1, 19 49, p. 5*1 determined that "...the needs and interests of the general public with respect to programs devoted to new[s] commen tary and opinion can only be satisfied by making available to them for their consideration and acceptance or rejec tion, of varying and conflicting views held by responsible elements of the community."^4 In an earlier decision 37
14. Ibid. , p. 2.
quoted in this report, the Commission had said,
The life of each community involves a multitude of interests some dominant and all pervasive such as interest in public affairs, education and simi lar matters and some highly specialized and limited to few. The practical day-to-day problem with which every licensee is faced is one of striking a balance between these various interests to reflect them in a program service which is use ful to the community, and which will in some way fulfill the needs and interests of the m a n y . i S
15. I b i d . , pp. 2-3.
Report on en banc Programming Inquiry
While the broadcaster was expected to devise
programming which would serve the community needs and
interests, discussion of an ascertainment process did not
officially appear until July 29, 1960 when the FCC
adopted the Report and Statement of Policy Re: Commission en banc Programming Enquiry. At that time the Commission took a firm and far-reaching stand on the obligation of a broadcast licensee, saying that such an obligation
"...consists of a diligent, positive and continuing effort by the licensee to discover and fulfill the tastes, needs and desires of his service area."^® That phrase 38
16. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Report and Statement of Policy Re; Commission en banc Programming Inquiry, FCC 60-970, July 29, 1960, p. 13.
is repeated throughout the report. It is there that the specific concept of ascertainment was devised. Because this document is so crucial to today's discussion, several excerpts are presented below.
Although the inquiry was initiated in rather general terms— "...the Commission must determine whether the total program service of broadcasters is reasonably responsive to the interests and needs of the public they serve"17 — it eventually developed some very specific
17. Ibid., p . 6. criteria for that determination. The Commission contended that a significant element of the public interest aspect of public interest, convenience and necessity "...is the broadcaster's service to the community."1®
18. Ibid., p. 11.
The confines of the licensee's duty are set by the general standard 'the public interest, convenience or necessity.' The initial and principal execution of that standard, in terms of the area he is licensed to serve, is the obligation of the licensee. The principal 39
ingredient of such obligation consists of a dili gent, positive and continuing effort by the licensee to discover and fulfill the tastes, needs and desires of his service area.
In the fulfillment of his obligation the broad caster should consider the tastes, needs and desires of the public he is licensed to serve in developing his programming and should exercise conscientious efforts not only to ascertain them but also to carry them out as well as he reason ably can. He should reasonably attempt to meet all such needs and interests on an equitable b a s i s .
19. Ibid., pp. 13-15.
It was in this report, then, that the Commission listed the fourteen major elements usually necessary to meet the public interest, needs and desires: ” (1) Oppor tunity for Local Self-Expression, (2) The Development and
Use of Local Talent, (3) Programs for Children, (4) Reli gious Programs, (5) Educational Programs, (6) Public Af fairs Programs, (7) Editorialization by Licensees,
(8) Political Broadcasts, (9) Agricultural Programs,
(10) News Programs, (11) Weather and Market Reports,
(12) Sports Programs, (13) Service to Minority Groups,
(14) Entertainment Programming."2®
20. Ibid., p. 15.
In order to finally emphasize the Commission^ interest in the ascertainment process, a future proposed 40
rule-making was discussed.
To enable the Commission in its licensing functions to make the necessary public interest finding, we intend to revise PART IV of our ap plication forms to require a statement by the applicant, whether for new facilities, renewal or modification, as to: (1) the measures he has taken and the effort he has made to deter mine the tastes, needs and desires of his com munity or service area, and (2) the manner in which he proposes to meet those needs and desires.21
21. Ibid., p. 17.
Following the routine procedures for the develop ment of such a rule-making, FCC Form 301, Sections IV-A and IV-B, were revised in October, 1966. (See Appendix
B) That form now contains lengthy references to the
Commission's Report and Statement of Policy Re: Commis sion en banc Programming Inquiry, emphasizing the ascer tainment process.
Fairness Doctrine
Discussions of community needs— how they are deter mined and served— consistently focus on minority needs.
Broadcasters are reminded that there are many communities, many audiences, who view their stations. There are also many diverse minority viewpoints and when issues of public 41
importance arise in the community, broadcasters must be
ready, able, and willing to discover those viewpoints
and see to it that they receive exposure on the air.
These discussions of community needs consequently turn
to the Fairness Doctrine. It is pertinent at this point
to briefly review the impact of recent Fairness Doctrine
activit y.
Radio is not to be considered merely as a business carried on for private gain, for private adver tisement, or for the entertainment of the curious. It is to be considered as a public concern, im pressed with a public trust, and to be considered primarily from the standpoint of public interest.22
22. Walter B. Emery, "Broadcasting Rights and Respon sibilities in Democratic Society," NAEB Journal, XXIV (April, 1965), 75-76.
Although Herbert Hoover was discussing radio broad
casting in 192 7, he was sounding a theme which has con
tinued for over forty years and was reaffirmed on June 9,
1969. On that date the Supreme Court of the United
States issued a decision on broadcast policy that many observers feel will have profound effects on the future of broadcast journalism. The high court's decision on the Red Lion case heightened the interest and discussion throughout the industry, the public, and academic circles about fairness and serving the public interest. 42
Editorializing
In order to understand the Fairness Doctrine, one
must have some understanding of editorializing practices
in broadcasting. The FCC issued its first comments on
editorializing when it decided the case against the May
flower Broadcasting Corporation in 1940. When station
WAAB of Boston applied for its license renewal, the
issue developed over editorializing. At that time the
Commission addressed itself to the question: is it con
sistent with the public interest for a licensee to use
his facilities to air his own partisan ideas on public
issues? The management of WAAB had indeed been doing
that and when it promised that the practice would be dis
continued, the Commission renewed its license.^3 It was
23. Mary Ann Cusack, "The Emergence of Political Edi torializing in Broadcasting," Journal of Broadcasting, VIII (Winter, 1963-1964), 56.
the famous Mayflower decision then that revealed the FCC's
pronouncement "...that a station licensee could not be
an advocate on controversial questions and did not have
the privilege of editorializing...."^4 The decision
24. Walter B. Emery, Broadcasting and Government (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1961) , p. 2T4. 43
said, in part,
Freedom of speech on the radio must be broad enough to provide full and equal opportunity for the presentation to the public of all sides of public issues.... The licensee has assumed the obligation of presenting all sides of important public questions, fairly, objectively and without bias.25
25. The Mayflower Broadcasting Corp., 8 FCC 333 (1940), quoted in Emery, Broadcasting and Government, p. 244.
According to Walter Emery, in Broadcasting and
Government, the Mayflower decision "...met with disfavor from some segments of the broadcast industry." The Com mission held public hearings in 1948, at which forty-nine 26 witnesses testified. In its report of June 1, 1949, the
26. Emery, Broadcasting and Government, pp. 245-246.
Commission revised the 1940 decision so as to allow editorializing. It is in the final paragraph that the
Commission issued the requirements for fairness.
This requires that licensees devote a reasonable percentage of their broadcasting time to the dis cussion of public issues of interest in the com munity served by their stations and that such pro grams be designed so that the public has a reason able opportunity to hear different opposing posi tions on the public issues of interest and impor tance in the community.27 44
27. FCC Docket No. 8516, June 1, 1949, pp. 12-13.
This report, issued in 1949, has been the standard now for twenty-two years of interpretive rulings. The emphasis or focus is changed from time to time, which re flects the Commission's constant reminder that their reports and opinions are only general guidelines because each case brought before the Commission is determined en tirely within its own context.
Controversial Issues
On July 26, 1963 the Commission issued a public notice which again created a furor in the industry and through out the populace. This notice, "Broadcast Licensees
Advised Concerning Stations’ Responsibilities Under the
Fairness Doctrine as to Controversial Issue Programming," reactivated much discussion of fairness. It stated that the Commission continues to adhere to the views expressed in the policy issued June 1, 19 49, "...namely, that the licensee has an affirmative obligation to afford reason able opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints on any controversial issue which he chooses to cover.!*28 45
28. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Public Notice, FCC 6 3-7 34, Broadcast Licensees Advised Con cerning Stations’ Responsibilities Under the Fairness Doctrine as to Controversial Issue Programming, July 26, 1963, p. 1.
The notice concluded, "Regardless of label or form, if one viewpoint of a controversial issue of public im portance is presented, the licensee is obligated to make a reasonable effort to present the other opposing view point or viewpoints."29
29. I b id., p. 2.
Red Lion Decision
It was then in 1969 that the Supreme Court made its decision, which Henry Geller, at that time the General
Counsel for the FCC, termed "...probably the most sig nificant case the Supreme Court has decided in the com munications field since the Commission was established."2°
30. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Inter-Office Memorandum, To the Commission, From General Counsel, Sep tember 2, 1969, p. 9.
The two specific cases before the Court "...challenge the constitutional and statutory bases of the doctrine and 46
component rules. Red Lion involves the application of
the fairness doctrine to a particular broadcast, and
RTNDA arises as an action to review the FCC's 1967 promul
gation of the personal attack and political editorializing
regulations ... . " -*1
31. U.S., Supreme Court, Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc., v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), p. 2.
Mr. Geller's interpretation to the Commission con
cluded that the high court's decision
...squarely upholds the Fairness Doctrine and lends strong support to other Commission require ments in the programming areas. The Court has indicated in this case that it regards the Com mission's activities affecting programming as of great significance. The rationale underlying the Red Lion opinion gives strong legal support to the proposition that the Commission has broad authority to establish general program standards founded on clear public interest con siderations ....
32. FCC, Inter-Office Memorandum, p. 9.
The opinion from the Supreme Court contains numerous specific references to FCC policy. Three particular con clusions, however, are especially pertinent to this study. 47
There is nothing in the First Amendment which prevents the Government from requiring a licensee to share his frequency with others and to conduct himself as a proxy or fiduciary with obligations to present those views and voices which are representative of his community and which would otherwise, by necessity, be barred from the air waves....It is the right of the viewers and lis teners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount.
Congress need not stand idly by and permit those with licenses to ignore the problems which beset the people....33
33. Supreme Court, Red Lion, pp. 21, 25.
An incident following the Red Lion decision, between the FCC and the broadcast industry, is significant in its revelation of internal policy postures by individual com missioners. The Geller memorandum cited above was an inter-office memo, for official use only. Its content, however, was "leaked" to two industry periodicals which made references to the memo in subsequent articles. The
FCC was petitioned to inspect the records so as to make the memo public and the Commission did so.**^ In a
34. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 70-106.3, In the Matter of Request by Reuben B. Robertson, III and Ronald L. Winkler, For Inspection of Records, October 9, 1970. concurring opinion, Commissioner Nicholas Johnson questioned 48
the Commission's rationale for making the memo public.
It is possible... that the majority feels willing to release Mr. Geller's memorandum because it does not intend to follow its recommendations, much less exercise the authority the Supreme Court has given us in its Red Lion decision. Certainly we have done very little, for example, to establish the general program standards the Supreme Court has sanctioned.35
35. Ibid., Concurring Opinion, p. 4.
Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems
The Camden Decision
On June 13, 1969, the FCC issued the Camden deci
sion. This immediately followed the landmark Supreme
Court opinion and became itself a landmark decision. It
strongly indicated to the industry what standards should
be maintained. The Camden decision led, in turn, to the most recent decisions concerning the ascertainment of
community needs.
The proceeding concerned an application from The
McLendon Corporation to assign the license of Station
WCAM, Camden, New Jersey, the license being previously held by the City of Camden. The FCC determined that
"...The McLendon Corporation has failed to establish that
its proposed programming is realistically designed for 49
Camden...[and that] the assignment would be contrary to
the public interest and should be d e n i e d . "36
36. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Camden Deci sion, FCC 69-644, Docket No. 18303, June 13, 1969, p. 3.
The specific objections to the assignment focused
on the failure of the applicant to adequately survey the
community of intended service. No research was con
ducted to determine the demographic composition of the
city. "Nor were any specific efforts made to select as
interviewees, persons of foreign extraction or representa
tives of charitable, educational, or labor organiza- 37 tions." Further, there was "...no clear evidence that
37. Ibid., p. 6.
the McLendons sought to explore and evaluate the pressing
needs of the economically disadvantaged in Camden in
developing programming proposals." The survey also
overlooked individual members of the general listening 38 public. The Commission concluded, "...the steps taken
38* Ibid., p. 16. by the McLendons to ascertain Camden's needs and interests 50
were inadequate; their proposed programming cannot be 39 regarded as responsive to properly determined needs."
39. Ibid., p . 9.
Prior to the Camden decision, in a Public Notice
Relating to Ascertainment of Community Needs by Broadcast
Applicants, released August 22, 1968, the FCC had reiter
ated and clarified the four elements of the showing to be
made by broadcast applicants in response to Part 1, Sec
tions IV-A and IV-B, the programming sections of applica
tion forms. Those four elements are:
(a) Ascertainment of community needs by consulta tions with community leaders. (b) A listing of the significant suggestions as to community needs received from consulta tions with community leaders. (c) The applicant's evaluation of the relative importance of those suggestions as to community needs and his consideration of them in formu lating the station's overall program service. (d) Relating the program service to the needs of the community as evaluated— a showing in the application of what programming service is proposed to meet what needs.4®
40. Ib i d . , pp. 9-10.
The Commission emphasized that it has been a longstanding policy for the licensee to "...seek out and be responsive to a community's needs and interests."4*' The FCC stressed 51
41. Ibid., p. 10.
its previous decisions that were based on the Commission's
"...interest in how the licensee discovers the needs of his community and what he does to meet those needs."4^
42. Ibid., p. 10.
Citing decisions from 1960 through 1968, the Commis sion set out the specific details of how the ascertain ment process is expected to be developed. One important distinction was that "...the applicant or licensee is ex pected to elicit information as to the community's needs, problems and issues, not the audience's current broadcast programming preferences."4'*
4 3. Ibid., p. 11.
He should consult with a representative range of groups, leaders and individuals in community life— public officials, education, religious, the entertainment media, agriculture, business, labor, professional and eleemosynary organizations, and others who speak for and embody the interests of the community, to give him a better basis for determining the total needs of the community. The applicant should indicate, by cross-sectional sur vey, statistically reliable sampling, or other valid method, that the range of groups, leaders and individuals consulted is truly representative of the economic, social, political, cultural, and 52
other elements of the community. The consulta tions should not be designed to develop predeter mined answers or to secure approval of existing or preplanned programming, but rather to elicit constructive information concerning community needs. This consideration is of major signifi cance in the case of a multiple broadcast owner, using a standardized format for his broadcast facilities. The purpose of the community needs investigation is not to determine whether there is an audience within the service area for the applicant's or licensee's particular pre-planned formula, but to ferret out the needs of the com munity he proposes to serve and then develop programming responsive thereto. The applicant's efforts to determine needs must be adequately documented in his application (leaders and indi viduals consulted must be identified by name, position and organization). Sufficient material must be available to establish that a careful in vestigation of the community was made and that meaningful results were obtained. That an appli cant or an interviewer may have had experience in that particular community or generally in broad casting is insufficient unless such experience is coupled with an adequate survey or investigation of the community conducted along the lines discus sed above.
44. Ibid., p. 12.
The Primer
The Notice of Inquiry which presented the "Primer on
Ascertainment of Community Problems" followed six months after the Camden decision. The Primer was in response to a request from the Federal Communications Bar Association for clarification of the requirements of the ascertainment 53 section of the application forms. The members of the
FCBA wanted the clarification so as to better advise their clients. The FCBA pointed to "...differences in interpretations by applicants, members of the said Bar 45 Association and the Commission staff.”
45. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Notice of Inquiry, FCC 69-1402, In the Matter of -Primer on Ascer tainment of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants, Docket No. 18774, December 19, 1969.
Writing later about the Primer inquiry proceeding,
Commissioner Nicholas Johnson said,
I believe the 'hue and cry' raised by the broad casting industry over alleged 'confusion' in as certainment standards supposedly wrought by the Camden decision is a smoke screen to cover their ■* attempt to roll back the standards contained in that decision. I believe a careful reading of Camden will show that most, if not all, of the requirements it contains were directly taken from prior Commission decisions.4®
46. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Public Notice, FCC 70-312, Interim Procedure Relating to Sub- mission of Community Survey Showings in Connection with Radio and Television Applications, March 26, 1970, "Dis senting Opinion of Commissioner Nicholas Johnson," p. 1.
The Primer attached to the Notice of December, 1969, presented interpretations the Commission intended to fol low and invited comments from interested parties. One 54
major filing came, of course, from the National As
sociation of Broadcasters. Emphasizing their desire for
renewals to be afforded different status from construction
permit applicants, the NAB stated, "Broadcasters are
themselves community leaders and by virtue of their
necessary involvement in local affairs are inherently
cognizant of the needs and interests of their respective
areas. They urged that licensees seeking renewals
47. National Association of Broadcasters, Comments Before the Federal Communications Commission In the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems by Broad cast Applicants, Part I, Section IV-A and IV-B of FCC forms. Docket No. 18774, January 30, 19 70, p. 3. could satisfy ascertainment requirements by listing the ten most vital issues facing their communities and then explaining what programming they would propose to treat
A O those issues. The NAB then commented specifically on
48. I bid. the details of the Primer as it might apply to new appli cants .
The Primer, as revised upon consideration of the comments filed by seventy parties during January of 19 70, was finally adopted by a Report and Order on February 18,
19 71. ' The total Primer can be consulted in the Appendix. 55
The report by the Commission preceding the Primer con
tains certain points that should be emphasized.
It was again pointed out that applications for non-commercial FM and television channels were exempt.
Several of the comments filed had suggested, however,
"...that all new applicants, including educators, should be required to ascertain community problems in the man-
40 ner prescribed in the Primer." One such request came
49. FCC Report and Order, FCC 71-176, In the Matter of: Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems by Broad cast Applicants, Part I, Section IV-A and IV-B of FCC Forms, Docket No. 18774, February 23, 1971. from the National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Com mittee, which urged that the Primer be extended to include non-commercial stations.
These stations should be equally as responsive to the needs of the community and its various segments. As the educational stations are not likely at renewal time to draw opposing applica tions, the Commission should sua sponte undertake the duty of encouraging these stations to meet their obligations to the local communities.50
50. "Comments by National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Committee, Inc.," In the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants, Part I, Sections IV-A and IV-B, Docket No. 18774. March 28, 1970, p. 5. 56
The Commission nonetheless reiterated its stand that,
"Given the reservation of channels for specialized kinds
of programming, educational stations manifestly must be
treated differently than commercial stations.*'51
51. FCC 71-176, February 23, 1971, p. 3.
The long-range intent of the Commission was to
exempt renewal applicants from meeting the requirements
of the Primer. The Commission indicated, however, that
until other standards are adopted "...renewal applicants 52 will be required to comply with the Primer."
52. I b i d ., p. 7.
In an attempt to make broadcasters more responsive
to the problems of their communities, the Commission used a new phrase— community problems, needs and interests.
Having failed "...in our earlier efforts to impress upon applicants that the phrase 'community needs' encompasses a much larger area than program preferences, we sought in preparing the Primer to use a new word to emphasize our intent; hence, 'problems.*...the word 'problems'...would be considered by us to be generally synonymous with c 5 'community needs and interests.*" 57
53. I b i d ., p. 8.
The Primer also emphasized that inherent in the phrase "to meet community problems" is the "...obligation to meet, aid in meeting, be responsive to, or stimulate » the solution for community problems. "5^
54. I bid ., p. 9.
In describing the ascertainment process, the Commis sion assumed that "...members of the general public may perceive community problems differently than community 55 leaders." The Primer also pointed out that groups may
55 * I bid ., -p. 10. not have formal organizations or be large in size, but still be significant to the community.56 The National
56. Ibid., pp. 10-13.
Citizens Committee for Broadcasting suggested, in its comments filed on the Primer,
...an applicant's obligation does not end with 'establishment' leaders, and includes 'voluntary associations and agencies dealing with the needs of the elderly, the indigent and the handicapped, 58
with welfare associations, tenant groups, youth and student groups and civic improvement organiza tions, taxpayer groups, property owners associa tions and other groups organized for the express purpose of protecting particular needs and interests.1
57. Ibid., p . 16.
The Commission's response was, "The question is whether
those groups comprise a significant segment of the Com munity, not whether they fall within or without the 'es
tablishment', however that word is defined. Leaders of the
listed organizations should be consulted, if they repre sent a significant group within the particular communi-
58. Ibid.
The two major segments of the ascertainment process are consultations with leaders and with members of the general public. "The applicant is expected to choose members from each of those broad groups that reflect the composition of the city of license. Obviously, an ap plicant does not rely on a random sample to choose com munity leaders. Rather, he is expected to contact leaders of each significant group within the community."5® 59
59 . I b i d ., p. 13.
In a number of actions since adoption of the Primer, the Commission has emphasized the need for meaningful dia
logue between leaders and broadcasters. Various broad casting organizations have asked for clarifications on the types of meetings allowed. A June 30, 1971, letter fjrom the FCC to the Southern California Broadcasters
Association related that "...the flow of information be tween the community leaders and the broadcasters 'could well be encouraged by various types of joint meetings,’' as long as each individual community leader is given an opportunity to present freely his opinions of community problems and as long as each broadcaster has an oppor tunity to question each leader, which would alleviate the possibility of an inhibition of the free flow of communica tion."60
60. FCC, News, Report No. 9977, "SCBA Plan for Joint In terviews with Community Leaders Accepted by FCC as Satis fying in Part Requirements for Community Problem Ascer tainment," July 1, 19 71, p. 1.
The use of outside research organizations to compile demographic data is permitted, although this too was chal lenged by the National Mexican American Committee. 60
Permitting the Applicant to use third parties to contact members of the general public will permit the Applicant to avoid or minimize con tact with leaders and members of the un-organized segments of the community....Applicant should con suit with the general public, including members of unorganized segments of the community which may have the greatest problem and fewest recog nized leaders.61
61. National Mexican American Committee, p. 8.
However, the Commission pointed out that it is not
research sophistication or expertise that is critical, 6 2 but rather the proposed programming.
62. FCC 71-176, February 23, 1971, p. 15.
That attitude has altered slightly since stations
have begun their surveys. The Commission originally in
tended for each licensee to conduct its own survey of the
community and, therefore, required:
...only a generally random sample in consulting with members of the general public. A sample that meets statistical sampling criteria is not re quired. Thus, it is possible that the consulta tions conducted by an individual applicant could contain errors in s a m p l i n g .
63. FCC, News, Report No. 9744, "Southern California Broadcasters Association Notified Use of Research Firm for Community Survey is Acceptable," March 12, 1971, p. 2. 61
Several broadcasters suggested conducting joint surveys.
The Southern California Broadcasters Association, for
example, proposed "...to hire a reputable research organi
zation to conduct a comprehensive in-depth survey to
ascertain the community problems of Los Angeles as viewed
by members of the general public. The results of that
survey would then be used by the Los Angeles stations par
ticipating in the project in preparing their renewal ap
plications."®^ While allowing such a joint survey, the
64. I b i d ., p. 1.
Commission noted that a survey based on the same methods
could compound the potential error of a non-statistical
sampling. Accordingly, the FCC declared, "...if a joint
survey is conducted, it must use sampling techniques that will be statistically valid."
65. I b i d ., p. 2.
In answer to the problem of numbers— how many per sons should be consulted— the Commission posed three que stions.
Have community leaders from each significant group been consulted? As to members of the general public, has the applicant used a method that will result in a generally random selection? 62
Has the applicant elicited sufficient infor mation as to community problems in those con sul tat ions ?6*>
66. FCC 71-176, February 23, 1971, p. 21.
Previously, in a separate proceeding, additional
emphasis was given to the need for the broadcaster to be
thoroughly familiar with his communityproblems and in
terests. This was expressed in the Commission's Notice of
Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making In the Matter
of Obligations of Broadcast Licensees under the Fairness
Doctrine.67 The Commission is continuing to study the
67. FCC, Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 70-507, In the Matter of Broadcast Licensees Under the Fairness Doctrine, Docket No. 18859, May 18, 1970.
scope of the affirmative obligation concept of the Fair
ness Doctrine. In June, 19 71, the FCC announced a full
inquiry into the twenty-two year old policy statement on
fairness. While raising questions about access to the media, the Commission "...affirmed its view that
licenses [sic] must operate their facilities as trustees
for the public, with a duty to present conflicting views on controversial issues by appropriate spokesmen."6® 63
68. "Chance to Escape Fairness Trap?" Broadcasting, June 14, 1971, p. 23.
When issues of public importance are discussed,
the licensee has an affirmative obligation to notify
specific spokesmen of the opportunity to present contras
ting viewpoints.
If the issue is one of such public importance— and indeed is worthy of such multiple airings— one would certainly expect that there would be spokesmen for the other viewpoint, and that the licensee, who is the expert in the community, would know who are the most suita&le spokes men. [Emphasis added.]
69. FCC 70-507, May 18, 1970, p. 5.
The Commission raised "...the issue of requiring a further,
more specific effort to achieve fairness...most signifi
cantly, in accordance with our policy to insure that the
licensee is expert on community problems and interests."^®
70. I b i d ., p. 8.
A licensee's responsiveness to the community has become an important factor at renewal time. When a regular renewal applicant is challenged by a new applicant, the
Commission may designate the competing parties to a 64
comparative hearing. The public, the FCC, Congress, and
the broadcasting industry have shown concern for the
rights of that renewal applicant in such a hearing. More
important, however, may be the rights of the public.
Policies for Renewal Applicants
On January 15, 1970, the Commission released a
Policy Statement on Comparative Hearings Involving Regular
Renewal Applicants. This statement indicated the approach the Commission intended to follow in comparative broad
cast hearings. The policy would give great weight to 71 . . stability and predictability in station operation."
71. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Memorandum Opinion and Order, -FCC 70-738, In the Matter of Policy Statement on Comparative Hearings Involving Regular Re newal Applicants, In re Petitions filed by BEST, CCC, and others for Rule Making to Clarify Standards in All Com parative Broadcast Proceedings, RM-2551, July 21, 1970, p. 2.
However, it does state that "... any interested persons who believe that an existing licensee has not, in its last license term, provided substantial service, without serious 7 9 deficiencies, may file a competing application."
72. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 70-63, In re Petitions filed by BEST, CCC, and Others for Rule Making to Clarify Standards 65
in All Comparative Broadcast Proceeding, RM-1551, January 16, 19 70, p. 3.
The concept of "stability and predictability" was challenged by petitions from Black Efforts for Soul in
Television (BEST), the Citizens Communications Center
(CCC), and (jointly) Hampton Roads Television Corporation and Community Broadcasting of Boston, Inc. The petitions were denied and the Commission justified its January 15,
1970, Policy Statement by saying:
. . . in an industry requiring substantial investments, often with long periods of financial loss, the public interest is served by a reasonable assurance that good public service will constitute a protection against a complete loss of the business. . . . We have given up the fullest advantages of competition only in favor of continuance of a solid measure of performance without substantial defects. We have, however, main tained the competitive spur of the statutory scheme by not only permitting but encouraging competing challenge to renewal applicants who are believed to have minimally served the public interest. . . . The assignment of conclusive weight to a solid record of opera tion in the public interest is not the grant of a right to future use based upon past oc cupancy of a channel. As we have made amply clear, past occupancy by itself is irrelevant under our p o l i c y . 7 -*
73. FCC 70-738, July 21, 1970, pp. 2-4.
The challenges to this policy statement were dismissed, but not without a dissenting opinion from Commissioner 66
Johnson. He provided some historical background which he
felt was crucial to the Commission's original policy statement.
The Commission's Policy Statement decision cannot be considered 'reasonable' or 'fair'— particularly in view of the political events surrounding its adoption. Following the decision in WIIDH, Inc....the broadcasting industry sought to obtain from Congress the elimination or dras tic revision of the comparative hearing proce dure ....Although more than 100 Congressmen and 23 Senators quickly announced their support, a number of citizens groups testified that S. 2004 was 'back door racism' and would exclude minori ties from access to media ownership in most large communities*..would perpetuate excessive concen trations of control... and would remove 'competi tion' from broadcasting and 'freeze out every underrepresented class in American society'.... The impact of citizen outrage measurably slowed the progress of St 2004, and many Senate observers began to predict the Bill would never pass. Then-, without formal rule making hearings, or even submission of written arguments, the Com mission suddenly issued its January 15, 1970' Policy Statement— achieving much of what Congress had been unable or reluctant to adopt. There were many parties who had invested substan tial time and money fighting the threatened diminu tion of their rights, and who no doubt would have opposed our January 15, 1970 Policy Statement on numerous grounds. In challenging S. 2004, many of these parties claimed to represent the inte rests of important segments of our population: the minorities, the poor, and the disadvantaged. By refusing even to listen to their counsels, this Commission reached a new low in its self-imposed isolation from the people; once again we closed our ears and minds to their pleas.
74. Ibid., pp. 5-6. 67
By February, 1971, however, the Commission seemed
ready to establish "some pertinent standards" for
evaluating "substantial service" of renewal applicants.
It, therefore, issued a Notice of Inquiry on February 23,
1971, which suggested some guidelines for a possible rule-
making. It is important to point out that although non
commercial educational television stations were not spe
cifically included in these guidelines, neither were they
exempted. ETV was exempted, on the other hand, from the
Primer. While the Primer applies to new applicants and
not to renewals, the instant order was made applicable to
all currently licensed television stations.
The Notice focused on two critically important
areas: local programming and programming designed to
contribute to an informed electorate. "If a television
station does not serve in a substantial manner as a
local outlet...it is clearly not meeting its crucial 75 role." The figures proposed as reflecting substantial
75. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Notice of Inquiry, In the Matter of Formulation of Policies Relating to the Broadcast Renewal Applicant, Stemming from the Comparative Hearing Process, FCC 71-159, Docket No. 19154, February 23, 1971, p. 2. service are: 68
(i) With respect to local programming, a range of 10-15% of the broadcast effort (including 10-15% in the prime time period, 6-11 p.m....) (ii) The proposed figure for news is 8-10% for the network affiliate, 5% for the independent VHF station (including a figure of 8-10% and 5%, respectively in the prime time period.) (iii) In the public affairs area, the tentative figure is 3-5%, with, as stated, a 3% figure for the 6-11 p.m. time period.76
76. Ibid., pp. 3-4.
The Commission added that these guidelines would not be definitive either for or against the renewal ap plicant. In other words, an applicant lacking in total time devoted to these areas might point to substantial service via exceptional quality. At the same time, meeting the guidelines would not negate the challenge that his service was not really substantial, i.e.,
"...the licensee...could have a substantial percentage figure and yet not serve *equitably and in good faith' the needs of significant groups within his service area."^
77. Ibid., pp. 4-5.
Several proposals directly related to the ascertain ment process were also presented in this notice.
A renewal applicant would be required to list the most important problems or concerns facing his area during the twelve months preceding 69
filing of his application which, in his opinion, were most serious or important. He would then be required to list all the programs he has pre sented during that same period which dealt with these issues, giving the name of each program, the date, time and duration of its broadcast, and a brief description of the program. At yearly intervals (specifically on September 1), the broadcast licensee would again prepare the information set out in the first two sentences of this subsection. This information would be an attachment to a shortened form which he would prepare at this annual interval....
...we would propose not to require the extensive survey now incumbent upon the new broadcast ap plicant ... .The basis of this proposal to simp lify our procedures is that there is no need at renewal for a new, detailed survey; the licensee should have been digging in each year of his operation to ascertain and meet needs, and would have maintained a continuing stream of contacts with interested individuals, leaders, and groups. In short, when it comes to renewal— to a ques tion of performance consistent with the public interest standard— it is substance, not form, which is of critical importance.... We stress this point of community involvement. The above proposals... are geared to a continuing dialogue between station and community— not a triennial spurt; to actual performance in cru cial areas rather than elaborate surveys; and, finally, to reliance upon community leaders, and groups, both to point up the need for any fur ther inquiry by the Commission at renewal time or to spur substantial performance by the pos sibility of filing of a competing application ....None of these proposals, we emphasize, is designed in any way to dictate a particular program or format.... the Commission intends to place great reliance on community interest and participation in the renewal process.
78. Ibid., p. 6. 70
An accompanying Notice, released the same day, proposed the formulation of rules and policies relating to the regular renewal procedures for broadcast licenses.^ Noting that the FCC had received a
79. FCC Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making, FCC 71-15(5, In the Matter of Formulation of Rules and Policies Relating to the Renewal of Broadcast Licenses, Docket No. 19153, February 23, 1971. significantly increasing number of petitions to deny license renewals or complaints that the licensee had not met its public service obligations, the Commission pre sented several proposals which were designed specifically to ensure that:
(1) the licensee will remain conversant with and attentive to community problems and needs throughout the license period; (2) the licensee will make known to the public his responsibility to continually ascertain the most significant problems and needs of his service area and to present programs designed to deal with these problems and needs; (3) the public will be con tinually encouraged by the licensee to make com ments, complaints, and suggestions regarding the operation of the station....8®
80. Ibid., p. 2.
The Notice gave details for the procedures to be used to inform the public of the licensee's obligations 71
and approaching renewal date and the ability of the
public to file comments and participate in the licensee's
ascertainment and programming to meet the community
problems and needs. An amended Section IV-B of Form 303
(Statement of Program Service in Application for Renewal
of Television Station License) and an annual reporting
form were also proposed.
The Annual Reporting Form asked for information
concerning what the licensee considered to be the ten
"...most significant problems and needs of your service
area during the past twelve m o n t h s . "81 The information
81. I b i d ., p. 28. required would include a description of each of the pro grams devoted to each problem or need, as well as program source, time of broadcast, number of segments, amount of
total program time, and amount of local program time devoted to each problem or need.®^
82. I b i d ., p. 33.
The new Section IV-B of Form 303 would require all of the above information as well as more specific indica tions of the ascertainment process. 72
State...the methods by which the applicant during the past three years determined the problems and needs of the public served by his station. Does the applicant anticipate any significant new problems and needs in his service area during the next renewal period?...If Yes, indicate... the new problems and needs. Does the applicant expect to air during the next renewal period any new programs or program services devoted to significant problems and needs of his service area?...If Yes, indicate... the new program or program services and briefly describe these. Does the applicant, during the next renewal per iod, plan to change the methods described in his answer to Question 3 for determining the problems and needs of the public served by his station... If Yes, describe.... the changes planned by the applicant.... summarize and comment upon the com plaints and suggestions received by the appli cant from members of the public during the past renewal period in each of the following cate gories: (1) technical operations, (2) adver tising, (3) employment practices, (4) criti cisms of programming, (5) compliments of pro gramming, (6) suggested programming.® 3
83. Ibid., p. 29.
The Policy Statement of January 15, 1970, was. shortlived, however. As is pointed out in preceding dis cussion (see pages 64-66 ), BEST and CCC, primarily, challenged the Commission's procedures for arriving at that posture on comparative hearings and for giving in cumbent licensees carte blanche for "substantial service."
BEST, CCC, Hampton Roads, and Community Broadcasting of
Boston carried their cases to the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On June 11, 73
1970, the Court issued a decision against the FCC's
Policy Statement, ordering, "...that the Policy Statement,
being contrary to law, shall not be applied by the Commis
sion in any pending or future comparative renewal
hearings.1,84
84. U.S. Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit, Citizens Communications Center, Black Efforts for Soul in Television, Hampton Roads Television Corporation, Community Broadcasting of Boston, Inc. v~. Federal communi cations Commission' and United States of America, Petitions for Review of an Order of the Federal Communications Com mission and Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, June 11, 1971.
This dissertation has been written too soon after
the decision to detail lengthy responses within the in dustry and at the Commission. Initial reactions in
Broadcasting- have been, as could be anticipated, strong and vitriolic. Its first news item on the decision was o c headlined— "The roof falls in on renewals." An
85. Broadcasting, June 14, 1971, p. 9. editorial began;
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington has issued a new prescription for anarchy in broad cast regulation. Its reversal of the policy under which the FCC has been handling challenges to license renewals exposes all incumbents to attack. It is a formula for dismemberment of 74
the system.
Nothing less than survival is at issue.86
86. Ibid., June 21, 1971, p. 108.
Because of its apparent impact on future actions
by the Commission and the import accorded to it thus far,
the entire document, written by Circuit Judge J. Skelly
Wright, is included as Appendix E.
The Court admonished the Commission in much the
same language used by Commissioner Johnson in his dis
senting opinion on the original policy statement (see
pages 65-66). The Court gave lengthy explanations for
objecting to the disputed policy, which is that
...in a hearing between an incumbent applying for renewal of his radio or television license and a mutually exclusive applicant, the incum bent shall obtain a controlling preference by demonstrating substantial past performance with out serious deficiencies. Thus if the incumbent prevails on the threshold issue of the substan tiality of his past record, all other applica tions are to be dismissed without a hearing on their own merits. '
87. Court of Appeals Order, pp. 4-5.
It was maintained by the Court that the Policy Statement had a "deadening effect" upon renewal challenges. 75
By depriving competing applicants of their right to a full comparative hearing on the merits of their own applications, and by se verely limiting the importance of other compara tive criteria, the Commission has made the cost of processing a competing application prohibi tive when measured by the challengers * very mini mal chances of success. That the Policy State ment is in this sense self-executing and that it has in fact served to deter the filing of a single competing application for a television re newal in over a year is perhaps the most compel ling factor in the court’s decision to review this dispute at this time.®8
88. Ibid., pp. 10-11.
The panel of judges pointed out that in 1928 the Federal
Radio Commission defined "public interest, convenience, or necessity" as
'a matter of comparative and not an absolute standard when applied to broadcasting stations. Since the number of channels is limited and the number of persons desiring to broadcast is far greater than can be accommodated, the Commission must determine from among the applicants before it which of them will, if licensed, best serve the public. 1
89. I b i d . , p. 12.
The Court traced the history of renewal proceedings with emphasis on the controversial WHDH case, in which the
FCC, for the very first time, applied comparative criteria in a renewal proceeding and deposed the incumbent, awarding 76
the frequency to a challenger.90 Following that FCC
90. Ibid., p. 16. decision was the activity in the U.S. Senate on behalf of
licensed broadcasters to greatly reduce the impact of
the renewal hearing procedure. Before S. 2004 could be dealt with fully by Congress, the FCC suddenly enacted disputed policy, with no formal rule-making proceedings.9*
91. Ibid., pp. 18-20.
Rather than merely "substantial service" which the policy calls for, the Court would require "superior service." It noted, "The Commission in rule making pro ceedings should strive to clarify in both quantitative and qualitative terms what constitutes superior service."92
92. Ibid., p. 26.
The Policy Statement purports to strike a balance between the need for 'predictability and stability' and the need for a competitive spur.... Unfortunately, instead of stability the Policy Statement has produced rigor mortis.
93. Ibid., p. 28. 77
The Court concluded, "Our decision today restores
healthy competition by repudiating a Commission policy
which is unreasonably weighted in favor of the licensees
it is meant to regulate, to the great detriment of the
Q A listening and viewing public."
94. I b i d ., p. 29.
Attorneys for citizen groups concerned with how a station serves its community needs are pleased with 9 5 this victory. It appears that this decision, like the
95. See Broadcasting, June 21, 1971, p. 29.
Court's Red Lion decision, will give the FCC and the public greater opportunity to insure that licensees will ascertain and meet community needs. The assessment and subsequent programming would seem to be necessary to show the "superior service" required by the Court's extant opinion. CHAPTER III KPBS-TV— SAN DIEGO
The Station License
KPBS-TV is the public broadcasting station of San
Diego, California. It is located on the campus of San
Diego State College and licensed to the Board of Trustees of the California State Colleges on behalf of San Diego
State College.
The application for a construction permit was filed on December 23, 1964, but the final license was not granted until December 3, 1968. Financing problems with the legis
lature and matching grants from the U.S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare delayed the licensing.*-
1. The Board of Trustees, The California State Colleges, Station File of KPBS-TV, Federal Communications Commission, As of May 26, 19 71.
In December, 1966, San Diego State College requested the call letters KEBS-TV to conform with their already op erating FM station KEBS. The construction permit was auth orized March 29, 1967 with KEBS-TV call letters assigned to channel 15. The license was then granted in December, 1968.
The licensee requested a change in its call to KPBS-TV on
78 79
July 13, 197 0. No statement of explanation from the li
censee is listed in the station file but a letter from
the Public Broadcasting Service did state an objection
to the change because of the identity of the initials
PBS. The Public Broadcasting Service indicated to the
Federal Communications Commission that they would meet
with KEBS-TV to resolve the question. On October 1, 1970, 2 the Commission did authorize the call change to KPBS-TV,
2. Ibid.
despite PBS's objection.3
3. According to Allen MyerS of the FCC Educational Broadcasting Branch, the objection of PBS was not con sidered pertinent to the Commission's licensing policy. Objections to call letter assignments are allowed if the call is already assigned or, if there is a similar call in the vicinity which would cause confusion among the lis tening public. Telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., June 25, 1971.
The transmitter is located on Mt. San Miguel, nine miles from the studios, and operates with one million watts of effective radiated power. The antenna is 1912 feet a- bove average terrain. The grade B contour covers a pop ulation of approximately 1,775,000. The primary service area of KPBS-TV is the populous portion of San Diego Coun- 4 ty with a population of 1,375,000. 80
4. Fact Sheet prepared for investigator by Bradford B. Warner, December, 1970.
The area's elementary and secondary school population
of 336,962 is served by KPBS-TV through contractual ar
rangement with the San Diego Area Instructional Television
Authority, a joint powers organization consisting of mem
ber school districts in San Diego County.5 in addition,
5. Ibid.
the station serves a campus community of 24,000 students
and 1,400 professors.6 The television station staff
6. San Diego State Profile (San Diego: Publications Bur- eau, 1970), p. TT
consists of approximately thirty full-time employees, plus nearly fifty part-time employees. The latter are
largely drawn from students in the Telecommunications and
Film Department of the college and comprise the major por- 7 tion of the operating crews.
7. Fact Sheet.
The operating budget is over half a million dollars annually. Funds are provided in part by legislative 81
appropriation from the State of California, through the
operating budget of San Diego State College, by contract
services to the public schools, and by projects, grants,
private philanthropy, public subscriptions, and general
support grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcast- g ing. The maximum state appropriation is 4 3% of the total
8. Ibid.
budget. For the school programs the state provides $1.70
per average daily attendance of the participating school Q systems.
9. Donald R. Martin, conversation via radio-telephone, San Diego, June 22, 1971.
Statements of Purpose
The California State Colleges presented six purposes
for the educational television station at San Diego State
College. These were filed with the statement of Program
Service in the original FCC application for a construction permit in 1964. The proposal was:
a. to extend to the citizens of San Diego County the benefits of a growing, national, non-commercial television service. . . . b. to provide . . . broad and varied programs of direct instruction by television, within and with out the classroom, for children and adults partici pating in formal education at all levels. c. to make available to . * . formal and informal 82
groups and organizations whose concerns include the education of the general public and/or their own membership, the medium of television as a tool of communication. d. to increase cordial relations and promote understanding between citizens of the State of California and Baja California by seeking ways in which educational and instructional program ming scheduled on the station can also serve our Spanish-speaking neighbors, and making available the facilities for programs by and for the citi zens of the Republic of Mexico which will also promote understanding of mutual concerns by viewers on both sides of the International Border. e. to expand the boundaries of the campus . . . to include the entire community by making avail able . . . some of the people and events . . . f. to provide the necessary pre-requisite to the eventual development of a state-wide ETV network in bringing ETV service to the third major popu lation center of California.1(^
10. Station file of KPBS-TV.
Ascertainment of Community Needs
The Program director of KPBS-TV has expressed, in the KPBS Program Guide, his concern for the audiences it serves. To the Telecommunications and Film Department of San Diego State, the academic department most directly involved in the station operation, KPBS-TV represents a
. . . concerted effort to establish the station as an integral part of the instructional and ed ucational process .... It is the creation of the college, the schools, and the community . . . a cooperative venture whose future development depends largely upon your ideas and support. We invite both and look forward to hearing from you often.11 83
11. KPBS Program Guide, I (November, 1970), 2.
That statement by Bradford B. Warner perhaps en compasses the basic philosophy of the station, in terms of its purposes, intended audiences, and needs for involve ment by the public via input, feedback, and funding.
The investigator interviewed the Program Director, the Director of News and Public Affairs, Corporation for
Public Broadcasting Fellow in the Public Affairs Depart ment and the coordinator for Instructional Television.
Their responses to the open-ended questions (see Appen dix D) indicated a variety of concerns for the station*s responsibility to the needs-of its audiences.
David Crippens, the CPB Fellow at KPBS-TV, insisted that broadcasting must lead the way in minority affairs.
Commitment from stations is needed first. He is convinced that too many stations today give lip service but not a firm commitment.12
12. David Crippens, "Racism in Broadcasting," WEST Symposium, San Diego, February 25, 1971.
Through the News and Public Affairs Department of
KPBS-TV,.a commitment to diverse audiences comes from members of the department who have diverse backgrounds— a liberal activist, a Republican campaign manager, a 84
newspaperman, a black, and a Chicano. Crippens presumed
that this diversity allows a wide range of responses to
community needs. Their emphasis on investigative report
ing keeps the doors to the community open. if one person
on the staff cannot handle a particular issue, another
one can step in. "We don't allow ourselves to be sty
mied. ,tl3
13. David Crippens, Private interview, San Diego, February 24, 1971.
The Director of News and Public Affairs, Peter F.
Kaye, emphasized that his approach is basically journa
listic. He is not interested in doing a large quantity
of stories or becoming a station of record. The focus is
on specialization— doing what the other stations do not
do well. Since San Diego has many media, Kaye is con
cerned with programming to a particular need, not a par
ticular audience. He regards location filming as essen
tial. "Try to stay out of the studio; get out there where
it's happening."14
14. Peter F. Kaye, Private interview, San Diego, February 24, 19 71.
Another important consideration in a station's philosophy of ascertainment is its viewpoint of the 85
audience. Crippens looks at San Diego as many communities.
"Even the black community is many communities." The same
applies for the white residents. The audiences for KPBS-
TV have many classifications— leisure, education, retire ment, and wealth. "Ascertainment requires looking at life in the pluralistic sense,
15. Crippens interview.
The station management is aware that the Federal
Communications Commission is looking at public television stations with some intentions of future action on ascer tainment procedures. Some program ideas for ascertainment and meeting the needs of San Diego are being developed, not because the legal requirements are set but an ethical a- wareness is developing and FCC action in public broadcast ing appears to be inevitable. As Warner recently wrote,
"The FCC Primer has caused us to reopen some on going con versations on ways of assessing needs--and goals— and then doing something about them."^®
16. Bradford B. Warner, Personal letter to investigator, March 19, 1971.
Formal Procedures
KPBS-TV does not have any formal, systematic 86 procedures for the ascertainment of community needs. As of February 25, 1971, they had not instituted any of the activities commonly discussed by broadcasters or suggest ed for commercial stations by the Primer— such as citizen's advisory councils, community surveys, or consultations with community leaders.
Informal Acquisition of Information
The informal acquisition of information about the community and its needs is, however, an on-going process, especially for the News and Public Affairs Department. » Current ascertainment procedures
Constant contact with many individuals throughout the community provides the biggest percentage of input about community needs. Crippens, for example, gathers information during his many speaking engagements, especi ally in the public schools. Furthermore, he teaches a college class in political science and senses that the youthful audience is more critical of television than their elders. "They really think." He writes a tele vision column for a black newspaper and receives much feedback from his readers. In addition to gathering ideas from as many individuals as possible, Crippens tries to talk specifically to people who have a feel for the media.
During the annual Pledge Night Activities the station 87 receives numerous suggestions from the public via phone calls and letters. The station appears to maintain the respect and confidence of many individuals in the commu nity because they come to the station (perhaps via a tele phone call to a staff member) to discuss emerging problems.
"They tell us things they would never tell the other sta tions, M Crippens maintained. This information comes from the people, concluded Crippens, because they feel the regular press will not do anything at all about the prob lems but that KPBS will do something.^
17. Cripr.ens interview.
A former newspaper reporter and political writer,
Kaye has built up a long series of contacts over the years.
He observed that he can call someone for any task or story background. Constant checking helps to verify the breadth and depth of various community issues that may come to his attention. As the investigator points out in Chapter II, an important aspect of serving community needs is fair re presentation of all significant sides of an issue. Kaye emphasized the need to consistently check all stories to get both sides.
18. Kaye interview. 88
Warner, the Program Director, observed that deci
sions in terms of community needs are visceral judgments.
He asserted that he must trust his own judgments and
those made by others in whom he believes. Ascertainment
is a continuing process for a station manager, who is con
stantly doing research wherever he goes. Again empha
sizing informal processes, Warner is convinced that the
programs in public affairs and the community share a mu
tual trust. He related that although KPSB-TV is not sub
servient to the specific interests of the ethnic groups
in San Diego (i.e., Chicano and black), the public affairs
programs do keep contact with the various factions in the
city. Another important source of informal input that
helps Warner and KPBS ascertain San Diego's needs is the
campus. Those affiliated with the college are likewise
involved throughout the community and they provide Warner
with additional data. He pointed out furthermore, that
requests from special interest groups for time and faci- 1Q lities are frequent.
19. Bradford B. Warner, Private interview, San Diego, February 24, 1971.
Current needs and issues in the community
The problems currently being faced by KPBS's potential audiences are approached from two different di
rections by the station. One sees the San Diego audience
as a part of the entire country and the problems also
being part of the whole. Kaye perceives the four major
problems in the country as being the war in Southeast
Asia, the aspirations and frustrations of minorities, the
aspirations and frustrations of youth, and the environ- 2 0 inent. Warner and Crippens described, on the other hand.
20. Kaye interview.
"a fragmented community with major problems."21 San
21. Warner interview.
Diego's needs, as seen by these men, comprise such issues as education, employment, economics, and the retired per-
22. Crippens interview.
Crippens outlined the specific needs in the com munity which he maintained the station should be hitting.
The most critical problem seems to be growth. San Diego has just,in recent years, begun to realize severe growth problems. San Diego is not locked in yet and the ways in which the community develops is a major concern. The 90
four areas most effected by growth are pollution, race
relations, economy, and education. The population is con
tinuing to change in the county and politically the move
is from conservative to moderate. Ethnically there are more Chicanos to be served than blacks. In addition there are three issues KPBS-TV must help the community understand and solve: housing patterns for minorities; the legal, penal, and judicial systems; and the educa tional system.
23. Crippens interview.
The particular needs for minority programming are especially critical in today's society. In discussing racism in broadcasting, Crippens maintained that minority programming serves these functions: (1) providing a win dow to the outside world— letting majorities view the real minority world; and (2) helping the community itself— let ting minorities know where they can get and/or provide community services.2*
24. Crippens, "Racism in Broadcasting."
Current programming especially devoted to community needs
Once the principal members of a station have 91
outlined what they consider to be the essential community
problems, needs, and issues, as they did for this inves
tigator, the concern must be for the next step. What is
the station doing about these needs? Have they developed
any programming that is especially devoted to the current
issues in the community?
The differences between the various audiences and
their reasons for watching and needing to watch KPBS-TV
is obvious from the beginning. As Crippens asserted, "We
handle who watches us pretty well." These are the fairly
affluent, well-educated, not conservative individuals who
look at KPBS as an alternative service.^ Crippens is the
25. Crippens interview.
black producer at the station and it seems significant
that he did not cite the station's ethnic minority pro
gramming. Kaye, the white director of News and Public
Affairs, feels that with the race problems being covered
by a black man, Mr. Crippens, and a Chicano, Jorge
Sandoval, that the station is handling the race issues well. He is convinced that the station's programs on youth and the environment are well developed. Certainly
in those.three areas— race, youth, environment— KPBS is doing much better than the commercial stations in San
Diego, asserted Kaye.^® 92
26. Kaye interview.
"Under 30," for example, was a one-hour-per-week
"rap with the kids" which was done with funds from the
Ford Foundation. The fund has been depleted, however,
and the series is no longer aired. In terms of the en vironment, Kaye insisted that KPBS has fought for many
issues. They have been consistent and ahead of the com mercial stations. One example was "Troubled Waters," a
KPBS production about the Santa Barbara oil slick which then became the first PBS network offering. The investi gative reporting,furthermore, has been dealing heavily with city scandals. KPBS's "City on Trial" was their own investigation that eventually gave pertinent information to the city prosecutor. This involvement in community issues by KPBS has created quite a stir, Kaye related.
The Public Affairs Department is, nonetheless, moving slowly into anti-establishment campaigns. With emphasis again on the need to check leads on a story thoroughly,
Kaye insisted that he has never had to pull back from a story because of outside pressures. The only limitations are "libel and a sense of good taste.
27. Ibid. 93
Again the investigator points out that while Kaye
cited race, youth, and enviroment as issues being handled
well at KPBS, his examples of programs addressed to those
issues did not include any ethnic minority programs.
If Crippens* analysis is correct, this leads one to question if stations are giving lip service but not commitment.
Lionel Monagas, Director of Minority Affairs of the NAEB,
has insisted that one hour a week of minority programming
is not commitment.2® A survey of KPBS's viewerfs guide
28. Lionel Monagas "Racism in Broadcasting," WEST Symposium, February 25, 1971. for November 1970 reveals ohe hour of original local minority programming for the entire month. That one hour is also repeated during the month; fifteen minutes each week is devoted to lessons in English as a second language for Spanish-speaking children; there is an additional local program with a magazine format which may deal from month to month with black and Chicano movements, among others; and KPBS-TV offers four hours a month of network minority programs. For original local ethnic minority programming, KPBS therefore offers, at the most, three hours for the month. The other areas of community affairs outlined by Kaye and Crippens receive, for the month, eight and one-half hours of local original programming, 94 six hours of that programming repeated, approximately twenty-five and one-half hours of network programs and nineteen hours of that repeated.29
29. KPBS Program Guide.
Desired Procedures, Information, Programs
The staff members of KPBS-TV have many ideas for ways of ascertaining the needs of the residents of San
Diego County and of taking the next most crucial step- programming to meet those needs.
One concept is ascertainment on the air. Public affairs involvement would be developed by getting indivi duals from various groups on the air to tell what they see as their needs. Then KPBS would bring experts and practitioners from the field of educational television to discuss what communications can do for those groups and their needs. Warner has also indicated that they may try to develop a community advisory board.30
30. Warner interview.
A major problem being faced by nearly all public broadcasting stations is funding. The KPBS management is not yet satisfied with its leadership support. It 95
lacks adequate underwriting from people who care about
public television. Warner submitted that since the
station is only three and one-half years old, it still
has some major organizational problems which likewise 31 need to find resolution.
31. Ibid.
In terms of programming needs, the KPBS staff perceives
several levels. One is the area of non-academic training.
It is felt that there is a need for more continuing edu cation and public television in San Diego could help satisfy that need.*^
32. Ibid.
A major emphasis must be on more local programming, concluded Crippens. KPBS should do more to utilize San
Diego's resources. Certainly more than once-a-month minority programming is needed. There are certain pockets of the San Diego County population— the less af fluent and less educated— who need more service-oriented programs (e.g., legal counseling, consumer affairs,
"how-to-do-it yourself"). ^
33. Crippens interview. 96
The continued interest in strong investigative
reporting was revealed in Kaye's and Crippens' desire
for a local newsroom program. They sense that their present efforts are making an impact on the community.
Crippens related that the commercial stations are changing
to become more hard-hitting and investigative. Those
stations feel KPBS is their competition. Nevertheless,
"Newsroom" everyday is needed "to really cover this town."
Crippens suspects that the residents have no sense of
"community" and that part of the fault lies with the media and their inadequate news coverage. "If the town were covered properly, this town would make a hell of a lot more sense.
34. Ibid.
The need for a local newsroom is seen by Kaye as a need for treating news of significance, not highlighting trivia like the "fender benders" commercial television news seems to thrive on. Furthermore, a local newsroom should deal with stories that are not obvious. This again re flects the investigative bent of the KPBS News and Public
Affairs Department. Kaye argued that a journalistic ap- 35 proach is best. This would be his answer to meeting 97
35. Kaye interview. the needs of the communities in San Diego County.
Barriers to Ascertainment
The lack of adequate funding is the first explana tion offered for inadequate or non-existent ascertainment procedures. Warner has indicated that if money can be found from some outside source, the on-the-air discussions 36 may see fruition in the near future. The problem of
36. Warner letter. finances seems most crucial to the staff in terms of the development of programs to meet the needs. Crippens as serted that KPBS is only doing about 10% of what it could be doing in local community service but that the problem is not desire but lack of money. More money would addi tionally allow the station to up-grade its technical facilities so it could reach the small pockets of the population buried between the hills, and to increase its promotion. ■*7 '
37. Crippens interview. 98
According to American Research Bureau data, 85% of
the television homes in San Diego can receive UHF. There
fore, more than 15% of the households in San Diego can
not view KPBS-TV.38
38. "Where the UHF-Equipped Homes Are," Broadcasting, July 5, 1971, p. 33.
The problem of the ascertainment of needs still
remains. The staff members appear to assume or firmly
believe that they already know the needs and problems of
their potential audiences; they just do not have the
programming. The possible use of a community advisory board was suggested by the Program Director. However,
he indicated that a major barrier was the pressure each board member may be inclined to exert in favor of his 39 own vested interests.
39. Warner interview.
When asked what methods for ascertaining community needs were used at KPBS, no one mentioned community sur veys or direct consultation with community leaders. It appears that formal ascertainment procedures have not been initiated at KPBS for two basic reasons. First, the personnel most directly involved in public affairs 99 programming believe they already know the needs and is sues. Second, as the Program Director indicated, no real concentrated thought or effort had been given to ascer tainment procedures— either the need for them or the desirability of having them. No thought or effort, that is, until the Federal Communications Commission released the Primer for commercial stations. Now KPBS, and other stations across the country are beginning to give some consideration to this aspect of their service to the public interest, convenience, and necessity. CHAPTER IV
WOSU-TV— COLUMBUS, OHIO
The Station License
In 1953 the Board of Trustees of The Ohio State
University filed an application to construct a non commercial educational television station. A license was granted for the operation of Channel 34, with the call letters WOSU-TV, in April, 1957.1
1. The Ohio State University, Station files of WOSU-TV, Federal Communications Commission, as of May 26, 19 71.
The administrative responsibilities for the tele vision station flow from the Board of Trustees to the
President of The Ohio State University, and on down . through the Vice President for Learning Resources to the
Director of the Telecommunications Center and to the 2 Television Manager.
2. ’’Administrative Organization,” The Telecommunications Center, The Ohio State University, April 15, 19 70.
The question of the appropriateness of universities
100 101
as licensees was raised by three staff members of WOSU-TV.
They suspect that there is an inherent conflict of in
terest in a university's being a licensee of a non
commercial educational television station. The Produc
tion Manager suggested that The Ohio State University has
a view of television different from the view of television
held by the station personnel, that being that the univer
sity considers television a teaching tool and only secon-
darily a mass communications medium for the public.
3. Dan Kramer, Private interview, WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio, April 29, 19 71.
An example of this conflict of interest given by
Dan Kramer was the campus disturbances in the spring of
1970. He maintained that allowing the campus riot to 4 "totally disrupt WOSU programming" was unjustified.
4. I bid.
There is no doubt that the campus disturbances be
came a real crisis for the University. There is further
agreement among those interviewed that for WOSU-TV the
crisis was increased by the nature of the University decisions. The violence began on April 29 and on May 6
President Novice G. Fawcett closed the University with 102
this statement:
At 5:15 p.m. this afternoon the Governor of the State of Ohio recommended to me that the Columbus campus of the University be closed im mediately because of the imminent danger of fur ther disruption and violence. After consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, I am following the Governor's recommendation and I am closing the University until further n o t i c e . 5
5. "Diary of a Dilemma," The Ohio State University Monthly, June, 1970, p. 15.
On May 8, Richard B. Hull, Director of Telecommunica tions ,telegraphed the Federal Communications Commission:
This is to advise that WOSU-TV Channel 34 dis continued broadcast service in Columbus, Ohio at 5:00 PM EDT Thursday, May 7, 1970. This deci sion to discontinue service was made necessary by an order from the administration of The ’Ohio State University to close all of The Ohio State University activities. WOSU-TV will remain off the air until further notice. We will advise of any change in our status immediately.®
6. Station files of WOSU-TV.
Then on May 15, Hull notified the FCC that the
Board of Trustees of Ohio State University had advised
WOSU-TV that they could resume normal broadcast activities at 7:30 a.m. EDT, Friday, May 15, 1970.7
7. Ibid 103
The relationships of the licensee and its desig
nated representatives to the staff members and their
responsibilities was questioned by three of the staff.
One respondent indicated that there are no specific
directives passed from the licensee to the staff and con
sequently station relationships get "very muddy and com
plex." The staff member felt that the tone of various
station policies changes when there are administrative
changes in the University. In addition, the Director of Telecommunications does not like to formalize policy,
according to that staff member. Several of the staff concluded that this lack of policy added to the confusion during the crisis of the Ohio State spring riots. High
Ohio State University administrative personnel were in volved in decisions and there was reportedly massive con fusion on the part of the staff at the station. One staff member indicated that if a story or situation affects or reflects Ohio State University, the personnel are aware of p the ramifications and let that temper their decisions.
8. The investigator wishes to protect the anonymity of the interviewees.
A manager at WOSU-TV likewise discussed conflict of interest. He related that during discussions of program proposals and station activities, if an idea 104
appears to be in conflict with the interest of the
University, then the Television Manager or the Director of
Telecommunications makes the final decisions. According
to Donald W. Brown, Hull keeps the University administra
tion advised of these decisions and that. Brown suspects,
opens the door for possibly more intervention by the 9 University.
9. Donald W. Brown, Jr., Private interview, WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio, April 30, 1971.
Another manager observed, however, that the involve ment of the Director of Telecommunications is not quite so
presuming as Brown seems to suggest. Kramer remarked,
"Mr. Hull is seldom apprised of what we're going to do before we do it. He doesn't want to know." Kramer believes that the conflict of interest link is broken by Hull's attitude. He added that the conflict of in
terest has never presented a major problem although the station staff is aware of its potential.^-®
10. Kramer interview.
The present facilities of WOSU-TV include one studio with an adjoining control room, offices, and sup port systems housed in a one-floor building on the campus 105
of Ohio State University. A new complex of studios, of
fices, and housing for support systems has been built in
the Telecommunication Center, part of the Center for
Tomorrow, also on the university campus. The move to the
new facilities is imminent.
WOSU-TV is authorized to transmit with an effec
tive radiated power of 219 kilowatts and its current an tenna is 560 feet above average terrain.^
11. Station files of WOSU-TV.
The signal of WOSU-TV can reach more than 1.5 million people in seventeen central Ohio counties. Its metropolitan area is the three counties of Franklin,
Delaware, and Pickaway.^ The instructional broadcasts
12. Untitled data sheet, on file at WOSU-TV. are viewed in sixteen counties, with eighteen public school systems and thirty-five private and parochial schools subscribing to the Central Ohio Educational
Television Foundation. There is a potential viewing 13 audience of 170,000 students.
13. John D. Metzger, Private interview, WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio, February 12, 1971. 106
WOSU's communities of service include the
University, the city of Columbus, and central Ohio. The
dilemma of how to serve the varied and sometimes con
flicting needs of those communities was obvious in several
interviews at WOSU-TV.
Hull observed, "While we serve a laboratory function
for some departments in the university, we don't exist
primarily as a training entity, but as a broadcast
facility."14
14. Richard B. Hull, Interview, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, January 27, 1971.
The Production Manager of WOSU-TV indicated that
since the community is the seat of Ohio government and
since WOSU-TV produces programs for the Ohio Educational
Television Network, the station must be concerned about
the voters of the entire state.
15. Kramer interview.
The training of skilled and talented personnel
at WOSU-TV is an informal activity except for that now
being instituted as part of the Westinghouse Skills Bank.
The Skills Bank is set up to provide training for members of racial minorities in the field of television 107
broadcasting. The details of the operation of the
Skills Bank in Columbus are discussed later in this
chapter.
16. M. A. Durea, Interview, Columbus, Ohio, January 27, 1971.
The Ohio State University indicated on its 1961
application for renewal of its television license that
the operation of the station is financed by state 1 7 legislative appropriations to The Ohio State University.
17. Station files of WOSU-TV.
The investigator knows, as a member of WOSU-TV*s viewing
community, that WOSU-TV also receives some financial
support from public contributions and grants from the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
In the course of a discussion of possible conflict of interest by the University in handling station af
fairs, Kramer indicated that there was no real threat of the University's cutting the budget because of the public affairs programming. His explanation was that the University was concerned with equipment to support the campus closed circuit system and would, therefore, do nothing to jeopardize that operation.*® 108
18. Kramer interview.
Statements of Purpose
The records at WOSU-TV indicate that the first
statements of intent were filed with the FCC on Septem
ber 10/ 1951. "A Statement of Programming Policies-for
WOSU-TV” gave the purpose of the proposed station:
...to extend to television viewers, within its video audience range the cultural resources of the Ohio State University, thereby providing opportunities for a continuance of their edu cational and cultural development and the oppor tunity to broaden their interest.
. . .program plans will be developed in coopera tion with the many departments of the University and with both State and local agencies.19
19. Exhibit 2, September 10, 19 51, on file at WOSU-TV.
FCC Form 301 was filed on February 18, 1953. This
form is the application for construction of a new com mercial broadcast station. When WOSU prepared this form,
there were no frequency reservations for non-commercial educational television stations; there were no fees nor any concern on the part of the FCC as to which form an educational institution should use; therefore, WOSU used the commercial form.^® 109
20. Allen Myers, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 8, 19 71.
Section IV, "Statement of Program Service," contains one question which most nearly expresses the current desire for information on program purposes: "If this is an application for TELEVISION authorization, submit as
Exhibit no. 5 a narrative statement outlining program plans and policies."^
21. FCC Form 301, filed by The Ohio State University, February 18, 1953, on file at WOSU-TV.
"A General Plan for Television Programs" was pre pared as Exhibit 5.
The basic program purpose will be to extend the educational and cultural facilities and services of the University and other central Ohio agencies to a larger audience. Full control and responsi bility will rest with the University but other groups and organizations...will be invited to par ticipate. Every effort will be made to build a coordinated program of educational television in the area covered by the proposed station. ...No effort will be made to televise programs designed solely for entertainment, but educational and cultural materials will be presented in as interesting and attractive a manner as possible.... Effective use will be made of the University staff and other resources in the area to provide suitable programs on an adult level where the university is best equipped to serve. However, responsibility for providing a total program that will be useful to all classes and ages of persons is fully recognized and accepted.... The training of students and others in the 110
techniques of television broadcasting will be done to a limited extent through the use of the facilities provided and in cooperation with the appropriate departments of instruction of the University. This training program shall be of secondary importance to the providing of a program service that will truly reflect the high quality and type of service befitting the University. ^2
22. Ibid.
If The Ohio State University had filed a Form 340, which was established in the early 1940's for non-commer cial educational broadcasting, it would have had to an swer the following, more specific question:
Attach schedule of the purposes, plans and pro posed programs of the applicant showing how the station will be operated to furnish noncommercial educational broadcast service, particularly with respect to separate units in an educational system. Describe fully how the station will further and advance education, and will serve the public interest, convenience and necessity.^3
23. FCC Form 340, p. 13, as originally drafted at FCC.
In its 19 61 renewal application, WOSU-TV presented the following:
WOSU-TV recognizes its obligation to make time available on vital issues of a local, regional or national nature. When controversy arises, the station, through che OSU Forum committee, a com mittee composed of OSU professors in the depart ment of Political Science, Education, Economics, History, and Law, attempts to obtain persons Ill
well qualified to speak on the subject. Equal opportunity is given to participants to examine in depth their opposing viewpoints.^4
24. Station files of WOSU-TV.
Some general statements about the purposes of public
broadcasting have been published by the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting and accepted and distributed by WOSU-
TV, AM, and FM stations.
The stations exist to serve the interests and tastes of all the people. And it means they exist to help fill public needs and attack public problems.
Program schedules are devised to provide programs that are not generally available elsewhere— to add new richness and variety to the broadcast dial and make the viewer or listener's choice that much wider.25
25. Corporation for Public Broadcasting, "Public Broad casting. . .What Is It?"
The Central Ohio Educational Television Foundation
states, "The instructional service is designed to offer
the classroom teacher a resource not possible in any other way— to provide enrichment, inspire and motivate 26 through the use of television."
26. Central Ohio Educational Television Foundation, Inc., "ITV Schedule and Fact Sheet." 112
Ascertainment of Community Needs
The Television Manager of WOSU-TV, M. A. Durea, in
dicated that decisions about programming for community
needs, issues, and problems are based on the greater
good of the community. These decisions are made by
"well-trained, conscientious, and qualified broadcasters."
It is his presumption that broadcasters are experts at
communicating. The suggestion that black programming
should be determined entirely by the black community, for
example, is to Durea an extreme point of view. He would
approve black input but not black producing and directing.
A skillful communicator can, with advice from experts, he
argued, perform well in any subject area. Moreover,
Durea adds, "The broadcaster is the intermediator between
the expert and the viewer. His primary job is communica
tion. m27
27. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
The Television Manager has some serious doubts, furthermore, about the methods of ascertaining community needs which are currently being discussed within the industry; i.e., citizen advisory groups, consultations with community leaders, and community surveys. "Ascer tainment could be a trap," Durea asserted. He noted that 113
current evidence indicates that even after a station
attempts to ascertain its community's needs, the program
ming and viewers do not change. He further revealed that
the type of ascertainment procedures needed at WOSU does
not include action groups in the community. He presumes
that most representatives of official groups do not
really know the needs of their people. Durea suspects 2 8 that what the leaders give are only their own feelings.
28. I b i d .
Durea questions the whole concept of studying com munity needs by stating that serving the "public interest,
convenience and necessity" presupposes that the public has high moral values and is interested in his fellow man and community problems. He doubts that the community is really moral or interested in community needs. He added that what the public wants and what the public needs are not necessarily the same. Furthermore, Durea indicated that, specifically as a television audience, "The black community is no different from the white community."29
29. I b i d . -- One successful method for studying community needs 114 appears to be the establishment of a healthy interaction among a staff which has a diversity of viewpoints. Es pecially necessary and successful in the current com munity crises is having blacks on the staff to join the interaction.
30. Gregory Bowler, Private interview, Ohio State Univer sity, Columbus, Ohio, April 21, 1971.
One producer, in apparent agreement with Durea, is convinced that the personnel responsible for public af fairs programming must be given the freedom to make their own judgments of community needs.
31. Bob Spiro, Private interview, WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio, April 30, 1971.
The Director of Telecommunications has emphasized what he considers to be an important question for WOSU-
TV: who is the audience and what is your obligation to it? He acknowledged that WOSU-TV is responsible to the
University, the educational interests of the entire com munity, and the results of an appraisal of community needs and wants. Hull observed that the FCC wants stations to tap the leaders of the community, He concluded, "You use every means at your disposal to get a complete picture of the audience." 115
32. Richard B. Hull, Interview, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, January 20, 1971.
About possible legal requirements for educational stations to ascertain community needs, Durea said that he did not have "the vaguest idea" if there were any or what they might be. "I don't think the FCC thinks much about public broadcasting at all." He added, however, that the FCC is "walking delicately" in the area of programming requirements— trying to make regulations without looking like it.33
33. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
Durea*s directive to his producers, in terms of their ethical responsibilities to the community needs, is,
"Be fair— and then go back and be fair again." He further 34 asks that the producers be responsive to the public.
34. I b i d .
A producer indicated that he has no knowledge of any legal requirements, never having looked into it nor been involved in a formal way. At present, Bowler contended,
WOSU has no systematic project that involves the station 116
personnel in the ascertainment of community needs.^5
35. Bowler interview.
Another producer revealed his assumption that the
FCC expects an educational station to produce "a balance
in programming.” To Spiro that means twenty percent of
the programming ought to be for blacks and produced by 36 blacks, if twenty percent of the population is black.
36. Spiro interview.
The Production Manager said that the FCC does not
define its requirements but’he believes that, philosophi
cally, the Commission wants public stations to counter
program against the commercial stations on those points
of the Blue Book that are not being met or only weakly
met. "It therefore behooves us to know what commercial
37. Kramer has confused the Blue Book with the report of the en banc Programming Inquiry. See investigator's conclusions in final chapter.
stations are doing." Kramer pointed out that this re quires a public station to do more local programming and provide a true alternative service. He added that the FCC
is not interested in making programming decisions. He 117 quoted Henry Geller, former General Counsel for the FCC and now Special Assistant to Chairman Dean Burch, speaking at a Legal Seminar for the management of public broad casting stations, "We want to see what you can do."
Kramer interpreted this to mean that the Commission was giving educational stations the freedom to move in any of several directions in terms of alternative program- mrng. 38
38. Kramer interview.
Formal Procedures
As indicated above by one producer, there are no systematic procedures involving station personnel in the ascertainment process. Bowler said there have been periodic attempts to deal with the problem out of a frustration of not knowing the community needs, but nothing formal and on-going has been devised.^®
39. Bowler interview.
Two procedures were proposed but never succeeded in getting the final stamp of approval. Some members of the staff wanted a Community Advisory Group, with represen tatives from community organizations, to provide regular 118
input about the concerns of their organizations and con
stituencies. That project "never got off the ground.
It got lost in the echelon. There never was a strong
interest in doing that kind of thing at WOSU." Staff contact with community leaders was likewise proposed as potential input. That was not activated either because it would take extra time to organize and coordinate.40
40. I b i d .
WOSU—TV plans to move to its facilities in the new center in August# 1971. During that time, the station will not originate any local programming. While the program and production crews are free, Hull anticipates the launching of "some sort of ascertainment procedure."
He plans to use the crews to conduct a community survey.
The details of such a survey had not been delineated as of July 9.41
41. Hull interview, July 9, 1971.
As at WVIZ and WETA, the formal procedures for ascertaining needs are most often employed by the public schools.- The Central Ohio Educational Television Founda tion (referred to as COETV) has a Programming Council 119
which meets twice a year. The Council consists of one
representative from each of the eighteen school systems.
The superintendent of each system appoints his repre
sentative and the total Council has teachers, administra
tors, curriculum supervisors, and audio-visual supervisors
42. Metzger interview.
COETV conducts a survey each spring in which questionnaires are sent to a balanced sample of the member schools. The questionnaires are sent to the building principals for distribution to the teachers.
Following an analysis of the returned questionnaires, interviews are set up with 750 to 1000 teachers. All the teachers in each selected building are interviewed, regardless of their use of televised instruction. The schools are selected to fit the following pattern: twelve Columbus public schools, five Catholic schools, and five suburban schools. For the COETV interviews, the Columbus public school system is divided into four regions, each having one inner city school, one suburban school, and one "other1* school. It is assumed that this provides a cross section of teachers, students, and situations for the interviews. COETV uses graduate and 120
undergraduate students at Ohio State University to con
duct the interviews.^
43. Ibid.
Informal Acquisition of Information
Current ascertainment procedure
The many activities cited as providing information about community needs can be placed into one of three general categories. These are: intuitive decisions based on personal and professional experience, expertise, and judgments; direct contact from outside organizations; and station functions.
Intuition seems to make the biggest contribution to programming decisions. The Television Manager relies heavily on his program intuition to determine the "local gutsy issues" that should be discussed over Channel 34.*^
44. Durea interview, January 20, 19 71.
Durea further trusts in being aware of what people are reading. Through that he "can tell what that amor phous group called a television audience is interested in."
He studies popular reading material, the local newspapers. 121
A C and such periodicals as Variety and Broadcasting.
45. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
A producer revealed that, like Durea, his major
resource for studying community needs is his intuition.
He called it "a function of assimilation, based on sub
jective pragmatism." He develops impressions of problems—
the difficulties facing people— and then attempts to
develop specific concepts out of his own experience. He
asks himself, "What's frustrating to me, to my friends?"
Decisions are "rooted in a conscious effort to understand
what's happening and give others a better understanding."^^
46. Bowler interview.
Another producer selects programs based on his
judgment of what people will respond to. This decision
is often the result of his searching for information he
does not already have and determining that if be did not 47 know, "there must be lots of people who didn't know."
47. Spiro interview.
An important aspect of intuitive decisions seems to be one's own involvement with the community. For example. 122
Durea related, "The best producer-director from New York
City won't be a damned bit of good for six months because
he doesn't know Columbus."^®
48. Durea interview, January 27, 1971.
Durea added that his program decisions are based on his cumulative experience in the market. To Durea,- knowing
the community requires being especially aware of the 49 changing community living patterns.
49. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
The Production Manager, of WOSU-TV emphasized that the producers are the primary contact with the community.
They make their contacts and develop ideas and then submit 50 proposals for station action.
50. Kramer interview.
One of the producers corroborated Kramer's assess ment of community involvement. Bowler trusts the use fulness of community contacts, on a one-to-one basis, and constant exposure to "different notions." He em phasized' that a station must be staffed with people who are involved in the community— from a social perspective. 123
not public relations. People with many different in
terests who are active, involved, and in touch with the
community are essential to a station’s knowing about
community needs, issues, and problems.51
51. Bowler interview.
Being in touch with the community further requires
informal contact with community leaders, noted the Direc
tor of Telecommunications. Hull indicated that on any
given day, he talks to many leaders and people in touch
with the issues. He avoids consulting the same opinion
leaders time after time, however, because he senses the 52 leaders may not really know the issues.
52. Hull interview, January 20, 1971.
Durea has said that he "gets told” what the public wants whenever he goes out into the public. When asked,
"What are the program wants and needs (e.g., inner-city)?”
Durea responded, "We are trying to find out.” He is more
inclined to listen to members of Kiwanis or the Parent-
Teacher Association than to the President of Ohio State
University. 124
53. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
Association with citizens extends beyond specific leaders to professional contacts developed for journalis tic purposes. For Bowler, people who know about particu lar issues can provide important input.54
54. Bowler interview.
An awareness of other news media in the community gives additional information on the needs of the community.
Spiro reads the local newspapers and watches the local newscasts and has concluded that, on several subjects, the media have been talking around the issues and WOSU-TV can, therefore, do something that contributes to the well-being of the community.®®
55. Spiro interview.
Durea also looks at what is being done and said on the local commercial television stations. Some of his programming is scheduled "because no one else is doing it. Ascertainment involves finding out what other sta tions are doing.
56. Durea interview, March 25, 1971. 125
A second informal source of information on community
needs is direct communication with individuals and out
side organizations. Acknowledged Durea, "We respond to
expressed needs." One major source of these expressions
is letters, which are,Durea has said on several occasions,
99:1 favorable of WOSU-TV programming.^
57. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
The Assistant Program Manager handles the viewer cor respondence, amounting to forty to fifty letters per month. He is responsible for following up on the comments, especially those dealing with minority interests, and more especially with black concerns. The contacts with the writers and those who initiate telephone calls to the station can precipitate station action on particular
CO expressed needs.
58. Brown interview.
Personal correspondence from viewers may be the area to which WOSU-TV is most responsive. Letters from
University personnel and the community have prompted changes and additions to WOSU-TV programming. For example, a letter from a representative of the Department of Miriority Affairs initiated black programming for 126
WOSU-TV. "Let's Talk About It From a Black Perspective"
was moderated and produced by a black from the University.
Another letter contained a program proposal from a beauty
salon operator who wanted to contribute his time and ex
pertise to a community need which he had ascertained—
women's home hair care. This has led to the development 59 of instructional programs for specific community needs.
59. Kramer interview.
The use of information gathered from telephone calls
to the station was mentioned by several of the WOSU-TV
staff. Durea indicated that there is little documenta
tion of the phone calls. He finds the phone calls least helpful in ascertaining community needs. Calls from
viewers are too spontaneous and easy to make, it is
Durea's opinion, and are, therefore, less thought out and
constructive.
60. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
One producer considers the phone-in responses to his programs as very important to his decisions as to what needs to be talked about. A program on abortion law
reform in Ohio, for example, prompted 125 calls in the 127 first fifty-two minutes of the program. The second show of the series prompted an additional seventy calls.
61. Spiro interview.
Kramer characterized the telephone response to call- in shows as giving the station a feel for what the letter- writing part of the community wants. He argued that those people who become activated by televised discussions are the same ones who involve themselves in letter-writing campaigns to the various news media, their Congressmen, 6 2 and similar community representatives.
62. Kramer interview.
Other ideas have been generated from contacts with people seeking public service announcements. "The public knows that an educational television station does that sort of thing." In addition, thirty to forty news re leases a day come in to the station and provide program- . , 63 ming ideas.
63 . Ibid.
Two organized groups representing the interests and needs .of Columbus's black population, and especially the 128
inner-city blacks, are the Columbus Broadcast Coalition
and the Black Solidarity Coalition. The Broadcast Coali
tion did not challenge the license renewal of WOSU-TV in
19 70, although it did challenge those of the commercial
stations in Columbus. The Coalition, however, has been
giving informal input to WOSU-TV on minority program- 64 ming.
64. I b i d .
Representatives from the Black Solidarity Coalition
of Ohio State University preview black programs with the
Assistant Program Manager of WOSU-TV. The organization
has attempted to let the inner-city citizens know about
the black programs currently broadcast by Channel 34.
For example, they wanted video tapes of black network
programs to take to the inner-city to show and let the
people know what is on their UHF channel. The Coalition
has reportedly told WOSU-TV that many inner-city resi
dents do not know Channel 34 exists or they have no
converters nor even any television. The Black Solidarity
Coalition has informally provided WOSU-TV with information
about the needs of the black students on campus and the black residents of the c o u n t y . 129
65. Brown interview.
Various station functions have provided the staff
with additional information about community needs. One
of these seems to be the cooperative effort of the staff
members. For Gregg Bowler, the informal contributions
of the staff are important. The various producers add
their own expertise and input to the topics discussed fi 6 informally at the station. Spiro finds it useful for
66. Bowler interview.
gathering information on community issues to have lists
of program ideas circulated to other producers and the 6 7 film crew for reactions.
67. Spiro interview.
The format and content of programs themselves can serve to encourage the viewers to provide information about their needs. Kramer maintained that an important resource for a station is putting together a series that allows for individual community member response. Two of these at WOSU-TV are "Let's Talk About It" and "This Hour
This Week."68 130
68. Kramer and Spiro interviews.
The value of any procedure for assessing community
needs depends upon the quality of the decision-makers.
Bowler warned that insensitive or biased people will not
see even the most obvious needs and issues plaguing a community. That is why he emphasized the need for staff members with a wide range of experiences and viewpoints to 69 be continuously interacting.
69. Bowler interview.
John Metzger, Executive Secretary of COETV, is in volved in several activities which aid him in under standing the needs in the classrooms of central Ohio. He visits the member schools two times a year and meets monthly with the State Instructional Television Committee.
This group of seven foundations previews programs and shares ideas. COETV sends a newsletter periodically to each building in the member school systems, which could serve to solicit information from the classroom teachers.7®
70. Metzger interview. 131
Current needs and issues in the comiimnity
While discussing the needs of the residents of
Columbus, Kramer made the following observation: "If someone said, ’What does your community need?' I'd go out of my mind." He indicated that he sees Columbus as
"lots of communities, lots of people and potential in puts." From this he concluded that WOSU-TV "can't pos- 71 sibly serve all the needs."
71. Kramer interview.
Kramer did cite, however, one particular need in
Columbus— additional black programming. He presumes that
WOSU-TV can be particularly effective in this area because the commercial stations, he is convinced, have not been so responsive. 72
72. I b i d .
Bowler maintained that there was no local black programming on the commercial television stations two years ago. WOSU-TV tried to initiate some programs for the black community "with hot and cold success." An example of an unsuccessful attempt was WOSU's investiga tion of the black problems in the Columbus city schools. 132
Superintendent Harold Eibling told the producer that he did not want WOSU to "stir things up,” that the commercial stations had agreed to avoid the subject, and that he, the Superintendent of Schools, would report WOSU-TV to the Board of Trustees of Ohio State University if it pursued the subject. WOSU-TV dropped the controversy nearly two years prior to the serious disruptions in the
Columbus city schools in the spring of 19 71 when some members of the black community forcefully brought the 73 issues before the entire community.
73. Bowler interview.
Durea seemed -to be quite skeptical of the phrase
"relevant black programming." A study done for WOSU-TV attempted to ask leaders of black organizations what they considered to be relevant. The report indicated that the majority of the black organizations would not talk with the student. Durea's conclusion was: The black community does not really know what relevant black programming is. He said, "They know what they 74 don* t like, not what they want.”
74. Durea interview, March 25, 1971. 133
Some of the concerns of the black community for pro
gramming may be those expressed in the following letter
written to Our Choking Times, a black student newspaper at
Ohio State University.
When WOSU T.V. asks for viewer response to Black programs like SOUL and BLACK JOURNAL, brothers and sisters, you'd better start responding immediately, even if it's just a postcard. Because the program director of WOSU T.V. is a blatant racist, who has been recently quoted as saying that he doesn't really care if Black programs are aired or not, and the only way to KEEP our programs on the air is through oublic pressure— from the Black public of course.
75. A Concerned Sister of OSU, "Save Black Programs," Our Choking Times, April 21, 1971, pp. 5-6.
The Assistant Program Manager considers a top
priority need in Columbus is getting "Sesame Street" to
the children who need it. Cursory national studies have
indicated that there may be very little viewing of "Sesame
Street" by the inner-city children, the ones to whom the 76 program is directed.
76. Brown interview.
Spiro characterizes the inability of many inner-city residents to view any UHF programs as an urgent problem in 134
Columbus today.^
77. Spiro interview.
American Research Bureau figures indicate that in
Columbus, as in San Diego, 8 5% of the television households
are UHF-equipped.7®
78. "Where the UHF-Equipped Homes Are," Broadcasting, July 5, 1971, p. 32.
Another need especially felt in the black community
is minority employment. The broadcasting industry has been
especially criticized for not responding adequately to this
concern. The Assistant Program Manager suggested that
WOSU-TV has been very negligent and "we've gotten away
with being a white organization." He argued, however, that
proposals and talk do not work. "We need action now. We
need black people here, not just to meet a requirement, 79 but to serve the community."
79. Brown interview.
Spiro urged, "More blacks must be employed in the media." He said that WOSU-TV has only one black employee
"and that's wrong." Minority employment is a definite 135 need in the community.®®
80. Spiro interview.
Another area of concern to two producers at WOSU-TV is the need for the discussion of issues not being presented completely in other media. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, Spiro asserted that when he is aware of issues to which the commercial media are giving only cursory attention, then, the community needs a more com plete investigation and documentation. He believes that anything that is open to question (e.g., something said by the mayor or done by City Council) is a community 81 issue and should be debated.
81. I bid .
Bowler also emphasized the need to discuss issues that are not being dealt with in other media in the community. Often, it is.Bowler's opinion, the issues are handled inadequately or are diverted by the media's own sphere of influence. It appears to Bowler, for example, that the family ownership of three Columbus broadcasting stations, a newspaper, and other businesses is often a detriment to objective investigative reporting. There is 136
a need in Columbus which WOSU-TV could fulfill, for pul
ling the issues and all viewpoints together rather than
allowing the "piece-meal handling" that appears to happen 82 in initial exposure to the community.
82. Bowler interview.
Another aspect of this need to bring issues to' the
foreground is, described Spiro, the lack of editotaliza
tion on the part of commercial media in Columbus. He
noted that the community definitely needs thought- and
action-provoking statements from the media. He pointed
out that non-commercial educational stations are cur
rently prohibited from editorializing and he believes
"we are doing a disservice to the community by not
editorializing."88
83. Spiro interview.
A specific problem in Columbus is the use and abuse of drugs. Both Durea and Spiro indicated that there has been an urgent need for drug information in the community,
a need which many television stations are attempting to 84 fulfill. 137
84. Durea interview, March 25, 19 71, and Spiro inter view.
The question of individual rights has appeared in the community in several different forms in recent months; e.g., the rights of students to attend class versus the rights of students to protest and communicate their grievances; the rights of adults to purchase any type of reading material versus the rights of minors to be protec ted from pornographic material. Durea discussed the need for leading the community in assigning priorities and developing attitudes and values conducive to individual respect. He asserted that some members of the public have lost respect for individuals by asserting their own 85 rights as individuals.
85. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
One program segment on this subject asked the ques tion, "Can or should we legislate morals?" Spiro related that that program prompted over one hundred telephone calls from viewers.®6
86. Spiro interview.
The problems of education are likewise current in 138
Columbus. Two specific aspects are the needs of the black
Q -T community and the Catholic school dilemma.
87. Bowler and Spiro interviews.
Other needs or issues mentioned by the WOSU staff in
clude: health and welfare, water fluoridation, transporta- go tion, inter-municipality cooperation, and good drama.00
88. Ibid.
Current programming especially devoted to community needs
The latest renewal of its license was granted to The
Ohio State University September 30, 1970 In response to
the requirement for filing program data, WOSU-TV indicated
to the Federal Communications Commission the following
amount of time (in a full week) devoted to the various
types of programs. TABLE 1 WOSU-TV— TYPICAL WEEK, 19 70*
Type of Program Hours Percent Instructional 26.0 30 General educational 32.0 37 Performing arts 7.0 8 Public affairs 9.5 11 Light entertainment 4.0 5 Other 8.0 9 TOTAL 86.5 100
♦Station files of WOSU-TV. 139
The public affairs programming at WOSU-TV iis res ponsive to the community needs, insisted several of the
staff. Durea indicated that until 196 8 there were no public affairs programs on WOSU that dealt with community
issues, but now there are.®® WOSU has had a public affairs
89. Gregg Bowler told the investigator he produced a series in 1965 on the contemporary racial situation en titled "The Negro in Columbus."
90 program for three years and plans to develop more.
90. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
The schedule analysis prepared by Don Brown,
Assistant Program Manager, reveals that WOSU scheduled seventeen hours of public affairs programming for one week in the fall of 1970. This represents nearly twenty percent of the total number of hours broadcast. None of those public affairs hours was considered by Brown to be minority programming. However, 1-1/2 hours were devoted to local issues and six hours to national issues. "Black
Journal" was not listed in the schedule; the three black productions were "Black History," "On Being Black" and
"Soul!" Those three were categorized by Brown as formal instruction, cultural affairs— drama, and cultural affairs— Q1 general performing arts, respectively. * 140
91. Donald W. Brown, "WOSU-TV Schedule Analysis, Average Week, Autumn, 19 70,” pp. 7-13.
The needs of the community to be informed on national issues are being met, said Durea, through the 92 network programs of the Public Broadcasting Service.
92. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
Strictly local productions at WOSU-TV comprise 5-1/2
Q O hours of the weekly schedule. Two of the local programs
93. Brown, Schedule Analysis, p. 6. devoted to public affairs have been "The City-Makers," an urban affairs series developed with the cooperation and partial funding of the Chamber of Commerce, and
"Urban Beat,” which discussed open housing, employment, police-community relations, and other issues in the com munity.
94. Bowler interview.
Two additional series considered by the staff to be successful and responsive to issues in the community are 141
"Let's Talk About It" and "This Hour...This Week." These seem to generate extensive responses from the viewers.
"Let's Talk About It" has a call-in format and deals with contemporary issues and controversy.
95. Kramer and Bowler interviews.
The first issue of the WOSU-TV and Radio Program
Bulletin gave the following description of "This Hour...
This Week," a sixty-minute weekly magazine of features.
The program is hosted by Bob Spiro and produced by Gregg Bowler. It consists of six to eight segments from entertainment to previews of upcoming shows on WOSU-TV. One essential ingredient is "Two-Cents Worth." This is a special weekly segment made up of comments and opinions by people around Columbus on particular topics. A kind of electronic soap box for those who wish to get their feelings out, the segment will also invite comment from viewers about the programs, about the subject matter we treat and their own ideas about what should have been done. Another segment "Inquiry" will continue the fine reporting of contemporary issues begun last season when it was a separate program on education. "Etc." is a kind of grab bag of special features from the exploration of a man’s art to the exploration of cancer research at Ohio State.... "Let the Buyer Beware" will examine con sumer questions with the intention of keep ing the citizens of Central Ohio informed on the positive and negative aspect of our con sumer economy.... 142
On occasion the program might be devoted to a single significant subject or to only one or two features.96
96. "WOSU-TV & Radio Program Bulletin, "Vol. 1, Jan uary, 19 71, p. 3.
The development of "Let's Talk About It From a
Black Perspective" is presented earlier in this chapter.
The program was broadcast once a month during the 19 71-
1972 schedule.. The 1971-1972 program schedule will contain a weekly "From a Black Perspective" done in cooperation with the Department of Minority Affairs at the Univer sity.97
97. Kramer interview.
Black public affairs programming at WOSU-TV has been aided by the cooperation of certain black news makers in the community. For example, one black spokes man, Nomo X, refused to appear on the air for commercial stations but was willing to go on Channel 34. It is
Kramer's conviction that educational television stations can give minority people more latitude than commercial stations can give and turn them loose in public affairs programming because commercial stations must be concerned about their sponsors and the Fairness Doctrine. 143
Although educational stations are likewise required to
adhere to the Fairness Doctrine, Kramer maintained that
educational stations are more willing to face those
requirements. During the broadcast on which Nomo X
appeared, for example, he made accusations against various city officials and educational leaders. WOSU-TV
sent letters, as the Fairness Doctrine requires, notifying all of them of the accusations and inviting them to re spond. None did, but WOSU-TV felt that their obligation to notify the people was worth being able to present a black spokesman to the community during a particularly volatile period in Columbus education.®®
98. Ibid.
One of the black network programs seen on WOSU-TV has been "Black Journal." The Corporation for Public
Broadcasting has stated that it is "the only national TV 99 program for and by the black community."
99. Corporation for Public Broadcasting. "Public Broad casting. ..What Is It?"
The investigator asked Spiro, who is listed by the
Columbus Broadcast Coalition as a member, why the license 144 of WOSU-TV was not challenged along with the commercial licenses in Columbus. He responded that it would be more difficult to challenge WOSU on its not meeting community needs because WOSU does schedule black programming reg ularly four hours per week.^°
100. Spiro interview.
An area of need to which WOSU is responding, to some degree, is minority training. The effort is being made through participation in the project of the Westinghouse
Skills Bank. A black television personality at a local commercial station is responsible for recruiting members of minorities interested in the broadcasting industry.
A University Telecommunications Committee does the screen ing and interviewing of applicants. WOSU-TV is respon sible for doing the training. Then, if WOSU cannot absorb each trainee into the organization, the commercial stations are committed to finding a position for the individual. The first trainee began his work at WOSU-
TV in April, 1971.101
101. Brown interview. 145
A series on drug abuse was developed as a result of
the broadcasters' seeing the need. Durea related that
the public had not requested the drug information but the need was felt nonetheless. Another series of programs has been devoted to what Durea calls "a definitive look at 10 9 what's going on on campus."
102. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
When the investigator asked the Television Manager what parts of the community he felt WOSU-TV is serving, he replied that he could say "schools." He remarked, however, that instructional television suffers from a lack of creativity. "ETV should never be run by educators," he added. He did indicate that he thought the needs of the pre-school and early school child are being met by
WOSU-TV. The scheduling of "Sesame Street" and "Mister- rogers' Neighborhood" is meeting the need for children's programming in the late afternoon. Those programs seem to provide a viable alternative to the commercial of fering.103
103. Durea interviews, January 20 and March 25, 1971. 146
The Executive Secretary of COETV stated that the
instructional programming "gets better every year" be
cause it reflects what the teachers want. "We have
directly reflected teachers* requests in our scheduling."
The Columbus Public Schools did not have resource teachers
in art, physical education, or science so the Foundation
was organized to provide instruction for the children
and assistance to the classroom teachers in those subjects.
COETV must program a minimum of twenty-five hours a week
in instruction to qualify for state funds.104 The schedule
104. Metzger interview.
for autumn 1970 indicated nearly fifty hours of both
formal and informal instructional television.10^
105. Brown, "WOSU-TV Schedule Analysis," p. 10.
Desired Procedures, Information, Programs
Throughout the twelve interviews conducted with WOSU-
TV personnel, the most frequent references to desired procedures was for some type of research. They expressed a need for systematic research106 and research depth. 147
106. Hull, January 20, 1971, and Bowler interviews.
Brown suggested that WOSU needs professionals who are
trained in survey work and media experts to establish 107 relations with other media m the community.
107. Brown interview.
Kramer called for independent research not done by
broadcasters and not especially oriented to or organized
by broadcasters. He would not like to see organized
research from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,
the National Association of educational Broadcasters, r>r 108 the Federal Communications Commission, uo Bowler, however,
108. Kramer Interview. urged that one of those organizations themselves survey the communities, with competent controls, and supply the
information to the stations. That; he surmises, will take out the local bias.10^
109. Bowler interview.
In terms of specific survey techniques, both Durea 148
and Spiro want a door-to-door canvas of all people.
110. Durea, March 25, 1971, and Spiro interviews.
While Durea suggested that all stations in the community
pool their efforts in ascertaining the community's needs,
111. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
Bowler questioned the value of the whole process. He
posed the following questions: Commercial stations pay
to have someone do a community survey, but whatever hap
pens? Do they do anything? Bowler argued that the community never sees the survey results reflected in pro gramming .
112. Bowler interview.
Bowler is more inclined to having the station support the efforts of sensitive staff members. He insisted that
WOSU-TV needs to make a greater effort to become aware of and meet the needs of the community. He said the producer may be aware of the needs but he must discover the levels of awareness in the community on particular issues. This requires correspondents who are in touch with parents. 149
blacks, and the police, for example, to establish basic
communication. Then the station can promote discussion
of mutual issues. Bowler indicated that it would help if producers talked with the beat reporters for the local newspapers, using their contacts, observations, and ex pertise. 113
113. Ibid.
Bowler and Spiro both suggested the use of public forum television. Bowler would take the responses to such programs from the audience and use them as input to de termine the needs and further programming. He thinks coordinated input is needed "as long as it's truly re presentative."*^
U 4 . Ibid.
Spiro expanded the concept and discussed the need for a complete and accurate survey of the black community.
He senses that the black man is a member of one of the least known communities in Columbus. He would ask how they feel, what they think, what they want, what they are looking for, and what they want in life. Spiro would 150
then do four or five programs giving the results of the
survey. The next step is crucial to the success of the
total concept. Spiro argued that every radio and tele
vision station in the area should air the program. He
would require that the FCC demand this participation of
all stations, "and then sit back and wait for the white
community to respond." The next part of Spiro's plan is
to have the interviewers go into the white community and
ask the same questions. In addition, they would be asked
questions based on the results of the first survey; e.g.,
"John, a black, wants to complete his education and thinks
you ought to pay part. What do you think?" This type
of survey must be done in Columbus, "where you only hear
from the blacks when they're worked up and where the whites
do all the cdmplaining." With this type of survey, Spiro
is convinced that WOSU-TV could better determine the needs
of the community.
115. Spiro interview.
Another procedure for assessing community needs that
is wanted at WOSU is the implementation of a large Com munity Affairs Department with a Utilization Director. 151
Brown wants a person in that position to be in the inner- city and to work with the people, developing a personalized relationship between the station and the community.
116. Brown interview.
Kramer agreed that there is a need to put people into the community and keep them there to generate ideas and programs. Kramer wants WOSU to expand its staff to include a Development Office which would deal with local institutions and eleemosynary groups to get funds to perpetuate the system that works in the community. The development person would be a liaison to act as a buffer between the demands of the funding organizations and the decisions of the programming personnel. Kramer would then put two staff members into the inner-city to spend the first three months just talking to people and then later 117 develop ideas and programs.
117. Kramer interview.
Bower suggested that the station needs a "constant, semi-establishmentarian, formalized channel of feed-in— maybe full-time probers of the community. "H ® 152
118. Bowler interview.
Both Kramer and Bowler emphasized the value of on-
location community programming to aid the station in un derstanding and responding to community needs. Kramer would
invest in film stock to bring the city to the air, the 119 most effective presentation being from the environment.
119. Kramer interview.
Bowler concurs. He contended that the stations which program from the community all the time are the most re sponsive. stations that reach out, Bowler insisted, do 120 the best job in assessing and meeting community needs.
12 0. Bowler interview.
Contrasting community stations such as WVIZ and WETA with university stations like WOSU, Brown stated that community stations are inherently involved in the com munity. It is too easy for university stations, however, to be unaware and uninvolved. With a self-supporting
Development-Utilization Office and a Promotion Department under that office, "then we'll be more responsive to the community. As a university station we're too ingrown. 153
The public thinks we just serve the campus, "l2^-
121. Brown interview.
Another activity that is seen by Brown as being es
sential to a station's assessment of community needs is
a "UHF Awareness Campaign." He said, "We have to let
them know we're here. That's the biggest problem here now." He noted that it does no good to offer training,
skills, "Sesame Street," and the Children's Television
Workshop Reading Program if the intended audiences do not 122 know about Channel 34.
122. Ibid.
The problem of funding is monumental to those inter viewed. Brown said that WOSU-TV needs funding from the outside. He is convinced, however, that the key to a utilization effort is involving the community and then the money will come.123
123. Ibid.
Auctions to bring the business community and the consumer together were suggested. They represent the 154
one chance for a university-owned station to get in the
forefront of the economic community. Kramer indicated
that there was a possibility that Channel 34 would pursue
this particular method of fund-raising.*-24
124. Kramer interview.
The Director of Telecommunications hopes to have in
1971-1972 a fund-raising organization to gather community
support. This would be an advisory committee to raise
funds. They must have influence to get the money and would then serve as programming advisors. They would be
a Board of Directors in terms of input. Hull indicated
he was hopeful that, the Board "will be an influence on programming." He believes the members of such a com mittee should not get into operations but be involved
in programming policies.
125. Hull interview, February 10, 1971.
Brown wants a Utilization Office actively engaged in forming a Community Advisory Council. This group would provide feedback on the schedule and content, new ideas for local programming, an assessment of how to develop utilization in the community, and an over-all 155
"thrust for action."126
126. Brown interview.
Kramer assumes that an Advisory Board is inherent to
the structure of a community station. Even though Channel
34 is university-funded, he asserted that a Community
Advisory Board must be assembled. The station staff
apparently agrees on the need but no one agrees on who
should be on the boards. Kramer noted that among the
leaders and spokesmen there should also be "non-spokesmen
from areas that need to be explored." Kramer said they
should be advisors on programming, but, based on the license requirements, they cannot make the decisions. He warned, however, "Don't bring them together unless you plan to take their advice."127
127. Kramer interview.
Several of the station staff contended that employing members of minority groups would further help in assessing community needs. The Television Manager indicated that he would like to have a black producer.^"2® Bowler noted that
128. Durea interview, January 27, 1971. 156
the interaction at the station suffers when there is no
one on the staff to promote the awareness of black issues.
He has observed at WOSU a lack of money and strong com mitment by many individuals to carry on since the "resident
black" left the station.12^ Brown told the investigator
12 9. Bowler interview. that WOSU-TV must hire people to reflect the minority view points, including hippies, students, and blacks.^2®
130. Brown interview.
There are several procedures Metzger wants instituted which would help him assess the needs in the classrooms.
One is a previewing set-up for teachers. Another is breaking the Programming Council into committees of special areas to deal with specific problems in each area. His goal is to have an Instructional Television Director in every building. This would be especially helpful in 131 promoting an on-going relationship with the schools.
131. Metzger interview.
The investigator asked each of the people interviewed 157
what they would like to know about the community WOSU is
licensed to serve. In nearly every case the WOSU personnel
responded with the questions they would ask if they could
develop the research instrument. The following questions
were posed: Why do they not watch? Why do they watch
what they watch? What do those who want more than en
tertainment from television really want from television?
What are their motives for watching? Why is a particular
program wanted or needed? Why do they feel they want or
need that program?^-^
132. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
How do blacks feel and think about certain subjects? 113 What do they want in life? What are they looking for?
133. Spiro interview.
What is relevant black programming?^^
134. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
Additional questions were: Is public affairs program ming relevant? Does it offer concrete solutions? Does it present a plan of action for the individuals themselves. 158 on their levels, for their problems? How accurate is phone and mail response? When should we schedule black affairs and black culture for the black audience? When can we find the black audience for "Black Journal"? Are repeated broadcasts valuable? What time of day? How can we reach the inner-city children and parents with 135 "Sesame Street"? What magazines do they subscribe to?
135. Brown interview.
What are the differences between the visible supporters of art and culture, the invisible supporters, the par ticipants, and those who would watch it on educational television?136
136. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
Both Durea and Hull mentioned a need for a complete 137 demographic breakdown on the entire community.
137. Durea interview, March 25, 1971, and Hull interview, February 10, 1971.
The station staff provided a varied list of types of programs they feel are needed at WOSU-TV in order to serve more fully the needs of the community. The program types 159
included those done by, for, and about the minority groups
themselves. Spiro insisted that time proportionate to the
ratio of population should be turned over to the black
community and they should be allowed to do what they want
with the air time.188
138. Spiro interview.
Public forum television and those formats that seem
to inherently provoke viewer response are likewise desir- 139 able. The weekly schedule should include, Brown
139. Bowler and Kramer interviews. argued, twenty-five to thirty per cent local productions.1*8
140. Brown interview.
Development of the ombudsman concept is, in Bowler's opinion, a "good way to get at what's bugging the coin- 141 munity." It is very direct.
141. Bowler interview.
Spiro contended that public television should be allowed to editorialize. He wants the FCC to require educational stations to editorialize as part of their 160
license.14^ He thinks WOSU-TV should have an editorial
142. See investigator's comments on this subject in final chapter.
143 board, with a competent writer and a competent reader.
143. Spiro interview. •
Durea is skeptical of some of the local programming
that is recommended for the community service. He re
marked that suggestions are continually sent from the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, or the Public Broad
casting system, or NAEB, such as televising city council
meetings. He questions the value of such programs be
cause "television doesn't always get to the core of things,"
indicating that merely televising an event is not always 144 the most meaningful activity.
144. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
Programs which are desired by WOSU personnel include those for the lower economic class and the non-readers
145. Brown interview. 161
as well as for college students and teenagers. 14® Ser-
146. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
vice to the secondary schools is a major concern to
COETV.147 Durea indicated that the biggest complaint
147. Metzger interview.
received at WOSU-TV is the lack of good children's
programming on Saturday mornings.14® As a consequence.
14 8. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
beginning Saturday broadcasts has assumed a top priority 149 for the statxon funds.
149. Hull interview, January 20, 1971.
A special plea to the Federal Communications Com
mission was made by the Assistant Program Manager. He
conceded that accountability has been very lax. The FCC
should require full disclosure, which would include a
description of the local public affairs programming, the
public reaction, and what concrete solutions it posed or problems it solved. "The concept that ETV automatically 162
serves the public is a fallacy." Brown hopes the FCC
will become more stringent on accountability. "Inspire
us. Force us to pour our money into local public affairs. 150 We haven't really ascertained and met the needs."
150. Brown interview.
Barriers to Ascertainment
„In assessing all the comments made during the inter
views of WOSU-TV personnel, the investigator concludes
that the greatest hindrance to ascertaining community
needs seems to be station and university politics. The
possible conflicts with universities as licensees are
discussed earlier in this chapter. Brown stated that the
station has a "sticky problem" when local politicians,
state legislators, or the University try to intervene in
the decision-making process.
151. Ibid.
Bowler insisted that the lack of policy keeps the
station from adequately assessing needs. When issues
arise which relate to the organization that is also the station licensee, those who work for the station apparently 163 let the situation temper their decisions unduly.
152. Bowler interview.
Spiro indicated that a major problem is how the station can keep its credibility if it is nothing but the voice of the University administration. A partial solution, he said, is to get others to speak for the point of view that opposes the University. If he has another individual say something which he believes needs to be said but might be looked upon by the administration with disfavor, 1 S3 he has protected his position at the station.
153. Spiro interview.
Durea admitted that they cannot be boat-rockers at the station because that requires money and a we11-qualified 154 staff. The limited staff and restricted hours of op-
154. Durea interview, March 25, 1971. eration likewise hinder full service to the community, 155 Hull asserted.
155. Hull interview, January 20, 1971. 164
Metzger is especially prevented from developing on
going relationships with the schools because of his lack
of personnel. The entire COETV system is operated by
Metzger and an assistant.
156. Metzger interview.
Brown emphasized that there are too few local pro 157 ductions on the schedule. Durea indicated that the
157. Brown interview. limiting factor is time. There are just too many areas and needs to be covered for any one station to serve 158 adequately the community needs.
158. Durea interview, March 25, 1971.
Although Hull would like to have a systematic means of ascertaining community needs, he said they just have 159 no funds for such a project.
159. Hull interview, January 20, 1971.
Brown insisted, however, that the money is available 165 but it has been diverted into other channels. He suggested that there is too much emphasis, budget-wise, on hardware.
Also, much of the money for staff time and hardware is drained by the campus closed circuit system. The money that should be used for a Department of Community Affairs and for ascertainment procedures is being used by the
University for non-broadcast purposes.^60
160. Brown interview.
Durea pointed out that the community needs are con stantly changing and are, therefore, more difficult to assess.
161. Durea interview, January 20, 1971.
Kramer related that another task difficult to complete is seeking organized opposition to certain com munity issues. Although an issue may be many-faceted, finding spokesmen for the various sides is a problem for the station.^-®2 Some issues and problems cannot be
162. Kramer interview. dealt with, because the station has no entrle to the proper 166
16 3 groups and their representatives.
163. Bowler interview.
This is often the result, contended Bowler and Spiro,
of the lack of balance of viewpoints on the staff. If
there is no balance of people, Bowler fears there may
be whole areas the station does not even have questions
for. He questioned what might happen to the programming
if a staff were comprised of "all middle-class whites
who came on the same boat."16^
164. I b i d .
Spiro is convinced of the need for minority view points on the station staff. He argued that the problem with broadcasters today is that they are not black and have
not lived black problems day in and out.^6^
165. Spiro interview.
Lack of commitment to the concept to serving the community is a further barrier to the ascertainment of community needs. Bowler argued that there must be a com mitment on the part of the station personnel involved 167
in public affairs. He suggested that it would be ex
tremely valuable if the FCC did the assessing of com
munity needs, but instead, a commercial station surveys
the community from its own ' 'as and the programs reflect 166 that bras.
166. Bowler interview.
Kramer noted that public affairs is logically tied
to news. Since WOSU-TV has no on-going news service, the public affairs efforts suffer.
167. Kramer interview.
The UHF handicap. Brown submitted, is perhaps more than just lack of promotion. He indicated that even those
UHF stations with a lot of promotion are still not pene- 168 trating the inner-city and other poverty-pockets.
168. Brown interview.
Although neither a comprehensive community survey nor the creation of a community advisory group has been completed, the rhetoric supporting such activities has 168 been heard. Perhaps, like KPBS, now that attention has been focused on the ascertainment of community needs, WOSU will soon take the necessary steps in that direction. CHAPTER V
WVIZ-TV— CLEVELAND, OHIO
The Station License
The Educational Television Association of Metro
politan Cleveland (ETAMC) applied for a construction permit on April 7, 1964. The Federal Communications
Commission granted the application for the Association
to operate channel 25, WVIZ-TV, with certain engineering conditions attached because of technical problems. On
November 4, 1964, Miss Betty Cope, as Executive Sec retary of ETAMC and Station Manager of WVIZ-TV, filed a request for Special Temporary Authority for operation on an interim basis. That authority was granted the following month. For the next six years WVIZ operated on this authority but had to file requests for exten sions of the STA (Special Temporary Authority) every sixty days to six months.^
1. Educational Television Association of Metropolitan Cleveland, Station file of WVIZ-TV, Federal Communica tions Commission, as of May 26, 1971.
In its original request for an STA in November of
169 170
1964, WVIZ made the following explanation:
The purpose of the request for Special Authority was to facilitate the immediate introduction of educational television programming on Channel 25 at Cleveland, and also to keep open the pos sibility that at the conclusion of two comparative hearings now being held before the commission concerning the assignments of Channels 19 and 65 at Cleveland, the Association might enter into an agreement with the victorious applicants look ing toward the mounting of all three UHF stations transmitting apparatus on a single tower.
2. Ibid.
WVIZ has been broadcasting for six years although its final station license has not yet been granted.
Because of the hearings on the assignments of channels
19 and 65, noted above, WVIZ has been allowed to continue operating on the STA so as to avoid unnecessary and repetitive filing of engineering data. WVIZ's studios
3. Allen Myers, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., June 25, 1971. are housed in a spacious facility, formerly an Allis-
Chalmers office and heavy equipment showroom. The an tenna is presently located in North Royalton, at one thousand feet above average terrain. The transmitter is 171 authorized to operate at a maximum of five hundred kilo watts effective radiated power.^
4. Station files of WVIZ-TV.
WVIZ's coverage area includes the large northeastern
Ohio sector called Greater Cleveland plus the metro politan areas of Painesville, Akron, Canton, Ashland, and Sandusky.5
5. WVIZ-TV Auction '71. (promotional brochure)
' ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ' ' — ■ — ■ ■ |« In its promotional literature WVIZ calls itself
"big ten" television. "Among the nation's 200 educational stations, Channel 25 is ranked in the top ten in terms of facility, staff, classroom usage, series distribution, broadcast hours, audience and annual budget.”**
6. I b i d .
The size of WVIZ’s viewership is cited exclusively in terms of its classroom audience. When WVIZ began its
School Service in February, 1965, eighteen school dis tricts participated, providing programs for an estimated fifty thousand children. The total program viewership 172 for 1969-1970 was nearly 590,000, with forty-seven area school systems participating in the planning, production, 7 and utilization of the televised instruction. The ac-
7. WVIZ Viewsletter, Vol. 5, No. 1, Fall, 1970. tual number of individual children watching was approx imately 450,000 with 17,000 teachers utilizing the in-
Q structional programs.
8. Alan Stephenson, Interview, WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio, February 3, 1971.
Q "Cleveland is nothing but a city of ethnic ghettos."^
9. Annetta Jefferson, Private interview, WVIZ-TV Cleve land, Ohio, March 15, 1971.
That analysis by a black female writer-producer at WVIZ points up an important aspect of WVIZ's community of service. How the station reaches those ghettos is, of course, a critical part of this study. Mrs. Annetta
Jefferson observed that black people automatically turned off educational television until just recently.
Although she cited no supporting data, she believes that members of the black community are now watching 173
WVIZ in ever-increasing numbers and it is Mrs. Jeffer
son's intent to serve the black community even more
via educational television.*0
10. Ibid.
Another sector of WVIZ's community includes business
and industry. "More than five thousand employees of business and industry have received industrial training via Channel 25, with participating companies underwriting the costs."**
11. "Happy Birthday, WVIZ," The Plain Dealer, February 6, 1971, p. 10A.
Those diverse audiences could not be served without a staff and budget prepared for the challenges.
The Station Manager of WVIZ, Miss Betty Cope, was the first woman station manager in the Cleveland Area.
The assistant manager, Dr. Alan Stephenson, is also the
Director of Educational Services. Both have been on the staff of WVIZ since it began broadcasting.*2
12. WVIZ Viewsletter, Fall, 1970, p. 1.
Stephenson is personally involved in all decisions 174
that concern the school and adult training programs. The
station organization allows the producer-directors to
contribute to both instructional and evening programs.
The producer-director of each series has the total re
sponsibility for the programs and produces only one pro
gram per week.1-*
13. Stephenson interview.
The Curriculum Council of the Schools Department and
WVIZ's administrators jointly select the television
teachers. Those teachers are brought exclusively from the membership systems. Since the teacher is released from his particular district, the school system's ad ministration is also directly involved in the process of nominating teachers for WVIZ's school programs. WVIZ considers television teaching a full time activity and requires that the membership district release the teacher from all responsibilities to the system for a full calendar year.1^
14. Ibid.
WVI? refers to itself as "people television" and 175
asks, therefore, for "people support." Members of the
community "...are asked to subscribe as they would to a
newspaper, concert or lecture series. Membership fee is
$15 and to date there are 5,000 full-fledged subscrib
ers."15
15. "Happy Birthday, WVIZ," The Plain Dealer, February 6, 1971, p. 10A. "
In addition to the subscriptions "people support"
comes via the televised auction. A phenomenon of edu
cational television, the televised auction in Cleveland drew an audience of nearly 850,000 in 1970 and $105,640
for the budget.*®
16. WVIZ Auction *71.
A second source of funds is the public school assess ment of the school districts that participate in WVIZ’s classroom instruction. The assessment is $1.00 per child per fiscal year,'for the total student enrollment in each school system.17
17. Stephenson interview. 176
Additional funds for the exclusive use of the instruc
tional programming are not part of the budget but have provided 5-10% of the instructional capital. One of these sources was a grant from the Martha Holden Jennings
Foundation which enabled WVIZ to undertake a new series 18 in the literature of Black Americans.
18. WVIZ Viewsletter, Fall, 1970, p. 2.
WVIZ has acknowledged that "...foundations, businesses and individuals contributed nearly $2 million to build and equip the station. Operation and programming sustain and expand according to special grants# viewer support and 1 9 revenue from the Annual Auction.
19. WVIZ, Auction '71.
Statements of Purpose
When filing an application for authority to construct a non-commercial educational television station (FCC
Form 340), a Statement of Program Service is required.
The first exhibit of such a statement requires that the applicant submit his "...purpose and objective in es- 20 tablishing the proposed station..." 177
20. FCC Form 340, Section IV, Page 1, paragraph 1.
The Educational Television Association of Metropoli tan Cleveland (ETAMC) stated in its application that—
...its essential function would be that of a central services corporation, a facility for the production and distribution of educational and instructional television programs in the Greater Cleveland community in response to the demonstrated needs of the educational organiza tions located therein, and its own evaluation of other broad educational requirements.
The fundamental purpose of ETAMC is to contin ually assess the complex of business, civic, cultural, economic, governmental, spiritual and social needs in the Cleveland community, and to utilize educational television as a major instru ment in the search for their solution. More specifically, the several functions which would be performed by ETAMC as the licensee of the proposed station, would include: 1. It would become the central coordinating and liaison agency for ETV in dealing with educational agencies, civic and cultural groups, health and welfare agencies and units of city and county government. 2. It will become an 'educational materials and personnel resource center’ which will bring together in one place a pool of skilled and creative television teachers, writers and pro ducers . 3. It would be 'traffic manager.' Obviously, the general and instructional program policy commit tees would guide the ETAMC administration in making basic allotments of time, and the day-by-day traf fic decisions would rest with ETAMC management as would such decisions in any other enterprise. 4. It would be a contract producer for instruc tional programming and special public services programming. Conceivably, various educational agencies would have different educational objectives and differing methods whereby they hope to 178
accomplish their respective purposes. Therefore, any given agency contracting for a program or pro gram series would write the specifications for the program which ETAMC personnel would produce. The same conditions would prevail if ETAMC should undertake custom production work for the proposed Ohio and NET ETV networks. 5. Finally, it would be a creative programming agency in its own right apart from its role as a producer and distributor of instructional materials. During the late afternoon and evening hours and on Saturdays and Sundays (when full-scale operation is achieved), ETAMC would have a primary responsi bility to the community at large to provide it with news and news commentary on local, state, national and international levels; discussions of public affairs as well as specialized services for minority groups and "shut-ins." Here the ETAMC should seek to develop a distinctive charac ter comparable to that which a great national publication or a university sometimes achieves.
21. Station file of WVIZ-TV.
Some of the station’s informal statements of purpose emphasize its public service. As non-commercial tele vision, WVIZ's programs are "...devoted to specialized tastes and quality programming." As community television, the station is proud of its weekly coverage of City
Council meetings, high school sports, community hearings and meetings, as well as serving as a platform for the 22 city’s teenagers.
22. WVIZ Auction '71.
Its purpose in instruction is to relate to 179
curriculum but concentrate on doing what is not being 2 3 done in the classroom. "One thing that hasn't changed
[since its 1964 beginning] is our basic philosophy of
23. Stephenson interview. providing educational experiences not readily available in the classroom."2^
24. Stephenson, WVIZ Viewsletter, Fall, 1970.
Ascertainment of Community Needs
An education practicum conducted January through
March, 1971, at Ohio State University provided pre internships for graduate students to study and evaluate various aspects of two educational television stations.
WVIZ was one of those stations. One of the assignments was to scrutinize the philosophy of the station's opera tion. The observations and evaluation made by John M.
Wood provide some additional insight for this study.
Portions of Wood's report are quoted below.
WVIZ has a vigorous leadership which is deter mined to serve both the schools and the community- at-large. The school programming is based upon conscious attempts to contact the schools, urge school participation, and have the schools par ticipate in selecting or rejecting particular 180
programs or program ideas. To the best of its ability, WVIZ has sought to democratize, as much as possible, the decision-making process in school programming and certainly this is the best philosophical frame for the community television station to function within. Its 'community' programming is designed to serve the varied cultural and educational needs of the greater Cleveland area. Program offerings are indeed varied to suit different tastes. The station through its public affairs programs such as the broadcast of the city council meetings provides a valuable public service. The range of programs produced and aired and the attitudes voiced by the management and production staff in dicate a generally liberal attitude in terms of topics presented and the manner in which they are presented.
The emphasis at WVIZ is upon total service. Since it must depend upon the community for sup port, it must attempt to serve the various needs, of the community. Hence, we see high school wrestling matches as well as the Cleveland Sym phony. Black programming is an important part of WVIZ's total design as well it must be in troubled Cleveland. WVIZ might well be viewed as a 'responsive' station run by a well-intended 'liberalocracy.' As has been said a great deal of creative freedom is allowed as well as the airing of diverse points of view. Special interest programs provide a use ful service to the community as well as maintain support for the station itself. This duality of function, intended or not, seems to have worked successfully.
There seems to be at WVIZ no one particular guiding philosophy or scheme for how the station is to relate to and interact with the community. In deed, if the station acts from any design or frame, it would seem to be from a constantly evolving set of action principles emanating in an ad hoc sort of way from the operation itself. Demands and challenges are received; they are met in the most efficacious way possible; and a point of refer ence for further action is established. In a real sense, the station's total design seems based on this evolving set of heuristics. However, it 181
is a heuristic approach which 'flies by the seat of its pants.' That is, it is present but seems to have its base in no set operational design or philosophical frame. Certainly, this approach seems to have been, at the very best, moderately successful and justifiably pragmatic in light of the station's dual responsibility to, and depen dency upon, community and schools. The prime drawback of this quasi-heuristic approach seems to be that it is only as effective as the people who develop it. For example, if the leadership of the station changes, if the board of trustees considers its carte blanche to all points of view in the community has ended, then what is the station left with? The community and its needs have not disappeared and the schools will still exist.2 5
25. John M. Wood, "WVIZ: An Evolving Philosophy" (un-. published report, Ohio State University, 1971), pp. 1-3.
The analysis made by Wood of the station's philosophy
of operation in general coincides with the investigator's
analysis of the station's philosophy of ascertainment,
specifically. While the Schools Department has set up
some specific mechanisms of assessing the classroom needs,
the other programming reflects the intentions of the production personnel. The writers and producers are given "free reign" conceptually, creatively, and through out the mounting of the program. If the writer-producer is concerned about community needs, he is free to insti tute his own methods for dealing with them. However, there appears to be no basic frame of reference for 182 insuring the station's overall responsiveness in its specific programs to needs expressed or developing throughout the community.
From the interviews with staff members on various levels, it appears that the WVIZ administration has formulated no concept of its responsibilities to ascertain community needs. The personnel were asked what they thought was expected of them legally and ethically, in terms of assessing community needs. In summary, they indicated that they were not aware of any legal require ments. In terms of evening programming, there is a def- inate felt responsibility to be responsive to the many and various needs of the community. The responsibility to ascertain those* needs, however, does not appear to have been conceptualized. The Schools Department, on the other hand, is quite involved in meeting its responsi bility to assess the needs in the classrooms throughout the greater Cleveland Area.
Formal Procedures
The only procedure for determining community needs cited by one administrator at WVIZ was a telephone survey.
Approximately three thousand telephone calls were placed to Cleveland area residents. The three critical questions 183
were: Do you have a UHF receiver? What do you watch
and what have you watched? What would you like to see?
Sharon Moodie considers this an adequate and even admirable
means of assessing community n e e d s . ^6
26. Sharon Moodie, Private interview, WVIZ-TV, Cleve land, Ohio, March 15, 1971.
A more responsive procedure instituted by an individual writer-producer is the use of a Consultants Committee.
Jefferson formed this group of twelve black persons from various organizations representing various economic levels
in the community. This committee determined what was needed by the black citizens and then, in consultation with Jefferson, developed programs that were responsive to those needs. Jefferson used this committee through out the development and production of two different series. She apparently had no opposition from the station management in instituting this activity. The Consultants
Committee was "a marvelously functioning group." There 27 was very little absenteeism for the monthly meetings.
27. Annetta L. Jefferson, Private interview, WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio, March 15, 1971. 184
The Schools Department of WVIZ has established five formal channels of communication with the member school systems for obtaining information about program utilization.
A major survey is conducted at the end of each school year. Programming Evaluation Forms are distributed to each representative to the Curriculum Council. (These represent atives are appointed by the school superintendent and are usually media or audio-visual coordinators, librarians, or an assistant superintendent.) The representative then distributes, in an unstructured manner, the questionnaires to the teachers in each building. A computer program has 2 8 been written to analyze statistically the results. This
28. Carole Latanick, Private interview, WVIZ-TV, Cleve land, Ohio, March 15, 1971. survey asks for evaluative data on the instructional pro gramming and demographic data on the participating teacher and students. On a scale of one to five, low to high, the teachers are asked to evaluate each series viewed along eight criteria: quality of content, pacing of lesson, appropriateness of vocabulary, quality of visuals, overall rating of teacher, usefulness to instruction, pupils inter- 29 est level, and knowledge gained from programs. 185
29. WVIZ-TV School Programming Evaluation Form.
Another survey is utilized to evaluate new local pro grams eight to ten weeks into the production schedule.
Forms are sent to the coordinators (Curriculum Council representatives) who distribute them to the building principals, who then distribute them to the teachers.
These forms go only to teachers who have viewed at least one program in the series and can evaluate its usefulness in their classes.^0
30. Latanick interview.
A third type of form is printed in each lesson guide, half-way through the series, which asks the teacher for further evaluative data. One of the field coordinators observed that the response to these forms has been very limited. Another procedure, which is utilized with limited advantage, is the occasional direct mailing of postcards to selected buildings. These are used to
1 1 gather responses on specific programs.
31. Ibid. 186
A survey of teachers in December of each year
specifically aids in gathering new program ideas based
on the needs in individual classrooms. These ideas are
formulated into specific program suggestions for the
Curriculum Council's Committee, which develops production
plans. These are then submitted to the Council for voting
and assigning of priorities.^2
32. Ibid.
The December survey is publicized in advance in the
fall issue of the Viewsletter. The following paragraph
to teachers is an example:
We want to hear from youl Survey forms for new programming ideas will be distributed to each building. Brainstorm— let us know through your coordinator what type of new programming would best suit your classroom n e e d s . 3 3
33. WVIZ Viewsletter, Fall, 1970, p. 4.
After gathering the information from the December
survey, the Curriculum Council decides in March which
programs will continue, which will be discontinued, and what new programs will be created. According to the
Director of Educational Services, the Council is, in
effect, the Program Manager for daytime television at 187
34 Channel 25, Cleveland.
34. Stephenson interview.
Informal Acquisition of Information
Current ascertainment procedures
Gathering information about the needs of ethnic groups in the audience of WVIZ receives perhaps the most informal attention of all groups. As pointed out earlier in this report, there is a discrepancy between the admin istration's voiced concerns and those of the individual' writer-producers. The Director of Promotion would not allow the investigator to speak with the Station Manager and insisted on being the spokeswoman for the station administration. She was asked to discuss the specific minority needs in Cleveland and what programs WVIZ has devoted to those needs. Her response gave examples of youth-oriented programs, City Council meetings, and drug action programs. When asked further about ethnic min orities, she indicated that she did not know about their needs. "If they want a program, they can ask." But, 35 they must have the money to support the production. ^
35. Moodie interview. 188
Jefferson maintains several informal activities,
in addition to her formal ascertainment procedures, for
discerning the needs of the community. She emphasized
that becoming involved in community activities and tap ping their resources is important. In addition she is concerned with other people who are very community oriented. For her "Literature of Black Americans" series she consults informally with two white teachers, two black teachers, and a black poet. Although it appears that Jefferson is diligent in her efforts to assess the needs of Cleveland residents, she apparently knows about her viewing audiences only through letters and telephone calls. Those are, however, two additional sources of information.
36. Jefferson interview.
Another producer-director indicated that he is not involved in assessing community needs. That assessment comes from the community or the station management, al though he may make suggestions. Confirming the position expressed by Moodie, Randy Martin revealed that organiza tions representing minority interests usually underwrite their own productions.*^ 189
37. Randy Martin, Private interview, WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio, March 15, 1971.
Another contributing factor to understanding a community’s needs is one's being part of the community himself. Martin assumes that prevailing attitudes, which are so crucial to community issues and problems, are.
"things you know only by living here." It is his under standing that most of the WVIZ personnel are not from the
Cleveland area and, therefore, are not really able to understand the community needs. He relies on the judge ment of the Board of Trustees, therefore, since they live in Cleveland. The Board represents the only direct community contact. The members suggest what to do or not to do, but, Martin noted, they do not make the final determinations. They do hold a potentially powerful position, nonetheless. For example, Martin indicated that if something potentially controversial comes over the network, the members of the Board are polled for their opinions as to whether they would want the show in their h o m e s .
38. Ibid. As the director for some of the black programming,
Martin gives his personal opinions on the interest potential of a program and the validity of the topic.
As a white person he reacts to the content with Jeffer-
39* Ibid-
In terms of the need to ascertain specifically the community issues and problems, it seems that the community itself has always come to the station with suggestions,
"so we've never had the need to go out to ask them. They know better what they want and have always told us."^0
40. I b i d .
The producer-directors are informally involved in the instructional television surveys of the classroom teachers. The results of those surveys are given to the appropriate producer- director and television teacher.
After they have discussed the implications of the results for their own program responsibilities they meet with
Stephenson, the Director of Educational Services. Together the staff attempts to translate the needs of the teachers 41 into creative and effective televised instruction. 191
41. Ibid.
In addition to the five formal ascertainment pro
cedures, the Schools Department pursues three informal
means of contact with the teachers, A telephone survey
of approximately twenty teachers twice a month gives further
feedback on the programming. The teachers call the field
coprdinators at rue station. The survey originated with
calls from all forty-seven districts but teacher involve
ment has decreased the calls to twenty. No specific
questions are asked nor any particular data sought but
the teachers' comments are recorded for use in overall
evaluations and recommendations on programs, formats,
television techniques, and teaching styles.^
42. Latanick interview.
The two field coordinators visit each school system every two years. In that very limited contact., however, their visits with the teachers involve more promoting and explaining than gathering information on classroom needs or even direct feedback on the series.*^
43. Ibid. 192
Another informal activity which exposes the station to classroom needs is the visits by the television teachers.
They spend time in the classrooms with the students as they 44 watch the programs.
44. Stephenson interview.
Just as special interest groups in the community contact WVIZ with program proposals for general educational and cultural productions, so too do groups with special in structional needs. For example, the Ohio State Department of Education recently began requiring that para-profes- sionals receive in-service training. A representative from one of the Cleveland area schools suggested that WVIZ produce a telecourse for the member school systems to help them meet the state requirement. Once the Curriculum
Council approved the idea, volunteers from the member schools spent two months planning the topics which were then submitted to the State Department for approval.
During the next four months the series was written and the filming completed for fall broadcasts.^5
45. WVIZ Viewsletter, Fall, 1970, p. 2. 193
Through the Viewsletter teachers are informed about
the Curriculum Council and their ideas are solicited. In
the Fall, 1970, issue, for example, the following was
printed under the headline, "Your Voice at WVIZ":
Every member school system has one or more representatives appointed by the superintendent to represent you on the WVIZ Curriculum Council and to coordinate the flow of information and materials related to television. If you need a guide, have a problem or better yet— a great idea, contact him. Please check the list of coordinators below if you don't know who your representative is. You'll find him anxious to hear from you.46
46. Ibid., p. 4.
Current needs and issues in the community
Although many problems and issues in a community are obvious and often explosive, Stephenson pointed out that a responsive broadcaster must be tuned to subtle approaches.
For example, "Sometimes you've got a need you don't know about until you see a series and then say, 'Hey, we could use this. We need i t . '"47
47. Stephenson interview. 194
Many of the needs of the black community are dis
cernible, however, especially to an aware, concerned
individual. Jefferson perceives a real need in Cleveland,
for example, for an opportunity for young talent to gain
exposure. There is likewise a necessity for the mass
dissemination of information about coming events in the
black community. Another essential item is the showing
of the many sides of black talent— classical as well as
jazz, for example. Jefferson argued for concentrating on
that part of the community that has been neglected. She
indicated that the middle-class black man can be seen on
television anytime. She, therefore, gives exposure to the others .
48. Jefferson interview.
Martin asserted that the problems in Cleveland center on jobs, skills upgrading, and industry and management training. Like Jefferson, he perceives a need to expose the talents of the many ethnic groups in northeastern 49 Ohio.
49. Martin interview. 195
Current programming especially devoted to community needs
Since 196 8 WVIZ has broadcast five local series
directed specifically to the black community. All five
have been written or produced by Mrs. Annetta Jefferson.
They are: "Black Peoplehood," "Brotherman"— a series
highlighting developments in the black community, "History
of Black Americans," "Black Journal— Cleveland Response,"
and "Literature of Black Americans."^®
50. WVIZ Viewsletter, p. 2.
Jefferson has presented Black Nationalists, Black
Panthers, and other types of activists and philosophies.
There have been a wide variety of representatives from many organizations to explain their cases and their problems.
All of this is in keeping with her conclusion that she should concentrate on that part of the community which has been neglected. She pointed out, furthermore, that there is not one "leader" who speaks for the entire com munity— black, white, or otherwise.^
51. Jefferson interview.
Two series which Martin thinks have been particularly responsive to the needs in Cleveland are the language 196
lessons of Hebrew for the Jewish community and "Brother-
man." He emphasized that "Brotherman" is a totally black
series--produced by the black community, for blacks,
about blacks. The black producer meets with black consul
tants once a month. As a white director, Martin seemed
especially proud that WVIZ had established itself in at
least this one series as being responsive to the needs of 52 the black citizens of the metropolitan Cleveland area.
52. Martin interview.
Other programs that are devoted to particular
community needs include the school activities which stress
"involvement for kids" and which help support operating
levies, City Council meetings, teen programs that do not
try to hit the mass audience but rather saturate the in
tended audience, and the drug action programs. Basketball in Cleveland serves especially the black audience and
"Sesame Street" is watched in inner-city viewing centers.
Moodie considers it significant that the black newspapers in Cleveland cover the black programming on WVIZ and that 53 one-fifth of all programming is local.
53. Moodie interview.
Stephenson has remarked, "We make a real effort to 197
meet the people. Not everyone likes Stravinsky. We give
them programs they want." Thus, Friday night high school 54 sports is an important part of WVIZ's schedule.
54. Stephenson interview.
WVIZ has a division for business and industrial
programming. Television Training Institute produces
multi-media courses for managers, supervisors, and staff
personnel in business offices, industrial plants, govern
ment agencies, educational institutions, retail stores,
and hospitals. The three locally produced series are:
"Put It in Writing," "Supervision of the Disadvantaged,"
and "Performance Reviews That Build Commitment," the lat
ter likewise being used at WETA. All three series are
available in all formats for purchase or short term lease by companies who wish the added convenience of in-house
use. Other educational television stations may also rent 55 the courses for telecast to companies in their area.
55. TTI Training Programs (promotional flyer).
The Ohio State University study of WVIZ indicated this observation:
Since this is a community-oriented and -funded station and the bread and butter is derived from 198
its success, we feel that this station must continue to maintain its contact and awarenesses of the local community needs. The high degree of community aware ness that the station exhibits is evident in the broad spectrum of broadcast activities that are provided. These activities are planned and designed toward the interests and needs of a variety of social, ethnic, and cultural groups. To provide a little something for all can be a difficult endea vor but we wish to encourage WVIZ to continue in this direction.56
56. Howard G. Ball, "WVIZ: Personnel" (unpublished re port, Ohio State University, 1971), p. 4.
Desired Procedures, Information, Programs
The station staff did not express any desire for ad ditional ascertainment procedures or information about the needs of the community. They did, however, express unani mous interest in certain program ideas. Three groups would have programs devoted specifically to their needs if Jefferson, Martin, and Moodie were able to control the funding. These are artists, youth, and ethnic minorities.
Jefferson placed emphasis on the arts and especially black creative talent. She argued that there are too many talk shows. "They run the mouth but don*t do anything."
The artistic shows she has done seem to have elicited 57 the best response.
57. Jefferson interview. 199
Martin likewise wants to see more ethnic minority
programming— from blacks, Puerto Ricans, and the Slavic
communities. "Anyone who has a legitimate physical
grouping and therefore exists as a community" should have programs. Martin would continue the high school sports,
telecast the local plays by high school students, and develop "a decent youth show that's not restricted to one
format."58
58. Martin interview.
The need for more youth programming was echoed by
Moodie who said the teens should be given free reign to bring in people to question on the air. She concluded that there was a need for "more ethnic things" and for giving exposure to the many and diversely talented artists in
Cleveland.
59. Moodie interview.
The single greatest program need in instructional television, according to the WVIZ schools staff, is to find ways of reaching and helping the junior and senior high school students and teachers. WVIZ has developed Project
Assist, a video retrieval system that provides new flexi bility -for the station and the schools. The teachers 200
request specific programs to be broadcast in the early
morning hours after the station completes its regular
schedule. The programs are video-taped off the air at
the requesting school and then the following day the
teacher is free to fit that lesson into his own schedule
of classes. As Project Assist grows and develops, more
programs devoted to the particular needs of this new
audience will have to be developed as well.60
60. Latanick and Stephenson interviews.
Barriers to Ascertainment
The filtering of information and the distribution of
surveys through school principals can very seriously
hamper an attempt to ascertain classroom needs. The suc
cess of the several procedures instituted by WVIZ*s
Schools Department varies from building to building. In
some schools every teacher has a telelesson guide. In
other schools they have nothing. This is greatly depen
dent upon the enthusiasm of the principal. Obviously if
he keeps all of the WVIZ material and literature in his
storage area, the teachers and the students may never benefit from WVIZ's productions, and, more critical to
this investigation, WVIZ may never learn about the par
ticular needs and problems in that building. 201
61. Latanick interview.
Another barrier is the doubt, as expressed by Martin, that surveys can adequately reveal the prevailing atti tudes of a community. He assumes that only if one lives in a community for a long period of time, can he under- 6 2 stand the issues.
62. Martin interview.
This position seems to support the need for on-going dialogue with community leaders and other residents within signal range of the station. CHAPTER VI
WETA-TV— WASHINGTON, D.C.
The Station License
On October 5, 1962, a license was granted to the
Greater Washington Educational Television Association, Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as GWETA) to operate channel 26
in Washington D.C., WETA-TV.
The Board of Trustees of GWETA are representatives of
cultural institutions, the universities, the elementary
and secondary schools of Washington Metropolitan area, and
additional elected Public Trustees.* According to the
1. The Greater Washington Educational Telecommunications Association, Inc., Station file of WETA-TV, Federal Com munications Commission, as of May 26, 1971.
March 1, 1971, WETA Program Listings, there are nine officers, twenty-three public trustees, and thirty-one
institutional trustees.
The second vice-president of the Association serves as chairman of the Program Committee.
The Program Committee of GWETA, composed of educa tional, cultural, and civic organizations of the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area, is dedicated
202 203
to serving the community by providing the finest educational television programs, and ultimately sharing these programs with the nation and with other countries of the world.
The Program Committee of GWETA is composed of: (1) One representative of each institutional member organization of GWETA; (2) One represen tative of each national educational organization concerned with television, as selected by the chairman of the committee.
The purposes of the Program Committee are: (1) To recommend program policy and general program plans to the Executive Committee of GWETA; (2) To deter mine specific program plans as requested; (3) To provide a central planning group whereby member institutions of GWETA can enrich each other's educational and cultural objectives.2
2. Ibid.
WETA-TV is currently authorized to transmit with 794
kilowatts of effective radiated power. Its antenna is
770 feet above average terrain. The studios currently oc- 3 cupy a converted gymnasium at 2600 Fourth Street, N.W.
3. Ibid.
WETA-TV serves the highly populated Washington, D.C.,
metropolitan area. The latest Census Bureau report in
dicated that Washington has a 71.1 percent black popula
tion. That 537,712 of the 756,510 residents is the
largest number of Negroes among the sixteen U.S. cities 4 with a black majority. According to a recent survey 204
4. ”16 U.S. Cities Now Predominantly Black,” Citizen- Journal, July 6, 1971, p. 8.
conducted by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,
fifty-five percent of the total television households in
Washington, D.C., are viewers of WETA-TV. The station1s subscription membership of $15 has netted 22,000 members, the fourth largest membership for educational television.5
5. Michael Hardgrove, Private interview, WETA-TV, Washington, D.C., March 23, 19 71.
The school service is intended to meet the needs of higher education, continuing education, private home, business, and industry, as well as the in-class instruc tional needs of the elementary and secondary schools.
Eighteen suburban school systems, public and parochial, provide WETA-TV with its largest continuing contract.®
6. Richard T. Pioli, Private interview, WETA-TV, Washing ton, D.C., March 23, 1971.
There are 135 persons on the staff of WETA-TV and 7 the total budget is approximately three million dollars.
7. Hardgrove, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 9, 19 71. 205
The station receives its funds from the public school
districts, grants, public subscription, and operations
contracts. The schools provide $1.00 for each child en
rolled in kindergarten through sixth grade and 25C for
each secondary student. The highest subscription paid by p any system has been $34,000.
8. Pioli interview.
Statements of Purpose
In its original application for a construction per mit, filed on May 8, 1961, GWETA stated as its purpose--
"to furnish a non-profit and non-commercial educational television service to the Greater Washington Area, and to make available to the educational and cultural institu tions and organizations willing to provide suitable tele vision programs the necessary physical facilities and operational staff." Specifically, WETA-TV plans its programs for in-school viewing and "...for the education of the residents of the greater Washington area communities.
9. Station file of WETA-TV.
The station's Director of Administration and Assistant 206
Director of Programming asserted that the major role for
WETA-TV is that of local service. The station wants to
remain independent, as a local entity without control
from the FCC, the NAEB, or the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting. Yet, in direct conflict with this expressed
attitude is the fact that CBS has designated WETA-TV
as one of the seven national production centers. Con
ceded John Rahmann, other educational stations look to
WETA for national programming.*0 In fact, a portion of
10. John Rahmann and Michael Hardgrove, Private interview, WETA-TV, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1971.
the recent $500,000 CPB grant to WETA is to be used to help develop a new national production center focusing on news and public affairs coverage.1*
11. NAEB Newsletter, June 19, 19 71, p. 7.
The Director of the Educational Services Division,
Richard T. Pioli, considers the purpose of the programming
from his division to be that of filling educational needs of the entire community. The difficulty for the division to overcome is the lack of participation by the D.C. city
schools. The school system has insisted in the past that 12 WETA's instructional programs do not meet its needs. 207
12. Pioli interview.
Ascertainment of Community Meeds
Robert Frye, producer of "Newsroom," maintained that
in order to ascertain the community's needs, the station must have the community involved on the air. The ascer
tainment should not be based solely on professional
judgments.*"^
13. Robert E. Frye, Private interview, WETA-TV, Washing ton, D.C., March 23, 1971.
The responsibility of ascertainment is limited by a station's individuality, insisted WETA's Assistant Director of Programming, Michael Hardgrove. No one station can satisfy all of the community needs. Even if a station * knew weekly.what the community needs were, that station could not begin to cover them all. Hardgrove emphasized that the needs of a community fluctuate from week to w e e k .^
14. Hardgrove interview.
Hardgrove assumes that the requirements to ascertain community problems are the same as those for commercial 208
television stations, but not as highly structured. That structure is established "within the limits of financial capability." The federal agencies and national organiza tions recognize limited funds as a serious detriment for educational stations. The status of the funds in turn limits the amount of follow up that should be done at all staff levels. Within its financial capability Hardgrove suggested that a station should have its staff searching 15 and determining the areas that need further work.
15. Ibid.
However, regardless of what the regulations are or will be, Hardgrove emphasized that what a community sta tion can do is restricted by its lack of funds. He noted that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting asks that the money they give to stations be used for emphasis on local programming, for an increased role in community service, and for local community interest.
16. I b i d .
It appears then to the investigator that a pure lack of funds per se is not the restriction on ascertainment procedures but rather the priorities assigned to those f u n d s . 209
Formal Procedures
Of the several ascertainment procedures available to
a station, the one most strongly recommended by Hardgrove
was the use of black producer of minority programming.
The requirement for both the station and the producer is 17 that the producer be free to "roam about the city.”
17. I bid.
The use of an ethnic minority producer to keep in
contact with the community might satisfy the needs for
formal ascertainment procedures if that person were pre
pared to gather pertinent data from appropriate sources
on community issues, needs, and problems. It is signif
icant, nonetheless, that a station's administrator did
consider the use of a "free-to-roam" black producer as
the most fruitful procedure instituted by WETA-TV and the
one he would most highly recommend to other stations.
The Program Committee of the Board of Trustees is
seen as the most formal method of gathering public comment.
The members of that Committee meet with the Program
Manager of WETA-TV, and offer their comments and recommen dations. 210
the Program Committee, Hardgrove indicated that no specific
data are sought by or offered to the station in terms of
community needs and issues. Nor is there any formal pro
cedure for having the committee members solicit information 18 from the general public. However, since the members of
18. I b i d .
the Board of Trustees are considered by the station management to be leaders in the community, that Board and
Committee could be the vehicle for consultations with the
community leadership.
The procedures for gathering specific data on instruc
tional needs are much more formalized in the Educational
Services Division of WETA.
The superintendent of each subscribing school system appoints a representative to the Instructional Budget Com mittee. This committee is responsible for production, maintenance, and program priorities. It acts as a liaison between the station and the schools. Since forty- five percent of the program format is local production, the IBC also supplies the specialists for all levels of production. In addition to the IBC, a curriculum committee is organized for each subject area for responding to program needs. There are five to twelve people on each 211
Curriculum Committee. Those committees also help select
teachers and researchers and make other necessary arrange ments. Each series is pilot tested before it is aired.
Questionnaires are then sent to a representative sampling of the teachers, students, staff of WETA, and the Curricu lum Committee to gain additional information and evalua-
19. Pioli interview.
The formal procedures for gathering evaluative data then conclude with a survey of all teachers in the parti cipating school systems. The form asks for an evaluation 20 of the entire school broadcast schedule for the year.
20. I b i d .
Those teachers who do not use television are likewise asked to respond. In addition to evaluating the series, the teachers provide data concerning the availability of a video tape recorder for their use, the extent to which they use televised lessons, and the availability of a television set for their classroom use.^
21. WETA-TV School Television Service, Evaluation Form for Classroom Teachers. 212
The educational television programs for business and industry are developed to meet specific needs in that area.
WETA-TV organized the Business and Industrial Council, whose purpose is threefold: (!) to give WETA ideas on the needs throughout business and industry, (2) to develop proposals for programs to meet those needs, and (3) to review programs to determine if they will be useful and g o o d .^ ^
22. Margaret Yeager, Private interview, WETA-TV, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1971.
Informal Acquisition, of Information
Current ascertainment procedures
The producer of "Newsroom” emphasized the contribution of the one reporter who is in the community gathering data on the issues confronting the black person in Washington,
D.C. Frye likewise prefers the use of active citizens, actually on the air, as reactors to certain issues to be discussed. These people are not the ”man-on-the-street" but those actively involved in their community. As an example Frye cited a recent telecast of political candidates interacting with a welfare mother, a NASA employee, the Model Cities Commission Chairman, a 213
government research chemist, and a member of the League
of Women Voters. Those individuals, it was felt, repre
sented a wide range of interests and experiences and
could question the candidates in ways not possible for 2 3 the television reporter.
23. Frye interview.
Another source of information is the returns based
on the programs. According to Frye, the members of the
viewing public do tend to respond to the issues being
discussed on "Newsroom.
24. Ibid.
The Assistant Director of Programming outlined seven
informal activities for ascertaining community needs. One
is the use of the Board of Trustees. Hardgrove presumes
that the input from their groups and their expertise in community affairs gives them a priority listing in the station's ascertainment procedures. WETA-TV also solicits viewer mail through the program guide and then, on a pro gram called "Letters to WETA," the Program Manager responds to the viewers and explains the policies. WETA-TV keeps a daily phone log and notes, especially in the evening, of 25 the comments made. 214
25. Hardgrove interview.
Hardgrove indicated that informal and undocumented
telephone surveys, "using demographic sections of the phone book," are conducted periodically to see what the
inner-city residents are looking for. In past surveys, after a target geographic area of the city was selected,
ten operators made calls to the residents. The calls took place over a weekend and usually generated about five 2 a hundred responses.
26. Michael Hardgrove, personal letter to investigator, July 14, 1971.
Again, the experiences of the black producer and black reporter were cited as being useful for the station.
Hardgrove called them "another set of ears." The producer 27 spends time on the street just talking with the people.
27. Hardgrove interview.
Mail from viewers provides further suggestions of programs for WETA-TV to consider. The final source of in put discussed by Hardgrove is an attorney who was a pro ducer and is now in the administration of WETA. This 215
individual keeps in close contact with the issues in legal
aid, bail reform, and other legal concerns of the com- . . 28 m u n i t y .
28. I b i d .
Rahmann emphasized the use of the Board of Trustees,
acting in an advisory capacity, for gathering information
on community needs. Out of the Board, an advisory group 2 9 was also developed specifically for "Newsroom." One
29. Rahmann interview.
might question its use and/or effectiveness since the
producer of "Newsroom" did not mention this group at all.
Mentioning the black female reporter, Rahmann pointed
out that at commercial stations the reporters change
assignments and never get to know their "beat." They
presume at WETA, however, that their reporter knows the
inner-city because that is her single responsibility.
WETA-TV also has interns from Howard University who pro
vide local contact and are helping the station develop additional effective means of communicating with the
local community.3® Non*' of the black employees or interns,
30. Ibid. 216
however, were available to discuss their roles at WETA with
the investigator.
In March, 1971, WETA was conducting a survey to
find out how many inner-city children were watching
"Sesame Street." There was evidence that seemed to in
dicate that "Sesame Street" was not reaching its target
audiences and the station wanted to be able to confirm 31 or deny that situation in their community. Questions
31. Ibid. dealt with family utilization of WETA, children's utiliza
tion of WETA, and such specific items as whether the parents watch "Sesame Street" with their children and whether the parents do follow-up work with the children after viewing.^2
32. Hardgrove letter.
This is a major concern for WETA— the need to learn which programs are really being watched. They want to know which programs really mean something to the viewers.
WETA-TV personnel suspect that if they know this, they will then be better able to develop other programs which 33 will really be a local service. 217
33. Rahmann interview.
Hardgrove further revealed that WETA has used "...very
informal man in the street surveys in an attempt to learn
the viewing habits and areas of interest of segments of the
population."^
34. Hardgrove letter.
If a WETA production centers on a community controversy
and in itself becomes controversial, the Program Committee
of the Board is consulted for opinions or a decision if
necessary. 35
35. Rahmann interview.
Within the Educational Services Division there are
several additional informal ascertainment procedures. The
representatives to the Instructional Budget Committee con duct informal and unstructured surveys in their school systems for program needs and then meet to develop pri orities. Furthermore, the Directors of the Educational
Services Division and the School Television Service go to the schools to talk to the superintendents about program priorities.36 218
36. Pioli interview.
"In-school programs [are] planned by the school systems initiating them, either on a cooperative or an individual basis." These programs are not under the supervision of 37 the Program Committee of GWETA.
37. Station file of WETA-TV.
A prime example of WETA's responsiveness comes from the Business and Industry section. The Civil Service
Commission went to WETA-TV asking for in-service training for secretaries. With this need expressed directly to the station, a program format was developed using fourteen half-hour lessons, "From Nine to Five." In addition to the televised course, WETA makes available the rental of sixteen millimeter film and half-inch, one inch, and two inch videotapes to allow for maximum flexibility in the training programs in the various sectors of business and industry. The lessons may be rented for seven weeks up to three years.3®
38. Yeager interview.
In addition to "From Nine to Five," WETA-TV*s 1971 219 spring schedule included two other in-service training programs for business and industry— "Performance Reviews that Build Commitment" and "Efficient Reading." Margaret
Yeager reported that agencies were enrolling in these pro grams based on the original success and promotion of "Prom
Nine to Five."^
39. Ibid.
Current needs and issues in the community
One of the needs, as expressed by the producer of
"Newsroom," is for the American public to be addressed as concerned people. He senses that "middle America" is a misconception created by television. The image of the middle class family does an injustice to the needs of the
American public. Frye presumes that the majority of
Americans do not relate to most news programming because the producers have what Frye considers an ill-conceived image of the viewers. Consequently, a real need is for the viewers to be respected as intelligent, incisive citizens, 40 with programs directed to that level.
40. Frye interview.
As discussed above, the need for information on legal 220
aid, for bail reform, and other forms of legal justice is
also prevalent.^
41. Hardgrove interview.
The greatest need in terms of in-school programming
seems to be programs for the D.C. city schools. That
school system does not participate in the WETA-TV school
service because it feels that WETA's instructional programs
do not meet its needs. WETA officials have periodically
tried to work out policies and programs with the school
system, but with no success. ^
42. Pioli interview.
By mid-summer, 19 71, however, Pioli reported that
they were having substantive and positive discussions with
the D.C. schools. Their immediate plans for fall include
staff development programs for the D.C. teachers. Pioli
expressed the hope that this is the beginning for WETA and 43 the city system.
43. Richard T. Pioli, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 9, 1971. 221
Current programming especially devoted to community needs
In terms of general programming categories, it is
helpful to note the statement of program service that
WETA-TV filed in its May 1969 renewal application. For a
composite week, WETA-TV indicated the following programming
TABLE 2
WETA-TV— TYPICAL WEEK, 1969*
Type of Program______Hours______Percent
Instructional 27 31.04 General educational 38 4 3.68 Performing arts 4 4.68 * Public affairs 16 18.39 Light entertainment 0 0 Other 2______2.29
TOTAL 87 100.0
♦Station file of WETA-TV.
According to the Assistant Director of Programming, most of the local community involvement programming is centered around "Newsroom.*1 This statement was also made by several other members of the WETA staff. Hardgrove indicated that "Newsroom" has its own methods of developing community involvement. He also asserted that it is not really news but live discussion with people in the area. 222
"Newsroom" focuses attention on an issue weeks before it
becomes news, then keeps an eye on it and stays with it
to the end. This, to Hardgrove, is WETA-TV*s greatest
service to the community.44
44. Hardgrove interview.
Another program devoted to community problems was a project on drug abuse in the District of Columbia that was developed by all D.C. stations. It had a grand town meeting concept. Although this was developed to address a specific need, WETA is questioning its effectiveness.
"Are we really sure it will do any good?" Hardgrove asked.45
45. I b i d .
WETA will carry a series of lessons of English as a second language for Spanish-speaking persons in primetime after the series has finished its run on a commercial station.46
46. Rahmann interview.
The appearance of programs on the schedule can be another indication of the station's responsiveness to 223
community needs. For example, WETA-TV, as do most other
educational television stations, repeats many of its
programs throughout the day or week to make them acces-
A. ^ sible to as many of the viewers as possible. Two prime
47. Some broadcasters, however, have questioned the value of repetition and have suggested a needed study to deter mine the optimum valuable exposure of any program during a week.
examples are "Newsroom" and "Sesame Street." "Newsroom" is
telecast live each evening at six o'clock and then the
taped broadcast is at eleven o'clock. "Sesame Street" is broadcast three times a day, each lesson being shown twice one day and a third and fourth time later in the week.
Another example is a schedule change in response to viewers. "Black Journal" originally appeared at the same time as a commercial television program which also had high appeal for a black audience. In response to requests from black citizens, WETA-TV changed "Black Journal" to another time slot which would enable viewers to see both 48 programs if they wished.
48. Rahmann interview.
Rahmann reported, "Almost all local programs we do are a result of support grants or what we feel is community 224
service." He emphasized WETA's pride in "Newsroom" as
being their greatest contribution to service in the public
interest.49
49. Ibid.
Desired Procedures, Information, Programs
The realization that television can be used itself as
an instrument for ascertaining needs, gathering information, and providing public service programming all at the same time was discussed by more than one person at WETA-TV.
One example came from Frye. He would like to program a half-hour each night, taking each sector of the community and discussing its needs. As an experiment in this general format Frye suggested crossbreeding groups. For example, he would take a family from Chevy Chase, Mary land, and a family from the inner-city of the District of
Columbia and help them discuss their mutual and different problems of living in an urban environment Frye would call community meetings to learn what types of programs the individuals would like to be involved in. This ap proach is in sharp contrast to asking community members what programs they would like to see. Likewise, it is not 50 the same as asking what the needs and problems are. 225
50. Frye interview.
The town meeting concept was likewise mentioned by
Hardgrove who suggested that they be televised from the studio and that the public use coupons printed in the newspapers for balloting purposes.
51. Hardgrove interview.
The importance of getting the various factions in controversial issues on the air was emphasized by Frye.
He wants more discussion, more face-to-face debate, because he is convinced that citizens tend to be more incisive when facing adversaries, while many news repor ters tend to let a man have complete say without refuting 52 his position or case.
52. Frye interview.
As a newsman, Frye insisted that it is highly desir^le to spend more time on stories to find out "what's really going on." He asserted that a station can ascer tain community needs in a professional way by using tele vision to go to the people. He sees the role of television as that of shaking society. The primary question is, "Do 226
ycu do it in a useful way or a harmful way?" in terms of
public service, "television must act as an ombudsman."
53. Ibid.
Promotion of a station and its programs is often
seen as merely self-serving. VJETA's Director of Administra
tion observed, however, that with extensive coverage in
newspapers, the public can see how a station relates to
its community. An educational station must achieve
stature at least on a parity with commercial stations.
WETA officials concluded that they are receiving the 54 proper amount of newspaper coverage.
54. Hardgrove and Rahmann interview.
Hardgrove is convinced that WETA-TV is serving all of the community. In response to the investigator's ques
tions, "What parts of the community are you serving? or not serving?" Hardgrove replied, "You can’t break it down
into segments. There are no segments not being served."
He indicated that citizens at all levels of income and education say they watch WETA. This is in contrast to his statements earlier in the interview that he wanted to know "precisely how many take the trouble to watch 227
55 UHF. His assumption that WETA is serving all segments
55. Hardgrove interview.
of the community is in contrast, furthermore, to the fact
that the D.C. city schools do not subscribe to WETA's in
school programming because they feel those programs do not
meet their needs. It is significant to point out that when
the investigator asked the "Newsroom” producer what parts
of the community V7ETA was and was not serving, Frye re
fused to answer.5®
56. Frye interview.
The Educational Services Division wants three
utilization p.eople who could be instrumental in helping
WETA learn where it is inadequate in serving the public
schools. In addition, they could be directly involved in
surveys to determine the educational needs of all members of the community.^7
57. Pioli interview.
Another set of questions relating to ascertainment procedures prompted further diverse responses. The in vestigator asked, "If the Corporation for Public 228
Broadcasting gave you all the money you would need to con
duct a thorough survey, what would you like to know about
your community and the people you are to serve?" Although
it was emphasized that this question was asked in terms of
a survey to ascertain community needs, the answers were
almost exclusively demographically oriented. Rather than being issue and problem oriented, they continue to think about numbers. This seems an obvious carry-over from the commercial broadcasting concern for ratings. Frye wants
to know who watches WETA-TV and the composition of groups by income, race, and education. In addition he would like to know who can technically receive channel 26 in the 58 Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.
58. Frye interview.
As mentioned above, Hardgrove is interested in knowing precisely how many people watch UHF. Another concern is for knowing what programs now being telecast are truly useful and informative. He cited an example of WETA's broadcasts of city council meetings on highly controversial subjects which received very little response from the public.5®
59. Hardgrove interview. 229
Hardgrove considers another source of input for ideas
for his own community as being the exchange service of
program ideas and problems that is part of the conferences
and meetings of the National Association of Educational
Broadcasters. He further supposes that as the Corporation
for Public Broadcasting progresses, it will do more to
aid in the development of programs that are suitable for
local adaptation.. He does not, however, want any guide lines or directives on ascertainment from the PCC, the
NAEB, or CPB. He conceded that the NAEB performs well as an adviser to member stations and in keeping them informed of FCC proposals, but he does not want them to go any further.6®
60. Ibid.
Neither does Frye desire any formal directives from the national organizations or federal agencies. Position papers, however, would be welcomed by him. "All kinds of healthy input is not harmful."6*
61. Frye interview.
Pioli, as Director of the Educational Services
Division, seems very concerned about the needs of the black community. He was the only person interviewed by the 230
investigator who answered the question,"What would you like
to know about your community?" by saying, "I want to know
what the blacks need." He likewise wants to know what
kind of programming would get the inner-city involved. At
the same time he recognizes a conflict in the station's
service. "We’ve got to serve the people who support us
with money." His implication was that the financial
supporters and the members of the black community are
not necessarily the same. This again reflects the dilemma
faced by the School Television Service. They must produce
instructional programs to meet the needs of the schools who
subscribe. Since the D.C. city schools do not offer
financial support to develop programs to meet their needs,
those programs are not produced. Pioli is further in
terested in getting a count of UHF receivers in the metro politan area and an accounting of those who have receivers but are still unable to receive the signal because of 6 2 geography and architectural interference.
62. Pioli interview.
The programs that are desired by the various staff members of WETA are varied. Frye emphasized that the station has a responsibility to program for a broad spectrupi of needs and interests. This was again related 231 to his criticism that too much programming is directed to 6 3 a non-existent but stereo-typical middle America.
63. Frye interview.
A program idea that has come from the Business and
Industrial Council of WETA-TV is to teach the citizens of the District of Columbia the tools for their participa tion in government. The Council is especially interested in learning how a course in adult citizenship would effect those in the inner-city. The specific objectives and tentative programs are still to be developed but the major 64 emphasis will be on relevancy and training.
64. Yeager interview.
The other potential audiences and programs that the
Educational Services Division is striving for include: more adult basic education, high school equivalency, voca tional, continuing education, professional continuing education (especially medical), programs for disadvantaged parents to show them the community services available to them, and, of course, the D.C. public schools.
65. Pioli and Yeager interview. 232
However, the entire character and scope of WETA's school services will be changing. According to an FCC spokesman, a construction permit for WNVT, UHF channel
53, was issued in March, 1971, to Northern Virginia Edu cational Television Association. It will serve the northern Virginia schools and will cover all of Washing ton, D . C . ® 6 Also, south and northwest of D.C. the Maryland
6 6 . Allen Myers, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., June 25, 1971. state ETV system overlaps WETA-TV*s grade B service area.
As a consequence of these two developments, WETA's schools division may develop into one or more of the following: a production house which develops series for other agencies, special services for individual schools, or in- 6 7 structional service for just the D.C. city schools.
67. Pioli interview.
Barriers to Ascertainment
While this investigator was not so concerned with possible personality conflicts surrounding station opera tions, it may be illuminating to report observations made by others, vis-a-vis station ability to be responsive to 233 community issues. The investigator was told, for example, that the Program Manager of WETA-TV was considered a racist and therefore incapable of developing programming that would serve the local needs of the black community.
It seems significant that this analysis came from a profes sional colleague of the Program Manager— not a black man,
g O nor an employee, nor a person unfamiliar with the medium.
6 8 . The investigator wishes to protect the anonymity of the interviewee.
This charge of racism and irresponsibility has been lev*led against others in educational broadcasting and two of them are in this study— Raymond D. Hurlbert, General
Manager of the Alabama Educational Television Commission, and Merv A. Durea, Television Manager of WOSU-TV. Those charges are discussed later in this paper.
Upon recognizing that the station's activities in ascertaining community needs is minimal, WETA's personnel were quick to rationalize. The reasons for inadequate procedures, as seen by the staff, are many. Their state ments not only explained a lack of ascertainment procedures but revealed other circumstances which they presumed militated against their having a full understanding of their audiences' needs and producing meaningful programs 234
to serve those needs. Sometimes their reasoning seemed
circuitous. The investigator inferred from many of the
comments their feelings that since they have very little
money for local productions, they do not perceive the
need to determine local issues. Another implication ap
peared to be that because their audience is so complex,
they feel they cannot hope to meet its needs so why even
try to find out what those needs are?
Although the personnel who talked with the investi
gator saw the problems of determining needs, gaining a
full understanding of the audience, and developing respon
sive programs as all being the same, the investigator has
attempted to separate them, but at the same time show where and how they are related.
One fairly obvious reason for not instituting formal
and systematic methods for determining community needs may be the person's conviction that such methods are not neces
sary and that he already knows the problems and issues in
the community. For example, the producer of "Newsroom" does not think there is a scientific way to get input for developing public affairs programs. The scope of such programs is "only as broad as your knowledge." Frye argued that a question such as, "Who should we get for this program?" is not one that a computer can answer for 235
him. He seemed to imply that science cannot be responsive
to human questions. He said, "That bothers me," that some
one would try to use scientific methods to answer questions 6 9 which he answers from his own experience.
69. Frye interview.
Another major consideration for public broadcasting
stations is the lack of adequate funds. The Assistant
Director of Programming maintained that WETA-TV especially suffers since Washington, D.C. offers no large industrial or business base to support the funding of educational television. ^ 0 The assumption is that formal ascertainment
70. Hardgrove interview. procedures cost large amounts of money. Indeed, some of the price tags quoted to the investigator for community surveys are formidable for most educational television stations. These are discussed in the concluding chapter.
Other potential procedures are likewise affected by small budgets. The greatest inadequacy felt in the School
Television Service is the lack of utilization of personnel and field .coordinators. People in these capacities could be instrumental in gathering data on the needs and problems 236
71 m the school classrooms.
71. Pioli interview.
Another ascertainment procedure outlined in the Primer
and suggested by many leaders in education and broadcasting
is the use of citizen advisory groups. Two difficulties with that method have been noted at WETA. Hardgrove main
tained that there is no time to set up special groups to 72 advise the station on local programming. Although such
72. Hardgrove interview. groups are functioning in the Educational Services Division, a major problem is that these are committees of volunteers who have other full time jobs. Consequently, the time, energy, and creativity that can be contributed is often limited. The determination of needs is, therefore, some- 73 times restricted.
73. Pioli and Yeager interview.
Some stations rely heavily on being contacted by community organizations and then trying to respond to the expressed needs or interests. That method alone would be totally, inadequate even if the groups were sincere and 237
represented significant needs in the community. WETA-TV has
found, however, that being contacted by groups "with an ax
to grind" may not be truly representative of community issues. Hardgrove suggested that this was not an effective 74 method of determining community needs.
74. Hardgrove interview.
In general one might say that the reason the broad casters at WETA-TV do not fully understand the needs of their audiences is that their attempts to find out have been inadequate or nonexistent. That explanation, however, does not probe into the actual experiences of the staff of
WETA.
For example, Frye, the news journalist with commercial network experience, articulated a strong case for allowing journalists to make decisions based on their own knowledge and wide range of experiences and contacts. However, his initial statement to this investigator about the problem of ascertaining community needs, was, "Reporters are not representative of the community." He is convinced that there is too much misrepresentation in televised public affairs reporting, that reporters tend to get the fire and 7S heat of an issue but not the real importance of it. 238
75. Frye interview.
Because of inadequate or nonexistent surveys to deter
mine specific needs and because of a unique community,
WETA-TV finds it very difficult to identify a strictly
local audience— to discern local and national differences.
They are striving for the proper mix of local and national
news and public affairs. According to Rahmann, it is hard
to provide local programs that are of interest to all
sections of the community. "We lose the support of the
suburbs if we concentrate on D.C." In addition to that'
difficulty, as a broadcasting station, WETA-TV is concerned because its audience includes the Federal Communications
Commission, Congress, and the Administration. That is unique among public television stations and WETA remains constantly aware of the power and potential criticism of 76 that audience.
76. Rahmann interview.
The difficulty encountered by the educational division is a lack of communication between the schools and the television station. Because of inadequate interchange, misunderstandings arise on both sides. "Schools look at us as another textbook salesman." These feelings are 239
compounded by two additional problems— "not knowing what's 7 7 going on and needing more research and evaluation."
77. Pioli interview.
Some have suggested that the schools are backward in
the use of the media. Speaking as a parent of two children
in the D.C. schools who has, in his role as a parent,
with other parents, attempted to get the D.C. school system
to use television, Dr. Robert L. Hilliard believes that the
school system is deficient in that respect. He is con
cerned that Washington, D.C., is the only one of the sixteen
great cities that does not use television as part of its 7fl regular instruction.
78. Robert L. Hilliard, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 9, 19 71.
Even if the station had the funds and desire to in
stitute formal procedures for assessing community needs,
problems, and issues, WETA-TV still contends that there
are no funds to do extensive local programming. For eighteen months, for example, the station was able to broadcast a local service program about jobs, the govern ment, community services, etc. This was funded by the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, but that 240
79 grant is no longer operating.
79. Hardgrove interview.
Another aspect of the financial squeeze is the use
of union personnel. Washington, D.c. is highly unionized
and WETA's production costs are the same as the commercial
stations. It is Rahmann1s understanding that university
stations can use students in production and, therefore, 80 free funds for other activities.
80. Rahmann interview.
A problem encountered by those concerned with instruc
tion is the inability to validate the programs. They are
never really sure the skills they intend to teach are
really being taught. This again involves time, money, 81 and a skilled educational researcher.
81. Pioli interview.
Perhaps the biggest barrier to be overcome by educa
tional television still remains UHF receiving difficulties.
The most frequent complaint from members of the public,
according to a December, 1969, survey conducted by the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, was an inability to 241 receive channel 2 6 . That inability may be the result
82. Hardgrove interview. of one of four possible situations: no all-channel re ceiver, no UHF converter, inadequate signal received at the home antenna, or inability to tune the receiver properly.
What public television has done, is doing, or should be doing about those situations is the subject of many studies and reports. It is sufficient to say at this point that WETA-TV considers UHF a significant element in its inability to assess adequately the community needs. The investigator inferred from one attitude,
"Since the public can't or doesn't watch when we do try public affairs programs, why should we bother making any effort to assess their needs any further?" CHAPTER VII
ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION
The Stations
On June 15, 19 53 the Alabama State Legislature and then Governor Gordon Persons created the Alabama Edu cational Television Commission (hereinafter, AETC) "...to devise a system of utilizing allocated educational TV channels for the State of Alabama."^- The Commission is •
1. Raymond D. Hurlbert, "Nation's First Interconnected Educational Television Network,” December, 1968, p. 1. composed of five Alabama citizens who each serve over lapping terms of ten years. They are appointed by the 2 Governor and approved by the State Senate. The Commission 3 meets monthly.
2. Alabama Educational Television Network, 19 71 Bulletin, p. 2 .
3. Robert E. Dod, Private interview, Alabama Educational Television Commission, Birmingham, April 6 , 1971.
The first of nine stations, WCIQ at Cheaha State
242 243
Park, went on the air January 7, 1955. During the fol lowing fifteen years eight additional stations were added 4 to the network.
4. Hurlbert, "Nation's First," pp. 2-3.
The Commission contracts with six studios throughout the state to provide programming. Those studios are af filiated with the University of Alabama, Auburn University,
Montevallo University, the State Board of Education, the
Huntsville City Board of Education, the Birmingham Board of Education, and the Mobile Board of School Commissioners. 5
5. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 1.
The programming agencies are strategically located to cover the resources of the State, embracing pub lic education, the great universities, commercial and industrial centers, NASA, the seaport area, and the State Capitol. All instructional programming is with the advice and approval of the State Depart ment of Education.®
6 . I b i d .
The AETC appoints a Program Board to serve in an ad visory and consulting capacity to the Commission. That
Board consists of the AETC General Manager and the adminis trative head of each of the programming agencies (i.e., the 244
presidents of the universities and the superintendents of 7 the public school systems).
7. Ibid.
According to the AETC General Manager, Raymond D.
Hurlbert, the Program Board gives status and academic
respectability to the Commission. It was not really
functioning at its best so a working committee was set 8 up. The members of that committee are administrative
8 . Raymond D. Hurlbert, Private interview, AETC, Birming ham, April 5, 19 71. assistants appointed by the members of the Program Board.
Its purpose is to research and establish programming 9 guidelines, implement and supplement policy, and bring
9. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 8 . together a loose organization. The Committee makes demo cratic decisions about which studios will produce which programs. It provides a conference table for general statewide programming.^
10. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971. 245
The other major committee established by the AETC is
the Programming Advisory Committee. The details of this
committee's membership, activities, and shift in emphasis
since 1969 are discussed further in the chapter where the
investigator presents the AETC's formal procedures for
ascertaining community needs. It is sufficient to point
out here that the committee is composed of approximately
thirty citizens representing various groups and interests
in the state . ^
11. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 8 .
The studios are considered to be completely indepen
dent and autonomous as far as specific programming is con
cerned. The Commission does, however, have ultimate respon
sibility as licensee. The AETC is now removing programming
authority from the studios because of the licensing res- 12 ponsibility.
12. Dod interview, April 5, 19 71.
Hurlbert related that the AETC chose to take over the
responsibility for programming two or three years ago when
NET became live interconnect. When the National Educational
Television network had been delivered to the affiliates by tape, the University of Alabama production center in 246
Tuscaloosa was the receiving center for the state. It was
determined by the AETC, however, that the live interconnec
tion could be better handled in Birmingham. At the same
time of these programming policy changes, the AETC Preview
Board decided to delete some editions of "Black Journal."
That, said Hurlbert, was the background to the license
renewal challenge submitted to the FCC by two employees of 13 the Tuscaloosa center.
13. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
The licenses for the nine educational television sta
tions in Alabama were last renewed by the Federal Communica
tions Commission on June 24,.1970. On July 28, 1970 a
petition for reconsideration of the renewal was filed by
Albert Kramer of the Citizens Communications Center on
behalf of the Reverend Eugene Farrell, Linda Edwards, and
Steven Suitts. The petition objected in part to the AETC's
assuming programming control over the entire state network.
The petitioners contended that while AETC has always been
the licensee, prior to July 1, 1969, the programming
decisions had been rendered by a programming board and an
advisory board centered in the University of Alabama. The petitioners cited complaints against the AETC, saying
that it "...had discriminated against the black community
in Alabama and had failed to meet their educational 247
needs.
14. Alabama Educational Television Commission License Renewal, Federal Communications Commission active file. Petition for Reconsideration, July 28, 1970, p. 2.
The petition continued, "As a licensee of a non
commercial educational television station, AETC assumes
the responsibility of meeting the educational and cultural
needs of the communities it undertakes to serve. " 1 5 The
15. Ibid., pp. 4-5.
petitioners also contended that "...the licensee of an
educational television station is required...to make a
positive effort to understand the needs of the community
and how those needs may be most appropriately satisfied. " 1 5
16. Ibid., p. 9.
According to the petitioners, as of July 28, 1970, there were no black employees at AETC, none on the Commission
itself, and little consultation with blacks.
When the AETC first received its license to operate a noncommercial educational television station in 1954, a programming board composed of distinguished educators from the State of Alabama was to exercise professional guidance in programming decisions. In deed the Commission’s [FCC) initial approval of the 248
AETC's license was predicated on the functioning of this program board. Through informal negotiations with the Commission, the interested parties in Alabama learned that the creation of the program ming board would alleviate the Commission's fear that political considerations would undermine the prospec tive licensee's ability to execute its responsi bilities .17
17. Ibid., p. 24.
The petition further noted that on July 1, 1969, the AETC transferred authority from the Program Board to the network offices in Birmingham to be under the authorization of AETC 18 General Manager, Raymond Hurlbert.
18. Ibid.
Another petition was filed by Anthony Brown and
William D. Wright on behalf of Black Efforts for Soul in
Television. Their contention was:
The primary concern here is not the sensibilities of 'commissions' but the education of black chil dren and black adults in Alabama. The education of blacks cannot be furthered if the standards of white individuals.-, .are used to measure the value of educational television programs for black individuals.
19. Ibid., Brown and Wright Petition, p. 6. 249
Two months after the above petitions were registered
at the FCC, the AETC presented an Opposition to the Peti
tions for Reconsideration. The AETC reiterated its conten
tions that: (a) as the licensee it must make all program ming decisions; (b) those decisions are based on decency
and good taste; (c) their programs are racially integrated;
(a) the state network takes precedence over the national network; (e) any nationally distributed black programs which were pre-empted were done so as not to offend the people of Alabama, whom they are licensed to serve. The
AETC informed the FCC that it now had a Program Board
Advisory Committee with eight members. The Committee,
"...policy interpreting, acts in an advisory capacity to 20 the Commission and is appointed by the Commission.”
20- Ibid., Opposition of AETC to Petitions for Reconsidera tion, p. 3.
The AETC added in its September 14 statement,
The AETC has been presenting educational programming for, involving, and including blacks for considerably longer than NET. It is our firm conviction that this can and should be done with decency and good ta s t e .21
2 1 * Ibid., p. 22. 250
On October 9, 1970, the five original petitioners
filed identical Replies to the Opposition of AETC to
Petition for Reconsideration. They maintained, "The instant controversy has arisen because members of the
Alabama public have raised questions as to whether AETC has fulfilled its statutory responsibilities as a non- commercial educational television licensee." 2 2
22. Ibid., Reply to Opposition, p. 37.
When the investigator studied the FCC file on the
AETC renewal challenges in March, 19 71, the FCC had not yet made any disposition on the case. A staff member in the Educational Broadcasting Branch indicated that as of July 8 , "the Commission does not feel any action is warranted at this time against the Alabama Educational
Television Commission." He pointed out that at the next renewal (April, 1973), all material filed with the FCC would then be given full consideration. 23
23. Allen Myers, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 8 , 1971.
The challenges made against the AETC in 1970 have created a few changes in the network offices in 251 Birmingham— in employment and policies. It was obvious to the investigator during the conversations with the adminis trators and staff that they felt the need to defend their actions and attitudes and these defenses will be seen in their responses presented throughout the remainder of this chapter.
The Alabama Educational Television Network consists of approximately two thousand miles of state-owned and state-operated microwave facilities which link nine sta tions and three translator-transmitters for simulcasting 24 the network programming.
24. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 1.
Data about the nine stations (the dates they began broadcasting, channel assignment, location, transmitting power, and the height of each antenna above average terrain) are listed below. TABLE 3 STATIONS OF THE ALABAMA ETV NETWORK*
Date Call Ch. Location Power Antenna
1955 WCIQ 7 Cheaha St. Park 316KW 2 0 0 0 ’ 1955 WBIQ 10 Birmingham 316KW 1050' 1956 WDIQ 2 Dozier 100KW 690 ' 1962 WAIQ 26 Montgomery 229KW 594* 1962 WEIQ 42 Mobile 238KW 600* 1965 WHIQ 25 Huntsville 631KW 1173' 1967 WFIQ 36 Florence 587KW 760* 1968 WGIQ 43 Louisville 675KW 9 4 7 1 1970 WIIQ 41 Demopolis 447KW 1080'
*AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 10. 252
Each of the seven agencies which maintains contracts to provide programming for the AETN supplies approximately 25 an even share of the weekly network programming. J
25. Ibid., p. 13.
The network simulcasts cover ninety-seven percent of the population and ninety-five percent of the geographic area of the state of Alabama. To the AETC, "The community is the State of Alabama . " ^ 6
26. Dod interview, April 5, 19 71.
Service to that community is considered to be effected by having the program schedule broadcast simul taneously from all transmitters throughout the state.
The local studios must, therefore, create all programs so 27 as to be applicable to all Alabamians.
27. Ibid.
The Assistant Manager of the AETC, Robert E. Dod, characterized the state as "caught in a dilemma." He said that while the social problems in the South are much the same as those in the North, the people in the North thought 28 they had had their problems solved when they did not. 253
28. Ibid.
He later added, "The South is not just a region of the
country? it's a way of life." The critics and those 29 studying the area "must take that into consideration."
29. Ibid., April 6 , 1971.
The state wide in-school programs are received in
309 high schools and 702 elementary schools. The broad casts are available to 10,025 teachers, 437,068 elementary students, and 471,295 high school students.3^ There are'.
30. These figures came from the Spring, 1971, AETC survey and were cited by Robert Dod, Assistant Manager of AETC, April 5, 19 71. however, approximately 550,000 public school viewers.^3"
31. Hurlbert, "Nation's First," p. 5.
In addition to the significant size of the black pop ulation in Alabama (thirty percent), the state also has six thousand "other" ethnic minorities, some of which are 32 Indian, Filipino, and Mexican.
32. Denis Stork, Interview, AETC, Birmingham, April 5, 1971. 254
Of the seven on the AETC staff, excluding secretaries,
one is a young black woman. She is Miss Elizabeth Sloan,
Assistant to the Program Director, and has been added
to the staff since the AETC license renewals were formally
challenged. She will be working with the university
research team to set up the state wide survey that is
planned for the summer of 1971. It is the hope of the
AETC that using a black woman will give them more access
to the homes and they do hope to get into the homes through- 33 out the state to discuss the community needs and issues.
33. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
The funds for the entire operation of the AETC come from three basic sources: the state legislature, the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the budgets of the various educational institutions which operate the studios. ^
34. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
"Each biennium since 1955 the Alabama State Legis lature has appropriated from the first $2 0 0 , 0 0 0 to the present $660,000 annually for the technical operation of 35 the network." These funds are allocated to the AETC which 255
35. Hurlbert, "Nation's First," p. 2 . then distributes them evenly to the studios .36
36. Dod interview, April 6 , 19 71.
The special grants from CPB are also awarded to the licensee and split among the studios. The operational budgets and salaries for the studio personnal come from the individual school systems or universities which 37 ope ra te th em .
37. Ibid.
Statements of Purpose
The AETC filed the following Statement of Purpose with the Federal Communications Commission: "The Alabama
Educational Television Commission is an educational agency of the State of Alabama, created by the Legislature for the purpose of serving the educational needs of the state; for the advancement of educational television programs, and to furnish a non-profit and non-commercial television broadcast service." The AETC also filed a statement of its proposed program policy for dealing with public 256 issues: "As a non-commercial educational station numerous forums are planned by staffs of cooperating educa tional institutions giving all sides of controversial issues.« ..38
38. Alabama Educational Television Commission, Station files O f WAIQ, WBIQ, WCIQ, WDIQ, WEIQ, WFIQ, WGIQ, WHIQ, WIIQ, Federal Communications Commission, as of May 26, 1971.
In a report entitled "Philosophical Guidelines of
Alabama Educational Broadcasting," Hurlbert outlined the goals of Alabama Educational Television :
Since the Alabama Educational Television Commission Network is an extension of public education in Ala bama, and is supported by public funds, the same general principles and purposes of public education in the State of Alabama also pertain to educa tional television. The function of the AETC Network shall be that of educational service to the citizens of Alabama. Through variety in truly educational programs, an effort will be made to reach, so far as possible, all viewers among our people regardless of age, professional interest, economic or social level. Through television, the educational, cultural, and civic benefits of the state will be extended to all the citizens regardless of how remote or impoverished the community.
In our country and in our times educational tele vision is the best practical means for informing the electorate and increasing public understanding. Therefore, it seems to be a providential instrument for insuring the perpetuation of our democratic society, if it is democratically controlled and truly reflective of the basic needs of the American people.39 257
39. Hurlbert, '‘T h e Alabama ETV- Network," pp. 2-3.
Hurlbert has likewise said that the services of ETV
...are helping our people keep pace with the demands of modern life. It is closing the gap between the knowledge of the few and the under standing of the many....Television is being used for integrating the efforts of worthwhile institu tions and organizations into the community.40
40. I b i d . , pp. 7-8.
It is Hurlbert's presumption that, "...if the best of what is being done in Alabama in education is good, it is good that such services be made available to all citizens of the State . " 4 1
41. Hurlbert, "Educational Television in Alabama," December, 1968, p. 1.
Educational television in Alabama, as a facet of public education, "...is making available to all the citizenry, regardless of age, sex, color or geographic location, the educational opportunities and resources of the State.
42. Ibid. 258
In 1956, Hurlbert stated:
It is the position of the AETC that educational television is an extension of public education and that, therefore, the same general principles which govern teaching in the public schools also apply to educational television teaching. In support of the above stated policy, the AETC has done every thing it could to safeguard programming from political involvement or of being used for propa ganda purposes .4 3
43. Hurlbert, “Nation's First," p. 4.
Lawson, in his dissertation (discussed in Chapter I),
cited extensive evidence of the disastrous status of public
education in Alabama preceding the initiation of the AETC.
Edward Wegener, Director of Educational Television at
Auburn University, said, in an interview with Lawson,
"Anything that is done would meet a need in Alabama....It
is not necessary to go to the various state agencies and
compile long reports out of official documents on educa
tional needs in an area like this. About the only place to
go is u p . " 4 4
44. Edward Wegener, interview with Richard Lawson, July 22, 1963, quoted in "The Role of Socio-Economic Environ ment in the Development of Educational Television: A Des criptive Analysis of Educational Television in Alabama and Illinois" by Richard G. Lawson (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1964), p. 71. 259
Ascertainment of Community Needs
The General Manager of the AETC characterized it as a unique grassroots system. He indicated that at the ATEC,
"democracy is not efficient," that decisions cannot be based on majority votes. On the other hand, he admitted A 5 that participation is the secret of success.
45. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 19 71.
Hurlbert has written that the AETC is committed to mass education because it believes "...that every avenue of approach must be used that will make individual citizens better informed and wiser members of the community."^®
46. Hurlbert, "The Alabama ETV Network," p. 11.
Dod maintained that the AETC embodies the concept of local stations which must reflect the desires of the local community. They at the AETC asserted that a group from out of state, such as the National Association of Educational
Broadcasters, cannot come in and tell them what their people want. "The only ones who can develop the programs are those who have lived it."^
47. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6, 1971. 260
In line with this concept of local stations, the indiv idual studios do most of the program development based on,
(1 ) the needs they feel are present and (2 ) their re sources. There is a major difficulty with this policy and the fact that all programs are simulcast throughout the state. A problem perceived in Huntsville and the best means of addressing it may not be applicable to Birmingham, but the local studio developing the program must try to make it apply to the public state wide.1*®
48. Ibid., April 5, 1971.
Denis Stork, Director for Programming, disagreed, how ever. He argued that the needs are universal across the state.
49. Stork interview, April 5, 1971.
In his dissertation, Lawson observed that issues such as local tax and government problems, municipal improvements, labor and industrial expansion, and also local exhibits and cultural events were not state wide in scope. He concluded,
"As of 1964 such problems had no way of being aired except through the local commercial stations or by making them statewide in scope and thus generalizing them to the 261
extent that the real issues were often not faced.50
50. Richard G. Lawson, "Role of Socio-Economic Environ ment," pp. 88-89.
The AETC is now re-evaluating its responsibility to
the community by removing the total programming authority
from the studios. Dod said they had formerly believed
that with many of the studios on college campuses, the
access to "lots of resource people" would be an important
asset. However, they have discovered that the local
studios have been producing "nothing significant." The
AETC is now trying to go in depth on the local issues,
as NET and PBS do on the national issues.
51. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Hurlbert acknowledged, "We have to account to the
people of Alabama before the Federal government. We 52 must please the folks at home first; they pay the bill."
52. Hurlbert interview, April 6 , 19 71.
Speaking specifically of minority programming,
Hurlbert said, "We serve the majority of the minorities"— 53 the glass collectors, gardeners, and Boy Scouts. 262
53. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
Dod put it another way: "Every program is a minority program."
54. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
They did direct themselves, however, to the lack of the particular minority programming for which they are being most criticized. About the black residents of
Alabama, Dod said, "We want to relate to them— that's why we*re here ."*5*5
55. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Hurlbert maintained that the AETC was adapting its operation more to the black community. They are doing this by providing an opportunity for participation and representation via membership on the Programming Advisory
Committee. He indicated that the Committee was formerly just a sounding board but now it serves for recommending felt needs in the community for broadcasting responses.*5®
56. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971. 263
Dod discussed other dilemmas being faced by the
AETC— the format, content, and production of black pro grams. He asks critics, "What do you want--integration or separatism?" He accepts the concept of black pro gramming by black people but insists it should be based on need, not a figure. It has been suggested that thirty percent of AETC's programs be black since the black population is approximately thirty percent of the entire population. Dod maintained that programs should be 57 based on problems and needs, not numbers.
57. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
Critics of the AETC black programming and decisions about network black programming have said the AETC lacks objectivity. In response to those critics, Hurlbert replied that the AETC is as objective as anyone, "taking into consideration the number of people involved in the decision-making.
58. Hurlbert interview, April 6 , 1971.
Dr. Dave Berkman, a very intense, dedicated person who acts forcefully on his convictions, has characterized the AETC's actions in the realm of black programming as 264
"the most blatant racism." While often standing alone,
he has publicly and continually criticized the AETC, which,
"...because of its patently racist nature... asserted its
right to ignore the interests of its substantial black
audience by refusing to carry Black Affairs programs...
59. Dave Berkman, "Statement and Resolution," Presented to General Membership Meeting of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 11, 1971, p. 1.
Speaking in response to the criticisms leveled
against the AETC, Hurlbert maintained that public broad
casting has become an open arena for anyone to say any
thing. This is good on paper, he said, but it has gotten
out-of-hand and is jio longer objective or balanced.
Hurlbert argued that proponents of public broadcasting must show the good side while offering solutions to any problems that may exist. There is no counterbalance in current criticism. "Being public broadcasters doesn't mean we're free to take pot shots at everyone."®®
60. Hurlbert interview, April 6, 1971.
Expressing an over-all philosophy which pervades all AETC decisions and programming, Dod said, "We’re 265
still in the ETV age." He was contrasting their focus
with the current emphasis in many other stations on
public broadcasting .6 1
61. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
Hurlbert has written, "...educational television has
no business in the entertainment field.” He further
submitted that all AETC programming should be available
to other media. "Inasmuch as they are products of public
funds, all educational television programs are available
to any commercial television station which may choose , ,i 6 2 to use them*
62. Hurlbert, "Educational Television in Alabama," p. 3.
The AETC staff showed concern during the investigator's
interviews for acting in compliance with the FCC Rules and Regulations and also the Civil Rights Act in terms of fair employment practices.
About the Federal Communications Commission, Dod said that the directives from that agency do not give any hint of what they really expect and consequently educational television stations are "going in wild directions." He 266
finds that with the FCC Commissioners having such diverse
backgrounds it is even more confusing. Dod wonders how
it is possible to get any reason out of opinions that vary
from Dean Burch to Nicholas Johnson. Dod suggested that
the FCC in the past "just sat back and let us go" because
they thought that ETV could not get into trouble . 6 3
63. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6 , 1971.
The greatest concern at the AETC in complying with
FCC Rules and Regulations seems to be the use of profanity
over the air. The reason the AETC gives for deleting
certain black programs is their frequent use of profanity.
Critics have contended the decisions were racist in nature, a means of keeping blacks off the air. Dod stated that
they must comply with the Rules and Regulations which for bid the broadcast of profane and obscene words. He re cognizes that the times may have changed and certain expressions are now more acceptable to the general public, but if that is the case, then the Rules and Regulations must also change. It is Dod's contention that the people of Alabama are sensitive to obscenity and the AETC has maintained an extremely religious outlook in its program ming. Observed Dod, "He stick to the FCC Rules and then 267
get accused of not carrying programs that are obscene. We
stick to the rules and get criticized, but those who
violate the rules (and allow profanity) are not criticized."
This is, to the AETC, a basic injustice.®^
64. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Dod did say, however, that he thinks the blacks who have contested the AETC programming "have a solid
argument" and have a right to challenge the Commission.
They must, however, go to Alabama and see the situation
first-hand.^
65. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
Hurlbert insisted that the Federal government should give direction to the AETC and the contesting parties.
He said, "The problems have existed for two hundred years...Give us time. We must negotiate from reason."
In terms of fairness in the treatment of black problems,
Hurlbert said, "Being fair to people is human."®®
66. Hurlbert interview, April 6, 1971. 268
Dod added, "We're not trying to shirk our obligations, but we want to make the changes... bet us solve our own problems— within reason— with a minimum of outside inter ference . 1,67
67. Dod interview, April 6,1971.
The AETC is also concerned about its obligations under the Fair Employment Practices of the Civil Rights
Act. In order to apply for Educational Television
Facilities funds from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the AETC had to indicate its compliance with the Civil Rights Act and was asked to lay out a plan for determining community needs. As a consequence, the major directives from the AETC to the heads of the instititions-operating the studios concern the equal rights provisions of the Civil Rights Act. They are told to try to integrate their productions. However, most of the schools, related Dod, are under various court orders from the Federal government and the AETC presumes it has no power to tell a school how it must operate.®®
68. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6, 1971. 269
The AETC administrators emphasized that they try
for balanced programming, not establishing percentages of any one type. They said that the facilities are open to any individual and that the studios try to serve everyone in the state. On the other hand, Dod remarked,
"If you've got a problem, you ought to devote one hundred percent of your time to it at that moment."^
69. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6 , 1971.
Dod indicated that the local producers go to re source people throughout the state for specific information.
They try no longer to present programs that just gloss over problems but, instead, are developing series that solve the problems. He concluded, "A lot of thinking 70 has to be undone, but we are changing."
70. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Formal Procedures
The AETC has had an Advisory Committee of some type for several years. Its exact title and responsibilities change from time to time. In fact, during the investi gator's research in Birmingham, there was no agreement 270
among the top AETC administrators and their latest pro motional literature as to the current title. This leads
the investigator to wonder if the same confusion permeates the committee's understanding of its responsibilities.
Nonetheless, Hurlbert indicated that an Advisory
Committee is now in the process of realigning its respon sibility. There are approximately thirty citizens who are representatives of various organizations throughout the state— such as labor, city mayors, Chamber of Commerce, and garden clubs. They are considered grassroots rep resentatives of the people of Alabama. Blacks were added to the Committee for the first time late in 1970. The black members met separately during initial reorganization phases to set up their criteria for evaluating AETN programming and their procedures for operation. All members of the committee were given survey blanks on which to record their reactions to the programs. The next task was to make program recommendations. These recom mendations were being processed in April, 1971.^
71. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
According to the 1971 Bulletin describing the Alabama
Educational Television Network, the Advisory Committee, 271
''...composed of eminent State citizens, evaluates public
television programming from a lay point of view with the
purpose of making recommendations to the Program Board
for the improvement of program quality and to reflect the
communities' needs for such services
72. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 1.
In another section of the brochure, however, the
Committee is characterized only as a sounding board, in
which its members "...supply a feedback of opinions and
reactions to state network programming."?3
73. I b i d ., p. 8 .
Hurlbert observed that the Advisory Committee had
been just a sounding board but its purpose now is to
recommend felt needs in the community for broadcasting.
The recommendations from the Committee come as official
requests for programming. Then the AETC approves the
recommendations. According to Hurlbert, this is AETC's way of keeping in touch with felt needs.
74. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971. 272
The other formal procedure for ascertaining community
needs was in the planning stages in April of 1971 and is
to be carried out during the summer. This plan calls for
a survey on a state-wide basis of minority needs. The
AETC is looking for ten areas of the most pressing needs.
Neither the exact instrument for gathering these data nor
the questions to be asked of the public had been developed
in April. Once those ten needs are ascertained, however,
the list will be taken to the studios and they will be
asked to develop programs addressed to those specific
needs. Previews of the programs will be set up for those
members of the public who list the particular needs
being dealt with. The citizens on the Advisory Committee will also preview the programs and all previewers will
then complete a questionnaire. This feed-back will allow
the studios to revise the programs, develop new approaches, or produce new programs. Once the programs are scheduled
for the air they will be promoted through the various minority media, the social agencies, and other service groups. 75 J
75. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
A follow-up procedure to the original survey will 273
provide additional valuable information. The people who
were originally contacted will be recalled. Those who
are potential resources on specific problems will be
identified. Members of various community action groups
will also be indicated. These lists, it is anticipated,
will help the local studios. They will further provide
built-in audiences because the people can be contacted
to watch the particular programs and then follow-up 7 6 surveys can be conducted.
76. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
for the in-school programming, the AETC delegates all
authority to the State Department of Education. The ETV
Coordinator surveys the needs of the schools. Since all
schools must follow the state-adopted course of study,
the programming is developed only according to state 77 criteria.
77. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Informal Acquisition of Information
Current ascertainment procedures
The work of the Program Board and the Program Working 274
Committee can be useful in assessing community needs. The
Working Committee "...meets regularly and recommends pro gramming guidelines, programming production practice and generally serves in a liaison capacity for expediting 78 and improving network programming."
78. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 1.
The State Department of Education can also be in volved in relaying the needs of the classroom to the state network. "A curriculum committee of the State Department of Education works closely with the Program Board Working
Committee in the coordination of in-school and instructional programming."^® The State Department determines the in-
79. Ibid., p. 1. school programming while the various studios provide the needed areas of expertise.®®
80. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Instructions to teachers on how to provide feedback are contained in the teachers' handbook for instructional 275
television. Enrollment and feedback sheets are incorp
orated into most of the teachers' guides. The teachers
are asked to complete the forms and return them to the
production centers promptly and regularly. The teachers
are informed by the State Department that their comments
and suggestions "...are passed on to the on-the-air
instructors and are very valuable to them as they are
about the only means the ETV instructors have to find out what the reactions are to their on-the-air instruction."
Short notes or post cards are solicited when forms are 81 not contained in the guides. The handbook itself con-
81. State Department of Education, Instructional Television; Teachers' Handbook, 1970-71, p. 33. tains a form which asks the teachers for suggestions as H2 to new courses, schedule changes, and teacher-training. *
82. Ibid., p. 37.
The awareness and understanding various state agencies have of community needs and issues is a valuable aid to the AETC. For example, the State Department of Education knows the number of functional illiterate, deaf, and other 276
handicapped people in the state. The AETC can then pro
gram for and promote through the specific people. Other
agencies that deal with particular problems come to AETC
and ask if they can develop a program to help. There is
a lot of input from the agencies and Dod indicated that
all strata of society are involved.®^
83. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
The studios have initiated on-the-air promotion
asking for feedback from the audience. The AETC is now
receiving what it considers a tremendous response— three
hundred phone calls and letters a week.®^ This response
84. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
was to the program schedule but also indicated growth
in numbers with new desires and needs never expressed to the AETC before . ® 5
85. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Stork referred to the audience response while talk ing about the issue of obscenity on the air. While the
AETC still maintains that Alabamians do not like to hear 277
profanity broadcast, Stork admitted that most of the
telephone calls and letters have complained because dialogue
had been "blipped” by the AETC for being profane . 8 6
8 6 . Stork interview, April 5, 1971.
Another potential source of input is the local
organizations. Groups come to the studios with program
ideas, but many only want local promotion. That, said
Stork, is not of interest to the entire state and is, 87 therefore, not acceptable.
87. Stork interview, April 6 , 1971.
The hiring of the young black woman is seen by the
AETC as a stimulus to black programming in the community.
Her primary role is to act as a liaison between the com munity and each studio. She goes to the six individual studios throughout the state to help them perform more effectively. The staffs of the local studios have dis covered that they are unable to get into the central cities and the rural black areas. Miss Sloan is expected to provide the necessary understanding and contacts for the studio. In discussing the purpose in hiring her 278
Hurlbert revealed that she was given production training because they "must guard against lousy programs."
Hurlbert argued that it is not a credit to the black com munity to be projected as crude, untrained, and vulgar.
On the other hand, the AETC recognizes that they cannot allow "Uncle Tom's" to hurt the programming. They try, therefore, to work through the rich, upper-class black man to his personal and professional contacts. 88
8 8 . Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
Current needs and issues in the community
To the AETC, quality education seems to be the most urgent need in Alabama. In one annual report, Hurlbert wrote, "The quality of education afforded the urban and more fortunate areas can now be delivered to the more remote and less fortunate areas at great economy on a per pupil basis." He further sees the need for continuing education and instruction for certificate and degree credit. 89
89. Hurlbert, "The Alabama ETV Network”, p. II. 279
The question of community needs was answered obliquely
by Dod. In reference to NET and PBS programming he said,
"Certain problems don’t relate to us down here." He
observed that Alabama had many non-racial problems such
as poverty. Dod indicated that minority programs in the past have come from PBS or else have been specials on such occasions as Negro History Week or Whitney Young's death.
He concluded, however, "I can't think of a problem that 90 is solely a Negro problem."
90. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Stork asserted, however, that the first concern for
AETC must be to establish credibility with the black community. In conjunction with the Director of Public
Information and Sloan, Stork drew up the following list of black community problems: (1 ) housing, especially for young couples in integrated areas; (2) employment and job discrimination; and (3) community services, especially in urban areas. Sloan added that militant groups in Alabama are small but will grow if problems are not alleviated s o o n .91
91. Stork, Calhoun, Sloan interview, April 5, 1971. 280
Current programming especially devoted to community needs
When the licenses of all the Alabama educational
television stations were renewed on June 24, 197 0, their
files contained the following information on their program
service. The data are identical for all stations since they broadcast the same programs simultaneously through out the state.
TABLE 4
AETN — TYPICAL WEEK, 1970*
Type of Program Hours Per Cent
Instructional 29 38 General educational 11:45 15 Performing arts 6:30 9 Public affairs 19 25 Light entertainment 0 0 Other 10:15 13
Total 76:30 1 0 0
*Alabama Educational Television Commission, Station files.
The AETC considers the proper mix of resources to be crucial to developing programming that is truly respon sive to community needs. The combination of resources surrounding the various studios gives "what would interest the whole state," said Dod. They produce series of programs for the general audience. Each studio has its 281
special realm of resources and expertise. For example,
the Huntsville studio concentrates on the George C. Mar
shall Space Flight Center and the social projects of that
growing Federal community? Auburn focuses on agriculture
and home economics; the Birmingham studio provides civic
sense with its big city concepts; and the Montgomery
studio is able to highlight the people and activities
of the state capital.
92. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6 , 1971.
Because of this "...diversification for an enriched variety of content on a broad base of community service,"®®
93. Hurlbert, "Alabama ETV Network," p. S.
the AETC argued that local productions should take pre cedence over national network programs. Dod emphasized,
"Local programs developed here for specific needs should
supercede PBS." He added, however, that AETC still needs the national viewpoint on many subjects. They feel they program for local needs by taking each studio to its advantage and show-casing it for the entire state. "We serve minority interests that commercial stations can't do. We hope we satisfy a lot of little needs." This 282 gives, AETC concludes, something for everybody. They con sider themselves unique in that they select only the pro grams they want or need.^
94. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6 , 1971.
About programs for the specific needs of the black community Hurlbert said, "We're doing more black program- Q 5 ming than anyone I know in the country." Dod likewise
95. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 19 71. pointed out that although the AETC has been criticized for deleting segments of "Black Journal" and "NET Playhouse," q g the majority of them are being carried. The investigator
96. Dod interview, April 5, 1971. has no monitoring data which would either challenge or confirm those claims.
The AETC is contributing to the solution of the minority employment crisis by working with Manpower to 9 7 train black television engineers.
97. Dod interview, April 6, 1971.
Two programs aimed at the youth are "Campus Forum" and 283
"Youth Speaks Out." The latter is an "...issues and
answers program involving the young people's attitudes and
opinions about current events." It is hosted by the city
editor of the Birmingham N e w s .9**
98. ETViews, March 19 71, p. 1.
In addition to the traditional public school in-class
televised instruction, the AETC has used ITV for adult
literacy classes.
Alabama Educational Television was selected for a federal 'pilot' project in the teaching of lit eracy in June, 1960, by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Originally designed as a two-year project financed by federal funds, the program was extended for five years with the help of the Alabama Federation of Women's Clubs and Alabama State Department of Education.®®
99. Hurlbert, "The Alabama ETV Network," pp. 14-15. .
Alabama citizens receive college credit for courses being broadcast from the University of Alabama. In addi tion, high school students have been able to complete remedial work in basic subjects during summers. "The
Alabama State Board of Education is the first such body to officially credit ETV approved courses toward a high school certificate."*®® 284
100. Hurlbert, "Nation's First," p. 5.
Some of the professions have been involved in con
tinuing education via television. The "PARA-MED-ED"
Television Series was a pilot project in 1968 for an eventual state wide medical television network. The con tent was directed toward three health care fields:
(1) physicians and dentists, (2) nurses, and (3) para medical personnel .1 ® 1
101. Hurlbert, "Alabama ETV Network," pp. 15-16.
The Extension Division of Auburn University contributes to the network by producing programs for specific interest groups such as the farmer, the disadvantaged homemaker, and 102 the gardener. Other local productions have included a
102. AETN 19 71 Bulletin, p. 5. focus on the Alabama environment, in which a national alert plan was adapted to a local area ;1 ® 3 a Food Service
103. Dod interview, April 6, 1971.
Sanitation Series through which the State Health Department tried to reduce the number of food-borne illnesses that 285
104 occur every year; a Taxpayer Information Service in
104. Francis E. Boyd, letter to AETC, in "Alabama ETV Network" by Hurlbert, pp. 22-23.
l ft e cooperation with the Internal Revenue Service; and
105. George Patterson, letter to AETC, in "Alabama ETV Network" by Hurlbert, p. 23.
local sports, especially in the summer.^^
106. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
Desired Procedures, Information, Programs
Before presenting the expressions of the AETC staff on what is needed and desired in Alabama ETV, it is perhaps first appropriate to note what is not desired at the AETC.
Dod wants critics to "forget that this is Alabama. Just judge us as a public broadcasting system. Changes can't 107 be done overnight."
107. Dod interview, April 6, 1971.
Hurlbert suspects that the criticisms of the AETC are made for the purpose of tearing it down, not building it up. 286
The critics are just pointing out problems but, Hurlbert contended, not doing anything to help solve the problems.
Criticisms voiced at the 19 70 convention of National
Association of Educational Broadcasters were merely vague conversations, Hurlbert thought, about grassroots response.
That, he maintained, is a foregone conclusion; the problem is how to get it. Representatives of the NAEB have been pressing the AETC to establish a significant percent of 10 8 black programming, a concept the AETC forcefully rejects.
108. Hurlbert interview, April 6 , 1971.
Both Dod and Stork expressed a desire for a primer for
ETV similar to the current one which gives direction to com mercial stations. Dod added that the Primer is desirable only if the FCC gives them time, is realistic, and con- 109 siders the problems and situations.
109. Dod and Stork interviews, April 5, 1971.
Hurlbert wants specifically to see AETC conduct different types of surveys. He suggested that constant sampling is necessary to measure needs, reactions, and symptoms before a crisis explodes. 287
110. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 19 71.
Dod wants a survey of needs that is realistic and purposeful. He pointed out that writing the proposal is easy but conducting the survey and implementing the re sults are the problem. He suggested that there is a special need to ask the man in the street how he feels about community issues .1 1 1
111. Dod interviews, April 5 and 6 , 1971.
Dod conceded that using black producers is good in concept. The problem is finding those who would want to live in Alabama. He submitted that an outside radical cannot help solve their problems. A black Alabamian is necessary. It is necessary to "develop our own people to help our own people." Repeating a basic belief at
AETC, Dod said, "We had the farthest to go; give us a 112 longer, more reasonable time."
112. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
Hurlbert would further like to have the services of a public relations man trained in psychology who would be sensitive to impending crises in order to help in avoiding 288
them. This person would be responsible for feeling the
pulse of the community and making inroads in community-
station relations. Hurlbert related, however, that the
most important action for the AETC to take is to implement
its present structure of committees, because he considers
it the best working relationship in ETV today.1 1 3
113. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
The State Department of Education needs, according
to Hurlbert, at least twelve utilization people to stimu
late and intensify teacher feedback. Annual workshops tb
train teachers are conducted,but they must be done
regularly and must be more widespread.11^
114. Ibid.
Dod wants to know who speaks for the various communi
ties. "How do you get down to their level?*'11'* Stork
115. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
pointed out that the black groups have questioned the
honesty and credibility of the AETC, so AETC must discover how to communicate with the people.11® 289
116. Stork interview, April 5, 1971.
Dod contended that the AETC and the black community
"must get over our mutual distrust." This must be done,
however, because they want to do it. Dod argued that so
much internal turmoil in the entire industry complicates 117 the situation.
117. Dod interview, April 6 , 1971.
Stork emphasized that standards for minority program ming and for defining minority categories should be estab
lished. He would ask, "How do you treat black material
so it will not be embarrassing?" The AETC should strive 118 for quality black programming.
118. Stork interview, April 5, 1971.
A definition of obscenity from the FCC is wanted so that stations will not live in constant fear that their 119 licenses may be revoked.
119. Stork interview, April 6, 1971.
Both Dod and Stork see the need for black programs.
While Dod calls for an "attempt to program in accordance 290 with the minority audience," Stork thinks it is essential 1 20 to make the programs relevant to the minority groups.
120. Dod and Stork interviews, April 6, 1971.
Hurlbert related that educational television has not yet scratched the potential, that there are even broader
fields for total communication in the state. One of the needs is to have the equipment used all the time. "Im- 121 mediacy and currency are always necessary."
121. Hurlbert interview, April 5, 1971.
In the AETN 1971 Bulletin, Hurlbert wrote:
But Alabama's ETV potential lies deeper than this. It can- aid the potential drop-out, the student who has had less, as well as serving as an intellectual stimulus for life in a world of expanding know-how and change; retrain adult industrial workers whose skills are becoming outmoded in an age of techno logical change and automation; bring new cultural experience to the leisure time of all our citizens who live in a society of growing affluence; pro vide opportunity for activities of the mind and body of growing numbers of senior citizens; expose the mind to enlarged understandings of intercul- tural relations and community, state, and national problems.122
122. AETN 1971 Bulletin, p. 17. 291
Barriers to Ascertainment
Dod asserted that a lack of finances has kept the
AETC from doing anything more than watch the mail and telephone calls to assess community needs. He said that there is no money to do a total state survey.12^
12 3. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
A more crucial problem seems to be the dilemmas and conflicts created by a changing society. For example, the
AETC has discovered that its audience is growing and developing new desires and needs and the AETC is caught between. They programmed for so many years to the general needs for drama and music. Their programming was, Dod stated, one hundred percent integrated after the Civil
Rights Act but now there are demands for all black programs.
"We've tried to be all things to all people. It doesn't . t . ,,124 work today."
124. I b i d .
The structure of the AETC has been a further hind rance. For years the AETC was just a transmitting facility but then it became the programming authority. "The studios 125 hadn't really thought about community needs."
125. Ibid. 292
Another conflict has been between educators and broad casters. Stork revealed that in the past educators had run the AETC for the most part, but now they are bringing 126 in television people to run the studios. Dod suggested that the AETC "must get a good mix of both."^^
126. Stork interview, April 6, 1971.
127. Dod interview, April 6, 1971.
A specific example of how educator-dominance can hin der the AETC's service to the community is the scheduling of black studies. Black studies programs cannot be used for in-school broadcasts because they are not part of the state curriculum. Black personalities such as Booker T.
Washington and George Washington Carver are treated only as part of Alabama history. A black studies series is now being developed, but only for the general adult audience.
128. Ibid.
Another barrier to assessing and meeting community needs is the difficulty in "finding qualified black pro- 129 ducers." Black producers will not go to the South
129. Stork interview, April 5, 1971. 293
because there is less money and more social problems.
Dod observed that it is essential that AETC develop and
train local blacks. However, the AETC does not choose to
control studio employment. It is not attractive for blacks
to go to the AETC where the open circuit productions are
just an adjunct to the major responsibilities the local
staff has to its local school or university administra
tion. The problems of hiring any black who may be avail
able is complicated by the fact that the AETC does not
like to work through a placement service. It is too
time-consuming, they argued.13®
130. Dod interview, April 6, 19 71.
Hurlbert insisted that they cannot hire blacks im mediately to fill some pre-determined quota. That would
require either dismissing whites from their current posi
tions or finding more money for additional salaries.
"The situation demands reason on both sides." Hurlbert
asserted that they are sincere and earnest but the changes must be reasonable and acceptable. The AETC must have the money and an opening before they will hire additional blacks.131
131. Hurlbert interview, April 6, 19 71. 294
Three of the studios are doing black programming,but they cannot get into the areas to talk with the blacks.
That is one of the reasons Sloan was hired, to act as liaison.
132. Dod interview, April 6, 1971.
Another major difficulty in the view of the AETC is that they have no one to look to for guidance; there is no precedent. Lionel Monagas and Presley Holmes went to
Birmingham, representing the NAEB, to talk about how to approach the various problems. The AETC was told to
"establish grassroots" but, according to Dod, they did not say much more. The NAEB suggested that thirty to forty previewers be asked to watch PBS. This was an unacceptable 133 suggestion.
133. Ibid.
Various conflicting pressures to solve their problems in certain ways have come from other sources. The State legislature, as comptroller of the funds, is considered a pressure. The Bible Belt inhabitants criticize very liberal programs. Although there is very limited pressure from the Commissioners themselves, the staff members feel that they know what things the Commissioners are interested 295
in and would approve of. They, therefore, take that into
consideration. ^4
134. Stork, Calhoun, and Sloan interview, April 5, 1971.
Pressures from PBS are also felt very strongly at the
AETC. The PBS contract apparently says a station will not edit a program nor can it be delayed more than seven days.
Other stations violate those parts of the contract, Dod maintained, but PBS "looks the other way." On the other hand, Alabama is being censured for editing certain seg ments. Dod said that PBS should change the contract if present practices by other stations are acceptable. "The stations need PBS and interconnection but they have become so dominant and so big that they have too much control.
They were so intent on a national network that they forgot the local stations— forgot the grassroots support." Dod maintained that all the funds from CPB go to either the interconnection system or the "big eight" stations.
135. Dod interview, April 5, 1971.
The difficulty with a procedure similar to that out lined in the Primer is, asserted Dod, "They can't come up with questions that will explain local problems and unique situations." Furthermore, "They haven't come up with a 296 system of separating truth from fiction." He maintained that the FCC cannot know the exact situation in Alabama without coming and talking to them. He asked, "How can they sit in Washington and know?" Dod concluded that the
AETC has two strikes against it— "this is Alabama and a 136 large state commission."
136. Dod interview, April 6, 1971. CHAPTER VIII
THE STATUS OF COMMUNITY NEEDS ASCERTAINMENT
Summary and Interpretation
Although one cannot generalize from these case studies to all non-commercial educational broadcasting, there are certain trends which seem to be consistent. This consis tency is notable, especially when one considers the various geographic locations of the stations in this study, the diverse potential audiences, and the varying organizations of the licensees.
There appear to be no formal, systematic community surveys being utilized, although some plans were being made at the time of the investigation. Consultation with com munity leaders with the specific intent of ascertaining needs, problems, and interests is evidently not being done, either. The concept of advisory councils is re ceiving considerable attention but problems of organiza tion, membership, and method of assessing needs have not yet been totally solved at any of the stations. Alabama's reorganized Advisory Committee may provide a model for other stations if it is successful in accomplishing its
297 298
goals.
The reader may have, at certain points throughout the
preceding report of station activities and attitudes,
questioned the judgments, competence, or even accuracy of
some station personnel. The investigator certainly did.
These statements are significant in that they aid in pro
viding a more complete picture of the current status of
community needs ascertainment by non-commercial educa
tional broadcasters. The investigator considered it
cogent to question a staff member on his feelings about the
community and his legal and ethical responsibilities to
serve that community. The apparent inconsistencies of at
titude reveal a general confusion about how to serve the
public interest, convenience, and necessity, and a specific
perplexity about how one might ascertain the community needs,
interests, and problems.
Station administrators seem overwhelmed by the concept
of ascertaining community needs. Rather than attacking the
problem one step at a time, they tend to view it as a monumental task that appears insurmountable. They tend to
focus on the barriers and then justify their inability to
confront them. Some station managers, for example, are
convinced that community needs constantly change; stations
cannot know all the needs; the people themselves do not know their own needs; leaders are not really aware of the 299
problems of their constituencies; stations cannot address
themselves to all the issues. In addition, stations have
limited money, time, personnel, and committed volunteers.
These factors combine and, in the eyes of administrators,
tend to support their conclusion that the ascertainment of community needs by non-commercial educational television is an impossible, if not undesirable, task.
Methods and procedures devised by the various instruc tional divisions should be given thorough consideration by the stations. Although the schools provide captive aud iences which are available for testing and questioning and although many classroom needs are already operationally de fined, the reliance upon representative councils and exten sive surveys is generally successful. The instructional divisions often gather data from many thousands of teachers and students and yet the community programming managers seem overwhelmed by a survey of several hundred citizens.
The development of a useful, pertinent community sur vey requires much thought and probably a trained social scientist. At WVIZ, for example, questions such as the fol lowing were considered an ascertainment of community needs:
Do you have a UHF receiver? Which programs do you watch?
What would you like to see? The investigator doubts that the questions really allow the residents to express 300
adequately their concerns. The data gathered from those
questions may indeed prove helpful to the station in
evaluating its programming schedule, but it does not in
sure that the station will be made fully aware of the
issues, problems, and needs confronting the community.
Station personnel do not appear to understand either
the requirements of the Primer or potential questions for
a community survey. One producer was convinced that a
systematic survey would try to tell him whom to bring on
his programs. That is not suggested by the Primer in any
way. Another individual insisted that a researcher could
not devise questions which would explain local problems and
unique situations. Such a response suggests an inadequate
grasp of research techniques and an unawareness of ques
tionnaires being currently utilized.
Although some type of advisory group is often recom mended, there are cautions to be considered. At WETA, for
example, an administrator characterized an advisory com mittee for "Newsroom" as a significant means of assessing
needs. The producer of that program did not mention the group at all. One might assume that either this advisory
committee does not make a significant contribution to the production of "Newsroom" or the producer does not consider its capacity as significant. Both of those possibilities are important to note. As can be seen in other stations' 301
activities, having committees and names of prominent
people to publicly point to as being significant factors in
the station’s responsiveness to the community is often in
sharp contrast to the actual contribution made to the
station's specific programs in the public interest. It may
be the case of the impressive letterhead versus the daily
production of public service programming. One must wonder
what real insights these boards of prominent citizens give
to the producers about the needs, problems, and issues of
the community.
There are also several complications in the activities
of instructional divisions as they attempt to assess the
heeds of their audiences. Although channels of communica
tion between teachers and the station have the potential
for providing much useful information on classroom needs, one major drawback exists in the three surveys conducted by
WVIZ. The Curriculum Council representatives and the building principals must handle all the materials. The station should utilize more direct contact with the indivi dual classroom teachers instead of filtering information back and forth through the Curriculum Council representa tive (especially since there is only one per school system) and the building principals.
On-going dialogue that is recommended for stations and community leaders is applicable for instructional 302
programming. Conferences of classroom teachers could be
set up with one representative from each building instead of
one administrator representing an entire system. These
teachers would meet with the schools department, the tele
vision teachers, and the producer-directors. Each month
at WVIZ, for example, approximately fifty different
teachers could gather to discuss specific needs and prob
lems that are not easily accounted for in the questionnaire
s urveys.
The investigator encountered another difficulty in
WVIZ's data collection. If WVIZ is to continue working
with the survey data statistically, then a person compe
tent in handling and communicating these data should be
trained or employed. The need for such a person was also
expressed at WOSU. A field coordinator at WVIZ made con
tinual references to random samplings of teachers. Fur
ther questioning revealed, however, that the sampling was
unstructured but not at all random. As stations increase
their sophistication in developing questionnaires, they must likewise increase their sophistication in dealing with the data garnered. The various surveys developed by
WVIZ's Schools Department have the potential for being quite fruitful in terms of assessing classroom needs. The data are there; they need only to be handled properly.
Generally, the station personnel have very vague or 303
mistaken concepts of their legal responsibilities in terms
of public service programming. Their understanding of FCC
policies indicates general confusion. For example, one
manager believes that the fourteen major programming ele ments which were actually outlined in the Commission's
Report and Statement of Policy Re: Commission en banc
Programming Inquiry (see Chapter II, page 39 ) were part
of the so-called Blue Book. Furthermore, that manager has
the impression that the FCC wants non-commercial educational stations to counter-program against the commercial stations on those fourteen points. A producer at one station is convinced that the FCC prohibits editorializing by educa tional stations. Actually that ban on editorializing was a product of the Public Broadcasting Act of 196 7. The question whether those stations would be permitted to editorialize may, according to Walter B. Emery, "...cause educators and the general public considerable dismay."*’
1. Walter B. Emery, "Is There a Constitutional Flaw In the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967?" Educational Broad casting Review, February, 1968, p. 17.
In discussing the constitutionality of that Congressional action, Emery wrote:
It may be that many educational stations will not want to editorialize. However, serious thought should be given to the question whether it is a 304
valid social principle and consistent with democratic ideals to prohibit them from doing it if they desire to do so. Assuming that an educa tional licensee does careful research, shows a high regard for facts in its programs, and at tempts to present well-reasoned points of view without fanfare or name-calling; and assuming further that it positively and aggressively 'seeks out' and permits the expression of other points of view, why shouldn't it be permitted to editorialize with the same right that commercial broadcasters have under policies established by the Federal Communications Commission? So long as the licensee is under a legislative mandate to be 'objective' and 'fair' and to maintain 'balance' in its programming, is there any real danger that can result from station advocacy? On the other hand, since some educational stations may have available vast intellectual resources and research facilities to make scholarly inquiry, the use of which may lead to enlightened opinions on important and critical issues, will it not be a serious loss to the public not to have the benefit of these opinions?^
2. Ibid., p. 20.
There appears, further, to be a great deal of con fusion about the rights and responsibilities of the licensee. Many station personnel apparently fail to realize that the licensee has ultimate responsibility for all material broadcast over the air. Consequently, the licensee has the right to make programming decisions.
When those decisions contravene the desires of the produc tion personnel, the latter are often critical of that inter ference. The supreme responsibility must be to serve the 305
public. If, therefore, station personnel wish to chal
lenge the licensee's decisions, that challenge must be
based, not on the licensee's right to make such decisions,
but on whether those decisions are in the public interest.
Examples can be seen in two cases cited in this investiga
tion.
The decision to close WOSU-TV during a period of
campus disturbance was, legally, the right of The Ohio
State University Trustees and President, the licensee and
its designated authority. If individual station employees
wish to challenge that decision, they must question whether
it was made in the public interest. Without judging whether
WOSU could have better served its community by staying on
the air, it must be-pointed out that the licensee has
the authority and must have the freedom to make decisions
about station operations, especially during crises.
Those challenging the Alabama Educational Television
Commission must likewise adhere to this concept of
authority. So long as the AETC is the licensee of all
stations in the state educational network, it has final
authority for all operations. The AETC's decisions must be challenged on its service to the communities since it does have the legal right to make the decisions. If chal
lengers can show that previous decisions have not been in 306 the best interest of the public and that there appears to be little chance for future decisions to be any different, then perhaps a case can be built for the challenging of the license renewals of AETC. To say that programming decisions, once in the hands of production centers, have now been returned to the AETC, in no way degrades the licensee. The question should revolve around: the party best able to meet the needs of the public should be the licensee.
Inconsistencies are prevalent among the AETC staff.
First they ask the Federal government and their critics to remember their Southern heritage and its incumbent problems for educational television. They want to be given more time and special consideration in solving their problems. On the other hand, they ask critics to "forget that this is Alabama. Just judge us as a public broad casting system." it appears that the critics of the AETC are primarily interested in the local communities, and especially the ethnic minorities, and how non-commercial educational television can best serve their needs and help solve their problems. Certainly the AETC can be commended for what changes they have effected since their license renewals were challenged. But these changes are, as are ascertainment procedures, only one step in the right direction. The hiring of one black woman and the 307
appointment of five blacks to an advisory committee to
serve the black communities of the entire state may make
impossible requirements on the talents and experiences of
all six of them. Their activities certainly must be
studied during the ensuing months to determine their
success at influencing programming for better service to
blacks.
Likewise, thorough procedures for ascertaining com
munity needs must.not be viewed as ends in themselves.
They are crucial and necessary to a station's operations but can be considered successful only insofar as programs, policies, and other station services are adjusted and created in response to the needs, issues, and problems
that are ascertained. The Primer requires such response.
Conclusions Suggested by Research
Local Service
The emphasis throughout much of the research indicates a concern for complete service to the local community.
"The FCC's emphasis on local programming, i.e., commercial stations, has equal applicability in terms of public interest service to the ETV station."^ It seems ironic,
3. Robert L. Hilliard, Private interview, Federal Communi cations Commission, Washington, D.C., May 26, 1971. 308 however, that while the Alabama Educational Television
Commission is concerned about the dominance of the PBS net work over local productions, the state network in Alabama actually prohibits truly local broadcasts by the indivi dual stations to their own communities. At the same time, the AETC has abdicated total daytime responsibility to the State Department of Education.
In his address to the 1970 convention of the National
Association of Educational Broadcasters, PCC Chairman
Burch said,
The underlying premise of the entire American scheme of broadcasting is strong local outlets. In that diversity lies its strength, its salva tion. This is just as true in public broad casting as in the commercial field. It does not serve the public interest to have weak local sta tions dependent entirely upon a central program ming source.^
4. Dean Burch, "Responsibility and the Public: A Give and Take,** Educational Broadcasting Review, 1970 Conven tion Report, pp. 18-19.
It appears, from discussions with several producers, that local communities will best be served by location filming and remote broadcasts which keep the stations physically in the community and empathetically involved in the concerns of the people— not isolated in the studios.
In addition to location production, specifically , there appears to be an urgent need for more local 309 productions at all levels. Although network programs can focus on issues which are being felt in communities throughout the nation, the particular needs, unique situa tions, and specific solutions directed to the individual communities must be emphasized.
Two major handicaps to complete local service appear to be UHF transmissions and a laissez faire attitude in the stations. Several of the staff members indicated a real concern for the continuing problem of the inability of the central cities and other economic and geographic pockets to receive UHF signals. The investigator noted an attitude of laissez faire between some administrators and their produ cers . This tends to encourage conclusions by the adminis trators that the producers are assessing community issues on their own for their own programs. At the same time there are producers who assume that the ascertainment of community needs is the responsibility of the station ad ministration and the producers will be informed of any particular needs that should be addressed.
Public Affairs
The stations that get heavily involved in public af fairs productions and become leaders in local issues feel that this involvement has made them a successful station.
They presume that the community is aware of their 3X0
leadership and respects them for it. It was in those sta tions that there appeared to be a greater sense of pride and commitment to involvement. If a station can show, through promotion via other media, that it is an integral part of the community and if its performance indicates community service and responsiveness to issues and needs, then the public will have a basis for respecting and res ponding to the station's operations.
News activities seem to encourage further awareness of community issues. Those stations with active news departments appeared to be very involved with the needs of the various publics.
There are creative uses of television which are being proposed and implemented which should directly help the stations ascertain community problems. The broadcast of town meetings and community forums for soliciting public involvement in the issues of the day has been suggested by several producers. Developing formats which encourage audience response and addressing itself to the controver sies in the community will help a station ascertain the nee d s .
Community involvement on a personal basis by the sta tion personnel is further considered an important aspect of a station's devotion to public affairs. It appears that those broadcasters who expose themselves to a 311
diversity of opinions, attitudes, and activities are more
able to act and react sensitively to the issues.
Minority Needs
Local minority programming is very limited or non
existent. This conclusion based on only five studies is
confirmed by the results of a recent survey conducted by
the NAEB. As reported in Chapter I, in March of 19 71 the
NAEB Office of Minority Affairs surveyed its member sta
tions to determine the extent of locally-produced minority
programming. Lionel Monagas reported to the investigator
on July 20 that the return had been very negligible and e negative. No meaningful compilation was possible.
5. Lionel Monagas, telephone conversation, Washington, D.C., July 20, 1971.
Certainly that result is significant in itself. With the
current emphasis on local and minority productions, one might assume that locally-produced minority programs would be very quickly and proudly announced to anyone within the industry who is interested.
Some of the producers interviewed for this study maintained that the stations lack commitment in terms of meeting black needs. The need for minority programming receives "lip service" but there appears to be little 312
performance. Black public affairs and performing arts
programming is limited to a great extent to network produc
tions. The specific local needs receive very little atten
tion.
In his opening address to the 1970 NAEB convention,
William G. Harley remarked:
A modest increase in the involvement of minority interests and concerns demonstrates another aspect of growing sensitivity to the whole community. Edu cational broadcasters must develop a sense of moral accountability to their potential or real minority audiences, to provide them with the services and information that will enhance their feeling of being free, independent contributors and partici pants in the progress of this country. Yet, with all these encouraging signs, we hear with considerable regularity and volume these days about the need for 'relevance,’ the importance of 'participatory democracy,' local involvement, the rights of citizens to the media, and the need to be 'responsive.' What is important about these aspirations and demands is what they have in com mon. They tell us that our programs are not getting through. In some cases, we may be program ming to ourselves and our colleagues; in other cases, we may be programming at a useless level— 'Intellectualizing about the problem,' as Ossie Davis says— rather than dealing with it. It is no longer possible for communicators, whether in the journalistic or the artistic sense, to deal with the real problems and real issues in this world without including materials, language, and other expressions that some people consider vulgar, obscene, profane or repulsive. In many cases, the only way to avoid offending the tastes of some people is to avoid the treatment of issues and problems that by their nature are distasteful realities. If distasteful realities are what community in volvement yields, then that is the arena in which we must operate.6 313
6. William G. Harley, "The Challenges to Educational Com municators ," Educational Broadcasting Review, 19 70 Conven tion Report, p. 4.
The need for minority employees at all levels in a
station seems to be urgent. Each of the licensees studied
have presently or have had a black producer. The sta
tions' employees all seemed proud of the contribution that
that black person was making or could make. There was a
feeling of urgency, however, that many more members of
minorities must also be employed— in technical support,
production, and administration. At one session of the
19 70 NAEB convention, Tony Brown, chairman of the National
Association of Black Media Producers, warned that "...un
less public television undertakes a meaningful effort to
involve minorities in every possible way, minority groups will use legal means to bring about the destruction of the
public television stations that do not respond to minority
needs." Brown characterized public television as the "play
toy of white racist broadcasters." In a strong statement of minority expectations. Brown declared, "Public televi
sion has failed in its effort to effect public change. If public television can't address itself to the needs of its ■y various publics, then it deserves its own demise." 314
7. "News From the NAEB," November 11, 1970, p. 1.
Stations in this investigation argued that it is
essential and, where tried, very successful to have the
black producers free to spend their time in the community
areas that need to be served.
Giving preliminary authority for particular produc
tions to outside agencies is used in some instructional
divisions. At WETA-TV, for example, the in-school programs
are not supervised by the general Program Committee of the
licensee, but are planned by the school systems. It seems
that this direct planning would facilitate the ascertain
ment of the educational needs and the responsiveness to
those needs since the station administration would not
be involved in the filtering of information back and
forth. This appears to be rather common practice and yet
stations are particularly reluctant to allow ethnic
minority organizations to assume some responsibility for
other programming needs.
A licensee cannot legally give total freedom to a minority citizens' group to program a segment of the week
ly schedule. However, he can put in as a program direc
tor or an advisor any group, as long as the licensee is willing to accept the responsibility for what is put on*
So, for example, if a licensee wants to meet the needs of 315
the inner-city and believes a special group can evaluate
inner-city needs and recommend programs, and the licensee
trusts its judgment, he may legally put on the programs
it recommends within the limits of responsibility to the FCC rules. There is nothing in those rules to prevent a station manager from programming from this basis, just as he scheduled programs prepared by his program director or any other individual or group, accepting licensee o responsibility for putting on that programming.
8. Hilliard interview.
Dave Berkman, writing in his monthly column, "Inner
City," in Educational Television, argued that when stations develop programs on the inner-city, responsibility should go to the blacks of that city.
Black people best know their own problems.... just as educational stations have long farmed out control of a specific program or series to institu tions or organizations which, by virtue of exper tise, merit control of presentations dealing with their specialties, here, too, that principle must obtain. The special expertise of inner city Blacks is the expertise of ghetto existence. To deny this, and the prerogatives of program control which, in this instance, go with it, is paternalistic at best. At worst, it is degrading and an insult.9
9. Dave Berkman, "Inner City," Educational Television, October, 1969, p. 35. 316
Minority employment problems indicate a need for sta
tions to institute summer and other short-term workshops and
training centers. Since stations despair at not finding
qualified blacks to hire, they will need to open their
facilities for developing the skills and providing the
experiences necessary. Internships for professional
training and experience are likewise needed.
The special programming needs in the communities seem
to be in the areas of race, youth, legal and penal reform,
employment, community services, continuing education for
the professions, high school equivalency, and other
courses for credit at all levels.
Use of Boards and Committees
The administrators of stations feel that their Boards
of Trustees or Directors can provide useful input on com
munity needs. Some also have a Citizens* Advisory Com
mittee. The makeup of these boards or committees must be
very carefully considered if they are to be a genuine source
of information on needs and issues in the community. For
Boards of Trustees and Program Committees to be a valid
consultation with community leadership," two essential requirements must be met. Discussion must focus on com munity needs, problems, and issues,and the people must
represent the full range of significant groups and issues 317
in the community. Until WETA-TV, for example, or any
other station purporting to use its Board of Trustees as
a sounding board, can assure the public of that purpose
of discussion and membership composition, its intentions
for serving the public interest must be questioned.
Ralph M. Jennings, a communications analyst for the
Office of Communications of the United Church of Christ in
New York City, addressed himself to this issue when he w r o t e ,
...Public Broadcasting appears to court public funding while it spurns community participation in shaping program service. Lax FCC licensing requirements for educational stations encourage the tendency of many public broadcasters to be more responsive to elitist directorships, wealthy benefactors, and politicians than to the less well situated and more needy elements of their con stituencies . 3-0
10. Ralph M. Jennings, "PTV Needs Responsiveness to the Community," Educational Television, July, 1970, p. 4.
It appears, further, that there could be a potential conflict of interest in having fund raisers become program advisors. Emphasis must be placed on community issues and needs if the licensees' boards are to do more than consider programming and operational problems. Another consideration in the selection of members is the representativeness of opinions. There must be people who can articulate the 318
needs of the many segments of the community. An elected
official may be considered a leader, but he may not really
be in touch with "gut-level” problems. It is cogent to
apply studies on opinion leadership by Katz, Lazarsfeld,
and others. Although those studies focused on the role
of the opinion leader in processes of opinion or behavior
change, the reversed use of those leaders— from the people
back to the media— is an important consideration. One
conclusion in Katz’s analysis of the research that is
especially pertinent to this study is, "Opinion leaders and
the people whom they influence are very much alike and typically belong to the same primary groups of family,
friends and co-workers. It seems, therefore, that a
11. Elihu Katz, "The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up-to-Date Report on An Hypothesis,” Public Opinion Quar terly, XXI (1957), 77. station must tap into those primary groups to discover needs and issues and develop programs and not just talk with the "doctor, lawyer, Indian Chief.”
Ward Quaal and Leo Martin, writing in their text,
Broadcast Management, are likewise concerned about how a station assesses its community problems.
The station manager needs to conduct his own per sonal involvement with the 'people' in his area. He won't necessarily find representatives of the 319
majority at country clubs or among his associates. Lest he become isolated from the mass audience he serves, it is essential for him to keep in touch with them. He should ride a bus, and talk with the people who are on it. He should converse with garage attendants, laborers on construction projects, taxicab or truck drivers, radio-repair men and the myriad of people who live outside his ordinary world.12
20. Ward L. Quaal and Leo A. Martin, Broadcast Management (New York: Hastings House, 1968), p. 60.
It was suggested at some of the stations investigated
that the regularity of meetings and the actual consulta
tions with the staff are further considerations in the
effectiveness of boards and committees.
The use of advisory groups for specific series ap
pears to be a fruitful activity for stations and their
producers. Consultations can be made with subject
resource people and those with special expertise as well
as with the lay citizen.
The success of the Consultants Committee at WVIZ, for
example, might be attributed to several factors. First,
there appeared to be a sincere intent on the part of the
station, in this case represented by a writer-producer, to
actually consult with and heed the suggestions of the com mittee. T.his was neither a group "in name only" nor a
gathering whose only intent was to lend prestige to the 320 station. Another factor was that the meetings were monthly and therefore provided a catalyst for on-going conversa tions. A third factor which seems most efficacious to the investigator was Jefferson's own enthusiasm and sin cerity about the importance of such consultations and the real contributions that the individual members could make. Certainly the effect of this attitude on the com mittee would be profound, especially in contrast to the disdain the management of some stations holds for citizens' groups and their possible influence on station policy or programming.
All personnel involved with in-school programming recognized the urgent need for more utilization experts.
There is a need for more extensive contacts between sta tions and the classroom teachers. In addition, the evening programming could benefit from the concept of utilization experts helping the potential audiences make the best use possible of the programs.
Organized citizens' groups are being noticed by the stations. Some are currently involved in challenging the license renewals of stations across the country. So long as the channel of communication between the groups and the stations stay open, negotiations for the good of the community can be fruitful. Writing about the beginning of public intervention at the FCC, The Office of 321
Communication of the United Church of Christ, noted,
The precedent set by the WLBT case [granting standing to the public to intervene in station licensing procedures of the FCC] made it possible for civic organizations and private citizens to have a legal voice in determining the services they receive from local radio and television stations. The American system of broadcasting is predicated upon the assumption that there will be interaction among the public, the broadcasters and the government. For more than a quarter of a century the refusal of the FCC to admit represen tatives of the public to its proceedings had negated the careful checks and balances written into the Communications Act of 19 34 by the Congress. The absence of public participation in the affairs of broadcasting is largely responsible for the indifference of television and radio stations to the needs and interests of the communities they are licensed to serve . ^
13. Racial Justice in Broadcasting, A Report of a Program to Combat Discrimination Practiced by Broadcast Licensees Against Blacks and Other Minorities By Means of Programming and Employment Practices, Conducted by the Office of Com munications, United Church of Christ. (no date), pp. 3-4.
Former FCC Commissioner Kenneth A. Cox spoke at the
1969 national convention of the American Council for Better
Broadcasts about citizens' groups and how they can increase their effectiveness. He said, in part,
In the first place, I think you should work to know your local broadcasters better. When you feel that you have something to say to one of them, whether by way of criticism or praise, I think you should gather a small group who share your concerns and go to visit the manager of the station or stations. Get to know them personally— they are undoubtedly very important to your com munity. Try to understand their problems and be 322
sure to listen to their side of the matters you have gone to see them about. If you have a realistic understanding of the basics of broadcasting, have your facts straight, and are reasonable in your criticism and constructive in your sugges tions, I think you will find that the broadcasters will listen, and perhaps act to correct or improve matters. Over time, you can develop a mutual respect which, hopefully, will work to the benefit of all concerned. Next, you should know your community. When you seek to influence the operation of a local station, you should do your best to reflect the community, rather than purely personal interests. Our policies require a broadcaster to ascertain the needs and interests of his community, and to develop and pre sent programs to meet them. To do this well, the broadcaster needs help from a wide range of informed and interested members of the public. I think you should try to identify the major problems facing the community, be aware of the community resources the broadcaster can look to in trying to present programs designed to help solve these problems, and be prepared, if asked, to help, yourself, in the development and presentation of such p r o g r a m s .
14. Kenneth A. Cox, "Necessary Self-Training for Citizen Effectiveness," Better Broadcasts News, October 1, 1969, p. 1 .
Funding
The lack of adequate funding for the implementation of procedures to ascertain community needs and for the develop ment of programs addressed to those needs is considered a major problem by the stations. When station personnel say they have no money, they do not mean that literally, of course. What they are actually saying is that on their 323 priority list of how their budget will be allocated, ascertainment is low. If there is a low budget allocation for local productions, as the stations suggested, and if they are as concerned as WETA, for example, that local production is really useful, meaningful, and being watched by the intended audiences, then the first priority ought to be to find out what the public needs so as to make the most efficient and effective use of that low local produc tion budget. If a station has several millions of dollars, it can afford to take the "shot gun" approach and hope that some of the programs meet some of the needs. However, if the budget only allows one hour per day for local produc tion, then the station ought to be quite certain that it is getting and giving the best for that hour-dollar.
Emphasis for local funding was provided by FCC Chair man Burch.
There has been a great deal of attention here on financing for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Of course, that attention is war ranted. But, there has been some tendency to overlook the need for proper financing of the local non-commercial stations. I believe that the Carnegie Report is correct in its assessment that 'the first task, upon which any further ac complishment must be built, is the strengthening of the local stations....'15
15. Burch, "Responsibility and the Public," p. 18. 324
The specific question of funds for a community needs
survey requires further scrutiny. Market Facts, Inc.,
for example, developed a proposal for the Columbia Broad
casting System to develop a survey of the Chicago area,
based on the Primer, that would cost $ 7 9 , 5 0 0 . Presley
16. Market Facts, Inc., Determining Chicago Area Community Problems and Leadership. Contained m FCC Docket No. 18774.
Holmes, Director of the Division of Educational Television
Stations of the NAEB, told the investigator that it would
cost $30,000-$50,000 to do a survey based on the Primer 17 requirements. There are research organizations and
17. Presley Holmes, Private interview, NAEB, Washington, D.C., March 22, 1971. media consultants, however, who are prepared to develop and 18 analyze surveys for as little as $250.00. ° It is also
18. Wade Media Consultants, Inc., "Community Needs Assess ment Package." conceivable that a station staff member with a basic exposure to research methodology and statistics could develop a survey to be conducted by the station staff that would cost a minimum in supplies and time. 325
It seems to the investigator, therefore, that if a
station seriously chose to implement a survey, it could be
done on even a very tight budget, if it were given a
significant position on the priority list.
Informal Input
Why are there no ascertainment procedures? All indi
cations are (1 ) the station managers and other personnel
never really thought about it before; and (2 ) now that
they have recently been considering ascertainment of
community problems, they have concluded that they really have been assessing needs— intuitively. Producers insisted
that the journalists' contacts provide valuable insight on community needs and emerging issues. They firmly believe
in their decisions which are often basically intuitive.
Administrators rely to some extent on input from their staff members. It is important, therefore, to guarantee a diversity of attitudes and experiences. Station personnel seem to believe that intuition, when it is their own, is an acceptable means of making decisions on com munity issues. When intuitive decisions are made by a station manager with whom they disagree, then intuition is not acceptable. They criticize others for using intuition, but praise themselves. As was seen at WOSU-TV, a creative producer insisted on having the freedom to decide which 326
issues are worth his time, and yet he was critical of the
attitudes of the station manager which controlled the manager's decisions.
The producers and the administrators maintained that they already know to a great extent the needs and issues in their communities. They just lack money for productions.
At the same time, it appears that sitting back and waiting to be contacted by organizations with program suggestions is not being truly responsive. Stations have an affirmative obligation to seek out the issues and the problems confronting their communities of service.
The reliance upon these organizations and their publicity activities can be questioned on several levels.
Using that method alone appears to be totally inadequate.
There are no built-in guarantees that the organizations, their activities, or their causes would represent a cross- section of the community. Neither would reliance upon this method provide access of the airwaves to the less vocal or less organized members of the community who may have, none theless, significant needs and problems.
While confidence in the rapport between station and community, such as that expressed at KPBS and WVIZ, may be admirable, it can be seriously questioned whether, in this crisis stage of urban complexities, it is possible that 327
every problem, issue, or need has been or even could be
articulated for the local public television station.
Can this rapport be so perfect that the station personnel
need only to sit back and wait until all problems are
expressed? Even if that were possible, can a station and
its community afford the wait? This investigator believes
not.
Research Needs
Although they trust that they generally know what the
community needs, all station personnel agree that some
research would be useful. The biggest concerns are for
demographic information on the community and assessments
of who is actually watching and whether the programs are
reaching the target audiences. There is, in addition, the
conviction that any type of community survey would be- too
expensive. The investigator submits, however, that surveys
are certainly available to educational stations. Those
stations have access to a virtually untapped resource— the manpower of advanced undergraduate and graduate students.
Those students are continually looking for pertinent and worthwhile research topics to pursue. University stations should cooperate with professors in communications, educa tion, sociology, psychology, or any pertinent area, for the development of term paper topics. There are many 328 courses and departmental activities whose purposes coincide with this type of research. Community stations should inform local colleges of research needs. Students can be supervised in gathering important data on the community and its needs. Quaal and Martin have likewise suggested the use of college research facilities and students.
Educational researchers are particularly suited for the kinds of studies which the local station needs to make of its audience. They, as a rule, have little or no interest in the quantitative 'ratings' type of research but they can become interested in projects which propose to study audience opinions and attitudes.
19. Quaal and Martin, Broadcast Management, p. 61.
Recommendations for Further Research
The study reported herein has led the investigator to ask several more questions which would be appropriate for other students of broadcasting, education, and/or community affairs to pursue.
(1) A study of the composition of ETV Boards of
Trustees, to determine their other membership affiliations, professional responsibilities, financial investments and the potential conflict of interest in providing leadership in educational television.
(2) A definitive comparison of a community's needs as 329 suggested by: (a) the lay public, (b) leaders, (c) social and behavioral scientists, (d) letters from the public to the stations, and (e) the station staff, to determine areas of agreement and provide a valid pattern for consul tations .
(3) Further experimentation in the creative uses of television for ascertaining community needs.
(4) The development of a low-cost community survey that can be implemented and validated by any station staff for its own community.
(5) A study to determine how to maximize UHF satura tion.
(6 ) Studies of programs, intended audiences, and ac tual viewers to determine if programs, such as "Sesame
Street," are being viewed by the target audiences.
(7) A study to test the often-stated hypothesis that community stations are inherently more responsive to com munity needs than are university stations.
Recommendations to the Federal Communications commission
As a result of the foregoing research the investigator makes the following recommendations to the FCC:
(1) Revise FCC Form 340, Section IV, so as to require applicants for non-commercial educational television stations to show how the community's problems, needs, and 330
interests have been ascertained and what proposed broadcast
matter will meet those problems, needs, and interests.
This revision assumes the requirements as outlined in
the Primer. The answers to Primer questions 9, 11(b), and
12 (see Appendix C) should allow the use of supervised
university students being trained in research techniques.
There have been many national organizations and
leaders in the field of educational broadcasting as well
as some station personnel themselves, who have expressed
a desire for the Primer to include non-commercial educa
tional broadcasting. Their conclusions tend to support
those of the investigator in this study. The United Church of Christ has related, for example,
The boards of directors of educational stations are largely upper class whites. They may be per sons who are not informed about the needs of minorities and may not have indicated interest in the problems of minorities. Isolated, segre gationist control of educational stations is ex acerbated by the iact that the FCC does not require educational stations to ascertain the needs and interests of the communities they serve, as com mercial stations are made to do. As a consequence, educational stations escape the requirement imposed by the Communications Act that all station licen sees must broadcast in the public interest, con venience and necessity. The deliberate neglect of the needs of minorities by the educational stations is a dereliction of public trust.2^
20. Racial Justice, pp. 15-16. 331
In the many comments filed with the FCC on the pro
posed Primer were numerous statements of conviction that
non-commercial educational stations should be included in
the requirements to ascertain community needs. Among those were the National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, the
Office of Communications of the United Church of Christ,
the Community Relations Service of the U.S. Department of
Justice, the Association of Afro-American Television
Producers, Michigan State University, the State University of New York, and the National Mexican American Anti-Defa mation Committee. One group commented.
Since public channels are involved, these stations should serve public needs. The ascertainment of needs should not be left solely to the personal predilections and judgments of the directors or contributors but should be determined by an objec tive pjrocess of community consultation. Many educational channels are presently being used in a manner which does not realize their full poten tial for public service .21
21. Comments of the National Citizens Committee for Broad casting on Proposed Primer, Docket No. 18774, January 29, 1970, p. 2.
William H. Siemering, the general manager of an educa tional radio station noted:
In granting exemption, the Commission is assuming the role of an overly protective parent toward the non-commercial broadcaster. Exempting us from rigorous exercise will not enable us to become as 332
strong as our commercial colleagues. Even though the primary reference group of the non-commercial broadcaster may be different from the commercial broadcaster, he may be just as isolated from com munity problems and knowledge about the needs of the total community .2 2
22. Comments by William H. Siemering, Docket No. 18774, January 29, 1970.
In writing about the need for public television to be responsive to the community, Jennings asserted:
The educational resources available to most non commercial broadcasters are uniquely capable of producing meaningful studies of the needs of all segments of the community. With representative community surveys and evaluation as the necessary and legally binding prerequisites to proposing programming, station management would be precluded from bowing to the predilections of the parochial interests now dictating station policies.
Let us hope that the FCC comes to a timely decision that a meaningful process of community ascertainment and program proposal for non-commer cial as well as commercial broadcasters is in the public interest.23
23. Jennings, "PTV Needs Responsiveness," p. 4.
More than ten years ago Sydney Head came to the same general conclusion:
The goal of ETV...is (or should be) to provide first of .all a service— not just a conglomeration of pro grams, but a sequence of events which relate directly to the needs of its audience as they emerge through out the day, the week, the year. To this extent, 333
ETV’s function is no different from that of commercial television. The difference lies in the identity of the audience and the kinds of needs served.*4
24. Sydney W. Head, "A Friendly Critic on ETV Programs," in Educational Television: The Next Ten Years (Stanford: The Institute for Communication Research, 19^2), p. 131.
The contribution of students to the ascertainment
process has not been unexplored. At Iowa State University,
for example, students majoring in Telecommunicative Arts
have served more than thirty-eight radio and television
stations in Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota,
and Nebraska. The students, under the direction of
Charles Connolly, have helped the stations ascertain their
community needs and. problems, as part of their license 25 renewal procedure.
25. "Feedback," November, 1970, p. 7.
As a result of the research conducted by the investi
gator and conversations with staff members of the FCC, the
above recommendation for an ETV Primer-type requirement and
the supporting research will be forwarded to the Educa
tional Broadcasting Branch and Education Commissioner H.
Rex Lee for their further consideration.
(2) Require each non-commercial educational television station to form a Citizens* Advisory Council. The membership 334 shall reflect the various economic, social, political, cultural, governmental, educational, religious, agricul tural, labor, professional, racial, and ethnic elements of the community. The primary purpose of this council shall be to consult regularly and frequently with station per sonnel at all levels to provide insight into the community problems, needs, and interests. It shall also initiate program proposals and such other station activities which it' feels essential to the station's responsiveness to the community.
This recommendation is also to be forwarded to the
FCC for its consideration.
(3) Applications and accompanying exhibits need not be kept at a station, available for public inspection, longer than seven years. When the FCC established that time limit, it intended to "...provide sufficient records available to the general public on which sound presentations can be made to the Commission." The Commis sion pointed out that it was
...requiring only that material be kept in public files which will provide essential material to members of the public who are interested in re viewing a licensee's relationship with the public and the Commission. It noted that it receives a vast amount of correspondence from the public concerning the broadcast industry and said this clearly indicates the interest citizens have in the activities of the industry and individual broadcasters.26 335
26. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Report and Order, Docket No. 18604. Seven-Year Retention Period Adopted for Broadcast Station "Local Inspection" Files, April 15, 1970, pp. 1-2.
Since a Statement of Purpose is filed only once with
the Commission and only a reference is made to it in sub
sequent applications, at the end of seven years a licensee
could destroy its exhibit that is called for in Section IV, question 1. Consequently, citizens wishing to assess a
station's performance in terms of its stated purposes or
objectives have no guaranteed means to do so. The inves
tigator firmly believes that any earnest and sincere desire on the part of individuals or citizens' groups to assess a non-commercial educational television station's performance must begin with the purposes for establishing such a station. After seven years, however, a citizen
from the local community would not have easy access to the station’s statement of purpose for any assessment of
its community service. The investigator recommends,
therefore, that the FCC require licensees to keep available,
for public inspection, indefinitely, the Statement of
Purposes and Objectives submitted under Section IV, paragraph 1. The statement never needs to be submitted to the Commission more than once and the licensee's copy would be kept in the public file. 336
The investigator is initiating a petition for rule making on this recommendation to the FCC.
(4) The Commission rules limit ownership of stations by networks,and the Commission has expressed great concern about other patterns of ownership. It appears that allowing one state organization (e.g., the Alabama Educational
Television Commission) to own and operate all non-commercial educational television stations in the state violates the public interest. The stations are subservient to the state network. There is no truly local community service. As it is currently organized, the AETC, as licensee, must retain ultimate control over the material broadcast. A better way to insure service to the local community interests, it would appear, is to transfer six of the licenses to the educational institutions which presently operate the indi vidual studios. The AETC could retain the licenses for the extra transmitters and would become the administrative and technical center for the network. It would then function as a coordinator of the state network programming, while providing research and development for extending its services to all people in the state. The local licensees would have the power to produce and schedule programs directed to their own community concerns and could pre empt the state network schedule whenever local interests could be better served. 337
It is recommended that this transfer of licenses be sought by the educational institutions or other local, non-profit, community groups interested in serving the local educational needs. It is further recommended that the FCC approve such transfers in its disposition of the proceeding involving the Alabama Educational Television
Commission. At the same time, the FCC should establish a rule prohibiting network ownership of all stations in any state. Network operations can be encouraged for states, regions, and the nation, but service to the needs, problems, and interests of the local community must take precedence.
Comments will be filed with the FCC in accordance with these opinions and recommendations.
For Licensees to Consider
Recommendations
From the activities that appeared to be most success ful at the stations included in this study or thought to be potentially fruitful by the persons interviewed, the in vestigator makes the following recommendations:
(1) Make a concerted attempt to define the various communities and establish purposeful lines of communication into those communities. Establish procedures for gathering input on community needs from the Board of 338
Trustees, Advisory Council, and/or other community leaders.
(2) Establish a Citizens' Advisory Council with a full
range of attitudes, experiences, and organizations repre
sented. Its membership should reflect the community ele ments outlined above in the second recommendation to the
FCC. One commissioner's office at the FCC is drawing up
tentative plans for the recommended use of citizen advisory
groups, not only for community problems but also for
programming.
It might be argued that regular consultation with a
citizens' council preceding programming decisions would be, in a very pragmatic sense, much safer than facing the challenge at renewal time of an active citizenry. The
WLBT case in Jackson, Mississippi has shown broadcasters that citizens* groups now have standing in evidentiary 2 7 hearings.
27. For a complete discussion of this case and its ramifi cations see, Ernest E. Phelps, "The Office of Communica tion: The Participant Advocate— Its Function as a Citizen Group in Broadcasting, March, 1964 - March, 1971" (unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 19 71).
The Kettering Conference on Public Television Program ming at Wingspread in June, 1969, elicited many observa tions about the obligations of educational licensees.
John W.. peavis, Jr., an independent television producer 339
from New York, stated that "...PTV is in the hands of
the wrong people, and that until control is shared with young, black, and poor people, its viewing audience will
continue to be ridiculously meager . " 2 8
28. Editorial, "Kettering Conference on PTV Programming," Educational Television, August, 1969, p. 8 .
Another assessment of the responsibility of educa tional licensees to solicit representative ideas from the community is the following:
As an educational communication facility in a democracy, the ETV station has the responsibility for providing a forum for diverse ideas and issues. It bears a special responsibility both in its capacity as an educator and as a mass communicator in a free society to promote through its programs and their content the highest ideals of free in quiry and expression. It must provide an outlet for the ideas and aspirations of minority groups which are not readily available on the commercial stations. The ETV station must see itself as serving not only the general community, but also its constituent parts. Judgments on who is to be served and in what manner must be made not uni laterally or on the 'notion' of the hierarchy of the station, but through a wide-based and system atic advisement structure where needs and trends are carefully considered and fully represented. 28
29. John M. Wood, "WOSU-TV: Philosophy and Objectives" (unpublished report, The Ohio State University, 1971), p. 2 . 340
(3) Initiate a major community-involvement effort such as an Auction or a Pledge Night. These activities seem to be successful in generating interest in and excitement about the local educational channel among the citizens and business community as well as bringing in additional and much-needed funds.
(4) Pursue news activities with the goal being the creation of a News Department. Approaching some public affairs programs from a journalistic point of view like wise appears to open the channel of communication between a station and its community.
(5) Develop program formats that provide for on-the- air ascertainment of community needs. Make creative use of television.
(6 ) Employ members of minorities for all levels of administration and production, but especially in public affairs. Regardless of their expertise, encourage all employees to interact and share perceptions of the issues and needs in the community.
The executive producer of n e t ' s "Black Journal,"
Tony Brown, speaking at the 1970 NAEB convention,
"...castigated broadcasters who shy away from airing pro grams depicting black culture realistically and who 'keep a list of bad words on their desks' to stifle authentic 341 black voices."3®
30. "NAEB Confronts Its Own Racial Crisis,*' Broadcasting, November 16, 1970, p. 38.
Dr. Robert L. Hilliard, Chief of the Educational
Broadcasting Branch of the FCC was asked: "What methods can be used to help ETV stations become more responsive to community needs and problems?" His reply was:
A greater inclusion in policy development, opera tion, and staff of people actively involved in the problems of the community and this, in fact, can be reflected in part in the FCC's Equal Employment stand. Other approaches in terms of total com munity might include a greater awareness on the part of ETV of its role as an alternative service so that it pinpoints and meets specific areas of public interest not already met by other stations in the community.31
31. Hilliard interview.
(7) Have at least one minority producer free to spend a significant amount of his time in the community. He should listen to the members of the community as well as stimulate them. He can be responsible for fuller coopera tive efforts between the station and the community it is licensed to serve.
(8 ) Work with the NAEB, the CPB, and the U.S. Congress to broaden the financial base for local non-commercial 342 educational broadcasting. In addition to making ascertain ment procedures accessible, this will provide more local programming latitude and freedom. It will, furthermore, give worthy program ideas a chance to be aired when the person or group initiating the idea does not have adequate funds .
The Future
Discussions of the ascertainment of community needs are often fraught with over-reactions, rationalizations, caution, testiness, skepticism, and urgency, but always with great interest. The discussions, for non-commercial educational broadcasters, are far from concluded. This study has attempted to shed some light on the processes involved and to provoke further action by those who care about public -television and the affairs of their communities.
In view of the conduct of the stations in this study, it appears that they have not met the expectations out lined above. These stations, as well as others throughout the country, have important steps ahead.
Licensees who are committed to serving their publics will first ascertain the needs for that service. The needs of the community are sine qua non and must take precedence over the interests of the broadcasters. The Supreme Court told broadcasters, in its discussion of the First 343
Amendment:
It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount ....It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail.... It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, esthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences which is crucial h e r e . ^ 2
32. U.S., Supreme Court, Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission. 39 5 U.S. 367 (1969), pp'. 2 1 - 2 2 .
Educational broadcasters have further responsibilities based on their special licenses. To become a non-commer- cial educational licensee, one must show "...that the pro posed station will be used primarily to serve the educa tional needs of the community; for the advancement of educational programs; and to furnish a nonprofit and non commercial television broadcast service. This indefinite
33. U.S., Federal Communications Commission, Rules and Regulations, 3.621. statement has allowed broadcasters to develop programs in any of several directions. However, the urgency for developing programming which meets specific and special needs has been felt. While educational stations may have been meeting the needs for quality music and drama and 344 special skills in cooking and knitting, the Supreme Court has emphasized expanded needs: "...access to social, political, esthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences...."^
34. Supreme Court, Red Lion, p. 22.
The ascertainment of those needs appears to be a crucial step in serving the public interest. When a station spends several hundred thousand dollars on purpor tedly meeting the needs, it does not seem unreasonable to expect the licensee to expend five to six percent of the budget to determine and assess those needs first.
It would appear that a full-time staff position devoted to ascertaining community needs is called for. A person in that position could develop full demographic descriptions of the community, a survey of the needs as articulated by the general public, and on-going dialogue between station management and community leaders.
It is in that way that the public can be more nearly assured that its interests and needs are, indeed, considered paramount. APPENDIX A
MINORITY EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES OF EDUCATIONAL BROADCASTING STATIONS
345 346
S u m m a r y
tor the third ti-cci'wce scai the Njnon.il Assoc ladon o( hduc alional Biuadcasu-n has surveyed (h« employment practices of educ al n>n,il iikvisiiMi and rjdro IdciJmt > »■■ the United Suics, Some ol I he findings noi unt^pu hkhs arc- disquieting. Others indicate that station managers are mAinx jo trfloil lo atteler* die ret ruilm enl ol m in o iih personnel. Most alarming i- ihc 1 ail Ihji 1 tdutahunjl mJili and television station licensers out ot j lulal ol ifcti approached chose not to pariiv ip.lie iri ihv N Al ti *u r m *. 4 hn m u >1 be m ru preird in It'll,- ^ tn K M ol an fdu«. j(r>-rv>l hrojdvasiing system th ji lur several years has been rviminmg its r 1' or I jntl irs inn 10 1 hart a sifcrvlik. jnt course Ln the .hvj of mmmiry n i ruiimtnl jnid development. I hi nliK i^rne to tOuO'-i die in j r uni.ompiic died sai is lestimcmv t o t he extent 01 nusumJef Handing jn-d insensiliviiy 1hal e*,nl regarding mjriuut> cmplus mem oppoi lunuy It should h c n o ie d i h jt ihy u.ita collet in i here cannot he subic-cied 10 any rigorous tests of su m lk al analysts Many survey responses weic meoTiplett, P4 > iiculirl y rccirchnntotjlempicy rrunt Injures. However, the sunrv is beginning 10 provide material lor useful eomp 4 Msoni. is I he data does represent Ihc number and level ol minority group employees in lb? stations that iL"tp{ir>LiriJ A surnnidi1! ot the findi • .s (hat arc «xjmini‘d tn detail in the tables in Pari II ol this report provides an interesting starling point lur visor owrr jnjivsrs 01 itie data 1. More rddio d^J Tele vi s^i^n licensers responded this sear I ?(J4I than in 1469 M 751 Of in 1 96B { I 22). I 2 i of 1 30 tele* vision licensees and 9 I 01 230 radio licensers icspondcd in 1970. 2., In the pjsi 12 months thyre hjs been ashghl me (trace m the number ol minority group personnelemployed in educa- lionjl broadcasting. Minonly personnel now rcprisenl I 1 s pei tent ol the work lurce (646 employ tcsoul of a total 01 s447 ,. In 196 per cent of I he lotaH 5 1 J of 5 131 employ ecs). fl is im portant that the 101 jI number ot minor,ty people employ ed keeps ir>i reaving. How the; are employed is more crucial. 3, There is siill no minority person "n a chiet esecutisc position. >1 , Mjnorne personnel rdentitied as maior dcrpai iment hrads dlopped tinm I 5 to 6 . 5. Minority personnel m othei supervisory oosiiiuns doubled from 15 10 TO, 6 . In production, minor 1 tv person rvel employ e
Tables TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF ALL RFSPON5E5 FROM EDUCATIONAL RADIO AND TELEVISION STATION LICENSEES* FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Metican- Spjn -Amer, Amec, T o ta l |o b T itle Total M F N tfr o Amrfican Puerto Rican Indian Awm O ther MG**
Chiel EtecuLrvc 144 135 1 2 ti (3 0 0 0 0 0 Mak.'f D epi. Heads 4 7 7 421 61 4 1 0 } 1 1 8 Other Supervisory 342 81 2 U 5 3 0 2 0 30 T'alhc Coniin'j.tv : i 4 69 M b 13 u 0 \ ■y 1 17 tyrcutive rm jucer jnd'ur Wr iter 141 105 27 6 1 O 0 0 0 7 Sf Jtf Prodiitci • Directory 734 i : i 7 1 21 4 6 8 T 1 2 97 Oq iht-Air lalenl fib? 369 222 74 1 2 m s ti 1 197 Prnduchon A1*-Is no 34»f> r : 1 4 -s 4 1 s n it >2 CdimrjrTHn JW 212 25 >4 4 (I 2 0 43 btjp'ng, Lighiiii^ Ariicix'Ptiuu^. 147 251 61 0 i 2 I 0 23 Opi'iaTmg Lngrs. 641 lb 29 7 6 3 j 4 51 M.i>fitenancc Fngis 2ft7 2t>3 7 6 I 4 1 V (j 14 d e l <4. al Wki 1 14 546 92 9 F 2 6 0 117 OTHER 6 6 0 0 n 0 0 0 p “ — ■-- 1 TOTALS 5447 37 j 1 T444 355 4b 199 15 2(1 9 616
*204 l. ktiwtt -* lolat Mieonr. tirowp Lmptoy tv 3*7
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES FROM EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION STATIONS F ULL-TIME. EMPLOYEES*
Me* Ic^n- Sfun.'An»«f. A w f, Totil |ot> Tills foul M F Nvjirti Amcfkiin PlK'i lo Ricjri tmlijn A^tdfl Other m g **
CSii’l F \fiiiiiu 7 l . 71 1 a 11 11 ( j n 0 ft Mji-it tX'pi. Hi.id' JSS ?7 •> 1 (1 0 0 (I y Otho 2S>74in 3 1 ft 2 n is Tr.jrtiH 1 Hi \> s (1 0 n 1 i 10 L V. L kjt | vi- PrudUM'i .mi]
■ I J.1 ** fofjl Mir i;^ l-nur I.
1 A B L E 7
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES FROM EDUCATIONAL 1LLL VISION STATIONS PART-TIME EMPLOYEES"
Mcjikjrv Spjn-Amer. Amtt Tdljl jobTiik Tnul MF Nttpo A*ne*Hjn PlU-fld RRja InJiirt A>wn Oth«r MG"* Chitf Lirciiiivr i 1 fj n ft ft n ft 0 0 Major IXpi. Ik jii*- to 4 ft li 0 (i 0 (1 ft Ottit*' Sur^rvisiHv ! \ 1ft (■ 0 u 0 (J 2 Ti j I (i t i Li 1 in u c I \ ; i In 2T ft 0 fi I (I 2 L MX U11 \ i' ftr <'dim. Of jnd iik VVrilfr q t n ft (t i) ii o 0 n 5utt Pri'duicr Oiirclrtri <“ T- n 1 1 f/i fi n' ft f? On fhi-Aip laUnl ! 1 - 171 2< in? 4 I it ft 127 Pn.idUvft«'M Vst- 11 .,T .,v in tel ft 0 ft ft i i Lami ‘j men 1 it' (ft* ; 5 u 1 (I I 11 is Sl I^'iiL! 1 ' * y liM*. I't'.i'i’o =;n ?<► 5 ft 1 I ft 0 7 ( *.t. • jMni. f ri^ir s Cl' 1 1 i ft n n T S MjmU'nsinLr t.rv v r: ft i» ft l t1 ft 2 Cl.'l md! ‘I l i i ii7 I'l 1 •> I 2 ft I1* 07 HER n • : ft i] ft ft fj ft ft • ft ■ — ■ ■ — - — 1 101 ALS S-T yiti h> 14 \i* ft > I 257
IJ I Pi •.[Wum * HifijriT> 4>riHir Cn p l O h rr- APPENDIX B
FCC FORMS 301 and 34 0, SECTION IV "Statement of Program Service"
348 f3 « 3 1Sa *i ft p p 5 B E Cl 2 ■» l 1 ii i S'*! i ii n {{} fist Ml jr si] lit* t Si i ii!*m £ 3 ii 1 IS] I I* Ii H {l ! n ;il 1 -! if m 1« HIS fti 1 £ M J t i r n ilJ » lii 1 * i p. Ji Ii 11| I Iji i i il h i l l i 5 i lit i i ' i ' l i 3 SI U i | i ii i l ii l < I i *S S* j I 3 j *11 3 J 1 1 n 1 5’ ( M S 1 I ] i * si1 1 ii ii fin! si'iii'i'i'i ill! APPENDIX C FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION "PRIMER" 351 352 FEDERAL COKKUKICATICKS COMMISSION PRIMER ON PART I SECTION IV-A AM) IV-B OF APPLICATION FORMS CONCERNING ASCERTAINMENT OF COMMUNITY PROBLEMS AND BROADCAST MATTER TO DEAL WITH THOSE PROBLEMS A- General 1. Question: With what applications does this Primer apply in answering Part I, Section IV (A or B) of the application forms? Answer: With applications fori a. construction permit for new "broadcast stations; b. construction permit for a change in authorized facilities when the statIon*s proposed field In tensity contour {Grade B for television, 1 mV/m for Ffc, or 0.5 mV/m for AN) encompasses a new area that is eaual to or greater than 5 0 % of the area within the authorized field intensity contours; c. construction permit or modification of license- to change station location; d* construction permit for satellite television station, including a 1 0 0 $ satellite; e. the assignee^ or transferee's portion of appli cations for assignment of broadcast license' or transfer of control, except In pro forma cases where Form 3 1 6 is appropriate. Educational organizations filing applications for educa tional non-commercial stations are exempt from the pro visions of this Primer. 2. Question: If Section IV (A or B) has been recently submitted, must an applicant conduct a hew ascertain ment of community problems and submit a new Section IV? Answer: Needless duplication of effort will not be recuired. Prior filings within the year previous to the tender of the present application will generally be acceptable, where they were filed by the same applicant, for the same station or for another sta tion in the same community and there sire no signi ficant coverage differences involved. Parties re lying on previous filings must specifically refer to the application relied on and state that in their 353 Judgment there has been no change since the earlier filing. Proposed assignors and trans ferors of control are not required to file Part I even where they must file, other parts of Section IV. 3. Question: What Is the general purpose of Part I. Section IV-A or IV-B? Answer: To show what the applicant has done to ascertain the problems, needs and Interests of the residents of his community of license and other areas he undertakes to serve (See Ques tion 6 , below), and what broadcast matter he proposes to meet those problems, needs and In- - terests, as evaluated. The word "problems" will be used subsequently in this Primer as a short form of the phrase "problems, needs and Interests." The phrase "to meet community problems" will be used to include the obliga tion to meet, aid in meeting, be responsive to, or stimulate the solution for community prob lems . 4. Question: How should ascertainment of community problems be made? Answer: By consultations with leaders of the significant groups in the community to be served and surrounding areas the applicant has under taken to serve, and by consultations with mem bers of the general public* In order to know what significant groups are found in a particu lar community, its composition must be deter mined, see Question and Answer 9. The word "group" as used here is broad enough to include population segments, such as racial and ethnic groups, and informal groups, as well as groups with formal organization. 5* Question: Can an applicant rely upon long-time residency in or familiarity with, the area to be served instead of making a showing that he has ascertained community problems? Answer: No. Such an ascertainment is mandatory. 6 . . Question: Is an applicant expected to ascertain community problems outside the community of license? Answer: Yes. Of course, an applicants prin cipal obligation Is to ascertain the problems of his community of license. But he should also ascertain the problems of the other com munities that he undertakes to serve, as set forth ir. his response to Question 1(A) (2) of Section IV-A or IV-B. Applicants for stations licensed to more than one city, or for channels assigned to two or more cities, or proposed transferees or assignees of stations which have obtained waiver of the station identification rules to permit secondary Identification with additional cities, are expected to ascertain problems in each of the cities. If an appli cant chooses not to serve a major community that falls within his service contours a show ing: must be submitted explaining: why. How ever, no major city more than 7 5 miles from the transmitter site need be included in the applicant's ascertainment, even if the station's contours exceed that distance. Question: Must the ascertainment of community problems for the other areas the applicant un dertakes to serve be as extensive as for the city of license? Answer: No. Normally, consultations with com munity leaders who can be expected to have a broad overview of community problems would be sufficient to ascertain community problems. Question: Should an applicant for a major chanpre in facilities (see Answer 1(b), above) make a new ascertainment of community problems for the entire service area or Just the addi tional area to be served? Answer: Only the additional area to be served need be subjected to a new ascertainment of community problems. Only communities or areas covered by Question and Answer 6 need be ascer tained, to the extent indicated in Answer 7. Question: How does an applicant determine the composition of his city of license? Answer: The applicant may use any method he chooses, but gruesswork or estimates based upon allered area familiarity are inadequate. Current data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Chamber of 355 Commerce and other reliable studies or reports are acceptable* The applicant must submit such data as is necessary to Indicate the minority, racial, or ethnic breakdown of the community, its economic activities, governmental activities, public service organizations, and any other factors or activities that make the particular community distinctive. 10. Question* If the applicant shows consultations with leaders of groups and organizations that represent various economic, social, political, cultural and other elements of the community, such as government, education, religion, agri culture, business, labor, the professions, racial and/or ethnic groups, and eleemosynary organizations, is the applicant still required to submit a showing in support of its determina tion of the composition of the community? Answer* Yes. The purpose of requiring a deter mination of the community is to inform the appli cant and the Commission what groups comprise the community. The applicant must use that informa tion to select those who are to be consulted as representatives of those groups. That determin ation may be challenged on a showing, Including supporting data, that a significant group has been omitted. The "significance" of a group may rest on several criteria, including its sl.ze, its Influence, or its lack of influence in the community. B. Consultations with Community Leaders and Kembers of the General Public. 11(a). Question* Who should conduct consultations with community leaders? Answer: Principals or management-level employ ees. In the case of newly formed applicants who have not hired a full staff and are applying for new stations, or for transfer or assignment of an authorization, principals, management-level employees, or prospective management-level em ployees. must be used to consult with community leaders• 11(b). Question* Who should consult with members of the general public? Answer* Principals or employees. In the case 356 of newly formed applicants who have not hired a full staff and are applying for new stations, or for transfer or assignment of an authorization, principals, employees or prospective employees may conduct consultations. If consultations are conducted by employees who are below the manage ment level, the consultation process must be supervised by principals, management-level em ployees, or prospective management-level employ ees, In addition, the applicant may choose to use a professional research or survey service to conduct consultations with members of the general public, 12, Question! To what extent may a professional research or survey service be used in the ascer tainment process? Answer: A professional service would not estab lish a dialogue between decision-making personnel in the applicant and community leaders • There fore, such a service may not be used to consult community leaders. However, a professional ser vice, as indicated in Answer 11(b), may be used to conduct consultations with the general pub lic, A professional service may also be used to provide the applicant with background data, including Information as to the composition of the city of license. The use of a professional research or survey service is not required to meet Commission standards as to ascertaining community problems. The applicant will be re sponsible for the reliability of such a service. 13(a). Question: With what community leaders should consultations be held? Answeri The applicant has already determined the composition of the community, and should select for consultations those community lead ers that reflect that composition. Groups with the greatest problems may be the least organ ized and have the fewest recognized spokesmen. Therefore, additional efforts may be necessary to Identify such groups and better ascertain their problems. 13(b). Question: With what members of the general public should consultations be held? Answer: A random sample of members of the general public should be consulted. The 357 consultations should be designed to further ascertain community problems which may not have been revealed by consultations with community leaders* In addition to a random sample, if the applicant has reason to believe that further consultations with a particular group may reveal further problems or may elicit viewpoints that will give him further insight into its problems, he Is encouraged to consult with additional members of that group. 1^* Question* Kow many should be consulted? Answer: Ko set number or formula has been adopted. Community leaders from each signifi cant group must be consulted, A sufficient number of members of the general public to assure a generally random sample must also be consulted. The number of consultations will vary, of course, with the size of the city In question and the number of distinct groups or organizations. I.o formula has been adopted as to the number of consultations in the city of license compared to other communities falling within the station's coverage contours. Appli cants for stations in relatively small communi ties that are near larger communities are re minded that an ascertainment of community prob lems primarily in the larger community raises a question as to whether the station will realis tically serve the smaller city, or Intends to abandon its obligation to the smaller city. 15* Question: VIhen should consultations be held? Answer: In preparing applications for major changes in the facilities of operating stations, a complete new ascertainment must be made within six (6 ) months prior to filing the application. Applicants for a new facility, or the party filing the assignee or transferee portion of an application for assignment or transfer, are also required to hold consultations with six (6 ) months prior to filing an appropriate applica tion. 16* Question* Is a showing on the ascertainment of community problems defective if leaders of one of the groups that comprise the community, as dis closed by the applicant's study, are not con sulted? 358 Answer * The omission of consultations with leaders of a significant group would make the a p p l i c a n t s shov:Ing defective, since those con sulted would not reflect the composition of the community, 17* Questioni In consultations to ascertain community problems, may a preprinted form or questionnaire be used? Answer: Yes. A Questionnaire may serve as a useful guide for consultations v:ith community leaders, but cannot be used In lieu of personal consultations• Members of the general public may be asked to fill out a Questionnaire to be collected by the applicant. If the applicant uses a form or Questionnaire, a copy should be submitted with the application. 18. Question* In consulting with community leaders to ascertain community problems, should an applicant also elicit their opinion on what pro pram s the applicant should broadcast? Answer: It is not the purpose of the consulta tions to elicit program suggestions. (See Question and Answer 3 *) Rather, It Is to ascer tain what the person consulted believes to be the problems of the community from the standpoint of a leader of the particular proup or organiza tion. Thus, a leader in the educational field would be a useful source of information on edu cational matters; a labor leader, on labor matters; and a business leader on business matters. However, it is also recognized that Individual leaders may have significant comments outside their respective fields, and the appli cant should consider their comments v:lth respect to all community problems• The applicant has the responsibility for determining what broad cast matter should be presented to meet the ascertained community problems as he has evalu ated them. 19. Question: If, in consulting with community leaders and members of the general public, an applicant receives little information as to the existence of community problems, can he safely assume that only a few problems actually exist? Answer: Ko. The assumption is not safe* The applicant should re-examine his efforts to 359 determine whether his consultations have been designed to elicit sufficient Information. Obviously, a brief or chance encounter will not provide adequate results. The person Inter viewed should be specifically advised of the purpose of the consultation. The applicant should note that many individuals, when con sulting with a broadcast applicant, either Jump to the conclusion that the applicant Is seeking proj?T£mmlnr preferences, or express community problems in terms of exposure or publicity for the particular group or groups with which they are affiliated. The applicant nay properly note these connents, but should ask further questions designed to elicit more extensive responses as to community problems. 20. Question: In responding to Part I of Section IV-A or IV-B hovr should the applicant identify the community leaders consulted? Answer: By name, position, and/or organization of each. If further Information is required to clearly identify a specific leader, it should be submitted. 21. Question: Should the information elicited from a community leader, from the standpoint of the group he represents, be set forth after his name? Answer: It is not required, but the applicant may find it desirable. The information can be set forth in a general list of community prob lems • C. Information Received 22. Question: I'luet all community problems which were revealed by the consultations be included in the applicants showing? Answer: All ascertained community problems should be listed, whether or not he proposes to treat them through his broadcast natter. An applicant need not, however, list comments as to community problems that are clearly frivo- . l ous• D. Applicant's Evaluation 23. Question: What is meant by an "applicant's 360 evaluation" of information received as to community problems? Answeri The applicants evaluation is the pro cess by which he determines the relative impor tance of the community problems he has ascer tained, the timeliness of the various comments, and the extent to which he can present broad cast matter to meet the problems. 2^. Question: Is the applicant's evaluation to be included in his application? Answer: It is not reouired. Where the appli cant's broadcast matter does not appear to be sufficiently responsive to the community prob lems disclosed by his consultations, the appli cant may be asked for an explanation by letter of inquiry from the Commission. See Questions and Answers 25 and 26. 25. Question: Must an applicant plan broadcast matter to meet all community problems disclosed by his consultations? Answer* Hot necessarily. However, he is expected to determine, in pood faith which of such problems merit treatment by the station. In determining what kind of broadcast matter should be presented to meet those problems, the applicant may consider his program format and the composition of his audience, but bear ing in mind that many problems affect and are pertinent to diverse groups of people. 26. Question: If an applicant lists a number of community problems but in his evaluation deter mines that he will present broadcast matter to meet only one or two of them, would the pro posal be defective? Answer: A prime, facie question would arise as to how the proposal would serve the public interest, and the applicant would have the burden of establishing the validity of his proposal. 2?. Question: As a result of the evaluation process, is an applicant expected to propose broadcast matter to meet community problems in proportion to the number of people irvolved in the problem? 361 Answer: No* For example, the applicant. In his evaluation (see Question and Answer 23) might determine that a problem concerning? a beautification program affecting all the people would not have the relative importance and immediacy of a problem relating to inadequate hospital facilities affecting only a small per centage of the community, but In a life-or- death way* E* Broadcast latter to Keet the Problems as Evaluated 28. Question: What is meant by "broadcast matter"? Answer: Programs and announcements. 29* Question: In the application, must there be a showing? as to what broadcast matter the appli cant is proposing to what problem? Answer: Yes. See Public Notice of August 22, 1968, FCC 68-8^7, 13 HR 2 d 1303* The applicant should give the description, and anticipated time segment, duration and frequency of broad cast of the program or program series, and the community problem o r problems which are to be treated by it. One appropriate way would be to list the broadcast matter and, after it, the particular problem or problems the broadcast matter is designed to meet. Statements such as "programs will be broadcast from time to time to meet community problems," or "news, talk and discussion programs will be used to meet commun ity problems," are clearly Insufficient. Appli cants should note that they are expected to make a positive, diligent and continuing effort to meet comrunity problems. Therefore, they are expected to modify their broadcast mstter if warranted in light of changed community prob lems. If announcements are proposed, they should be identified with the community prob lem or problems they are designed to neet. 30. Question: Can an applicant specify only an nouncements and no programs to meet community problems ? Answer: A proposal to present announcements 362 only would raise a question as to the adequacy of the proposal. The applicant would have the burden of establishing that announcements would b e the most effective method for meeting- the community problems he proposes to meet* If the burden is not met by the shoving in the applica tion, It will be subject to further inquiry. 31. Ouestion: What Is meant by devoting a "signi ficant proportion" of a station's programming to meeting community problems? (City of Camden 18 FCC 2d iH2, 421, 16 Rh 2d 555. 568, 1969) Ansvrer: There is no single answer for all stations. The time reauired to deal with, community problems can vary from community to community and from time to time within a commun ity. Initially, this is a natter that falls within the discretion of the applicant. How ever, where the amount of broadcast matter pro posed to meet community problems appears patent ly insufficient to meet significantly the commun ity problems disclosed by the applicant's consul tations, he will be asked for an explanation by letter of Inoulry from the Commission. 32. Ouestion: Can station editorials be used as a part of a licensee's efforts to meet community problems ? A n s w e r : Yes • 3 3 . Question: Can news programming be considered as programming to meet community problems? Answer: Yes. However, they cannot be relied upon exclusively. Host broadcast stations, of course, carry news programs regardless of com- munity problems. Hews programs are usually con sidered by the people to be a factual report of events and matters— to keep the public informed— and, therefore, are not designed primarily to meet community problems. 34. Question: If an applicant proposes a specialized format (all news, rock and roll, religious, etc.), must it present broadcast matter to meet community problems? Answer* Yes. The broadcast matter can be fitted Into the format of the station. Question* lay an applicant rely upon activities other than programming to meet community problems ? Answer: To. r?any broadcasters do partici pate personally in civic activities, but the Commission's concern must be with the licensee's stewardship of his broadcast time in serving the public interest. Question: Are there any requirements as to vihen broadcast natter meeting community problems should be presented? Answer: The applicant is expected to schedule the time of presentation on a good faith Judg ment as to when it could reasonable be expected to be effective. APPENDIX D INTERVIEW SCHEDULE Below are the basic questions used during all of the interviews conducted for this investigation of the ascertainment of community needs by educational television stations. 1. How do you study the needs of your community? What methods or procedures do you use? 2. What methods work? Which procedures have been successful for you? Which would you recommend for use by other public television stations? What methods have not been satisfactory? 3. If the Corporation for Public Broadcasting gave you the money necessary to ascertain community needs , what would you like to know about your community? How would that affect your programming? 4. How well do you feel you know your community? 5. What parts of the community is your station serving? What parts are not being served by your station? 6 . What do you use as input for public affairs programming? 7. What sort of directives do producers get from the management? 8 . What do you believe the FCC expects of you in terms of assessing community needs? 9. What do you want from the FCC or CPB or NAEB in the way of directives on ascertainment? 364 APPENDIX E U.S. COURT OF APPEALS DECISION, JUNE 11, 1971 Re: "Policy Statement on Comparative Hearings In volving Regular Renewal Applicants" 365 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Reports. L sers are requested to notify the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. ilmtrlt Stairs (Emtrt nf Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT » No. 24,471 C it i z e n s C ommunications C e n t e r , B l a c k E f f o r t s f o r S o u l i n T e l e v is io n , A l b e r t H. Kramer and W illiam D. W right, Petitioners t . F e d e r a l C ommunications C o m m is s io n a n d U n it e d S t a t e s o f A m e r ic a , R e s p o n d e n t s N o. 24,491 H a m p t o n R oad 3 T e l e v is io n C o r p o r a t io n a n d C o m m u n it y B roadcasting o f B o s t o n , I n c ., P e t it io n e r s t. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America. Respondents W TA R R a d i o - T V Corporation. RKO G eneral. Inc. (RK O ) a n d Dudley Station Corporation, 1NTERVENORS 367 2 No. 24,221 C it iz e n s C ommunications C e n t e r e t jll., A p p e l l a n t s v . Honorahle Dean B ix c n , C h a i r m a n , F ed er a l C ommunications C o m m is s io n , e t a l . Petitions for Keview of an Order of the Federal Communications Commission and Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Decided June 11,1971 Mr. William A. Dohrovir, with whom Messrs. Albert H. Kram er and Robert J. Stein were on the brief, for peti tioners in No. 24,171 and appellants in No. 24,221. Mr. Edward P. M orpan, with whom Mr. Gerald S. Rourkc was on the brief, for petitioners in No. 24,491. Messrs. Walter II. Sxveeneif and Vincent B. Welch also entered appearances for petitioners in No. 24,491. Mr. John H. Conlin, Associate General Counsel, Fed eral Communications Commission, with whom .1/r. Joseph A. Marino, Counsel. Federal Communications Commission, was on the brief, for respondents in Nos. £4,471 and 24.491 and for appellees in No. 24.221. Mr. Stuart F. Feld stein, Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, and Mr. Henri/ Geller, General Counsel. Federal Communications Commission, at the time the record was tiled, also entered appearances for respondent Federal Communications Commission in Nos. 24.471 and 24.491 and appellees in N o. 24,221. .1/r. Howard E. Shapiro, Attorney. Depart ment of Justice, entered an appearance for respondent United States of America in Nos. 24.471 and 24,491. 368 3 Messrs. Harold David Cohen and Janies J. Freeman were on the brief for intervenor RKO General, Inc. in No. 24,491. Messrs. Edgar 11'. Holts, Richard S. Rodin and William A. Bradford. Jr. were on the brief for intervenor WTAR Radio-TV Corporation in Xo. 24,491. Mr. Joseph F. Hennessey entered an appearance for in tervenor Dudley Station Corporation in Xo. 24,491. Before W right, M acK i n n o n and W ilkey, Ctrcvtf Judges. Opinion filed by W right, Circuit Judge. Concurring opinion filed by M a c K i n n o n , Circuit Judge. W right, Circuit Judge : Appellants and petitioners* in these consolidated cases3 challenge the legality of the 1 Hereinafter “petitioners." *Case Xo. 24.471 is brought by the Citizens Communica tions Center (CCC) and Black Efforts for Soul in Television (BEST), tivo nonprofit organizations organized “for the purposes of improving radio anti TV service, of promoting the responsiveness of broadcast media to their local com munities, of improving the position of minority groups in media ownership, access and coverage, and of generally presenting a public voice in proceedings before the FCC.” They have appeared and are appearing in numerous pro ceedings before the Commission and in other appeals in this court from Commission rulings. These parties filed a petition pursuant to 47 U.5.C. ? 402 fa) and 23 U.S.C. £ 2242 seeking review of (1) the Commission's Policv Statement Concerning Comparative Hearings' Involving Regular Renewal Appli cants, 22 F.C.C.2d 424 (1970) ; (2) a memorandum opinion and order bv the Commission dismissing a request of CCC and BEST that it institute rule making proceedings to codify standards for all comparative proceedings. 21 F.C.C.2d 335 (1C70): and (3) a memorandum opinion and order denying reconsideration of the 1270 Policy Statement und refusing to 369 4 “Policy Statement on Comparative Hearings Involving Reg ular lienewal Applicant!?,*’ 22 F.C.C.2d 424, released by the Federal Communications Commission on January 15. 1970, and by its terms made applicable to pending proceedings. Briefly stated, the disputed Commission policy is that, in a hearing between an incumbent applying tor renewal of his radio or television license and a mutually exclusive applicant, the incumbent shall obtain a controlling prel'er- institute rule making proceedings, 24 F.C.C.2d 383 (1970). Case No. 24,491 is a petition for review filed by Hampton Roads Television Corporation and Community Broadcasting of Boston, Inc.. two applicants for television channels who have filed in competition with renewal applicants in Norfolk, Virginia and Boston, Massachusetts. They also seek review pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 402(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 2342 of the Commission’s memorandum opinion and order denying re consideration of the 1970 Policy Statement and refusing to institute rule making proceedings. Case No. 24,221 is an appeal filed pursuant to 2S U.S.C. 5 1291 from an order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissing a complaint for permanent and preliminary injunction, Civil Action No. 42-70, for lock of jurisdiction. In their complaint filed Janu ary 7,'1970, CCC and BEST sought to enjoin the chairman and members of the Commission from ''promulgating any policy, rule or interpretation or making any other change” in the standards applicable to comparative broadcast license renewal proceedings without first giving all interested parties notice and an opportunity to be heard pursuant to § 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 533. A temporary restraining order was denied on January 7, 1970, and fol lowing a suggestion of iack of jurisdiction made bv the Commission, the District Court on January 23. 1970 dis missed the action. In light of our disposition of Cases 24,471 and 24,491. sitpra. this case is moot. RKO General. Inc. and WTAR Radio TV Corporation have both ■ intervened in-this controversy and have filed briefs defending the Policy statement and subsequent Commission actions. 370 5 ence by demonstrating substantial past performance with out serious deficiencies.3 Thus if the incumbent prevails on the threshold issue of the substantiality of liis past record, all other applications are to be dismissed without a hearing on their own merits. Petitioners contend that tills policy is unlawful under Section 309(e) of the Communications Act of 1934* and •The Policy Statement declares: “* * * Promotion of [the public interest], with re spect to competing- challenges to renewal applicants, calls for the balancing of two obvious considerations. The first is that the public receive the benefits of the statutory spur inherent in the fact that there can be a challenge, and indeed, where the public interest so requires, that the new applicant be preferred. The second is that the comparative hearing policy in this area must not undermine predictability and stability of broadcast operation. * - * *• * * "We believe that these two considerations call for the • following policy— nameiy, that if the applicant for re newal of license shows in a hearing with a competing applicant that its program service during the preced ing license term has been substantially attuned to meet ing the needs and interests of its area, and that the operation of the station has not otherwise been characterized by serious deficiencies, he will be preferred ■ over the newcomer and his application for renewal will be granted. His operation is not based merely upon promises to serve solidly the public interest. He has done so. Since the basic purpose of the act—substantial service to the public—is being met, it follows that the considerations of predictability and stability, which also contribute vitally to that basic purpose, call for re newal.” 22 F.C.C.2d at 424-425. (Footnote omitted.) 4 47 U.S.C. ? 309. Section 309 was amended in 1952, 1960 and 1964. As summarized in a Stall Study for the Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Inter- 371 6 the doctrine of Ashbacker Radio Corp. v. F.C.C., 326 U .S. 327 (1945). The 1970 Policy Statement is also attacked by petitioners on grounds that it 'was adopted in disregard of the Administrative Procedure Act and that it restricts and chills the exercise of rights protected by the First Amendment. Respondents urge the court to refrain from considering these arguments at this time because the 1970 Poiicv Statement is neither a final order nor yet ripe for review. In the alternative, respondents take the position that the state and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 91st Cong., 2d Scss,, November 1970 (hereinafter cited as Staff Study), “The Act’s Legislative History reveals that the amendments dealt primarily with procedure and did not limit the hearing right of Section 309(a) discussed in Ash- backer. The 1952 amendment moved the hearing provision from subsection (a) to subsection (b). The 1960 amendment moved it to subsection (e).” Subsection (e) of §309 today reads in pertinent part as follows: “If, in the case of any application to which subsection (a) of this section applies. ^ " * the Commission for any reason is unabie to make the finding specified in such subsection, it shall formally designate the applica tion for hearing on the ground or reasons then obtaining * * *. Any hearing subsequently held upon such appli cation shall be a full hearing in which the applicant and all other parties in interest shall be permitted to par ticipate * * V Subsection (a) of § 309 reads: “Subject to the provisions of this section, the Com mission shnli determine, in the case of each application filed with it to which section 303 of this title applies, whether the public interest, convenience, and noce.-sity will be served by the granting of such application, and, if the Commission, upon examination of such application and upon consideration of such other matters as the Commission may ojficially notice, snail find that public interest, convenience, and necessity would be served by the granting thereof, it shall grant such application.” 372 Policy Statement is a lawful exercise of tlie Commission’s authority. We find that the judicial re-new sought by petitioners is appropriate at tliis' time. Without reaching petitioners' other grounds for complaint,3 we hold that tlie 1970 Policy 5 Petitioners’ complaint charging a violation of the APA is based on the Commission’s iaiiuro to proceed by rule making rather than by issuing a policy statement. One of the pur poses of rule making pro lo'tures. of course, is to make an administrative agency more aware of the wishes of the public on whose uehuif it must regulate. Although it is not necessary for this court, in disposing of this case, to decide whether the Commission violated the letter of the APA in issuing the 1970 Policy Statement without first holding a public hearing, a serious question does arise as to the propriety of the Commission’s action. In order to avoid conflict with Ashbacker Radio Corp. V. F.C.C., 326 U.S. 327 (1945), the Commission characterizes Ashbacker as dealincr oniy with “procedure,” and distin guishes the Policy Statement as being in euect substantive. Then, caught between Scyila and Charybuis, the Commission turns around and calls the Policy Statement “procedural rather than * ■» * substantive” in order to avoid conflict with § 4 of the APA. The APA requires the Commission to follow certain procedures (notification, opportunity to file comments, etc.) in ail cases of admini.-irr.tive "rule making.” Section 2(c) of the AFA, 5 U.S.C. § 531(1), defines a "rule” as “the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability ana future ch'cct designed to imple ment, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or describing the organization, procedure, or practice requirements of an agency." Section 4(a) of the APA. 5 U.S.C. § 553(a)(3) (A), however, exempts from rule making "interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of c.eoncy or ganization, procedure, or practice," The Commission argues that the January 35. 1970 Policy Statement is an exempted "general statement of policy” under § 4(a) and that it did not therefore have to be developed under tlie procedural safeguards described in 5 4. As was said inCn' r.nhia Broadcasting System v. United States, 316 U.S. 407, 416 373 8 Statement violates the Federal Communications Act of 1934, as interpreted by both the Supreme Court and this court. ’ —- I Petitioners nrcue that the 1970 Policy Statement is “final” in the primary sense of tlie term because no further proceedings concerning the Policy Statement are contem plated by the Commission or provided for by the Com mission's rules. Respondents’ position is that neither tlie Policy Statement nor the order denying the petitions for reconsideration are final orders within the statutory mean- (1942), however, it is not the label placed *»pon such pro cedures by the Commission which dictates the procedures to be followed, but rather “the substance of what the Com mission has purported to do and has done which is decisive.” The issue here turns on whether the January 15. 1970 Policy Statement cnectcd a substantive change in the Commission’s comparative renewal standards. And the Commission seems to have decided this issue, si'fi silentio at least, when it "reimbursed Voice of Los Angeles, Inc., for costs in curred during* the initial portions of a comparative chal lenge to the licence of KXEC. Los Angeles, essentially on the ground that [the Commission's) January 15, 1970 Policy Statement came as an unannounced surprise to Voice, and that given the change in policy it would be inequitable not to permit them to withdraw. National Broadcasting Co., I :c. (XBCi, FCC 70-691 (Docket Xo. 18602) (released July 7, 1970). * * *” In Re Petitions Filed by BEST, CCC, and Others for Rule- making To Clarify Standards in all Comparative Broadcast Proceedings, 24 F.C.C,2i 633, SS3 (1970) (dissenting opin ion of Commissioner Johnson), In any event, the Commis sion's suggestion that under the APA it can do without notice and hearing in a policy statement what Congress failed to do when the Pa.'tore bill (dry text at pages 13-21, infra) died in the last Congress is, to say the least, remark able. 374 9 mg of 2S U.S.C. $ 2342(1) and 47 U.S.C. § 402(a). They argue that the Policy Statement sets only general guide lines to he applied in future adjudicatory proceedings ■where applicable. We find it unnecessary to resolve this particular disagreement because, even if the Policy State ment is characterized as interlocutory, it is still roviewable at this time. Since the Policy Statement is aliened to de prive petitioners in Xo. 24,491 of their statutory right to a full comparative hearing under the Ashbacker doctrine, the Commission's action in issuing the Policy Statement is reviewablc now. Chicago cC Southern Air Lines, Inc. v. Waterman Steamship Corp., 333 U.S. 103, 113 (194S); Delta Air Lines v. 97 U-S.App.D.C. 4G, 22S F.2d 17 (1935). As this court stated in summarizing the hold in g of Delta Air Lines in a subsequent case, “when the Commission adopts a procedure which precludes a true comparative hearing of conflicting applications, review may he sought here without awaiting a grant of one of the applications.” Midicestern Gas Transmission Co. v. F.P.C.. 103 U.S.App.D.C. ’ 3G0, 3G6, 23S F.2d GGO, G66 (1958). Petitioners contend that the same line of cases holding an interlocutory order denying a party an Ashbacker hearing to be final for purposes of review necessarily supports the proposition that such an order is also ripe for review before completion of the contemplated hearing. Without deciding whether this proposition holds in every case, we agree that the Policy Statement is ripe for review under the test laid out in Abbott- Laboratories v. Gardner, 3S7 U.S. 1SG M9G7). According to the Supreme Court in Abbott Laboratories, the ri]ieucss of a controversy de pends upon both “the fitness of the issues for judicial decision and the hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration.” Id. at 149. The Policy Statement controversy is ripe under both halves of this test. I Tore the Policy Statement has been administratively considered 375 10 and reconsidered by the Commission. The issues before us are “purely legal." “Ibid. Whether the Policy Statement denies a competing applicant the full comparative hearing to which he is entitled is strictly a matter of statutory interpretation involving a comparison of the hearing pro cedures spelled out in the Policy Statement with the re quirements of 47 U.S.C. § 309(c) andAshbacker. Likewise, the other issues raised by petitioners and enumerated in the introduction of this opinion are also purely legal and will not be focused or clariiied by further proceedings in particular cases before the Commission. if ore over, it would work a severe hardship on peti tioners for the court to withhold consideration of their appeal. The substantial financial expense1 to which Hampton Roads and Community Broadcasting will have ' been put if review of their alleged denial of procednral rights is delayed is a hardship which the court may prop erly take into account in finding this case ripe for review. Abbott Laboratories, supra, SS7 U.S. at 133-154; City of Chicago v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe It. Co., 357, U.S. 77, S4 (195S). Even more important perhaps is the dcarlen- | ing effect the Policy Statement has had since its institution t upon renewal challenges generally. By depriving competing ; applicants of their right to a full comparative hearing on •A s this court stated in Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. V. Hardin, 133 U.S.App.D.C. 391, 396, 42S F.2d 1093, 1098 (1970): “The doctrines of ripeness and finality are designed to prevent premature judicial intervention in the adminis trative process, before the administrative action has been fully considered, and before the legal dispute has been brought into focus." 7 The expense of preparing and presenting an application is substantial, rising to as much as C250.000 for a station in a ton market area. Inside the FCC: The Itcncical Branch, Television A ce, August 25, 1969, at 72. 376 11 the merits of their own applications, and by severely limiting the importance of other comparative criteria, the Commission has made the cost of processing a competing application prohibitive when measured by the challengers* very minimal chances of success. That the Policy State ment is in this sense self-executing * and that it has in fact served to deter the filing of a single competing application for a television renewal in over a year* is perhaps tlie most compelling factor in the court's decision to review this dispute at tliis time. n In order to clarify not only the legal issues but also the related substantive policy considerations involved in these consolidated cases, tlie court will first attempt to put tlie present controversy in its historical context. The national effort at comprehensive regulation of broadcast ing began in 1927 with the Federal Radio Act.10 This Act was intended to insure that “the broadcasting privilege wall not be a right of selfishness*’ but would rather “rest upon an assurance of public interest to be served.”a To achieve this purpose the Act provided for expiration of licenses, and consequent renewal hearings, every three * S e e 3 It Davis, Administrative Law Treatise §§ 22.01 and 22.03 (1958). • See text at page 28, infra. 10 44 S t a t . 1162. The Radio Act of 1927. with its several amendments, was.later included under Title III in the Com munications Act of 1934. S. Rep. No. 631, 73rd Cong., 2d Sess., at 6 (1934). According to F.C.C. V. Pottsvilte Broad casting Co., 309. U.S. 134. 137 (1940), the objectives of governmental regulation remained substantially the same. 11 G7 Cong. Rec. 5479 (1926) (Representative White, House floor manager). 377 12 years.12 At both initial and renewal licensing, applicants' were to be tested by the basic standard of “public inter est, convenience, or necessity,” 13 which was defined by the Federal “Radio Conunission in 192S as “a matter ofcoin pa rat ire and not an absolute stand ard when applied to broadcast ine: stations. .Since the number of channels is limited a ml the number of per sons desiring to broadcast is far areater than can be accommodated, the Commission must, determine from among ihe applicants before it uiticit of them tcill, if licensed, best sene the public” u Although tlie Federal Communications Act does not itself establish any specific licensing criteria, the Supreme Court has noted that “[slinee the very inception of fed eral regulation [of] radio, comparative considerations as to the services to be rendered have governed tlie appli- « Federal Radio Act, § 9, 44 St a t. 11GG (1926). « Id. §§ 9, 11, 44 STAT. 1166, 1167. The applicability of the public interest, convenience and necessity standard to license renewal was made explicit in the Communications A ct of 1934, § 307(d), which amended § 11 of the 1927 Act by adding: "but action of the Commis5ion with reference to the granting of such application tor the renewal of a license shall be limited to and governed by the same considera tions and practice whicn aiiect the granting of original applications.” 48 St a t. 1034 (1934). Perhaps to guard against the infer ence that an incumbent's past broadcast record could not be considered at all at renewal time, Congress in 1952 deleted the provision subjecting renewal applications to "the same considerations and practice’’ as original applications, substi tuting the provision of the 1927 Act which subjected renewal and original applications alike to the standard of "public interest, convenience and necessity.” 14 Federal Radio Co?r::i5sio:;. S e c o n d A n n u a l R e p o r t t o C ongress 169 (October 1, 1928). (Emphasis added.) 378 13 cation of the standard of 'public interest, convenience, or necessity.’ ” Xational Broadcasting Co. v. United States, 31D U.S. 199. 217 (1943). With the great expansion of the broadcast un-din after IVorld War IT. the Commission was undir heavy pressure to develop specific criteria for choosing among compeTitors seeking licenses for the quick* ly diminishing number of unallocated frequencies. The criteria wore developed through a scries of comparative hearing decisions and were reviewed and given final state ment in tlie Commission's 19G5 Policy Statement on Comparative Broadcast Hearings, 1 F.C'.C.2d 393. The 19G5 Policy Statement defines tlie purpose of the compara tive hearing as choosing tire applicant who will provide the “best practicable service to tlie public” and who will insure the “maximum diffusion of control of the media of mass communications." The basic criteria relating to the determination of which applicant will provide the best service to the public are listed as full-time participation in station operation by owners, proposed program sendee, past broadcast record, efficient use of freqneney. and character. Diversification of control of the media of mass communication is elevated in the 19(15 Policy Statement to n factor of primary significance; and in an effort to re solve the inherent contradiction between the goal of di versification and its tradition o^’ according an advantage to initial applicants with past bi mdcasting experience, the Commission states that it will jot consider a past broad cast record which is “within the bounds of average per formance.” Only records which demonstrate “unusual attention to the public’s needs and interests” are to be given favorable consideration, since average performance is expected of all licensees. Although the 10G5 Policy Statement explicitly refrains from reaching the “somewhat diucrent problems raised where an applicant is contesting with a licensee seeking t 379 14 renew al,” 19 the Communications Act itself places the incumbent in the same position as an initial applicant. Under the 1932 amendment to the Act, both initial and renewal applicants must demonstrate that the grant or continuation oi a license will serve the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” The Communications Act itself says nothing about a presumption in favor of in cumbent licensees at renewal hearings; nor is an inability to displace operating broadcasters inherent in government management, as is established by tlie fact that in its early years of regulation the Federal Radio Commission often refused to renew licenses.16 Nonetheless, the history of Commission decision and of the decisions of this court reflected until recently an op erational bias in favor of incumbent licensees;1T despite ** 1 F.C.C.2d at 393 n.l. But see Note 23, infra. 16 Under the Radio Act, 150 AM broadcasters out of the 732 operating prior to 1927 surrendered their licenses. Even then, however, the refusal was less a result of the competi tion of a new applicant than of the desire to reduce the absolute number of broadcasters and the concomitant elec trical interference. See Ii. Levin. Broadcast Regulation a n d Joint Ownership of Media 186, 193 (1060), and cases cited therein. 11 For criticism of the Commission's “rubber stamp” policy on renewals prior to its decision in T YHDH, Inc., 16 F.C.C.2d 1 (1969), affirmed, sub nom. Greater Boston Television Corp. V. F.C.C. [1VHDH),---- U.S.App.D.C. -- , ----- F .2 d --- (Ncs. 17723. 17723. 23L“D and 23172. decided November 13, 1970), see Cox c: Johnson. Broadcast‘nr/ in ,-t.mcricn and the FC&s License Renewal Process: A h Oklahoma Case Study, 14 F.C.C.2d 1 (19GS) : and Commissioner Johnson’s dissent to group renewal granted to broadcasters in Iowa and Missouri. 11 F.C.C.2d 919 (H-33). In Chi'cwo Fedcrc.’hit cf T."lwr v. Fr-trr'! Rf'Ra Co.n’n, 69 App.D.C. "33. 41 I'.2d 122 (1930). this court miirmed a Federal Radio Commission refusal to change the broadcast 380 15 Commissioner Hyde's observation in his dissent to tlie 1965 Policy Statement that there was no rational or legal basis for its purported nonapplicability to comparative hearings involving renewals,15 it was commonly assumed that renewal decisions would continue to he governed by policy established in the well known ilenrst1J and Wabash T'alley ^ cares. These two cases, which began with the unassailable promise that the past performance of a broad caster is tlie most roilaMe indicator of his future per formance, were typical of the Commission's past renewal rulings in that their actual effect was to give the incum frequcncy of Station YTCFL since the change would displace existing licenses. The court said: “It is not consistent with true public convenience, interest, cr necessity, that meritorious stations * * * should be deprived of broadcasting privileges when once granL-Ti to them v unless clear and sound reasons of public policy demand such action. * * *” 50 App.D.C. at 334, 41 F.2d at 423. Cases such as this one established a presumption in favor of license renewals when their past broadcast record was satisfactory, and led some observers to contend, despite clear language in the Act itself requiring that a licensee expressly waive any claim to use of a frequency predicated on prior use. 47 U.S.G. ? 301, that ‘■legal rights cr equities how from a license and must be considered by the Commission in the exercise of its juris diction." H. V.'akner, Radio and Television Law 720 (1949). See also Jovrnnl Co. V. F.R.C., 60 Apn.D.C. 92, 48 F.2d 461 (1931); WOKO, Inc. V. F.C.C., SO U.S.App.D.C. 333, 153 F.2d 623, rcr crsed on other crowds. 329 U.S. 223 (1946). Recently, however, and before the Commission’s \VTJDH decision, this circuit has he gun to lake a hard look at the presumption in favor of renewals. See Xote 23, infra. « 1 F.C.C.2d at 403. »Hearst Radio, Inc. (WEAL), 15 F.C.C. 1149 (1951). 901 Vabash Valley Broadcasting Corp. (TVTTIBTV), 33 F.C.C. 677 (1DG3). 381 16 bent a virtually insuperable advantage on tlie basis of his past broadcast record per se. In Hcarst the Com mission ruled that the incumbent's unexceptional record of past programming performance, coupled with the unavoid able uncertainty whether the challenger would be able to carry out its pro,vrain proposals, was siuiiciont to overcome the incumbents demerits on other comparative criteria. And in 'IVahasJt. 1 'alley the Commission lmld that a new comer seeking to oust an incumbent must make a showing of superior service and must have some preference on other comparative criteria. Then, in the very controversial W TIT) IT71 case, the Commission for tlie first time in its history, in applying comparative criteria in a renewal proceeding, deposed the incumbent and awarded the frequency to a challenger. Indicating a swing away fromIlearst and TT/ibas/tValley, in practical if not theoretical terms, the Commission stilted its intention to insure that "the foundations for determin ing the best practicable sendee, as between a renewal and a new applicant, are more nearly equal at their outset/’53 Finding that because the incuinlx-nt’s programming serv ice had been “within the bounds of the average it was entitled to no preference, and that the incumbent was inferior on the comparative criteria of diversification and integration, the Commission awarded the license to one of the challengers. Tlie WHDII decision became the immediate subject of fierce attack, provoking criticism from those who feared that it represented a radical departure from previous law 23 and that it threatened the stability of the broadcast 11 See Note 17, s u p r a * 3216 F.C.C.Sd at 10. 53 Despite the warning in the 1TG5 P olicy Statement that it was not applicable to the “somewhat different problems” 382 17 industry by undermining large financial investments made by prominent broadcasters in reliance upon tlie assump tion that licenses once granted would be routinely re- involvccl in renewal hearings, there were ample indications before the WHDH decision that The criteria relevant to origi nal licensing hearings (if not ike weight assigned to each such criterion) would be relevant at renewal hearings as well. In 5crcit (7) Lemme Productions. Inc. (Will), 1 F.C.C.2J 1537 (ID65), for example, the Commission bad decided to apply the 1305 Poiicv Statement to the introduc tion of evidence in renewal cases and to frive all parties in such cases an opportunity to present arguments as to the relative weight to be accorded the various criteria. At the same time, our own court, which had in earlier cases rou tinely approved the renewal of incumbent licensees, ex pressed a concern in two cases that a renewal applicant not receive an unfair advantage by the mere fact of his prior ' operation of the station. See South Florida Television Corp. V. F.C.C.. 121 U.S.App.D.C. 202. 249 F.2d 971 0905), ccrt. denied, £32 U.S. 027 (19U6). and Commximtn Droadcastiun Corp. v. F.C.C., 124 U.S.App.D.C. 230, 363 F.2d 717 (1965). Although this court afrirmed the Commission's WHDH decision on the ground that WHDH was in a “special and unique category” because of its past history of inroads made upon the Commission's rules governing fair and orderly adjudication and consequent grant of a four-month tempo rary license to operate, we also noted: •<• * * Although the 1965 Policy Statement did not purport to deal with the problems raised by renewal applications the Commission concluded in the same year that the policy statement properly governed the nature and scope of evidence contemplated for renewal proceed ings. Seven (7) League productions. Inc. (W i l l ), 1 F.C.C.2d 1597, 1593 (1935). Each applicant was aware that its task was to make the best case possible on the basis of program offering, integration, diversification, past performance and any other matters the parties asked the Commission to consider as pertaining to li cense fitness. As the Hear in** Examiner nor.-rl. all the applicants were riven the fut’t-t cniwc'tunity to display their advantages. It is certainly net uncommon for a 383 18 newed.24 While the Commission's decision was still on appeal to this court, ultimately to be affirmed, the broad- contender to be called on to put forward all the factors he deems favorable though he cannot be confident what absolute or relative weights will be accorded by those charged with appraisal and judgment.” U.S.App.D.C. at , ------F.2d a t------, slip opinion at SI. The appropriateness cf these decisions is underscored by explicit language in the Communications Act to the effect that no automatic preferential rights are intended to be extended to the renewal applicant. The Act provides, inter alia, that “no * * license shall be construed to create any right beyond the terms, conditions, and periods of the li cense” (47 U.S.C. § 301) ; that an applicant waives any claim to a frequency “because of the previous use of the same” (47 U.S.C. 5 304) ; that a renewal license may be granted for “a term of not to exceed three years” (47 U.S.C. § 307(d)) ; and that a license does “not vest in the licensee any right * * * in the use of the frequencies * * 15 beyond the term thereof” (17 U.S.C. 5 309(h)). See also F.C.C. V. Sanders Bros. Radio Station. 309 U.S. 470, 475 (1940) : “The policy of the Act is clear that no person is to have anything in the nature of a property right as a result of the granting of a license. Licenses are limited to a maximum of three years' duration, may be revolted, and need not be renewed. Thus the channels presently occupied remain free for a new assignment to another licensee in the interest of the listening public. “Plainly it is not the purpose of the Act to protect a licensee against competition but to protect the public. * * *»» A n d see F.C.C. v. PoftsviV.r Broadcasting Co.. supra Note 10. 309 U.S. at 133; Ashbacker Radio Corp. v. F . C . C . , supra Note 5; Transcontinental Television Corp. V. F.C.C., 113 U.S.App.D.C. 384, 386-387, 308 F.2d 339, 341-3-12 (19C2). “[The Federal Communications Act] does not reflect the same concern for ‘security of certificate’ that appears in other laws.” WHDH. supra Note 17. ------U.S.App.D.C. at , F.2d at , slip opinion at 24. 24 See, e.g., S J Billion in Stations Down t h e Drain in 384 19 cast industry sonsrht to obtain from Congress the elimina tion or drastic revision of the renewal hearing procedure* A bill introduced by Senator Pastore* Chairman of the Communications Subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee.” proposed to require a two-stage hearing wherein the renewal issue would he determined prior to and exclusive of any evaluation of challengers’ applica tions. The bill provided that if the Commission finds the past record of the licensee to be in tlie public interest it shall grant renewal. Competing applications would be permitted to be fded only if the incumbent's license is not renewed. Although more than 100 congressmen and 23 senators quickly announced their support, the bill was bitterly attacked in tlie Senate hearings by a number of citizens groups testifying, inter alia, that the bill was racist, that it would exclude minorities from access to media owners!lip in most large communities, and that it was inimical to community efforts at improving television programming.1*1 Broadcasting, February 3, 1969, at 19; Jaffe, WHDH;T he F C C and Broadcasting License Renewals, 82 Harv. L. Rev* 1693 (19G9). « S. 2004, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). M See Hearings on S. 200 i Before the Subcommittee on Communications of th e Senate com m ittee on Commerce, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (December 1, 1939). A Xew York Times article entitled “F.C.C. License Renewals: A Policy Emerges" (April 27, 1969), suggested that an analogous change in election laws would mean that no one could run for office until the incumbent had been impeached. For a critical scholarly analysis of S. 200-1. s e e Comment, T h e AttCi liiaili of W Z lD l l ; Rcf i'laiiou bp Competition or Protection o f Mediocrity?, 118 U. Pa. L. Rev. 363, 401-402 (1970) : “[Tlhe Pastore Bill, in its endeavor to promote security in the broadcasting industry and to avoid irrational decision-making, wouid have the eu'cct of protecting licensees rendering mediocre service and eliminating the most power ful available incentive for beiter broadcasting." The impact of' such citizen opposition measurably sioveil the progress of S. 2004. Then, without any formal rule making proceedings,27 tin* Commission suddenly is sued its own January 15. 1070 Policy Statement, and the Senate bill was thereafter deferred in favor of the Com mission*.'* ‘■compromise/* The 1070 Policy Statement re tains tlie single hearing approach but provides that the renewal issue must be determined first in a proceeding in which challengers are permitted to appear only for the limited purpose of calling attention to tlie incumbent's failings.24 Tlie Policy Statement sets forth that a licensee with a record of “substantia!" service to the community, without serious deficiencies, will be entitled to renewal notwithstanding promise of superior performance by a challenger. Only, upon a refusal to renew because of the incumbent's past failure to provide substantial service would full comparative hearings he held. Thus, in effect, the Policy Statement administratively “enacts" what the Pastore bill sought to do. The Statement’s test for re newal, “substantial service/* seems little more than a semantic substitute for tlie bill’s test, “public interest/* and the bill’s two-stage hearing, the second stage being dependent on tlie incumbent’s failing the test, is not sig nificantly different from the Statement’s sununary judg ment approach. The “summary judgment*’ concept of the 1!>70 Policy Statement, however, runs smack against both 91 See Note 5, supra. ** The Commission has in effect abolished the comparative hearing mandated by $ 309(a) and (e) and converted the comparative hearing into a petition to deny proceeding. The petition to deny proceeding is separately provided for in the Act under £ 309(d). but this suction is intended to cover only those situations in which the petitioner docs not seek the license himself but seeks only to prevent its award again to the incumbent. 386 21 statute and ease law, as tlie next section of tliis opinion will show. - m Superimposed full length over the preceding historical analysis of the “full hearing*’ requirement of Section 30U(e) of the Communications Act-u is. the toweling shadow 0 1 Ashbacker, S'.tpra, and its p rogen y, perhaps the most important series of cases in American administra tive law. Ashbacker holds that under Section oUS.>(e)» where two Or more applications for permits or licenses are mutually exclusive, tlie Commission must conduct one full comparative hearing of the applications.3* Although ** See Note 4, supra. *• The primary question in Ashbacker was whether an applicant for a construction permit under the Federal Com munications Act is prranted the hearing to which he is en titled by the Act where the Commission, having before it two applications which are mutually exclusive, grants one without a hearing and sets the other for hearing. Faced with two “actually exclusive'’ applications, the Commission had granted that of the Fetzer Broadcasting Company. At the same time, the Commission had designated the Ashbacker Radio Corporation application for hearing. The Commission took the position that at this hearing Ashbacker would have ample opportunity to shew that its oneration would better serve the public ir.erest than would the gram of the Fetzer application and that the Fetzer grant did not preclude the Commission, at a later date, from taking any action which it found would better serve the public interest. Construing the Act, the Supreme Court stated: “* '* * We do not think it is enough to say that the power of the Commission to issue a license on a rinding of public interest, convenience or necessity supports its grant of one of two mutually exclusive applications without a hearing of the other. For if the grant of one effectively precludes the other, the statutory right to a hearing which Congress has accorded applicants before 387 oo Ashbaclcr involved two original applications, no one has seriously suggested that its principle does not apply to renewal proceedings as well. This court’s opinions have uniform ly so held, as have decisions of the Commission itself.31 It is not surprising, therefore, that the Commission's 1070 Policy Statement implicitly accepts Ashbacker as applicable to renewal proceedings. To circumvent the Ashbacker strictures, however, it adds a twist: the Policy Statement would limit the “comparative'" heaving to a single issue—whether the incumbent licensee had rendered “substantial” past performance without serious deficien cies. If the examiner finds that the licensee has rendered such service, the “comparative” hearing is at an end and, barring successful appeal, the renewal application must be granted. Challenging applicants would thus receive no hearing at all on their own applications, contrary to the express provision of Section 3u9(e) which requires a “full hearing.” In Ashbacker the Commission had promised the chal lenging applicant a hearing on his application after the denial of their applications becomes an empty thing. We think that is the case here. *** * * [The procedure adopted by the Commission] is in effect to make [A&hbacker’s] hearing a rehearing on the grant of the competitor's license rather than a bearing on the merits of its own application. That may satisfy the strict letter of the lew but certainly not its spirit or intent. ***** «* * • \y& 011]y that where two bona fide appli cations are mutually exclusive the grant of one without a hearing to both deprives the loser of the opportunity which Con "res? chose to give him." 826 U.S. at 330-333. (Footnote omitted.) 31 See Note 33, infra. 388 23 rival application was granted. The Supreme Court in Ashbaclcr said that suelia promise was “an empty thing.” At least the Commission here must he given credit for honesty. It docs not make any empty promises. It simply denies the competing applicants the “full hearing*’ prom ised them by Section 3b9i'e ) of the Act. Unless the re newal applicant’s past performance is found to he insubstantial or marred by serious deficiencies.32 tlie competing applications get no hearing at all. Tlie propo sition that the 1070 Policy Statement violates Section 309(e), as interpreted in is so obvious it need not be labored.*3 In support of its 1970 Policy Statement the Commission is reduced to reciting tlie usual litany that “ [t]1 e1 task of ** “such as rigged quizzes, violations of the Fairness Doc trine, overcommerciaiization. broadcast of lotteries, violation of racial discrimination rules, or fraudulent practices as to advertising.” 22 F.C.C.2d at 12G. 11 Although the broadcast industry was perhaps less satis fied with the substantive res-‘It in WHDH than it had been with the results in 11 carst and ITobas/f VcAlcy, it should be clear from our earlier historical review that the procedure by which the Commission came to its decision was precisely the same in all three of these cases. It is true that the IE65 Policy Statement on Comparative Eroadcast Hearings spe cifically refrained from reaching the ‘‘somewhat different problems” raised by renewal applications. But the Commis sion itself concluded within the same year, and consistently with its own past practice, that the same comparative cri teria set out in the Statement fit not the weight assigned to each such criterion) must also te considered in renewal hear ings. Seven (7) Lean}tc Prod..ctions. Ive. (Will), svpra Note 23. Thus, without impinging at ail upon the Commission’s substantive discretion in weighing factors and granting licenses, our holding today merely requires the Commission to adhere to the comparative herring procedure which it has followed without fail since A 24 « choosing between various claimants for the privilege of using tlie air waves is essentially an administrative one” consigned by Congress to the Commission. Brief for the Commission at 30. But Congress did not give tlie Com m ission carte Uonchr. To protect the public it limited its mandate with the Section 10(c) “full hearing** require ment. Unless the limitation is observed, any putative exercise of the mandate is a nullity. Early afterAshhacker this court indicated what a “full hearing” entailed.In Johnston Broadcasting C o . v. l'.C.C., 85 U.S App.D.C. 40. 45-40, 173 F.2d 331, 35G-337 (1049), we explained that the statutory right to a full hearing included a decision upon all relevant criteria: “A choice between two applicants involves more than the hare qualifications of each applicant. It in volves a comparison of characteristics. Both A and B may be qualified, but if a choice must be made, the question is which is tlie better qualified. * • • «• * • Comparative qualities and not mere positive characteristics must then be considered. • • • * • “• * * The Commission cannot ignore a material difference between two applicants and make findings in respect to selected characteristics only. * * * It must take into account all the characteristics which indicate differences, and reach an over-all relative determination upon an evaluation of all factors, con flicting in many cases. * • •” We, as well as the Commission,*4 have consistently 14 There are several cases cited by resnondents to the effect that «o hearing need be held where an application fails to measure up to the Commission's rules and does not indicate waiver, or where one of several mutually exclusive applicants is basically unqualified.United States v. Stoi'cr Broadcasting Co., 351 U.S. 192 (1956) : Gainan. v. F.C.C.. Ill U.S.Anp. D.C. 371, 207 F.2d 7?2 (lTSl) : S i m m o n s v. F.C.C.. 79 U.S. App.D.C. 2G4, 145 F.2d 578 (1944). Contrary to the sugges- 390 25 applied the teaching of Johnston Broadcasting to renewal proceedings See South FloriJa Television Corp. v. F.C.C.t 121 U.S.App.D.C. 293, 349 F.2d 971 (1965); Community Broadcasting Corp. v. F.C.C., 124 U.S.App.D.C. 230, 3G3 F.2d 717 (I960). Particularly since the 19G5 Policy State ment, in a comparative hearing involving a renewal ap plication each applicant has been aware that its task is “to make the best case possible on the basis of program offering, integration, diversification, past performance and any other matters the parties asked the Commission to consider as pertaining to license fitness." W11DI1, supra, TkS.App.D.C. at , F.2d at f slip opinion at 31. We do not dispute, of course, that incumlient licensees should he judged primarily on their records of past per formance. Insubstantial past performance should preclude renewal of a license. The licensee, having been given the chance and having failed, should l>e through. Compare WHDII, supra. At the same time, superior performance should be a plus of major signiricnnce in renewal proceed ings** Indeed, ns Ashbaclcer recognizes, in a renewal tion of .respondents, however, these cases in no wny undercut our holding- of today. Whatever the power of the Commis sion to set basic qualifications in the public interest and to deny hearings to unqualified applicants, the cases cited above cannot be read as authorizing the Commission to deny quali fied applicants their statutory right to afull hearing on their own merits. ** The court recognizes that the public itself will suffer if incumbent licensees cannot reasonably expect renewal when they have rendered superior service. Given the incentive, an incumbent will naturally strive to achieve a level of perform ance which gives him a clear edge on challengers at renewal time. But if the Commission fails to articulate the standards by which to judge superior performance, and if it is thus impossible for an incumbent to he reasonably confident of renewal when he renders superior‘performance, then an in- 391 2G proceeding, a new applicant is under a greater burden to “make the comparative showing necessary to displace an established licensee.*’ 326 U.S. at 332. But under Section 309(e) lie must be given a chance. IIow can he ever show his application is c o m para lively better if he does not get a hearing on it.' The Commission’s 1970 l’oiiey State ment's summary procedure would deny him that hearing.33 cumbent will fce under an unfortunate temptation to lapse into mediocrity, to ssek the protection of the crowd by eschewing the creative and the venturesome in programming and other forms of public service. The Commission in rule ■, m a k i n g proceedings should strive to clarify in both quantita tive and qualitative terms what constitutes superior service. ■ See C o m m e n t , snpra N o t e 26, 1 1 S U. Pa . L. R ev. at 406. Along with elimination of excessive and loud advertising and delivery of quality programs, one test of superior service should certainly be whether and to what extent the in c u m b e n t h as reinvested the profit o n his license to the serv ice of the viewing and listening public. We wore w i t h approval that such rule making proceedings may soon be under way. News Notes, 39 U.S. L. "Week 2313 (March 16, 19 7 1 ) . M Since one very significant aspect of the “public interest, convenience, and necessity” is the need for diverse and an tagonistic sources of information, the Commission simply cannot make a valid public interest determination without considering the extent to which the ownership of the media will bo concentrated or diversified by the grant of one or another of the applications before it. Johnston Brnndcastiup C o . v. F.C.C., G5 U.S.App.D.C. 40. 175 F.2d 351 0949); McClatchn Brcadsastinft Co. v. F.C.C-. 99 U.S.Arn.D.C. 195. 2 3 9 F . 2 d 15 (1053). ccrt. denied. 3 3 3 U.S. 91$ (1957); Scripps-Hownrd R"-'io v. F.C.C.. S O U.S..-fip.D.C. 13. 339 F . 2 d 6 7 7 , crrt. denied. 3 4 2 U . S . 530 (1031). The Supreme Court itself has on numerous occasions recognized the dis tinct connection between diversity of ownership of the mass media and the diversity of ideas and ex nr c.-.sion renuired by the First Amendment. 5-v, Associated press v. Chi ted States. 3 2 6 U.S. 1, 2 0 (1945) : Red Lien Broadcast in ft Co. v. F.C.C., £95 U.S. 367, 390 (1969). While it is possible under 392 27 T h e suggestion that the possibility of nonrenewal, h o w ever remote, might.chill uninhibited, robust and wide-open speech eannot be taken lightly. But the Commission, of course, m a y not penalize exercise of First Amendment rights. A n d the statute d o e s p r o v i d e f o r .judicial review. Indeed, the failure to promote the full exercise of First the “fairness doctrine" approved in Red Lion Broadcasting Co., supra, to insure that ail stations will give time to m o r e than one side of important and controversial issues, w e re iterate the observation of this court in WI1DH, supra N o t e 17, that: “The Commission need not be confined to the tech nique of exercising regulatory surveillance to assure that lVensees will discharge duties imposed on them, perhaps grudgingly and perhaps to the minimum re quired. It m a y also seek in the public interest to certify as licensees those w h o would speak out with fresh voice, would most naturally initiate, encourage and expand diversity or approach and viewpoint” — — U.S.App.D.C. at , ---- . F . 2 d a t , slip o p i n i o n at 87. A s n e w interest groups and hitherto silent minorities emerge in our.society, they should be given some stake in and chance to broadcast on our radio and television frequen cies. According to the uncontested testimony of petitioners, no more than a dozen of 7 , 8 0 0 broadcast licenses issued are owned by racial minorities. The effect of the 1970 Policy Statement, ruled illegal today, would certainly have been to perpetuate this dismaying situation. While no quota system is b e i n g recommended or required, and while the fairness doctrine no doubt does serve to guarantee some minimum diversity of views, w e simply note our o w n approval of the Commission's long-standing and firmly held policy in favor of decentralization of media control. Diversification is a fac tor properly to be weighed and balanced with other im portant factors, including the renewal applicant's prior record, at a renewal hearing. For two strong statements by the Commission itself on the importance of diver; mention. see Bamberftcr Broadcasting Service. Ire., 3 Pike A: Fischer P.P. 914, 925 (ICfd). ard Policy statement on Comparative Broadcast Hearings, 1 F.C.C.2d 893, 8 D 1 & n . 4 (1985). 39 3 2S Amendment freedoms through the broadcast medium m a y be a consideration against license renewal. Unlike totali tarian regimes, in a free country there can he 110 authorized voice of government. Though dependent on government for its Ue-*nsL‘, independence is perhaps the mos t important asset of tiie renewal applicant. The Policy Statement purports to strike a balance be tween the need for “predictability a nd stability” 3T and the need for a competitive spur. It does so by providing that the qualifications of challengers, no matter liow superior they m a y be. m a y not bo considered unless the incumbent’s past performance is found not to have been “substantially attuned*’ to the needs and interests of the community. Unfortunately, instead of stability the Policy Statement h a s p r o d u c e d rigor mortis.** For over a year now, s i n c e the Policy Statement substantially limited a challenger’s right to a full comparative hearing on the merits of his o w n application, not a single renewal cliallcnge has been filed. Petitioners have come to this court to protest n Com mission policy which violates the clear intent of the 37 Th e Commission’s fears for the stability of the industry eeem groundless in view of the fact that in the year follow i n g the WKDH opinion— that is. in the period w hen feared instability was greatest— only eight out of approximately 250 (or three per cent of) television license renewals were chal lenged. See Staff Study, svpra Note 4, at 18 n . 1 0 1 . **The recent report of the United States Commission on Civil Eights commented that the hinds 0 1 competitive proceed ings eliminated under the 1970 Policy Statement are “an effective mechanism for bringing about greater racial and ethnic sensitivity in programing, nonuiscriminatory employ ment practices, and other affirmative changes which other wise might not take place." U.S. Commission o n C ivil R ights, Fedzt.al Civil R ights E n f o r c e m e n t E ffort 2 S 3 (1971). 394 29 Communications Act tliat the award of a broadcasting license should be a ‘’public trust.”3* As a unanimous Supreme Court recently put it, ‘‘It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount.”*0 Our decision today restores healthy competition by repudiating a Commission policy vh ieli is unreasonably weighted in favor of the licensees it is meant to regulate, to the great detriment of the listening and viewing public. Wherefore it is OllDEUED: (1) that the Policy State ment, being contrary to law, shall not be applied by the Commission in any pending or future comparative re newal hearings: (2) that the Commission's order of July 21, 1970 denying petitioners’ petition for reconsideration of the Policy Statement and refusing to institute rule malting proceedings is reversed: and (3) that these pro ceedings are remanded to the Commission with directions to redesignate nil comparative renewal hearings to which the Policy Statement was deemed applicable to reflect this court’s judgment. M acIv i x x o x , Circuit Judge : I concur in the foregoing opinion. While I recognize the desire and need for reason able stability in obtaining renewal licenses, under the pres ent statute as construed by Ashbachcr Radio Corp. v. F.C.C., 320 U.S. 327 (1945). I do not consider it possible to provide administratively that operating licensees who furnish *• "By whatever name or classification, broadcasters are temporary permittees—fiduciaries—of a great public resource * * *.** Office of Comm unicat io a of United Church of Christ V. F.C.C., 138 U.S.App.D.C. 112, 117, 425 F.2d 543, 548 (1969). 40 Red Lion Broadcasting Co. V. F.C.C., supra Note 86, 395 U.S. at 390. 395 30 • program service "substantially attuned to mooting the needs a n d interests of its area . . . [without] serious deficien cies . . . will be' preferred over the newcomer and his application for renewal will be granted.” Such policy would effectively prevent a newcomer applicant from being heard on the merits of his application, no matter h o w superlative his qualiiieations. It w o u l d also, in effect, substitute a standard of substantial service for the best possible service to the public and effectively negate the hearing requirements of the statute as interpreted by the Supreme Court. If such change is desired, in m y opinion, it must be accomplished by amendment of the statute. BIBLIOGRAPHY Government Documents (in chronological order) U.S. Congress. The Communications Act of 1934, as Amended. Public Law 416/ 73d Congress, June 19, 1934. U.S. Federal Communications Commission.. Twelfth Annual Report. June 30, 1946. ______. Report of the Commission In the Matter of Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees. Docket No. 8516. June 1, 1949. Report and Statement of Policy Re: Com- mission En Banc Programming Inquiry. FCC 60-970. July 29, 1960. ______. Public Notice. FCC 63-734. Broadcast Licensees Advised Concerning Stations' Responsibilities Under the Fairness Doctrine as to Controversial Issue Programming. July 26, 1963. ______. Report and Order. (AM and FM Program Form) Amendmen t of Section IV (Statement of Program Service) of Broadcast Application Forms. Docket No. 13961. July 27, 1965. 1 F.C.C. 2d 439-448. ______. Application for Renewal of Noncommercial Educational TV, FM, or Standard Broadcast Station License. FCC Form 342. December, 1965. ______. Report and Order. (Television Program Form) FCC 66-903. Amendment of Section IV (Statement of Program Service) of Broadcast Application Forms. Docket No. 13961. October 7, 1966. 5 F.C.C. 2d 175-184. 396 397 U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Application for Authority to Construct a New Broadcast Station or Make Changes in an Existing Broadcast Station. FCC Form 301. July, 1968. ______. Public Notice. FCC 6 8-847. Ascertain ment of Community Needs by Broadcast Applicants. August 22, 1968. ______. "Camden Decision." FCC 69-644. Docket N o . 18303. June 13, 1969. U.S. Supreme Court. Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission. . 395 U.S. 36*? (1967). U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Application for Authority to Construct or Make Changes in a Noncommer cial Educational TV, FM or Standard Broadcast Station. FCC Form 340. August, 1969. ______. Inter-Office Memorandum. To the Commis- sion, From General Counsel. September 2, 1969. ______. Application for Noncommercial Educational TV, FM, or Standard Broadcast Station License. FCC Form 341. November, 1969. ______Notice of Inquiry. FCC 69-1402. In the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Prob lems by Broadcast Applicants, Part I , Section IV-A and IV—B of FCC Forms. Docket No. 18774. December 19, 1969. ______. Public Notice. FCC 70-62. Policy State ment on Comparative Hearings Involving Regular Renewal Applicants. January 15, 1970. Federal Register, Vol. 35, No. 14, January 21, 19707 822-824. ______. Memorandum Opinion and Order. FCC 70-63. In re Petitions filed by BEST, CCC, and Others for Rule Making to Clarify Standards in All Compara tive Broadcast Proceedings. RM-1551. January 16, 1970. ______. Public Notice. FCC 70-312. Interim Procedure Relating to Submission of Community Survey Showings in Connection with Radio and Television Ap plications. 18 RR 2d 1923. March 26, 1970. 398 U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Report and Order. Docket No. 18604. Seven-Year Retention* Period Adopted for Broadcast Station "Local Inspection" Files. April 15, 1970. ______. Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making. FCC 70-507. In the Matter of Broadcast Licensees Under the Fairness Doctrine. Docket No. 18859. May 18, 1970. Public Notice. FCC 70-517. Revision of Interim Procedure Relating to Submission of Community Survey Showings in Connection with Radio and Televi sion Applications. May 18, 1970, Alabama Educational Television Commission License Renewal. Petitions for Reconsideration, Opposition to Peti tions, and Reply to Opposition. Federal Communica tions Commission active file. June 24, 1970 to October 9, 1970. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Memorandum Opinion and Order. FCC 70-738. In the Matter of Policy Statementon Comparative Hearings Involving Regular Renewal Applicants. In re Petitions filed by BEST, CCC, and others for Rule Making to Clarify Standards in All Comparative Broadcast Proceedings. RM-1551. July 21, 1970. Memorandum Ooinion and Order. FCC 70- 1063. In the Matter of Request by Reuben B. Robert son, III and Ronald L. Winkler, For Inspection of Records. October 9, 1970. Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule Making. FCC 71-156.' In the Matter of Formula tion of Rules and Policies Relating to the Renewal of Broadcast Licenses. Docket No. 1915 3. February 23, 1971. ______. Notice of Inquiry. FCC 71-159. In the Matter of Formulation of Policies Relating to the Broadcast Renewal Applicant, Stemming from the Com parative Hearing Process. Docket No. 19154. Feb ruary 23, 1971. ______. Report and Order. FCC 71-176. In the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Prob lems by Broadcast Applicants, Part I, Section IV-A and IV—B of FCC Forms. Docket No. 18774. February 23, 1971. 399 U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Letter from Francis R. Walsh, Chief, Broadcast Bureau to Ves R. Box. In re Declaratory Ruling Concerning Com munity Leader Interviews. March 1, 1971. ______. News. Report No. 9744. Broadcast Action. Southern California Broadcasters Association Noti fied Use of Research Firm for Community Survey Is Acceptable. March 12, 19 71. Alabama Educational Television Commission. Station files Of WAIQ, WBIQ, WCIQ, WDIQ, WEIQ, WFIQ, WGIQ, WHIQ, WIIQ. Federal Communications Commission. As of May 26, 1971. Educational.Television Association of Metropolitan Cleve land. Station files of WVIZ-TV. Federal Communica tions Commission. As of May 26, 1971. The Greater Washington Educational Telecommunications Association, inc. Station file of WETA-TV. Federal Communications Commission. As of May 26, 1971. The Ohio State University. Station files of WOSU-TV. Federal Communications Commission. As of May 26, 1971. San Diego State College. Station file of KPBS-TV. Federal Communications Commission. As of May 26, 1971. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Public Notice. Report No. 9899. Joint Interviews of Community Leaders Found Not Adequate for Ascertainment of Community Problems. May 27, 1971. U.S. Court of Appeals, For the District of Columbia Circuit. No. 24,221; No. 24,471; No. 24,491. Citizens Communications Center, Black Efforts for Soul Tn Television and Hanoton~Roads Television Corporation* Community Broadcasting of Boston, Inc. vT Federal r~ Communications Commission and United States of America. U.S. Federal Communications Commission. News. Report No. 9977. SCBA Plan for Joint Interviews with Community Leaders Accepted by FCC as Satisfying in Part Require ments for Community Problem Ascertainment. July 1, 1971. 400 Interviews Berkman, Dave. Private interview. The American University, Washington, D.C. March 22, 1971. Bowler, Gregory. Private interview. The Ohio State Univer sity, Columbus, Ohio. April 21, 1971. Brown, Donald W., Jr. Private interview. WOSU-TV, Col umbus, Ohio. April 30, 1971. Calhcun, Nez. Interview. Alabama Educational Television Commission, Birmingham, Alabama. April 5, 1971. Crippens, David. Private interview. San Diego, California. February- 24, 1971. Dod, Robert E. Private interviews. Alabama Educational Television Commission, Birmingham, Alabama. April 5 and 6, 19 71. Durea, M. A. Interviews. The Ohio State University, Col umbus, Ohio. January 20, 27, and March 25, 19 71. Frye, Robert E. Private interview. WETA-TV, Washington, D.C. March 23, 1971. Harley, William G. Private interview. National Association of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. August 1'8, 19 70. f Hardgrove, Michael. Private interview. WETA-TV, Wash ington, D.C. March 23, 19 71. . Telephone conversation. Washington, D.C. July 9, 1971. Hilliard, Robert L. Private interview. Federal Communica tions Commission, Washington, D.C. May 26, 1971. . Telephone conversation. Washington, D.C. JuTy 9, 1971. Holcomb, Richard B. Private interview. Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Washington, D.C. May 24, 1971. 401 Holmes, Presley. Private interview. National Association of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. March 22, 1971. Hull, Richard B. Interviews. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. January 20, 27, February 10, and July 9, 1971. Hurlbert, Raymond D. Private interviews. Alabama Educa tional Television Commission, Birmingham, Alabama. April 5 and 6, 1971. Jefferson, Annetta L. Private interview. WVIZ-TV, Cleve land, Ohio. March 15, 1971. Juntilla, James. Private interview. Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. August 18, 19 70. Kaye, Peter F. Private interview. San Diego, California. February 24, 19 71. Kelly, Eugene H., III. Private interview. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. May 10, 1971. Kramer, Dan. Private interview. WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio. April 29, 1971. Latanick, Carole. Private interview. WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio. March 15, 19 71. Martin, Donald R. Conversation via radio-telephone. San Diego, California. June 22, 1971. Martin, Randy. Private interview. WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio. March 15, 1971. Mendelson, Gilbert S., Jr. Private interview. Washington, D.C. May 25, 1971. Metzger, John D. Private interview. WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio. February 12, 19 71. Monagas, Lionel. Private interview. National Association of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. May 25, 1971. 402 Telephone conversation. Washington, D.C. July 2 7 7 " 1 9 71. Moodie, Aharon. Private interview. WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio. March 15, 1971. Myers, Allen. Private interview. Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. May 25, 1971. ______. Telephone conversations. Washington, D.C. June 25, and July 8, 1971. Niven, Harold. Private interview. National Association of Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. August 18, 1970. Pioli, Richard T. Private interview. WETA-TV, Washington, D.C. March 23, 1971. Telephone conversation. Washington, D.C. July 9, 1971. Polivy, Margot. Private interview. Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. August 18, 1970. Rahmann, John. Private interview. WETA-TV, Washington, D.C. March 23, 1971. Reyes, Domingo Nick. Private interview. The National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Committee, Washington, D.C. March 22, 1971. Riddleberger, Holt. Private interview. National Association of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. August 18, 1970. Rocciano, Tony and Brother One X. Interviewed by Bob Spiro on "Inquiry," WOSU-TV. December 6, 1970. Sloan, Elizabeth. Interview. Alabama Educational Television Commission, Birmingham, Alabama. April 5, 1971. Spiro, Bob. Private interview. WOSU-TV, Columbus, Ohio. April 30, 1971. 403 Spivack, Ed. Private interview. Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. August 18, 1970. Stephenson, Alan. Interview. WVIZ-TV, Cleveland, Ohio. February 3, 1971. Stork, Denis N. Interviews. Alabama Educational Tele vision Commission, Birmingham, Alabama. April 5 and 6, 1971. Thorpe, Robert S. Private interview. Federal Communica tions Commission, Washington, D.C. May 25, 1971. Warner, Bradford B. Private interview. San Diego, California. February 24, 1971. Woods, Robert A. Private interview. Schwartz-Woods Law Offices, Washington, D.C. March 24, 1971. Wright, William D. Private interview. Washington, D.C. May 24, 1971. ______. Telephone conversation. Washington, D.C. March 24, 1971. Yeager, Margaret. Private interview. WETA-TV, Washington, D.C. March 23, 1971. Publications Alabama ETV Commission. ETViews, March, April, 1971. Alabama Educational Television Network. Bulletins, 1968, 1971. Alabama State Department of Education, ed. Instructional Television: Teachers* Handbook, 1970-7IT Alexander, Sidney S. "Public Television and the 'Ought' of Public Policy." Washington University Law Quarterly, CMMLXVIII (Winter, 1968), 35. "Ascertainment of Community Problems and Broadcast Matter to Deal with Those Problems." ETS Newsletter. January, 1971. 404 Association for Professional Broadcasting Education. Feedback.XII (November, 1970). Barron, Jerome. "The Meaning and Future of Red Lion." Educational Broadcasting Review, III (December, 1969), 9-11. Berkman, Dave. "Inner City." Educational Television, October, 1969, p. 35. "Blacks vs. Chicago Stations." Weekly Television Digest, November 9, 19 70, p. 6. Brechner, Joseph L. "A Statement on the 'Fairness Doc trine'." Journal of Broadcasting, IX (Spring, 1965), 103-112. Burch, Dean. "Responsibility and the Public: A Give and Take." Educational Broadcasting Review, 19 70 Con vention Report, pp. 18-20. Chaffee, Steven H. "Life and Death of a Viewer Poll." Journal of Broadcasting, XIV (Fall, 1970), 473-482. "Chance to Escape Fairness Trap?" Broadcasting, June 14, 1971, pp. 22-23. Citizens Communications Center. Progress Report. May 1, 1971. Clyde, Robert W. and McDermott, Joseph T. "Minority- Produced Television: Problems of Policy and Measure ment." Educational Broadcasting Review, IV (August, 1970), 40-44. A Concerned Sister of OSU. "Save Black Programs." Our Choking Times, April 21, 1971, pp. 5-6. Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Guidelines for Con ducting a Telephone Survey for Public Radio and Tele vision Stations. December, 1970. ______. Newsletter. November, 1969, and November- December, 19^6. ______. Public Broadcasting...What Is It? 405 Cox, Kenneth A. "Necessary Self-Training for Citizen Effectiveness.1' Better Broadcasts News, October 1, 1969, pp. 1 ff. and Johnson, Nicholas. Broadcasting in America and the FCC' s License Renewal Process: An Oklahoma Case Study. 14 FCC 2d 1 (1968). Cusack, Mary Ann. "The Emergence of Political Editorial izing in Broadcasting." Journal of Broadcasting, VIII (Winter, 1963-1964), 5 3 - 6 T . Daniel, Jack. "The Facilitation of White-Black Communi cation." The Journal of Communications, XX (June, 1970), 134-141. "Diary of a Dilemma." The Ohio State University Monthly, June, 19 70, pp. 3-22. Emery, Walter B. Broadcasting and Government. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1961. ______. "Broadcasting Rights and Responsibilities in Democratic Society." NAEB Journal, XXIV (April, 1965), 72-84. ~ ______. "Is There a Constitutional Flaw In the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967?" Educational Broadcasting Review, II (February, 1968), 17-21^ ______. "Nervous Tremors in the Broadcast Industry." Educational Broadcasting Review, III (June, 1969), T3-T51.------— - - - - - ^ ------ Fairfax, Jean. "Contributing to Black Rage." Educational Broadcasting Review, IV (October, 1970) , 8-10. "Frito Bandito Is Still Around." Advertising Age, January 11, 1971, p. 10. Grover, Stephen. "Running Scared." Wall Street Journal. April 28, 19 71, pp. 1 f. "Happy Birthday, WVIZ." The Plain Dealer, February 6, 1971, p. 10A. Harley, William G. "The Challenges to Educational Communi cators ." Educational Broadcasting Review, 1970 Con vention Report, pp. 4 ff. 406 Head, Sydney W. "A Friendly Critic on ETV Programs." Educational Television; The Next Ten Years. Stanford: The Institute for Communication Research, 1962. Henry, E. William; Laurent, Lawrence; Shavon, Robert Lewis; and Robertson, James. "A Panel Speaks on Public Af fairs Programming." NAEB Journal, XXV {January- F e b r u a r y , 1966), 33-40 ff. Hilliard, Robert L. "Communications and the Urban Crisis: Doing Our Own Thing." Educational Broadcasting Review, II {December, 196b) , 16-22. Jennings, Ralph M. "PTV Needs Responsiveness to the Community." Educational Television, July, 1970, pp. 4 ff. Johnson, Nicholas. "The Media Barons and the Public Interest." ETC. : A Review of General Semantics, XXVI {September, 19 69) , 325-346. ______. "Public Interest and Public Broadcasting: Looking at Communications as a Whole." Washington University Law Quarterly, CMMLXVII (Fall^ 1967) , T80. ______, "The Why of Public Broadcasting." Educational Broadcasting Review, I {December, 1967) , 5-10. KPBS Program 'Guide. I (November, 1970) . Kahn, Frank J. , ed. Documents of American Broadcasting. New York: Appleton-Century-Crof ts , 1968. Katz, Elihu. "The Two-Step Flow of Communication: An Up-to-Date Report on An Hypothesis." Public Opinion Q u a r t e r l y , XXI (1957) , 72-78. Keller, Kent R. "Law of Administrative Standing and the Public Right of Intervention." Federal Communications Bar J o u r n a l , XXI (1967) , 134. "Kettering Conference on PTV Programming." Editorial. Educational Television, August, 1969, p. 8. Market Facts, Inc. Determining Chicago Area Community Problems and Leadership. Contained in FCC Docket No. t s t t t ------407 Mendelsohn, Harold. "What to Say to Whom in Social Amelio ration Programming." Educational Broadcasting Review, III (December, 1969), 19-26. Meyer, Richard J. "ETV and the Ghetto." Educational Broad- casting Review, II (August, 1968), 19-24. "'Modest Progress' in Minority Employment." National Asso ciation of Educational Broadcasters Newsletter. March 3, 1971, pp. 1-2. Monagas, Lionel. "Survey on Locally Produced Minority Programming." NAEB. February 19, 19 71. "NAEB Confronts Its Own Racial Crisis." Broadcasting, November 16, 1970, pp. 38-39. National Association of Educational Broadcasters. Memo on Instruction. March 15, April 15, and June 15, 1971. ______. Minority Employment Practices of Educational Broadcasting Stations'! Fact Sheet. February, 1971. Newsletter. Issues from July, 1969 through June 19, i$7l.---- The National Citizens Committee For Public Broadcasting. The State of Public Broadcasting, A Report to the American People. July, 196 8. Quaal, Ward L. and Martin, Leo A. Broadcast Management. New York: Hastings House, Publishers, 1968. Racial Justice in Broadcasting. A Report of a Program to Combat Discrimination Practiced by Broadcast Licen sees Against Blacks and Other Minorities by Means of Programming and Employment Practices. Conducted by the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ, (no date.) Rao Back. The Columbus Broadcastinq Coalition, Inc. April, 19 71. Roe, Yale and Bartley, Lynwood H. "TV— A Tool for Reaching the Poor: Comment and Reply." Educational Broad casting Review, III (June, 1969), 20-25. San Diego State Profile. San Diego: Publications Bureau, September, 1970. 408 Siepmann, Charles A. Radices Second Chance. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1947. "16 U.S. Cities Now Predominantly Black." Citizen-Journal. July 6, 1971. Stavins, Ralph L., ed. Television Today: The End of Communication and the Death of"community^ Washington, D.C.: Communication Service Corporation, 1969. WETA Program Listings. I (March 1-15, 1971). "WOSU TV and Raiio Program Bulletin." I (January, 1971). WVIZ Viewsletter. V (Fall, 1970). Wade, Serena E. "The Feasibility of Serving Minority Group Needs Through UHF-ETV." Educational Broad casting Review, V (April, 1971), 64. Waple, Ben F. and Smith, William R. "FCC Warns State Net About Decision Making." Educational Broadcasting Review, IV (October, 19 70), 11-14. "Where the UHF-Equipped Homes Are." Broadcasting, July 5, 1971, pp. 32-33. Speeches and Unpublished Materials "Administrative Organization." The Telecommunications Center, The Ohio State University. April 15, 1970. Baldwin, Thomas F. and Surlin, Stuart H. "A Study of Broadcast Station License Application Exhibits on Ascertainment of Community Needs." Filed in FCC Docket No. 18774. January, 1970. Ball, Howard G. "WVIZ: Personnel." Unpublished report, The Ohio State University, 1971. Berkman, Dave. "Freedom in Public Broadcasting." Un published article. ______. "Proposal for a Black Community Radio Service andUndergraduate Program of Communications Training for Black Inner City Students." The American Uni versity, Washington, D.C. October 2, 1970. 409 Berkman, Dave. “Statement and Resolution." Presented at General Membership Meeting of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 11, 1971. Black Efforts for Soul in Television. Comments on Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems, Docket No. 18774, January 30, 1970. Brown, Donald W. "WOSU-TV Schedule Analysis, Average Week, Autumn, 1970." Central Ohio Educational Television Foundation. ITV Schedule and Fact Sheet. Cohn, Marcus. "Problems of Maintaining Competition in Broadcasting." APBE Broadcast Regulations Seminar, Washington, D.C. November 8, 1969. "Comments by National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Committee, Inc." In the Matter of Primer on Ascer tainment of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants. Docket No. 18774. March 28, 1970. Comments by William H. Siemcring. Docket No. 18774. January 29, 1970. Comments of the National Citizens Committee for Broad casting on Proposed Primer. Docket No. 18774. January 29, 1970. Corporation for Public Broadcasting Advisory Committee of National Organizations. "Protecting the Public Interest in Cable Television." Crippens, David. "Racism in Broadcasting." WEST Symposium, San Diego, California. February 25, 1971. Day, James. "The Social Responsibility of Public Broad casting." Address before the Forty-Fifth Annual NAEB Convention, Washington, D.C. November 10, 1969. Durea, M. A.; Brown, Don W.; and Metzger, John D. "WOSU-TV Fall, 1970 Schedule." September 18, 1970. Hardgrove, Michael. Letter to investigator, July 14, 1971. 410 Harley, William G. "Educational Broadcasting and New Communication Technology." Statement presented to Executive Board of Directors, National Association of Educational Broadcasters. May 15, 1971. ______. Speech before Annual Convention of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 9, 1970. Hatcher, Richard G. "Broadcasters' Responsibility in the Urban Crisis.” Address before the Forty-Fifth Annual NAEB Convention, Washington, D.C. November 10, 1969. Hurlbert, Raymond D. "The Alabama ETV Network...Vehicle for Total Communications Service to All Alabamians." Unpublished report. March 4, 1969. ______. "Educational Television in Alabama." Unpub lished paper. December, 196 8. ______. "Nation's First Interconnected Educational Television Network." Unpublished paper. December, 1968. Lacy, Robert P. "Determining the Needs of Television and Radio Audiences in the State of Oklahoma." Un published Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State Univer sity, 1963. Lawson, Richard Gene. "The Role of Socio-Economic Environ ment in the Development of Educational Television: A Descriptive Analysis of Educational Television in Alabama and Illinois." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Illinois, 1964. Louis Harris and Associates, Inc. "The Viewing of Public Television— 1970" (November, 1970). Macy, John. Speech before Annual Convention of National Association of Educational Broadcasters, November 10, 1970. Monagas, Lionel. "Racism in Broadcasting." WEST Symposium, San Diego, California. February 25, 19 71. National Association of Broadcasters. Comments Before the Federal Communications Commission in the Matter of Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants. Docket No. 18774. January 30, 1970. 411 "The National Mexican American Anti-Defamation Committee." Fact Sheet. "News from the NAEB," November 11, 1970. Ohio Educational Television Network. "WOSU-TV Data Sheet." September 1, 1970. Phelps, Ernest E. "The Office of Communication: The Participant Advocate— Its Function As a Citizen Group in Broadcasting." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1971. Rawson, Robert. "Procedures Involved in License Renewals." APBE Broadcast Regulations Seminar. Washington, D.C. November 7, 1969. Schwartz, Louis and Woods, Robert A. "A Memo to Our Clients Ascertainment of Community Problems." March, 1971. "TTI Training Programs." (Promotional flyer.) "Telecommunications and Film at San Diego State." WETA-TV, School Television Service. Evaluation Form for Classroom Teachers. WVIZ Auction '71. May 10-16, 1971. (Promotional flyer.) WVIZ-TV School Programming Evaluation Form for Teachers. Wade Media Consultants, Inc. "Community Needs Assessment Package." Warner, Bradford B. Letter to investigator. March 19, 1971. Wood, John M. "WOSU-TV: Philosophy and Objectives." Un published report, The Ohio State University, 1971. ______. "WVIZ: Evolving Philosophy." Unpublished report, The Ohio State University, 1971.