Flajlju+O Adviser
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE ROLE OF CONGRESSIONAL EROADCA3TING IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By ROEERT EDWARD SUPERS, B. S., A. M. The Ohio State University 19 55 Approved by: /flAjlju+o Adviser Department of Speech TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION ................................... 1 II. GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC INFORMATION IN AMERICA .... 31 III. THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE BROADCASTING MEDIA TO PUBLIC INFORMATION........................... 84 IV. CONGRESS AND THE PUBLIC................. 137 V. LEGISLATIVE BROADCASTING AND CONGRESS ............. 191 VI. PRACTICAL LIMITATIONS UFON LEGISLATIVE BROADCASTING . 242 VII. PATTERN FOR THE F U T U R E ................. 297 APPENDIX I ............................................... 320 APPENDIX I I ............................................... 329 APPENDIX I I I ......................................... 335 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. 339 AUTOBIOGRAPHY ............................................. 353 11 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION American democratic theory is predicated on the assumption that members of the electorate should participate actively In the polit ical process. In spite of wide differences of opinion as to how much participation is required, American political history is character ized by continuing efforts to broaden citizen participation in govern ment. But even in the formative years of the Republic, the found ing fathers recognized the dangers of unintelligent or uninformed participation, and insisted strongly upon full and free public in formation as a prerequisite to political action. The necessity of the public being "informed", therefore, early became a cardinal principle of American democratic philosophy* Yet, for almost one hundred years, the "informed public" concept was accept ed as axiomatic, without either elaboration or analysis. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, however, political scientists commenced to express concern over the apparent lack of progress in achieving the democratic ideal. The problem of political education of the elector ate, for example, seemed no nearer solution than it had been when the Republic was formed. Notwithstanding the tremendous strides made in public education and in the dissemination of information, the citlzen- voter remained "uninformed" on a wide range of topics and issues upon which he was expected to make rational decisions. 1 The continuing low level of public information ainoe 1900 has tended to raise doubts as to the efficacy of information in the dem ocratic process, and to inspire the belief that existing ohannela of communication are unable to keep paoe with the public information demands of modern government. For more than fifty years, political and social scientists have sought methods of increasing the effective ness of the information process, hoping thereby to increase intel ligent political participation by the electorate. As early as 1898, a prominent political scientist of that day, Professor Lauros McConachie, maie the plaintive but seemingly futile observation* Were there...provisions for disseminating through out the country more fully and in better forms in formation, not only of private, but also of publio legislative doings, constituents could form a more intelligent estimate of the work of their represent atives, and publicity would have its most beneficial scope He dreamed of some new invention for the dissemination of knowledge— something which he labelled a "method of legislative extension", which could be trained upon eleoted representatives and would permit the eye of the citizen to see at first hand how his government was functioning. Unknowingly, Professor McConaohie described most accurately the sensational mid-twentieth century information medium— television. For through television, the method of "legislative extension" has already proved its efficacy as an instrument of public information. In leas 1 Lauros G. McConaohie, Congressional Committees (Uew York* Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1898), pp. 68-9. 3 than a decade, television haa grown to the point where it is available to two-thirds of the nation, and on numerous occasions has brought important governmental proceedings and political events into the liv ing rooms of millions of Americans* The postwar development of television was marked by a continuing procession of telecasts of governmental proceedings and events of major political significance. On January 15, 1946, President Truman inau gurated legislative broadcasting when his message to Congress was tele vised— the first television broadcast from the interior of the nation al Capitol* Three months later, on March 25th, the opening session of the United Nations Security Council was televised over WNBT, New York City. In 1947, the opening of Congress was televised over a three- city network, and three major policy speeches by President Truman, delivered before joint sessions of Congress, were carried by radio and television. The signing of the Japanese Peace Treaty in San Francisco in 1951 inaugurated coast-to-coast television. President Truman was again the chief actor in this nationwide television drama— with an audience whose potential was measured at 4 0 *000,000 as contrasted with the few hundred able to witness the first legislative telecast five years earlier. But the real evidence of television1s might in the realm of public information oame somewhat earlier that same year— 1951. The Kefauver Crime Commission conducted public investigations in a number of American cities. In each city, the hearings were telecast over local stations. By the tine the Comnittee reached New York, public interest in the hear* Inge reached its peak, and the televised New York hearings went out over an extensive network including nearly every television station east of the Mississippi River* The impact of the televised hearings upon the public startled even the most blase observers of the polit ical scene* In New York City, business virtually oame to a standstill while businessmen and their employees, housewives, and school pupils dropped everything to follow the dramatic story of corruption in their city government. Throughout the nation, press and public alike join ed in acclaiming television as opening a new era in the advance of knowledge and in the practice of popular government. A few individuals went so far as to assert that television was the greatest contribution in the communication of knowledge since the invention of printing* But this opinion was not shared by legislators. The wave of popular interest which followed the televising of the Kefauver investi gations inspired broadcasters to look to legislative bodies for other program material. Congressional committee proceedings became a prime target for television cameramen, much to the dismay of the majority of members of Congress* Promptly upon the opening of the 81st Congress in 1952, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Sam Rayburn, im posed a ban on all further broadcasts or telecasts of House oommittee hearings or other proceedings* The move brought Immediate repercussions* Having tapped a fer tile field for publio service programming, the broadcasting Industry vaa loath to surrender without a battle. Furthermore, both radio and television leaders viewed the action of Speaker Rayburn as discrimi nation between the broadcast media and the press, seeing in this move a violation of freedom of the press. Spokesmen for the major radio and television networks and the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters took a stand demanding the "right" of equal access with the press to all governmental proceedings. During the remainder of 1952 the legislative broadoasting contro versy raged, with the broadcasters enjoying the support of the press and a handful of Congressmen. The elections of 1952 put in a Republi can administration which gave heed to the broadcasters' demands for equality with the press. The new Speaker of the House, Joseph W. Martin of Massachusetts, rescinded the Rayburn ban, leaving the decision to permit televising up to the Individual committees. He also recommended that clear rules on TV coverage of hearings and proceedings be estab lished "at the earliest possible moment." No action was ever taken on this recommendation, however. Following the lifting of the Rayburn ban, some committees of the House of Representatives permitted broadcasts and telecasts of their proceedings; others did not. Then in 1954f control of the House once more fell to the Democratic Party, and Sam Rayburn resumed the Speaker1s chair. One of his first official acts was to relmpoae his previous ban against broadcasting and telecasting and the House of Representatives was again "blaoked out" as far as legislative broadoasting was concerned. Daring the far oar o n r the Baybarn b n , oplaioa in the Sonata, traditionally conservative, vaa divided on tha laaaa of legislative broadoasting. Mo niorophones or oaaeras h m ever boon pornlttod In tho Sonato ohaaber, bat tho Sonato ralos loft tho dooision to permit broadoasting or television coverage of oonaittee boarings to tho dis cretion of tho individual ooaalttoo. Soao Sonato oonalttees welcomed broadoast oororago with opon araa; othors did not. With still others, tho question has noror jot ooao up for disousslon and dooision. Tot it was tho tolorising of a Sonato ooaalttoo tearing in tho