Broadcasting in America; the Performance of Network Afficiates in the Top 50 Markets. INSTITUTION Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C

Home , Harte Hanks, KMSI, Science Digest, Springfield Television, Taft Broadcasting, The Outlet Company

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 082 483 EM 011 445

AUTHOR Johnson, Nicholas TITLE Broadcasting in America; The Performance of Network Afficiates in the Top 50 Markets. INSTITUTION Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE 10 Aug 73 NOTE 173p. JOURNAL CIT Federal Communications Conmission Reports; v42 (2d Series)N1 August 10,1973

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$6.58 DESCRIPTORS *Broadcast Industry; Certification; Citizen Partic4.pation; Commercial Television; *Equal Opportunities (Jobs); Evaluation; National Surveys; *Networks; Performance; Performance Criteria; *Programing (Broadcast); Television; *Television Surveys IDENTT_FIERS FCC; *Federal Communications Commission; Johnson (Nicholas); United States of America

ABSTRACT This report represents the final attempt by outgoing Commissioner Nicholas Johnson to draw attention to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) automatic renewal of licensees guilty of substandard performance. The report analyzes the performance of network affiliates in the top 50 television markets with respect to programing, female and minority employment, and ownership. It seeks to demonstrate the kind of analysis which can be made, to develop minimum standards, and to design an alternative to government regulation by using public disclosure of :;nformation to spur the industry to improve its performance and to motivate the public to challenge substandard licensees. The analyses of performance are based upon public data supplied by licensees to the FCC; in three separate chapters criteria on programing, employment, and ownership are developed from inspections of the data and the stations are rank-ordered according to their performance.it fourth chapter discusses what citizens can do to improve television in their community. Six appendixes and 17 tables provide detailed data on approximately 150 stations. (PB) VOL. 42 (2d Series) AUGUST 10, 1973 No. 1

IsrN FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REPORTS CO (42 F.C.C. 2d) co Decisions, Repo/1's, Public Notices, and Other Documents of CD- the Federal Communications Commission of the United States

VOLUME 42 (2d Series) Pages 1 to 172

Reported by the Commission

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION 8 WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO DUCE° EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN ATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS S-Al ED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE S:: NT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

DEAN BURCH, Chairman ROBERT E. LEE CHARLOTTE T. REID NICHOLAS JOHNSON RICHARD E. WILEY H. REX LEE BENJAMIN L. HOOKS

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, D.C.

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - on a subscription basis August 1973

Because Broadcasting in America was issued as a dissenting opinion to the 1973 Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi License Renewals while I was serving on the Federal Communications Commission, it is printed in the official F. C. C. Reports. You may order additional copies of Broadcasting in America for the cost of having them printed ($1.75 each). Just write: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington DC 20402. Ask for "F. C. C. Reports, Volume 42 (Second Series), Number 1, August 10, 1973." (Needless to say, I have no financial interest in the publication.) I hope you find Broadcasting in America useful, and that you will send me your comments, suggestions for improving future volumes, and the results of any comparable studies you may do on broadcasting in your community.

Nicholas Johnson P. O. Box 19101 Washington DC 20036 FILMED FROM BEST AVAILABLECOPY

BROADCASTING IN AMERICA The Performance of NetworkAffiliates in the Top 50 Markets

.//y tone st +(fly. pierteed byFCC Commissioner Nicholas Joh ',sokand his ,q01-1 and 6na?;nar stadeat8 Arkansas, Louisiana and JI;ssissippi 1.97Rene-wigs 3

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WAsm xurox, D.C.20.)54 In Re Renewals of BROADCAST LICENSES FOR ARKANSAS, LOIISIANA AND MISSISSIPPI, 1973 MAY 31, 1973. Ti IE Co3rmissiox ai Co3r3rissroNms Bum] (ClimamAN), Ronmrp E. LEE, H. REX LEE, REID, WILEY, AND HOOKS, WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON DISSENTING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT, APPROVED STAFF ACTION REVIEWING BROADCAST LICENSES FOR ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA AND Mississippi FOR 1973.

DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON For my entire term I have dissented to the automatic renewal of licensees guilty of substandard performances in programming and (more recently) employment. The 1913 Arkansas-Louisiana-Missis- sippi renewals represent the last group that will cross my desk during my official tenure as Federal Communications Commissioner. There- fore, I and my staff and seminar students have prepared a major report on broadcasting in America, incorporating many of the complaints and suggestions of my seven years, for this one final renewal dissent. 42 F.C.Q. 2(1 4 Federal Cominunieatio 718 C 077117218SiOn Reports TABLE OF CONTENTS page Table of Contents 4 Table of Tables 4 Credits 5 I NT RO D ETT ION (Mid Overall programming ranking') 6 Chapter 1. PROGRAMMING I.E,CFORMANcp: I. Introduction 14 II. News Public Affairs 16 III. Com inercial i zation 25 IV. Local Programming 30 V. Confidential Financial Informatnm 38 Chapter 2. EMPLOYMENT I. Introduction_ 49 II. Analysis of Minority Employment__ III. Analysis of Female Employment 59 IV. Remedies fm. Claims of Employment Discrimination 61 V. National Employment Analysis 64 Chapter 3. PATTERNS OF OWNERSHIP 68 Chapter 4. How You CAN IMPROVE TELEVISION IN YOUR COMMUNITY I. What Can You Do? (an Introduction) 100 II. How Do You Prepare? 103 III. What Action Can You Take? 118 Appendix A. Systems Methodology Appendix B. Citizens' Organizations & Resource Materials_ Appendix C. Additional Tables of Information_ Appendix D. The Ten Best and Ten Worst Stations 122E238133i Appendix E. Setting Minimum Levels of Performance 170 Appendix F. The Top 50 Markets 171 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1. Ranking the network affiliates in the top 50 markets on their overall programming performance 7 Table 2. Overall programming ranking including rank in each of the program ming criteria.. 14 Table 3. Ranking of performance in news, public affairs . and "other" programming 19 Table 4. Ranking of performance in category of Public Service announcements 23 Table 5. Ranking of perform: nee in commercialization category 28 Table C. Ranking of performance in local programming 34 Table 7. Ranking based on the percentage of gross revenues allocated to program expenditures 44 Table 8. Ranking of the total percentage of minority employees relative to the percentage of minorities in the SMSA 53 Table 9. Ranking of the percentage of minorities employed in high pay positions 57 Table 10. Ranking of the ;)ereentage. of women employed in high pay positions 59 Table 11. National total of full time, minority and women employees of affiliates in the study in 1972 64 Table 12. Stations reporting fewer than 5 minority employees in 1972 64 Table 13. Total full time, minority and women employees in high pay positions in 1972 65 Table 14a. Stations employing 0 or 1 minorities in high pay positions in 1972 65 Table 14b. Stations employing 0 or 1 women in high pay positions in 1972__ 65 Table 15. Stations showing a decrease in employment of minorities or women in 1972 66 Table 16. Cross reference of owners to call letters 74 Table 17. Ownership Information 77 42 F.C.C. 2d Akanis, Louis;ana aird .siNN;ppi. 5

CREDITS This report, is very much the product of a multi-group effort. The groups involved included my own stall, a 0roup of Georgetown Uni- versity law students in a seminar I WUS teaching, FCC employees outside of triV office, and guests appearing before the ..emuar. After .the markets and stations were selected, decisions had to be made as to which categories of data to include and exclude, and the analyses to which they should he subjected. The data had to be ex- tracted from FCC files. Computer programs w ere written. Additional research, writing and editing produced the text. The text and charts were laid out and typed many times. Each of these tasks involved uncounted hours of labor. The prineipal participants in any ow n office were Larry Gage and Elaine Weiss. It was they who did the 1 i.m's share of the administration of the group effort, following up on the thousands of details necessary to the project's timely completion, editing the seminar students' contribution, and adding their own substantial segments of text. Karen Possner. a. doctoral candidate in Communications at, the University of Iowa. made valuable contributions to the seminar sessions and this report. Chuck Shepherd helped out with some of the charts. Bonnie Herbert and Karen Marrrrave bore the considerable burdens of typing and preparing this surtsantiat manuscript at a time 11-110.11 their normal tasks were especially heavy. The Georgetown law students were : Phil A trent°, Thomas J. Collin, Raymond C. Fay, Ronald G. Gabler, Larry Harbin, Karen B. Possner, Lucilla A. Streeter, James R. Tantield, Wvid Wagner. James B. Wil- cox, Jr. and Brady Williamson. They participated in my seminar with the advance knowledge that, the burdens would be, substantial and executed the assignment with great ability and good spirits. Derrick A. Humphries participated in the first two months of the seminar. The contribution of Larry Harbin in preparing and executing our computer programs warrants special mention. Those FCC employees outside of my office who gave us invaluable assistance include: Pearl Cook, Larry Ends, John Foret, Alex Korn, Quentin Proctor, Allan Stillwell, Wally Johnson, David Westin and fIarold Kassens. We very much appreciate their cooperationocca- sionally requiring their staying well beyond the FCC's normal 4:30 p.m. closing time. Seminar guests who gave us an evening of their time ineluded: Sam Buffone, a former seminar student and currently an associate in Stern Concern; former FCC Commissioner Kenneth A. Cox former FCC Creneral Counsel Henry Geller, currently with the Rand Corporation; Dr. Everett Parker, Director of the United Church of Christ Office of Communications; Tracy Westen, a former legal assistant of mine and currently Director of Stern Concern; and Dr. Clay T. Whitehead, Director of the White. House Office of Telecommunications Policy as well as most of the FCC employees mentioned above. Each con- tributed in his or her own way to the seminar participants' tmder- standino of the performance and regulation of broadcasting in America. The other friends and advisors who have had sour input during the past seven years to my thinking about broadcast replation in general 42 F.C.C. 2d 6 Federal Communications Commission Reports and this approach to it in particular are too numerous to itemize but are no less important to the end product. With thousands of pieces of data copied and handled many times, there are undoubtedly errors somewhere in this report. All I can say is that we have done our best to keep such errors to an absolute mininnun and express our regrets in advance to any broadcaster who has been adversely affected by such error. Ntonor,As ,TotI.NSON. Washington, June 1973 INTRODUCTION The revelations surrounding Watergate have only dramatized what many concerned citizens and public interest lawyers have known for a long time: we cannot rely on government to solve our problems. The regulatory agencies set up to serve the public interest all too often end up almost totally subservient to industry pressure. Whatever may be the case elsewhere, however, the Federal Commu- nications Commission is a classic case of what now Chief Justice Burger once called "a curious neutrality in favor of the licensee.." Seemingly congenital pro-industry bias, of course, is no reason to give up on the agency. Quite the contrary. It must be watched all the more closel::. There must be appeals to the courts and Congressional and press exposes or the FCC's most egregious decisions. There must be public participation in license, renewa(hearings, fairness doctrine complaints, FCC rule makings, Congressional hearings involving the agency, and so forth. Still, it is only the better part of wisdom and imagination to try to come up with alternatives to government at the same time efforts are being made to maximize the potential of the FCC. One such alternative is represented by this report. It is, quite simply. an effort to use public disclosure of broadcasters' performance, and comparative rankings of those broadcasters, as a means of rewarding the better stations and punishing the worst. It is true, of course. that this analysis of what is, after all, FCC data, may attract the attention of FCC staff or Commissioners, or may provide an incentive to outraged citizens to file license renewal challenges against the worst stations. This report may be. more. seriously considered by broadcasters because. they arc aware of that potential threat. But that is not the principal purpose of the report. The major hope is simply that the mere, publishing: of this data. will, standing alone, provide reinforcement for the better stations and an incentive to improvement by the worst. It is true that an FCC Commissioner was involved in the preparation of this document. But. in many ways that should he irrelevant to its impact. The data nsed is publicly available from the. FCC's files. And broadcasters have little to fear frAn the vote of one dissenting Commissioner on a seven-person Commission. in short, this is the kind of study that any group should be able. to donotionally, as this one, or locally, and in more. depth. This report represents the attempt of one Commissioner, his staff, and seminar students to analyze the performance of each of the net-

Office of Communirotion of Ihr rolled Church of Chrini Frderol Communications Commission. 350 Ii' 2(1 094 (D.C. Cir. 1956). 42 P.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisana mid ppi Renewals 7 work affiliates in the top fifty television markets in the country. Be- cause the findings are presented in the form of rankings of .those stations, in areas of performance from employment to programming, it is perhaps fitting to begin the report with the overall composite ranking of the affiliates with regard to their programming performance. Quite simply, this table ranks each of the stations in the study based on a composite of all of the programming criteria analyzed in Chapter one. In this table KPIXTV, San Francisco, ranks as the best-pro- granmted station in the top fifty markets. and WCCB, Charlotte, N.C., yanks as the worst. TABLE I.Netork affiliate^ ranked by composite of all progra?nbliny criteria

RankCall letters Net. off. 1Ikt. No Location

1 KPIX CBS SSan Francisco 2 WIZ ABC 10Baltimore 3KING NBC 16Seattle-Tacoma 4 KDKA CBS 9Pittsburgh it KYW NBC 4Philadelphia 6W P I G ABC 18Miami 7WMAL ABC 10Washington D.C. sWTA B A BC 9Pittsburgh 9W P M Y CMS 48Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal 10KG W NBC 20Portland 11 WWL CBS 31New Orleans 12WRC NBC 10Washington D.C. 13WA BC ABC 1 New York City 14 KN:1C NBC ,Los Angeles 15 WIIC NBC ll Pittsburgh ISWTIC CBS 22Hartford-New Haven 17 WNAL. ABC 6Boston 16KATO ABC 26Portland 19 WII AS CBS 36Louisville 20KC RA NBC 27Sacramento-Stockton 21 LOIN CBS 211 Portland 22WRNS CBS 28Columbus 23KTA R NBC 43Phoenix 24KOM0 ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 23WLW T N BC 20Cincinnati 26WCBS 0 BS 1 New York City 27KAM X CBS 12St Lnuis 25WSM NBC 30Nashville 29 WK Y NBC 41Oklahoma City 30WAS T ABC 37A l bany-Sc heneetad y-T alWSI1 NBC 17Atlanta 31WBZ NBC 0Boston 33KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 34WIIAR CBS 10Baltimore 35INZZNI ABC 41Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids 30WDSU NBC 31 New Orleans 37WRTY" NBC 14Indianapolis 38WBPN CBS o5Buffa.o 30WN BC INow York City 40K N X 'P NCRSiS 2Los Angeles 41 KBRC NBC 15lionston 42WC PO CBS 20Cincinnati 43W3IAQ NBC 3Chicago 44KO V R ABC 27Sacramento-Stockton 40WIT1 ABC 21Milwaukee 46WCA CI CBS 4Philadelphia 47WS Y It NBC 43Syracuse 48111311 1., NBC 19 Baltimore 13 WB RC ABC 38Birmingham 50WPY I ABC 41 hiladel phia 01 WP RI CBS 31Providence 52 W A P I NBC 38Birmingham 53K UTV NBC 00Salt. Lake City 51KWTV CBS 41Oklahoma City 55WTOI' CBS 10Washington D.C. 00W C KT NBC ISBland 57WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 58WOAI NBC 45San Antonio 5Y ESTI' NBC 13Minneapolis-St Paul 60WA GA. CBS 17Atlanta 61WSIX ABC 30Nashville 62WO T IT NBC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 63WX11 NBC 48Gosh -high Pt-Win Sal 01KIRK ABC 15 Houston 65WLW I ABC 14Indianapolis (16 KS D NBC 12 St Louis 42 F.C.C. 2d 8 Federal Communications Commission Reports

TABLE 1,Network,' affilial,y ranked by catapofitt of all peogramoling criteria

RankCall letters Net. Mt Mkt. No, Location

66WTVJ C BS 18Miami 68KTVI ABC 12St Louis 69WWI N BC 13 Detroit 70K11011 CBS 15 Ballston 71 W 1.'1 Y A BC: 24Tampa -St Petersburg 7"WFBC NBC 40Gnville-SpInbg-Ashvi 73 W K. 13 W A BC 25Buffalo 74WTMJ NBC 21 Milwaukee 75WBBM CBS 3Chicago 70 K GO ABC 8San Francisco 77(VI B' 0118 7Cleveland 78KSAT ABC 15Son Antonio 7!) WV 1' E ABC 31 NvW Orleans Si) WT\'T C lis 21Tampa-St Petersburg 81 WAVY NBC 14Norf-Newp News-1 lamp 82WIITV CBS 35Charlot tit 83IVIAVD N II (: 39Dayton SiWCCO CBS 13Minneapolis-St Paul 85W FA A ABC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 80(VLAC CBS 30Nashville 87KC MO CBS 23Kansas City SSWT E\' ABC 34 Providence SO WM C N BC 20Memphis it°WI'EN C I3S 37Al I tally-Schenectady-1' Si KOCO ABC It0 lc laimma City 92W Lin' ABC 36Lot itsv Mc :13 WIIAP NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 941VJ A R N BC 34Providence 95\\"1/N1I ABC 22Hart ford-New haven sliK FM II CBS 4SSan Diego 97 KTVK ABC 45Phoenix t etW TO L CBS 45Toledo 9:1 KM(111 CBS 32Denver WOW D 110* ABC 45Toledo 101 K D FW CBS IIDallas-Fort Worth 102KA 13C ABC 2Los Angeles 103W DNB" NBC 22I I artford-New Maven 104 WISH CBS 14 Indianapolis 105 K XTV C BS 27Sacramento-Stockton 106 WAVE NBC 313 Louisville 107 WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 108WHEN CBS 43Syracuse Ilk) KC P X ABC 50Salt Lake City 110W !ITN ABC 33Charles) on-11 untingt 0 I 1 1 W LOS ABC 400 nail le-Spt tffig-Ashvi 112KG TV NBC 40San Diego 113KO A. NBC 32Denver 114 KI RO C BS 10Seattle - Tacoma 115 WLS ABC 3Chicago lit)CVKYC NBC 7 Cleveland 117 WXYZ A BC 5 Detroit 118 WRGB NB C 37Albany-Schenectady-T 119 WSPD NBC 15Toledo 120NV K RC ABC 20Cincinnati 121 WCIIS CBS 33Charleston-11 untbario 122KNSP ABC 13Minneapolis-St Paul 123 WG It NBC 25Buffalo 124 WSAZ NBC 33Charleston-II untingto 125 (YEWS A BC 7Cleveland 126 W1.110 CBS 39Dayton 127 W FLA NBC 24Tampa-St Petersburg 128WREC CBS 29Mem pl lis 129WSPA CBS 40(Inv ille-Sptubg-Asb v i 130 KENS CBS 45San A.,tonio 131 WIAVC NBC 28Columbus 132 WISN CBS 21 Milwaukee 133WJ 13 K CBS. 5 Detroit 134W D AF NBC 23Kansas City 135 KMBG ABC 23Kansas City 1361VTVN ABC 28Columbus 137WV EC ABC 41Norf -Nowp News-Uarnp 138WKZO CBS 11Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids 139W BM 0* CBS 38Birmingham 140KOOL CBS 15Phoenix 141 WIIBQ ABC 21) Memphis 142 KBTV ABC 32Denver 143(VQXI ABC 17Atlanta 144WCCB ABC 35Charlotte

*Denotes UHF network affiliate. 42 F.C.C. 2(1 Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 10.7,1 12(»ewais 9 This report represents an -'"t, to do more than just charge the Com- mission once again with the. refusal to develop any positive standards for the performance of its broadcast licensees. Such charges have often been made, in any different forums. This is an effort to demonstrate the type of analysis that could be made of the available indicia of a licen3ee's performance prior to the renewal of its right to profit from the public airwaves. The Commission has often been confronted with the opportunity to develop minimum standards in arerof programming, ownership and employment. Each time those stanuards have either been rejected or thoroughly emasculated by the Commission majority.' When former Commissioner Kenneth A. Cox was Chief of the Broadcast Bureau, lie sent letters to stations with percentages of news and public affairs programming below certain minimum levelsa practice swiftly ended by the. full Commission. The major problem seems to arise from the broadcasters' (and most Commissioners') refusal to accept the fact that there is most emphat- ically a difference between censorship of programming, which the Communications Act of 1934 specifically prohilits,3 and assurance of adequate levels of service in areas important to the listening or viewing public regardless of the subject matter or content of the program miing presented.'' When Kenneth Cox was an FCC Commissioner he attempted to come up with some method at license renewal time for determining whether or not a licensee had adequately served the public interest or whether it deserved further inquiry because of poor performance. One simple standard used the data available on the license renewal form. It merely required the licensee to demonstrate that 5% of its program week had been devoted to news, 1rA to public affairs, and 5% to "other'' non-entertainment programming (which came to be, known as the "5-1-5" standard)far too low, especially for television licensees. Other approaches were also tried. The occasion of the Oklahoma renewals (all the licenses in any given state expire at the same time) was used to do a book-length study of broadcasting in the state of Oklahoma, describing the communities in detail, noting the various sources of information available, from print as well as broadcast media, and generally describing the performance of the licensees seeking renewal at that time.2 Later, in the state of New York,6 and for the renewals processed jointly from Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia," still another 2 The most celebrated, of course, was the 1946 "Blue Book." Part IL which attempted for the first time to set minimum standards for service to the publicit did not last the decode. it is reprinted in F. Kahn, ed.. Document,: of American Broadcasting 141-146 (rev'd, ed. 19721. Most recently, former Commission General Counsel Henry Geller proposed a minimum level of performance below which a broadcaster would be questioned at renewal time; his proposalthat broadcasters program at least 15% local. 10% news and 5% public affairs, both overall and in prime timewas never seriously considered by the Commission majority. 347 U.S.C. 326. 4par an excellent explication of the broadcaster's point of view, see Kalven, "Broadcast- ing. Public Policy and the First Amendment," 10 J. Law & Econ. 15 (1967). Iteneu,aI of Standard Broadcast and Television Licenses, an Oklahoma Case Study, 14 P.C.C. 25 1 (1968). Renewal of Standard Broadcast and Television Licenses, 18 F.C.C. 2c1 1168, 269, 322 (1901. Renewals of Standard Broadcast and Television Licences, 21 F.C.C. 2d 35 (1969). 42 F.C.C. 2d 10 Federal Commanieatiods Commission Repopts approach was used. Stations were ranked hv all flu cuiterin available from their license, renewal form--news and public affairs. the number of public servic, announcements. and so torth--in a manner that is similar in some ways to the procedure of thi.-; larger study of network affiliates. The impact of each of these efforts upon the Commission was minimal, although it has recently adopted a badly-needed new renewal application which somewhat improves the quality of the data collected from licensees.8 It has not. however. acted favorably on any proposals for minimum standards on that information.9 The impact upon the industry, however, hies been somewhat more significant, and has been a motivating. -factor in this stnilv. For example. even though broadcasters and their lawyers knov: that a failure to meet the 5-1-5 standard will have no effect what - never upon license renewals, they are increasingly programming, to meet those standards if only because they dislike even the minimal adverse attention of a dissenting opinion buried deep within the °Mend FCC Reports. When the New York and Washin,,t on studies were publisliod, broil denstors were quite pleased to attract public and advertiser ritention to their high ratingsand very quick to call Commissioners' attention to any miscalculation that resulted in even a slightly lower ratim, than they felt they deserved. In attempting to mount a project that would have an effect on as wide a segment of American broadcasting as possible. there has been great selectivity in both the stations chosen and the criteria used. It would have been impossible to evaluate each and every one of the more than 8,000 radio and television stations in this country. First, television was chosen over radio, because its influence is more widely felt and also, quite frankly, because it was au easy way to eliminate. the vast majority of licensees at the outset. The 50 largest television markets in the col-witty were selected from among the some 12.000 communities in the United States, because. they contain more tlin 05% of the American population and constitute the most "cost effective" focus." The "top 50" have often been selected by the FCC as a natural break in its broadcasting regulations. Finally, the three network affiliates in each market were selected (rather than including independent television stations as well) because those are the choice of roughly 85%

hi.the(fatterof Formidation ofMlles and Policies Relating to the Renewal of Broadcast Licensees,Docket No. 19153. FCC 73-451 (May 4, 1970). For example. ace the lIenry Geller proposaldiscussed in note2 smpra, 20 The "top 50 markets" used in tills study were determined on the basis of the most .rscent rankings by the American Research Bureau, published in ARR's' 3972TrIrrision Market Analysis on November20. 1972. No ,nore currentdata will be published until after September 1, 1973. The market's rank is determined according to the average numoer of honseholds reached from A a.m.;o midnight withina surveyarea Survey arras are the geographic areas comprised of thosecounties in which ARB estimates 118q, of the net weekly circulation of home market stations occurs. Because the average number of house- holds is reported by thousands, two markets are tied for the 41st rank and three are tied for the 45th. Accordingly, we list no 42nd. 411th or 47th rank, The only exec tion to ARB's ton 30 markets A 'as our deletion of Wilk..sBarre-Scranton. which would her' number 49. from our stn ly and the concomitant elevation of Salt Lake City. otherwNe market number 51. This was done because we felt it unfair tocompare the results in Wilkes Barre-Scranton, market. with those of its VHF compoti- tors. even though we retained five markets in which one network afthiate broadcasts on rTIP (theyare appropriately identified in the rankingsl. The top 50 markets include narts of some 43 different states and help send over 52% of the members of the House of Representatives to Congress. 42 F.C.C.1. 2(1 Arkansas, Louisiana and 11 ississippi 1,97.3 wo78 11 of the nation's viewers at any given moment.' ' Moreover, as they tend to have the. largest; revenue of any stations in the industry, one can fairly hold them to the highest standards. Theoretically, then, that produces a population of some 150 stations (three network affiliates in each of 50 markets). However, factors intervened to reduce the final sample to 144, although for sonic purposes (sir:fa as employment there was information available on 1.4i.12 fl. That is not -to say there aren't a few enormously successful Independents that should have been included in a study of America's biggest broadcasters. However. we felt we had pi draw the line somewhere, anti we could not have justified the Inclusion of independents In lees than :111 the top 50 markets. . . la Three artwork a ffilla teslova ted int he top 50 markets were eliminated from our NI lily.Three additional Ida lions were excluded fromhe over-all rank ing a lidpantie service a IMMIIICI'MPIlt 1011'11010; of our report, but were included in the employment nun ownership portions. Til.b details are listed below: tall sign KSCT Channel :',I.. (111131..intiOn,1 ABC San Diego Ain rket numlier 41) I:v.111:1141 front Entire Study KSCT became San Diego's ABC 21 /1111:1to early this year. Prior to this. XFiTV. a Mexitain station, was the Alto affiliate. The Commission has no jurisdiction over, foal therefore 110 data pertaining to, broadcasters outside the U.S. Cail sign KRON Channel 4 A:Itliyliation NIIC San Francisco Market Number 8 Nelinled from Entire St udy KRONs 1005 renewal was designated for hearing on 3/10/09; a final derision was not made until 5/3/73. During this period, the station was "In docket" and not required to submit renewal application information. Tints, we had no more recent data than that reflecting the station's performance between 1965 and 196S. Call sign WC'S' II Channel ri 1ffiial1tl ion PistonA 1( Market number 6 1,f:eluded from Entire Study WCVli is just barely into its second year of operation after a Commission and court battle that lasted nearly a decade; its licensee VMS a successful competing applicant for the frequency formerly licensed to WHIMI. Inc. Call WG II P Channel A ffiliation ABCS City Greensboro Market nninbee 4S 1.N:eluded from Composite rankine and public service announcements only WGIIP was reviewed in 1966, lint its 196' renewal application was designated for hearing on 6/1/70. As yet unresolved, tl c most recent renewal application data reflects the station's performance between t163 and 1966. Ciill sign wKEP Channel 00 Affiliation ABC, City Dayton Market number 39 Excluded from Composite ranking and public serrifqi announcements only WKEF is r new UHF station which ouly commenced operation in 1909. Call sign w.r.All Channel ,. Affiliation CPS City Norfolk Market number 44 Exelnded from Composite ranking and public service announcements only WTAR was renewed in 1966. but its 1969 renewal application was designated for heating on 1/21/70. As yet unresolved the most recent renewal application data refieets the station's performance between 1063 and Mg. As en additional footnote. we wish to underscore the competitive problems faced by the five UHF affiliates that have hem included in our study tWLKY. Louisville. 91st in our composite programming ranking: WD110. Toledo. 100th : WIINB. Hartford. 103rd : WBMG, Birmingham. 139th: and WCCB. Charlotte. 144th). UHF stations are traditionally at a severe disadvantage in competing for viewers in n markel., oven when they are affiliated with a network. Virtually all UHF stations operate deeply in the red for years after they gn en the air. and it can be expected that their performance will radically improve as they edge toward profitability. Finally it must be noted that at least 000 of the UHF stations in this study, WDHO. Toledo, has been ranked on the basis of data submitted to the FCC before it had acquired even the financial stininhr- of a network affiliation. 42 F.C.C. 2(1 12 Federal Communko. tions C 0777.7111,8S ion Reports The analysis of the performance of those stations has been limited to information supplied by the broadcasters themselves on official Government forms in public files at the FCC." No monitoring (viewing or listening) of any of the stations was 'Indertaken. Nor was there even an examination of TV Guide or local newspaper listil:gs for additional information. There was neither the time nor the man-

la In order to provide the broadest possible view of television in the top 30 markets. It was occasionally necessary to use station data reported by form,r licensees. For example, if a station received its license renewal in June, 1972, and was sold in August, 1972, our data was taken from the information of the earlier licensee. This was the case with the seven stations listed below : KIITV. Channel 9. ABC, Denver, Colorado. l'resent licensee : Combined Communications Corp. Former licensee : Mullins Broadcasting Co. Date of change : September 19. 1972 KGTV, Channel 10. NBC, San Diego, California Present licensee : McGraw -Hill Broadcasting Co. Former licensee : Time-Life Broadcasting, Inc. Date of change : June 1. 1972 Former call letters : KOGO KMGII, Channel 7, CBS. Deliver, Colorado Present licensee : McGraw -Hill. Former licensee : Time-Life, Date of change: June 1, 1972 Former call letters : IC g.% KOCO, Channel 3. ABC, Oklahoma City Present : Combined Communications Former licensee : Chuaron Television Corp. Date of change : August 29, 1972 %VCRS, Channel S. CBS. CharlestomPfuntingt :1, IV. Va. Present licenseeRollins Telecasting, Inc. Former licensee : ',VCHS AMTV Corp. Date of change : 30, 1973 WRTV, Channel Ii, WBC, Indianapolis Present licensee : w-Hill 'Former licensee: Time-Life Date of change : June 1. 1972 Former call letters : WI'MB WTM.I. Channel 4. NBC, Milwaukee Present licensee : WTMJ, Inc. Former licensee : The Journal Co. In addition, data other than form 303 programming data from the seven stations listed below was partially affected by similar changes in licensees : Financial And Employment Data : WWII. Channel 12. NBC, Greensboro/Winston Salem/High Point, N.C. Present licensee : Multimedia. Inc. Former licensee : Triangle Broadcasting Corp. Dane of change : October 2. 1972 WBTV. CNannel 3, CBS, Charlotte, N. Carolina Present ik cnseelefferson-Pilot Broadcasting Co. Former licensee : Jefferson-Standard Broadcasting Co. Da to al' : Novembez. 7, 1972 WDSU. Channel NBC. New Orleans Present licensee : Cosmos Broadcasting of Louisiana Former licensee : WDStiTV, Inc. Date of charge : November 29. 1972 Financial data only (taken partially from former and partially from present licensee) : WPVI. Channel C. ABC, Philadelphia Present : Capital Cities Former : Triangle Publicat ions Date of change : April 27. 1971 WSAZ. Channel 3, NBC. Charleston-Uuntingtom W. Va. Present licensee : Lee Enterprises, Former licensee : Capital Cities Date of change : April 27, 1971 WTEN. Channel 10. CBS, Albany - Schenectady- Troy, N.Y. Present licensee : Albany TV, Inc. Former licensee : Capital Cities Date of change : April 27, 1971 WTN1L Channel 8. ABC. Hartford/New Haven Present licensee : Capital Cities Former licensee : Triangle Publications Date of change : April 27, 1971 Filially,station \VWYS TV. Syracuse, New York, was granted a modification on Deeming. 12, 1972 that changed the name of the licensee from WAG Baker Television Corp. to WNYSTV. The actual owners of the station remained substantially Lhe same. And Etta Hon WOTV. Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo was granted a change of call Rtters on July 1, 1972, from WOOD, although the licensee also remains the same. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi, 1,97.3 Relieu:Os 13 power, and there was an affirmative desire toavoid any data gathering or subjective analyses that would subject the findings to"tis-tain't" arguments with broadcasters. The findings are grouped into three separate chapters dealing with programming performance., minority and female employment statistics, and own,,rship information. A fourth chapter is devoted to the use of this information by interested community groups orindividuals. Appendices have been added that deal with the computer programming methodology, potential sources of informationand assistance for those interested in pursuing the subject further, and additional information not included in the main body of the report. The method of analyzing the stations' performance has been to select the most precise criteria available from the data collected and then simply rank the stations based on their performance. Thus, in programming, some four factors were isolated and explored. They were then combined for determination of a single overallranking based on a composite computation of progranumng performance. By this method, television station KPIX, San Francisco, owned by the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company, was the 1)e...4- programmed station among network affiliates ill the top 50 markets as of thine, 191.3; Id \TCCB, Charlotte, N.C., was the worst. There is often a wide range of performance among affiliates within a city. But Pittsburgh and Portland would appear to be among the best, and Charleston-limiting- ton, W. Va., and Kansas City, Mo., among the worst. Baltimore seems to have the best performance overall in local programming, Washing- ton in news, public affairs and other; Syracuse scores lowest in both categories. Oklahoma City stations have the most public service announcements; Nashville stations the fewest. Westinghouse Broadcast- ing Company's five television stations ranked 1, 2, 4, 5 and 31, thus making Westinghouse by far the best multiple owner in the country. The stations of Taft, ranked 49, 120, 123, 134 and 136, showed that corporate owner to be one of the worst. In the employment chapter, stations with low or non-existent minority or female, employment are singled out for special mention, and all the stations in the study are ranked on the basis of total employment as well as employment of minorities and iVOIllell in high paying positions.Stations WTEV, Providence, WN VS. Syracuse, and WCAU, Philadelphia were among the best, while 'KSL, Salt. Lake City, KMSP, Minneapolis and WKZO, Kr,"annizoo-Grand Rapids. were among the worst. In the ownership chapter, the findings have been collated and re- arranged to show the performance of individual owners, especially when (as is most often the case) they own two or more stations. In each section Commission policy is considered and its shortcomings pointed out, but the most important, part of this report is the information regarding the relative performance of each network affiliate in the top 50 markets. See Appendix D for a summary of the ten best and ten worst stations in each area of programming and employment and Appendix E for a summary of what we consider to be the minimum tolerable levels of performance in each of those areas. Finally, Chapter 4 is included on the assumption that anyone interested in improving the quality of broadcasting in this country can 42 F.C.C. 2(1 14 Federal Commup;eatiolis Commi88;on, Reports use this study as a handbook for the further pursuit, of those improvements. This report is necessarily incomplete. Only the action of concerned people in their own local communities can ensure that it will have maximum impact on improving broadcasters' performance. Chapter 1

PROGRAMMING PhuronmAxch

I. INTRODUCTION The composite programming ranking announced in the Introduction to, this report consists of an evaluation of the programming of each of 144 network affiliates in the top 50 markets on the basis of four distinct programming criteria : a combination of news, public affairs and other programming; local programming; commercialization; and allocation of financial resources to program expenditures. Each of these areas will be explained in detail, and individual area rankings given, in the four sections of this chapter below. The composite programming ranking that precedes the substantive discussion in this chapter was determined by transposing the quantitative performance of each licensee in each of the four areas onto a scale of 0 to 100, then weighting them equally in determining the final average on which the overall ranking was based. For a more complete explanation of the analytical models used in this section, see Appendix A. The programming criteria are presented in Table 2 in the form of the station's rank in each of the four areas. For a composite ranking that presents the criteria based on. the relative scale of 0 to 100, see Table 1-a in Appendix C. Network affiliates ranked by composite of all programming criteria

Call Net. Mkt. News, Con:- Finatt. Rank letters at!. No. Location Local Pa men dal and other

1 1 KPIK C4S SSan Francisco 31 13 303 2 WIZ ABC 19Baltimore 6 59 4 24 3 KING NBC 16Seattle- Tacoma 76 98 6 3 4KOK'', CBS 9Pittsburgh'. 4 6 30 67 5 KYW NBC 4Philadelphia 2 7 23 323 9 W PI. G ABC '8Miami 30 1 81 52 7 WMAL ABC JOWashington, D.C...... , 28 40 41 9 S WTAE ABC 9Pittsburgh 52 60 10 16 9 WFMY CBS 98Grish-IIigh Pt-Win Sal__ 96 38 2 70 10 KOW NBC 26Portland 07 35 49 2 13 WWI. CBS 31New Orleans 7 24 70 31 12 WRC NBC 10Washington, D.C._ 49 16 101 7 13 WABC ABC 1 New York City 63 77 40 1 14 KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 3 3 138 35 15 WHO NBC 9Pittsburgh 17 53 101 8 16 WTIC CBS 22Dartford-New Haven 68 28 5 110 17 WNAC ABC 6Boston 37 41 24 59 18 KATO ABC 29Portland 50 (16 21 13 19 WHAS CBS 36Louisville 35 84 33 20 20 KCP,A NBC 27Sacramento-Stockton 27 14 70 69 21 KOIN CBS 26Portland 81 29 67 12 22 WRNS CBS 28Columbus 22 19 81 61 23 KTAR NBC 45Phoenix 8 al 03 98 24 KOMO ABC 10Seattle-Tacoma 32 06 57 28 25 WLWT NBC 20Cincinnati 1 118 129 44 26 WCBS CBS 1 New York City 75 4 108 27 27 KMOX CBS 12St, Louis 59 11 101 36 28 WSM NBC 30Nashville 24 97 63 16 29 IVEY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 16 78 '36 70 30 WASP ABC 37Albany-Schenectady-T.__ 135 119 s 4 42 F.C.C. 2d A rAwnws, Louisiana and Mississippi 10'7'3 Renewals 16

Network affiliates ranked by composite of all programming criteriaContinued

coin_ Call Net. Mkt. News, Finan- Bank letters aff. No. Location Local Pa mer. dal and other

31WS14 NBC 17Atlanta 5 56 90 115 138 31 WU% NBC (1 Boston 15 16 40 33 KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 57 90 88 6 31 WMA It CBS It; Baltimore 11 25 78 35 IMAM ABC 91 Kaltunazoo-Gr Rapids 112 45 41 II 30 IV DSU N BC 31 New Orleans 20 55 81 55 37 WRTV NBC 14 Indianapolis 65 39 36 64 35 WHEN CBS 25Buffalo 55 21 57 81) 17 85 3) WNI!C NBC 1 New York City 60 53 90 KNXT CBS 2Los Angeles 21 8 121 88 41 KP RC NBC 15Houston 29 22 75 94 41 IVCPO CBS 20Cincinnati 4(1 41) 98 33 43 W7NIAQ NBC 3Chicago 41 2 132 71 44 KOV It ....kkili1F. 27Sacramento-Stockton 134 120 16 5 45 WITI 21Milwaukee 72 III 16 91 46 WCA IT CBS 4Philadelphia 42 9 121 73 47 WS YR NBC 43 Syracuse 117 127 13 45 W DA L NBC 19Baltimore 19 33 88 1111 49 41;WI1RC ABC 38 Birmingham 23 12 144 50 WPVI ABC 4Philadelphia 14 62 112 45 51 WPM CBS 34Providence 115 04 3 113 52 WADI NBC 38 Birmingham 126 46 16 63 53 KCTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 83 104 63 11 51 KWTV CBS 41 Oklahoma City 77 SO 70 25 55 WPOP CBS 10Washington D.0 79 10 117 50 56 WC ET NBC 18Miami 71 27 41 117 57 WSOC Nit (.' 35Charlotte 122 75 16 47 55 WOAI NBC 45 San Antonio 58 88 30 93 59 KSTI' NBC 13Minneapolis-St Paul 43 91 57 71 60 WA GA CBS 17Atlanta 70 5 121 70 fitWSIX ABC 30 Nashville 82 125 30 22 IC WOTV N BC 41Kalaniazoo-Gr Rapids 48 37 106 67 48Glisb-11igh Pt-Win Sal_.._ 11S 105 28 21 03 WXII ilk) 64 KIRK .NA113:'C 15 Houston IS 95 63 65 WLWI ABC 14Indianapolis 64 26 129 37 66 KSD NBC 12St. Louils 36 68 70 103 68 IVTVI CBS IS Miami 105 87 33 96 68 KTVI ABC 12St. Louts 86 140 24 19 69 WWI N BC 5Detroit 9 31 129 112 70 KHOU CBS 15Houston 25 30 103 127 71 WLCY ABC 24 Tampa-St. Petersburg.... 61 44 81 06 72 WFBC NBC 40Gliville-Sptubg-Ashvi lai 63 13 130 73 WKBW ABC 2.5 Buffalo 78 106 16 109 74 WTMI NBC 21Milwaukee 13 92 106 89 74 WBBM CBS 3Chicago 33 18 141 65 76 KG0 ABC 8 San Francisco 94 70 98 30 77WJIV CBS 7Cleveland 69 43 101 77 78 KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 90 131 28 38 79 WVUE ABC 31 New Orleans 107 112 41 34 80 WTVT CBS 24 Tampa-St. Petersburg 80 32 117 51 81 WAVY NBC 14 Norf-Newp News-Hamp_ _ 121 54 36 84 82 WBTV CBS 35 Charlotte 46 52 S8 1 83 WLWI) NBC 30 Dayten 30 42 137 83 84 IVCCO CBS 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 12 74 139 72 8.5 WFAA ABC 11 Dallas -Fort Worth 47 114 70 85 56 WLAC CBS 30Nashville 39 101 114 49 87 KCMO CBS 23Kansas City 51 69 101 07 88 WTFV ABC 34 Providence 130 110 41 32 89 WMC NBC 29 Memphis 3S 80 114 02 90 WTEN CBS 37 Albany - Schenectady -T.__. 110 103 70 39 91 KOC 0 ABC 41 Oklahoma City 62 124 SI 53 92 WLKY ABC 36Louisville 136 142 11 23 93IV BAP NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 132 50 36 115 04IVJA It NBC 34Providence 114 47 70 1)1 95 IVTNII ABC 22Hartford-New Haven 81 81 57 124 96 KFMB CBS 49 San Diego 51 20 132 128 07 KTVK ABC 45 Phoenix 8S 122 99 75 08 WTOL CBS 45 Toledo 87 71 63 122 99 KAIGH CBS 32 Denver 73 117 98 100 WDITO ABC 45 Toledo 14349 144 6 20 101 KDFW CBS 11 Dallas-FortWorth 26 34 121 141 102 KABC ABC 2Los Angeles 123 115 88 17 103 WIINB NBC 22 Hartford-New Haven 116 23 63 136 101 WISH CBS 14Indianapolis 73 65 78 135 105 KXTV CBS 27 Sacramento-Stockton 101 36 121 66 106 WAVE NBC 30Louisville 95 85 88 86 107 WNYS ABC 43 Syracuse 144 193 8 18 42 F.C.C. 2d 16 Federal COMIlunications Commission Reports Network affiliates ranked by composite of all programming criteriaContinued

Call Net. Mkt. News, Con- itiate No. Location Local l'a Mer. cial Ran': letters a11. and other

108 WHEN CBS 43 Syracuse 127 89 SS 109 KCPN ABC 5(1 Salt Luke City 142 136 1(1 40 ABC 33 0 ha rlestoml luntingio 110 107 16 102 II() WIITN Go 11111' LO 8 ABC 40linville-Spthbg-Asimi 143 137 12 112 K G TV Nit C 40 San Diego 111 102 88 62 113 K DA NBC 32 Denver 56 79 108 132 114K. I RO CBS InSeat tie-Tamil) i 61; 83 108 125 110111LS ABC 3Chicago .53 61 142 68 11(1 WKYC NBC 7Cleveland 113 86 121 43 117 WX YZ ABC 5 Detroit Oil 116 132 26 118 W 114: B NB(' 37 Albany-Sehowetady-T 100 121 36 129 119 WSP D NBC 5 Toledo 124 113 41 107 120 WK RC ABC 20 Cincinnati 74 138 33 133 121111C1IS CBS 33 0 harleston4 lunting1 0 85 132 24 140 122 KAISP ABC 13 Minneapolis-St. Paul 109 141 13 126 123 WO II NBC 25 Buffalo 141 100 41 84 12411'8AZ NBC 33Charleston4 lun HIV on _ 119 58 70 139 ABC 7 Cleveland 92 134 98 56 125 W EWS 87 126 11'1110 0118 3(1 Dayton 45 123 132 127 W E LA NBC 24Tampa-SI. Peters/aim 120 51 132 78 128 WIIEC CBS 2(1 Memphis 131 108 57 114 129 WS PA CBS 40Onville-Spt nbg-Ashvi 103 57 117 121 13(1 KENS 0130 45 San Antonio 106 03 81 134 131 W LW C NBC 28 Columbus 90 67 121 118 13211' ISN CBS 21Milwaukee :17 98 121 82 13311',1 BK CBS .5 l)piroit 93 99 514 196 134 WRAF NIP. 23Kansas City 3 . 72 144 131 135 KMBC ABC 23Kansas City Pt 133 88 00 136 11"PV N A110 20 Columbus 128 130 63 105 137 WVEC A BC 44 NortNewp News-Blimp 137 115 41 05 138 WKZO CBS 41 Kalamazoo-Or Rapids. _ _ IDS 100 88 142 139 WI/MO CBS 38 Birmingham 125 117 49 143 140 KOOL CBS 45 Phoenix 98 76 140 1 1 9 141 W II BQ ABC 29 Memphis 138 139 49 III 142 KIITV ABC 32Denver 01 128 142 42 143 WQX I ABC 17 Atlanta 129 120 112 lc; 141 WCCB ABC 35Charlotte 133 129 81 137

II. NEWS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS "GO per cent of all Americans over the age of 21 rely on television as their primary source of news." Barry Cole,Television (1970). To argue that Congress intended television to he dedicated stun- marily to the aggrandizement of the personal or corporate fortunes of its licensees is to argue the absurd. Rather, Congress intended that television frequencies be used to serve the public,' and any reasonable interpretation of "serving the public" must include equipping them to be better citizens, via the informational programming most often encountered in the rather cumbersome categories known to the Commis- sion as "news," "public affairs" and "other." 2 I See 47. § 307(a) (b). Indeed, the Commission stated early in its development that : It in axiomatic that one of the most vital questions of mass communications in a democracy is the development of an informed public opinion through the public dissemination of news and ideas concerning the vital issues of the day . ..It is this right of the public to be Informed, rather than any other right on the part of the government, any broadcast licensee or any individual member of the public to broadcast his own particular views of any matter, which is the foundation stone of the American system of broadcasting. Quoted in Walter Emery, National and International Systems of Broadcasting, at 13, Michigan State University Press (1969). For legislative history of the Communications Act, see Rosenbloom, "Authority of the Federal Communications Commission," in Coons, ed., Freedom and Responsibility in Broadcasting at 96 (1961), °The categories of "news" and "public affairs" are self-explanatory. "Other" programming is described as all programming not falling in those two categories or in the categories of "entertainment" or "sports." 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Jlissis8ippi 17 The Commission first determined that news and public affairs were "critical programming categories" and began collecting this data in its current form ir. 1966, when it adopted the license renewal application now in use.3 But collecting this data and putting it to significant use are two entirely different things, and the practice of this Commission to date has been to make no inquiry whatsoever into a licensee's news, public affairs, and other non-sports, non-entertainment programthing, no matter how badly a station had performed, and more than a few stations have been renewed notwithstanding a total failure to deliver programming in one or more of these categories.4 Even a major television station like WCCOTV, a Minneapolis CBS affiliate, was renewed automatically in .March, 1968, despite no public affairs shown during the composite week and only 30 minutes weekly proposed for the future. Although the Commission has never set standards in its renewal procedures for weighing the news and public affairs data it receives, a 5% news, 1% public affairs and 5% "other" standard thought to be comparable to the minimum diet necessary to stave of complete, informational starvation was established and discussed at one time by just two of the seven Commissioners (Cox and Johnson ).'" Since those standards have been so minimal and so easy to comply with, many previously offending broadcasters have made an effort to do so, as can be seen by a glance at the raw data in the three categories.3 There continues to be some, however, who do not choose even to provide that infinitesimal level of public service, who regularly devote, more minutes of time to commercials than to the three informational categories combined; and yet. the staff continues to do nothing every two months but provide, as a gesture of courtesy, a compilation of those stations falling below the 5-1-5 standard in each hi-monthly "package" of renewals for the remaining concerned Commissioner to use in his lonely dissents. The news, public affairs, and other progranuning information re- (wired of a licensee on his renewal application is collected in the form of hours and minutes of air time devoted to each. Of course, quality of programming cannot be determined from this data. It is impossible to tell without actual observation, for example, whether a station's news operation is of the wire service "rip and read" variety or whether there are mobile camera units roaming the city to provide original feeds at all hours. Until such information is available, however, we must rely on what the stations are required to tell the Commission quantitatively about their programming operations. For, although a station broadcasting only 8 hours of news in" a 140-hour week may in fact be investing more time, expense, and imagination in its produc- tion than one airing 14 hours in the same week, the only presumption we can make is the contrarythe more news, the better the potential for service to the public. We proceed therefore on the assumption that, all other factors being equal, a station running 14 hours of news on a weekly basis better serves the public interest and need than a

FCC 2d 175 (1966). 4 See, e.g., Herman C. Hall, 11 FCC 2d 344 (19681, See discussion of these studies at notes 5, 6 and 7 in the Introduction to this Report. ° The ten best and ten worst stations in each category may he found in Append)x D. 42 P.C.C. 2d 104-004-73-2 is Federal Communications Commission Reports station running 8 hours. The same reasoning would apply to public a ffairs and Other programming.. Another shortcoming of the existing renewal application is that it makes no inquiry into when during the broadcast day news, public affairs. and other programming are being aired. It is conceivable, for example, that a station may air one hour of public, affairs between 3 :30 inn and 4 :30 am daily and, when this is added to its other public affairs programs, post a total of 10 hours for the week.' It should be self-evident, however, that the seven hours of programming in the early morning can be written off as little more than no programming at all. reaching such a small audience as to be of virtually no service to the public. This lacuna in our information must be borne in mind when reviewing these figures, and local program guides or station logs should be consulted to learn the distribution of news, public affairs and other programming in a particular station's broadcast week. Our ranking of station programming performance, is based solely on the hours of programming presented. For the overall ranking of this performance factor, we have simply added together the number of hours and minutes of news, public affairs and other programming presented durincrthe composite week and ranked the stations on the basis of that total.6 We list the munber of hours of each of the three categories separately, and provide a ranking for each. For example, the top station in the overall news-public affairs-"other" ranking.. station IVPLCr', Miami, can be seen to be number 9 in news, number 7 in public affairs and number 12 in other programming. These additional statistics are provided in this chapter because a station's failure to devote, substantial time to any one of them is indefensible whatever its overall ranking, and such a station should be singled out for further inquiv.8 Although the percentage of the total programming week devoted by a licensee to each of these categories is available from the station's license itmewal form and has been used in similar studies in the past,n we have decided in this study to use the raw total of hours. This has been done because the use of percentages, we feel, tends to favor those broadcasters with a shorter broadcast week. For example, a station on the air 120 hours a week with 12, hours of news would be programming 10% news, while a station broadcasting 146 hours a week with 13 hours of news would actually show a lower percentage. We feel the additional hours of news programmed by the latter should be given greater credit than the higher percentage of the former, and have acted accordingly. In addition to the hours of news, public affairs, and other programming broadcast by a station in the composite week, the disparity between a station's promised performance and its actual performance and the decrease (or increase) in performance levels from one renewal period to the next can also be revealing measures of a station's service. Indeed, the Commission has said as much in a few specific In addition. many commercial stations will run the same public affairs special more than once. thereby getting credit for two or even three hours of programming for Just one show. 9WLWI, Indianapolis, for example, was number 26 in its overall news, public affairs and other ranking. due to a fine showing in the latter two categories (32nd and 4th). Its 2iews programming, however, placed it an abysmal 127th, thereby clearly delineating an area hi which the licensee could improve. '9 See the studies cited In notes 5, 6, and 7 in the Introduction to this Report. 42 F.C.C. Network affiliates ranked by total hours of news, Public Affairs, and "Other" in composite week Rank 1 Call letters Net. n11. Mkt. No. Location News and rank 9 Pub. affairs and rank 7 01 her and rank 12 Composi I e 2 IVAIAQ W1'LU NBCABC 18 Miami123 Chicago Los Angeles 22.0010.9817.00 27 41 10.0311.12 9, 10 8315 0 21. 7210.7511.1X116,82 7021 I 43.0.8315.53312. sl 7 z...,--..,--- 6543 WCKDKNBCWA KABS A CBSCBSC BS 17 49 At lantaPitNew t sburgh York City 18.5520.2017.7216.13 12 (1 11.437.4.974.10 13 3159 3 13.50110.18. 5392 6927 0 40.81740..11.10X)41.950 533 .c.:,.. -; 10 WTOP987 WCAUKYWKNXT CBSNBCCBS 1012 42 LosPhiladelphia A nglees WashingtonPhiladelphia D.C.. 17.0516.17.1216.37 25 "62510_17 ' 4.703.624. 104.92 6S9883IC 20.1.2IS.12,5219, 9203 38 835 39.10730.10.10040. 783550 .. ' .... 131211 WBKNIOXKPI RCX ABCCBS 2738 BirminghamS San Francisco St. Louis _'0.1513.9716.62 2351 3 10. 727.070.07 '21)31) 5 1(1.5711.371S.72 7750 7 38.38335.38.750 75/ c,,Z...'0 17 1VN18161514 1VBZWBWKC BC RC BMRA NBCCBSNBC 10 Washington316 D.0 NewBoston..ChicagoSareramento-Stockton York City 13.1X)15.0818.5314.2814.83 55493941 7 11. 13 5.577.789.37 47481513 6 17,11.1(811.1713.78 42 66231165 9 36.18(737.20737.301)37.48337.683 ..,.-- 2322212019 WWHNI3KFAIBWBNSKP BEN RC CBSNBCCBS 254928 San15Columbus Diego _ lloustonBuffalo_ 15.2x)15.8015.9019.27 36;3230 5 41.277,327,.154.5.60 22 36°72380 1.1.0313.551.3,0512.16.87 OS 25494816 35.01735.15035.40035.5)17 8., 262521 NVLWIWWLMIA R ABCCBSNBCCBS 143122 New1819Ilartford-New Miami Orleans haven BaltimoreIndianapolis 14.3715.0716.77 8.17 127 464020 7,61.836.335.50 38 25323549 15.11012.11819,8313.5212.70 37263615 4 31.43334.83331.91731.967 8-..., ... 30292827 KILOWTICWCKTKOIN U CBSCBS 152622 HartfordHoustonPortland -New Maven 14.61514.0313.58 5356 8.703.075.18 117 (3)1655 10.4717.25 S310 33.81734.35034.367 c_7_,1...,,ti 343331 %VBALWWJWTVTKDFW NBCCBSNBC 111924 Tampa-St,5 Petersburg Dallas-FortBaltimoreDetroit Worth 16.6516.7714.8014.07 24225242042 3.224.455.214.75 113 7454 13.4511. 5211.8513.05 (IS28iii19 33.211733.31733.36733.50033.800 ,t-1,4,...)-... 36 35KXTV KOW NBCCBS 412720 Sacramento-StocktonKalamazoo-GrPortland Rapids 14.17.2216.48 68 4316 .1.5.73 076.42 43189 11.5311.0511.40 5558 32.63332.083 3.--Zs'--.- p;bD 4.i4140393837 WWNAOWMALWOTV LWFMRTV YD ABCNBCABCCBS 48 1014ansb-High Washington6 Boston Pt-Win D.0 Sal Indianapolis 11.4312.6211.8310.4312. 82 101 74840967 11.17 7.!r27.677.473.87 18202292 4 12,11812.3315.8214.25'9.38 4095204310 31.83331.08332.35032..11732.500 -...., Gy1,5Q 47464543 WEZMWA43WJAIIWLCY WJW PI ABCNBCCBS 3438412439 BirminghamTampa-St.Dayton7 Petersburg Kalamazoo-6'rProvidenceCleveland Rapids 13.3515.11.57 63 6.258.08 137129 633381 7,4044.307.383.43 04 101 24607925 1(1.5311.21.1216.9316.70 OS 7:)001513 2 31.25331.01731.416731.7(X)31.71X) CO1-" composite ....,O Rank Ca31 letters Network affiliates ranked byNet. total aft. hours of news, Public Affairs, and "Other" in Mkt. No. 16 Location News13.48 and rank 01 Pub. affairs and rank week-Continued72 Other13.25 and rants 32 Composite G.tob 5251504048 WWBTVWFLAWBAPKING C PO NBCCBSCBS 35242011 Tampa-St.Cincinnati9 Petersburg CharlotteDallas-FortSeattle-Tacoma Worth 15.1316.1015.0211.27 3888132829 3.307.2.33.284.502.98 110108119 30 11.8516.5212.407.90 110118 415214 30.83330.93331.03331.011731.233 5553 WDSU54WIIC WAVY NBC 173141 NewNOrf-Newp Orleans NeWs-harp Pittsburgh ' 17.4017.1213.5017.55 151758 4.104.538.154.83 83711762 0.229.108.40 9799 30.30.75030.783 717750. 595S5756 WSBWSAZWJZWSPA ABCNBCCBS 193340 Ii BaltimoreCharleston-IICnville-Spinbg.-AsliviAtlanta tint i ngt on 11.14.3711.32 5S11.82 75794687 11.90 5.383.57 100 51122 10.7315.62 8.7515.85 13310 -I 7117 30.33330.20030.48330.500 413626160 WWPV WTAEW LSFI3C I NBCABC 144540 43 Philadelphia PhoenixChicago..Pittsburgh( inville-Spt libg-Aslivi 17.8511.339.3211.50 117114 8610 7.259.63ti.7.23'1.21 27 3ti282914 13.4311.35I1.50 5.67 140 173010 211.783211.91730.06730.183 6.3(10066501 KOMOWISIIKTARWLWCKSD NBCABCC BS 122816 Columbus St.Seattle-Tacoma1 ndianapolis Louis. 17.4712.8818.42 9.33 116 771460 8 6.(159.5.302. 5067 126 40539t11I 13.(1210.11.32 505.988.67 138107 802401 ':1.5(10_1'.51)029.58329.500 727069 WDAFWIOLKC510KGO CBSNBCABC 322345 Toledo__23Kansas Kansas City8 City ISan /enver Fri neiseo 11.5817.7513.3710.15511.72 107 71'62It 1L 15.1.322.354.3.9.3 18 133 7881 5 12.13.'15 82 0.7.50 SS 1.32121 3531 28.71728.29.29.0011 0011817267 7776757473 WSOCWABCWCCOKMGKOOL II ABCCBSNBC 453513 I Minneapolis-St.NewPhoenixCharlotte York City Paul 13.5010.5815.3313.50 3458118 3.845.372.524.7:1 125 M5261 12.121(1.5710.1811.20 S6634077 28..117_8.58328.36728.450 SO7977 WKYKOAWMC ABCNBC 2232 Hartford2941Denver Memphis -New Haven Oklahoma City 15.8214.3214.588.87 121 314845 12.92 1.136.175.85 385742 1 6.437.337.877.!10 136127120118 28.35025.28.28328.367 217 8584838281 WAVEWTNKWTVKI RO II Wil AS NBCCBS 303641 Louisville16 7 LouisvilleSeattle-TacomaOklahoma City 114.2312.'25 L 4711.7315.27 8235507672 4.08LOS4.403.555.15 143101 867656 12.0010.11211.12.22 239. 15 5102OS7544 27.27.58327.783 550'27.50028.017 89888786 WKWOAIWTVJWHEN YC CBSNBC 504345IS MiamiSyracuse SanCleveland Antonio 10.11.3715.1712.05 17 (6)8.53773 3.736.755.07 331159658 12.1x212.1(1.23 17 5.4Y2 111 314585 27.!7.21172_7.333'27.350 250 9493929190 W1MJWPKFNSKSTPKSL RI NBCCBSCBS 34452113 MilwaukeeMinneapolis-St.SaltProvidenceSon Lake Antonio City Paul 12.08122.8212.4014.10 051177151 -1.703.104.085.623.77 116 088641, 10.7210.50 S.7.33 10 115127 7280 25.753'6.63326.27.250 083 979695 WSMKATKIRK U ABCNBC 302126 15Nashville Portland1 loustou 2...23001100.. ,.1.67 104 614(!II 2.804.352.834.85 61 12.1 II. 8832 358. 17 113 425389 25.2.5. 517383633 Milwaukee 1111(7221::s1: 100 WKzo9998 WISN W.111 K CBSC BsCBS 5 KDetroit annazoo-U r 111)10 (5 10.8310.0.55.58 124107 95 3. 3023 131 12. 02 532350 25.0002.255.. 3335131 .....-,t. 10310210) WT WLACKGTV EN ellsNBCCBS 50374930 Nashville SanAlbany-Selmioctmly-T Diego 10.10.6213. 3257 102 9757 5.3.204.50133 98 114 4172 11631. 67S31575 8. 12 114131 74 24.2)833 417 313673 co7:-.- 195lot106 KIM/WXII WK13W NBCABC 2.548 BuffaloSalt(4 Lake nsb-I City I igh Pt-Win Sal 10.8810.2'28.75 123105 93 5.824.45 4374 10891.185(073 102 24. 207233 ". cnQ 107108 W7ITN WRFC119 W G R ABCCBS 2533211 C harleston-11 um ington MemphisBuffalo 11.0510.5(1 100 89 4.4.173.48 63 103 7082 886..271523 23.24. 20t1583967 c::, 112111110 WY WTEVWM 1TE ABCANBC BC 3121 MilwaukeeProvidence 10.11.63 08 9. 55 106113 78 3.323.135.115 107104 45 10. 40 1114rs3) :1:711 87 2233.23.33.5(N) 3833231 tyZ. 113 WsPD NBC 114531 New Orlean Toledo 12.629.64 11109I l i 3.252.51) il 6211221 II. 10 79.1:71 13. 033 Z'.,52 115114 WK FAAl3C A ABCA Bc 2 LosD alias-Fort Angeles Wort h 9. 75 4. 83 8. 38 111 1:113); it 21 067 116 WXYZ ABC 5 Detroit 10.30 7.73 132103 5.3.82 40 5093 9. 503.75 94 :!2122.2... 3t8,333367 119118117 WW13M:1WAST LW T ABCNBCCBS 372038 A27BirminghamCincinnati I bany-se heneetady-T 1L00 9.2.2 11129 90 3.733.42 106 06 1(1. 67 171.3902 117 ('6 2222. 1213393 t,.7.-4.6., 121120122 KOWRGB KTVKVIZ ABCNBC 4537 Albany-Schenectady -T Phoenix'Sacramento-Stockton 11. 47 9.9.57 50 114 82 4.833.L80 00 118132 62 7.7.38 28 127161126 73 2211.'1331721. 850 125124123 W1110WSIXKOCO ABCCBS 17303941 NashvilleDayton Oklahoma City 0.225.558.1108.38 141130125119 4.1k(2.3.582.45 65 122130 8690 127..12152110, .. 76101 130 0233 21.2832200.15137)) ..z.,.. Z.cn.. 129128127126 WOOWsWQXtKBTV y RB ABCNBC 353243 CharlotteSyracuseAtlantaDenver 5.08(91.. 9275 1421111,8.1 31.3.55 9241 13(1141101114 12.52 6.7.47 55 135125 3.8 10.21(0/ .. 500726177 y c,.....,...2 130 WWI,: ABC 28 Columbus 7.42 133 02 3.2.20 80 91 4.279.80 11.1111: 19.111719. 417 Q-k..:''---;,.. ' 133132131 WCITSKAIBCKsAT ABCCBS 233345 SanKansas Aatonio7 City Charleston-Huntington 1887(1:1381112575 128134122 2.2.402.00 03 137139132 88..7. 306897 112101 18. 817 136135134 W WVECKCPX EW S ABC 5044 SaltNorf-NewpCleveland Lake City News-Hamp la 63 6.00 139130 96 2.4.752.43 62 123131 (16 7.587.535. 27 123124142 Ill:::18. 6722:031 333 F5 139138137 WWEIBQWKRC LOS ABC 292040 GMemphis12 nville-Sptnbg-Ashvi Cincinnati 6.156.475.888.00 138136140 2.552.332.50 124134126 8.678.879.78 107103 91 1167..1178.1677 t96177 en-....., 144143142141140 WDII0 WNYSWLKYKMSPKTVI ABC 45433613 Toledo SyracuseSt. Louisville'Minneapolis-St.Louis Paul 1.676.554.538.20 144135143126 1.932.472.03 83 144140129137 0.465.7.735.63 12 143122139 87 12.13.14. 400733 600 i--,ND 22 Federal Comdtanicatiolis Continlion Report instances in the past.11' And even the current Commission, which at one time, or has indicated that it favors the total elimination oy exi.stiog CommissionCommission programming. standards, concedes that a sta- twit's"promise vs. performance''is a valid indication or its perform acen ni the public interest."'i -While we have not attempted., dm!. to t length of this study, to relate the licensees' most recent performance to either his current or his previous promises. the necessary in forma- tion is readily available, in the licensee's public lite or at the FCC for those who are interested. P la)/ SeTrke, .11i.1101111CCM e d In addition to requiring information with respect to 11(' \VS. public allairs, and other programming. the. FCC requires that stations report the number of public service. announcements (pro's) aired during the composite week and the number proposed to he aired durim average week in the future renewal period. While, the broadeastino of psa's is one measure of a station's performance in the public interest. the Com- mission. in common with the data it. receives 011 DONN'S. 1)111)th' :lira I PS. and other progrannning, has never attempted to set "psa stain lards- at renewal tune, for the purpose of evaluating licensee perforniance.'2 Although we believe that the quantity of psa's broadcast by a station in any given week is a measure of its performane in the pliblie interest. it must be recognized that the number by itself reveals very little about a station's performance. In point of fact. what the figure does not reveal may be even more significant than what it does. The figure does vot disclose, for example., how the psa's are dust ri uteri during a typical broadcast day. Because they are aired free of charge it is likely that a station will run them most frequently during the hours when its rates am lowest. and it sells the least. commercial timei.e., late night and early morning. The natural tendency. given that. television as presently constituted is a profit-maximizing enterprise, is to broadcast psa's in the horn's when air time is cheapest. and, accordingly, audiences smallest. To run a sixty-second psa during prime time will ordinarily cost a station hundreds of dollars in lost revenue, whereas running it at 2:30 am entails either no loss (because the time could not be sold) or a loss of considerably smaller magnitude. Notwithstanding, therefore, that a station may be presenting large numbers of psa's during any given week, their effect and value will be marginal if they appear predominantly at those times when television audiences are smallest. Not only does the present renewal application not disclose the dist ri- bution of psa's, but it also does not disclose, their length. Although a psa of ten seconds duration may on occasion be just. as effective as one of sixty seconds, it is likely that a station running five- and ten-second psa's exclusively is doing so solely in order to lose as little revenue as possible and is therefore indiscriminately rejecting all announcements

10 See, e.g.. ligi-BY Br/We/wing corp., 2.0 FCC 2d 95S. 975(1971): Soul h fy» Broadcast- ing Co., 26 FCC 2d MIS (1970): WMOZ, Inc., 811 Fee 201, 24.1(19(14) : and /CORD, Inc_ ;i11 SS (1961). 11 Sc' Letter from Clay T. Whitehead, Director of Office of Telecommunications Policy, to nen. Can Albert. March 13. 1973. 12 Indeed, Deputy Broadcast Bureau Chief Harold KfISSellS, in noting that some licensees even fail to fillin this blank on their application, said "It doesn'matter whether they run one or 1000 .. we're not going to do anything about it.. F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi Rein:Ia 7s 23 of greater length. This practice is manifestly nut consonant tvith station performance in the public interest. Filially, the renewal application does not rypiire that a licensee disclose the source of psa's. Licensees hove a Congressional mandate to Serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity of their local communities, and it necessarily follows that. psa's should be \yell-suited to this task. Although national organizations are fully entitled to free time for psa's, service to the local community is the )C;.,0;, 'Pore of a television station, hence locally produced announcements ono.lit to be given preferred treatment. When a station airs only professionally produced announcements from natioual organizations heart Association, the I T.S. Army or CARE), bectiuse they are better-sound- ing Or appearing or easier to broadcast for technical reasons, or lweanse they are less hard - flitting and controversial Ilunvino been cleared by the Advertising Council), it can scarcely be maintained that the local community is being as tvell served as it would be by announcements regarding even a local blood drive or a library fund-raising event--- not to mention 11101'0 controversial local issues.I 7nfortunatelv. flue present, renewal application does not reveal tvliether or not such treatment is in fact, being accorded locally originated psa's, and determination of that, as well as 'he time and duration of announcement's, must be left to the monitom 1g techniques of concerned local organizations. Notwithstandiho r these substantial shortcomings, the number of announcements listed on the rerewal applications does give some indication of service to the public. Vie do feel that the station with CIO psa's sand the station tvith but 50 both deserve to have that fact noted in our study. Accordingly, we present below a ranking based solely on the number of psa's. Because of the defects in these numbers which we have just discussed, bow-ever, we have not included this factor iii our final composite ranking.

Network, Affiliates Ranked by Number of Public Serv!'(? :Innou ncements in Composite Week

RankCall letters Net. MT. Mt_ No. Location PSA's

1 WRY NBC 41Oklahoma City 57'2 2WJ!.: ABC 19Baltimore 40,5 3KYW NBC 4Philadelphia 164 4WI, C Y ABC 24Tampa-St. Petensbnvg 462 5KOIN CIlS 26Portia ad 440 0W1V'P CBS 21Tampa-St. Petersburg 386 7WIAR NBC 34Providence 369 8Kw'ry CBS 41Oklahoma City 305 9KOKA CBS 9rittsburgh 304 10WPVI ABC 4 Philadelphia 315 11K001, CBS 45phoenix 330 12RP RC NBC 15Houston 327 13WT1C CBS 22Hartford-New Haven 326 14 KPIX Cris 8San Frouwisca 317 14IVI3NS CBS 28Columbus 317 16trr A E A BC 9Pittsburgh 309 17W137, NBC 6Boston 300 17WIRT. ABC 10Washington, 1).0 300 17WA PI NBC 33Birmingham 300 20WAVY NBC 41Norf-Nep News-Ilanill 297 21 W B AL NBC 19Baltimore 290 22WCBS CBS 1 New York City 9,7 22WNAC ABC Ii Boston 2s 24119,7,51 ABC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids__., 286 25KOMO ABC 10Seattle-Tacoma 285 26W R (713 NBC 37Albany-Schenectady-'P 281 27WSYR NBC 43Syracuse '372 23WINIr ABC 22Ilart ford-New Haven 270 42 P.C.C. 2d 24 Federal Communications Commission Reports Network Affiliates Ranked by -Number of Public Service Announcements Cut).

RankCall letters Net. att. Mkt. No Location PS A's

29KCPX ABC 50Salt Lake City 269 30W BA I' NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 265 31WKI3W ABC 25Buffalo 263 32Kt 1W' NBC 20Portland 262 33WT E \' ABC 34Providence 259 33 KO CO ABC 41Oklahoma City 259 3511'13 E N CPS 25Buffalo 258 30WLIVT NBC 20Cincinnati 256 37KFMB CBS 49San Diego 251 38WC A U CBS 4Philadelphia 247 38W'() AI NBC 45San Antonio_ 247 40wrop CBS 10Washington, D.0 246 41WMA R CBS 19 Baltimore 245 41WKRC ABC 20Cincinnati 245 43KA B C ABC 2Los Angeles 2.13 44WQX I ABC 17Atlanta 242 45KDFW CBS 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 241 45KSD NBC 12St. Louis 241 45WC KT NBC 18Miami 241 48WAST ABC 37Albany-Schenectady-T 238 49KMO X. CBS 12St. Louis 237 50WLWI ABC 11Indianapolis 235 51KMG II CBS 32Denver 234 52WT EN CBS 37Albany-Schenectady -T 231 52WBBM CBS 3Chicago 231 54W F LA NBC 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 230 51KAT U ABC SriPortland 230 56IVPLG ABC 18Miami 226 56W II C NBC 9 Pittsburgh 226 58WISN CBS 21Milwaukee 224 59WHTN ABC 33Charleston-lIuntIngton 221 60KIIOU CBS 15 Itonston 218 61 KOA NBC 32Denver 216 62W ABC ABC I New York City 214 f.3WBTV CBS 35Charlotte 212 64KENS CBS 45San Antonio . 211 53WNBC NBC 1 New York City 207 65W II AS CBS 36Louisville 207 67W FAA ABC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 204 67 .V1SII CBS 14Indianapolis 204 (i9WG It NBC 2.5 Buffalo 203 69W C HS CBS 33Charleston-Huntington 203 71Will' CBS 7Cleveland 200 72WV UE ABC 31 New Orleans 198 73WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 197 74KXTV CBS 27Sacramento- Stockton 195 74WOTV NBC 41 Kalamazoo -Gr Rapids 195 76W T V N ABC 28Columbus 194 77KC It A NBC 27Sacramento-Stockton 192 78WS13 NBC 17Atlanta 191 79W LW D NBC 3!) Dayton 188 80WMC NBC 29Memphii 186 81 WRAF NBC 23Kansas City 185 81 W ti RC ABC 3SBirmingham 185 8311.11',1 NBC 5Detroit 181 83WAVE NBC 36Louisville 181 85KNXT CBS 2Los Angeles 183 85W I' B C NBC 40Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi 183 87WLS ABC 3Chicago 182 88WKYC NBC 7Cleveland 179 88WRTV NBC 14Indianapolis 179 88KTA R NBC 45Phoenix 179 91WLW'C NBC 28Columbus 177 91ll'S A Z NBC 33Charleston-LIMIting ton 177 91WVEC ABC 44Norf-Newp News-1 lamp 177 91W F MY CBS 48Onsb-High Pt-Win Sal 177 95WWL CBS 31New Orleans ITS 06W RC NBC 10ll ashing ton D.0 173 97KMBC ABC 23Kansas City 172 97KOV It ABC 27Sacramento-Stockton 172 99KN13C NBC 2Los Angeles 169 WOWAC;A CBS 17Atlanta 166 101 WNIAQ. N BC 3C :long° 165 101KT It K ABC 15Houston 165 103WTOL CBS 45Toledo 163 101WS PA CBS 40Gnsille-Sptnlig-Ashvi 162 105WP RI CBS 31Providence 159 106KU 0 ABC 8San Francisco 155 42 F.C.C. 2(1 Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 25

Yeticork Affiliates Ranked by ZTuntber of Public Service AnnouncementsCon.

BankCall letters Net. alt. Mkt. No. Location NA's

1011 K 11T V NN, ii3i(c.37 50Solt Lake City 155 IOSWS PD 45Toledo 154 109KCMO CBS 23Kansas City 151 109WSOC N BC 35Charlotte 151 111 KT VK ((I: 45Phoenix 150 112IVXIf NBC 48Wisp-1110 Pt -Win Sal Ill) 11211"I'VJ C 11S ISMiami 112IVCCII ABC 36Charlotte 115W 11 EN 43Syracuse 110WCC() CBS 13Minneapolis-SI Paul 117W1)110 45Toledo 11sKS1, (kIIIISC 50Salt Lake City 119WBMG (2119 38Birmingham 120 W I 1 1 ABC 21 Milwaukee 133 121 K(.111' NBC 49Sail Diego 122KM S P ABC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 123KIITV A BC 32Denver 124It' EIVS ABC 7Cleveland 111;23427(1 125WLOS ABC 40Gtiville-Sptalig-Ashvi 11: 126KS1P NBC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 124 127WC P 0 CBS 20Cincinnati 121 128KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 115 129WKZO C S 1 Kalamazoo -Ur apid 114 130WLK Y BC 30Louisville 112 131 IV EEC CBS 20Memphis 112 132 111J 13 K (2119 5Detroit 133 KING NBC 10Seattle-Taeonta 131W1113Q ABC 29Memphis 135wr IJ NBC '21 Milwaukee 130W DB II NBC 31 New Orleans 137ICTV1 ABC 12St. Louis 138WS1 X ABC 30Nashville S4 131WLAC C MS 30Nashville. 84 140KIR° C 13S 10 Seattle-Tacoma 93 111 WN YZ A BC 5Detroit SI 112WSM NBC 30Nashville 75 143W111() CBS 39Dayton 00 144 WIINB NBC '22Ilartfortl-New haven 0

111. COMMERCIA1.1ZATION Public concern with the amount and character of broadcast advertising was recognized as early as 1922 when Herbert. Hoover. then Secretary of Commerce and in charge of radio regulation, said : "It is inconceivable that we should allow so great a possibility for service, for news, for entertainment, for education and for vital commercial purposes to be drowned ill advertising chatter." 13 In 1960 the FCC said that broadcast licensees have an obligation "to avoid abuses with respect to the total amount of time devoted to advertising continuity as well as the frequency with which regular programs are interrupted for advertising messages." " The problem, however, is that the Commission has never done anything conrete about overcommercializat.ion, because its knee-jerk response tends to be to protect the industrys profits rather than the public interest. In 1963, for example, the Commission tentatively announced that it would attempt to propose the adoption of rules requiring all broadcast. licensees to observe the limitations on advertising contained inthe indnstrys own self-regulatory handbook, the National Association of Broadcasters Code of Good Practices.15 Those limitations, which can be 13 Hearings Before Communications Subcommittee of Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce on H.R. 8316, H.R. 8318, H.R. 8729, H.R. 8896, H.R. 8980, H.R. 9042 at 57 (Nov. 0, 1963). 14" 7(1,Sea the comprehensive discussion of this rulemaking and its ultimate demise in Krasnow and Longley, The Politics of Broadcast Regulations 105-111 (1973). 42 F.C.C. 26 26 Federal Conin nunicatiolis C0111111,1.88i011 Reports ignored by broadcasters if they choose, today would include 91/9 minutes per hour of commercials in prime tnne and 16 minutes at all' other times (wep; children's weekend programming, from 7 :00 am to 2:00 pm Saturday and :Sunday, which has recently been limited to 12 minutes per hour. Needless to say, the industry outcry to the suggestion was as rapid as it was furious, and the Commission quickly backed off with a 1904 promise to continue to develop its policy on commercialization on a. case by case basis.16 Broadcasting. Magazine, always privy to the Com- missions innermost thoughts and processes, assured the industry in July of 1964 that only the most extreme cases of overcommercialization would ever be brought to the Commission's attention.' T I le basic assumption used in applying the commercialization factor in the final ranking of our study is that the greater the emphasis on commercials (the more, the commercial time) the worse the station is performing. While recopnizing tb.3 current need of the broadcaster to protect, his financial sel f-interest (and that of his stockholders) , we have attempted to balance that self-interest against the needs of the viewing public in determining the relative service of each affiliate in the si udy. Moreover, we are not convinced that greater service to the public, via fewer commercials, necessarily means less revenue to the broadcaster, An advertising executive concerned about the value of his commercial product recently screened for his colleagues a single "clutter clip" spanning the even minute period between the end of one prime time network show and the beginning of the next, in which lie counted no fewer than thirty-live separate. "messages" to the viewer' Surely, if fewer "minutes" of commercial time are made available, as a service to the public, the advertiser will be willing to pay a higher price for the greater exchisivity .1,e is buying. This theory is at least partially borne out by the variety of international experiences in setting commercial limitations. In Germany, for example, advertisers willingly pay more for one of the twenty minutes of commercials allowed per day than they would if commercials were appealing at a rate of 12 or 16 minutes per hour. Such advertising, moreover, is strictly limited to the 6-8 pm portion of German "prime time," in which the normally varied German tek .ision fare is given over toyou guessed it 1 American series reruns. Other international standards included those of France which, in 1968, only allowed a total of 2 minutes of advertising per clay. Newer rulings, however, allow 5 minutes of advertising on one channel and 15 minutes on another. Canada limits commercial time to 7 minutes per hour segment and also places a limit on the amount of 'advertisements during any 15 minute period to 5 in number and 4 minutes of total time. The extent of the Commission regulation of commercials at the present time is "the 18 month letter" which is sent to all television licensees who propose in their renewal applications to exceed 16 minutes of commercial matter per hour. In rebponse to this letter the applicant must give information on complaints, total number of hours at 107. The Commission found its ground cut out from under it by a concerted broadcaster assault on Congress which led to hcovrings on a bill "to prohibit the Commission from adopting ohy rules governing the length or frequency of brocarast ads." When the bill overwhelmingly passed the House (before dying in the Senate) the Commission seemed to get the "message" and allowed its rulemaking to expire without mining to any results. r "FCC Again Rebuff's Chairman." Broadcasting, July 27, 1900, uc ;i4, 42 F.C.C. 2(1 Arkansas, Lou;siana and M;ssiss;ppi 197.3 Rolm(' ls 27 in excess of 16 minutes of commercial time. and defenses of the station's policies in terms of community and public interest. The "18 month letter" amounts only to a doubt expressed by the Commis- sion that the licensee is not meeting the public interest in commer- cializationa "doubt" involving as little actual sanction as does the NAB Code. The data gathered in the cour.e of this study was limited to the resources available, namely the license renewal form 303 filed by the licensee. Form 303, Section IVB, Part IV asks the applicant to list past commercial practices and Part V asks for proposed commercial practices including the following questions: "What is the maximum amount of commercial matter in any 60 minute segment which the applicant proposes normally to allow ? If the applicant proposes to permit this amount to be exceeded at times, state under what circumstances and how often this is expectediooccur, and the limits that would then apply." The form fails, however, to request a break- down of commercialization in prime time and non prime-time hours. Nor does it require submisSion of crucial information on program interruption or other matters, such as loudness violations.18 The license renewal application requests the licensee to submit the number of 60 minute segments which fall into four categories: (A) up to and including 8 minutes; (B) over 8 and up to and including 12 minutes; (C) over 12 and up to and including 16 minutes; (D) over 16 minutes. We concluded that the categories (C) and (D) (over 12-16. and over 16) were most significant for our study; 12 minutes of commercials per hour means that the public is being subjected to commercials at a rate of one hour out of every five, or 20% of all broadcasting time, and is a useful maximum limit. Such commercialization would violate even the industry's own standards in prime time and during children's programming. We find no justification for giving any weight at all to the NAB's 16 minute non-prime time standard. The total column and the ranking column in the commercialization table will indicate the number of 60 minute segments in which 12 or more commercial minutes appeared during the composite week: the munber one station is therefore that station with thefewest60 minute segments with 12 or more commercial minutes. We considered and rejected using a method of ranking based on the number of N minute segments with 12 or more minutes of commercials expressed as a percentage of the total number of 60 minute segments in the station's broadcast week, because a clear advantage would then accrue to stations operating between 12 midnight and 6100 am, when far fewer commercials can be sold. The result_ would have been an unrealistic lower overall percentage. By using raw data the focus is on the time of greatest audience viewing, and a more accurate reflection of significant .overcommercialization should thus be obtained. We also considered more heav=ily weighting the over-16 category as a penalty, sincepeP seviolations were obvious here. A random sant- pliiw of the stations indicated, however, that this category produced

"Staten/Catof Policy Co»rerniny Load Commercials, FCC 65G1S (July 12, 1965). 42 F.C.C. 2d 28 Federal Communications Coinin;ssion Reports such a small occurrence relative to those in the over 12 to 16 category (just one or two 60 minute segments per station) that unless an extremely high weighting factor (e.g., 5s) was applied there would be no significance to the overall ranking. Moreover, 'any weighting would necessarily be arbitrary. Where ties occurred, however, in the commercialization ranking, the number of segments of over-16 minutes of commercials was used to break them. We recognize that this analysisand the data upon which it is based is less than ideal. For a broadcaster to run 13 minutes of non- program matter during 60 minutes when the NAB Code would permit 16 is one thing; to run 13 minutes when the Code permits 91/2 is something else again. And yet the renewal form does not permit such distinctions. On the other hand, to the. viewer who is watching, 1:3 minutes is 13 minutes whatever time of (lay the commercials may be run. Another factor we could not analyze from the available data was whether a broadcaster could have sold more commercials than he did. For example, of the 20 highest ranked stations on the commercialization index (that is. the 20 with the fewest number of commercials) 14 are in markets 26 to 50. It is possible to conclude that this "favorable" ranking reflects no higher ethical values, or desire to serve, the public interest., but merely the inability to sell more commercials than that: Network Affiliates Ranked by Number of Composite Week Hours 11-ith .More Than 12 Min of Commercials

Rank Coll lettersNet. aff. Mkt. Location 12-16 Over 16 Total No. min.

I KPIX CBS 8San Francisco 2 0 2 2 IVPMY CBS 48GnsbIligh Pt-Win S1 4 0 4 3 wpm CBS 34Providence_ 10 1 11 4 WIZ ABC 19 Baltimore 13 0 13 5 WTIC CBS 22 Hartford-New Ifaen 15 0 15 6 KING NBC 16 Seattle-Tacoma 18 0 18 6 WDII0 A 13C 45Toledo 18 0 18 8 WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 19 0 19 9 WASP ABC 37 Albany - Schenectady -T_- 18 1 19 10 WTA E ABC 9Pittsburgh 20 0 2t! II WLKY ABC 36Louisville 21 I 22 12 LOS ABC 40Onville-Splitlig-Ashvi_ 23 (1 23 13 WS Y R NBC 43Syracuse 24 0 24 13 Mlle N BC -10 Onville-Spinhg-Aslivi 24 o 24 13 Kmsr ABC 13Minneapolis-St Pout _ 24 0 24 16 KCPX ABC 50 Salt Lake City 25 0 25 10 WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 25 0 25 16 WI1TN ABC 33CharlestonlIuntingto_ 25 0 25 16 KDV R ABC 97 SaeramentoStockton 25 0 2.5 16 WKBW ABC 25Buffalo 25 0 2.5 10IV/ T/ A BC 21Aiihvaukee 25 0 25 22 WAN NI30 38 Birmingham 24 1 25 23 KIM NBC 4Philadelphia 26 0 26 24 KATU ABC 26Portland 27 0 27 24 KTV1 ABC 12St. Louis 27 0 27 26 WNAC ABC 6 Boston 26 I 27 27 WCIIS CBS 33Charleston-Duntingto '.A 3 27 M KSAT ABC 45San Antonio_ 28 0 28 28 WX11 NBC 4R Gnsh-High Pt-WinSal 28 0 28 30 KDKA CBS 0 Pittsburgh 29 0 20 31 WSIX ABC 30 Nashville 28 1 29 32 WOA I NBC 45 San Antonio 27 2 2!) 33 WKRC ABC 20Cincinnati 30 0 30 33 WTVJ CBS 18 Miami 30 0 30 35 IVRAS CBS 36Louisville 29 1 30 36 WAVY NBC 44Norfolk-Newport News-1 'amnion_ 31 0 31 36 WRO13 NBC 37 Alban y-sclieuectad y-Troy 31 0 31 36 W RTV NBC 14Indianapolis 31 0 31 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana. and ,lbss;88ippi 1973 Renewals 29

Network affiliates ranked by number of composite week ',ours with more 1/tan 12 min of commercialsContinued

RankCall lettersNet. MI, Mkt, Locution 12-16 Over 16 Total No.

l 31 311 W BAP NBC 11 Dallas-Port %%Malt 30 40WKY NBC 41Oklahoma City 29 2 31 41 WSPD NBC 45Toledo 32 (1 32 41 WV EC ABC 44 Norfolk-Newport News-ilampton_ 32 0 32 11WU It NBC 25linlialo 32 0 32 32 41 WMAL ABC 10Washington, D.0 32 0 41WIEV ABC 31Providence .-_.. :32 0 32 46W'' /, NI ABC 41 Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids 31 1 32 46WVUE ABC 31New Orleans 33 1 32 46WCKT NB( 18Nliami 31 1 32 49KTVK AB( 45Phoenix 33 0 33 49WIT DQ AB( 29Nlemphis 33 0 33 40K (1W NB( 26Portland 33 0 33 49W813 NBC 17Atlanta 33 0 33 49W137. NBC It Boston 33 0 33 49WA B C ABC I New York City 33 0 33 55WHMG CBS 38Birmingham 31 2 33 56WI3 RC ABC 38Birmingham 29 4 33 57WTNII ABC 22Ilart ford-New Ilaven 35 0 35 57WREC CBS 29\Ietnphin 35 0 35 57WHEN 0135 25Buffalo 35 0 35 57KOMO ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 35 0 :35 57KSTP NBC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 35 0 35 2 (42KOIN CBS 26Portland 33 35 63KUTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 36 0 36 63WITNI3 NBC 22Hartford-New Haven 36 0 36 63WI DL C1314 45Toledo 36 0 36 63KTA 12 NBC 45Phoenix 36 0 36 63WSM NBC 30Nashville 36 0 36 63KT RK ABC 15Houston 36 0 :36 69WTVN ABC 28Columbus 36 I 36 70WJA It NBC 31Providence 37 0 37 70WSAZ NBC 33Charleston-Huntington 37 0 37 70WWI, C135 31New Orleans 37 0 37 70VTEN CBS 37Albany-Schenectady-T 37 0 37 70KWTV CBS 41Oklahoma City 37 0 37 75KSD NBC 12St. Louis 36 1 37 75W FAA ABC 11Dallas-Fort Worth 36 1 37 77KC RA NBC 27Sacramento-Stockton 35 2 37 78WMA It CBS 19Baltimore 38 0 38 78WISH CBS 14Indianapolis 38 0 3R 80 NBC 15Houston 36 2 38 KPRC 39 81KOCO ABC 41Oklahoma City 39 0 81WDSO NBC 31New Orleans 39 0 39 CBS 45San Antonio 39 0 39 81KENS 39 81WCCI3 ABC 35Charlotte 39 0 81WBNS CBS 28Columbus 39 0 39 86W PLO AI3C 18,)liainl 38 1 39 87WLCY ABC 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 37 2 39 88KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 40 0 40 88KGTV NBC 40San 1:4ego 40 0 40 88WHEN CBS 43Syrrxuse 40 0 40 88WKZO CBS 41Kalamazoo -(Sr Rapids 40 0 40 88WAVE NBC 36Louisville 40 0 40 88WI3TV CBS 35Charlotte 40 0 40 KM BC ABC 23Kansas City 40 0 40 88 40 KSWBAL NtsC 1913altimore 40 0 88VNBC NBC INew York City 40 0 40 97KABC AI3C 2Los Angeles 30 1 40 58WETS ABC 7Cleveland 41 0 41 90WCPO CBS 20Cincinnati 40 1 41 99K(30 8San Francisco 40 1 41 ABC 42 101KCMO CBS 23Kansas City 42 0 101W RC NBC 10Washington, D.0 42 0 42 101WJW CBS 7Cleveland 42 0 42 42 101KMOX CB; 12St, Louis 42 0 105WIIC NBC 9Pittsburgh 1. I 42 106WOTV NBC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 43 0 43 106IVIIMJ NBC 21Milwaukee 43 0 43 108KIRO CBS 16Seattle-Tacoma 44 0 44 108WCBS CBS 1New York City 44 0 44 110KHOU CBS 15Houston 43 1 44 44 111 KOA NB(' 32Denver 42 2 112WQXI. ABC 17Atlanta 45 .0 45 45 113WPVI ABC 4Philadelphia 44 1 46 114WMC NBC 29Memphis 45 1 114%MEC CBS 5Detroit 45 1 46 116WLAC CBS 30Nashville 44 2 96 47 117KINIGII CBS 32Deliver 47 0 42- F.C.C. 2d 30 Federal Communications Conuni.98ion, Reports

Network affiliates ranked by number of composite week hours with more than 12 min of commercials Cuntinued

RankCall lettersNet. ati. Mkt. Location 12-10 Over IP Total

117 WTVT CBS 24Tampa-St. Petersham 47 0 47 119Ws1'A .10 Gnville-Sinnhg-Ashvi 40 I 47 119 WPC P (C2.11118S 10Washington, D.C. 46 1 47 121 WAGA CBS 17Atlanta 48 0 45 121 KDFW CBS 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 48 0 45 IllWKYC NBC 7 Cleveland 48 0 48 121 WCAU CBS 4 Philadelphia 48 0 45 121 KNXT CBS 2Los Angeles 48 0 45 126W LW C NBC 28Columbus 47 1 48 126KXTV CBS 27Sacramento-Stockton 47 1 48 128WISN CBS 21Milwaukee 46 2 48 129WWI NBC 5Detroit 49 0 49 130WM. ABC 14 Indianapolis 48 1 49 131 %% Uri` NBC 20Cincinnati 40 3 49 132WFLA 24Tampa:.St. Petersburg .50 0 .50 132WXY 7., ANIIIICC 5Detroit 50 0 50 132WMAQ NBC 3Chicago 50 0 50 135W1110 CBS 39Dayton 48 2 50 130KFMI3 C1133Se 49San Diego 47 3 50 137WLWD 39Dayton 49 2 51 138KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 52 0 : 41 139WCCO CBS 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 51 2 53 140KOOL CBS 45Phoenix .55 0 55 141 MIMI CBS 3Chicago 50 0 56 142KISTV ABC 32Denver 57 1 68 143WLS ABC 3Chicago 55 3 58 144WDAF NBC 23Kansas City_ 49 10 59

1V. LOCAL P110011AM LING From the. beginning, a strong legal and cultural emphasis in Amer- ican broadcasting has been on local service. The Federal Communica- tions Act of 1934, for example, provides that broadcast licenses should be divided "among the several states and communities as to provide a fair, efficient, and equitai,le distribution of radio services to each of the same." i" The Act never mentions networks. except to emphasize that the FCC should watch aver their operation,2° and in repeated decisions and rulings since then, both the courts and the FCC have defined television in America as local television.21 It didn't have to be this way, and in retrospect it would have been more efficient and more profitable for television service to have been national or regional in nature, with superpower stations blanketing the country and "local" service limited only to translating or augment- ing the central station's signal. This scheme is used in most of the civilized nations of the world, and indeed, was seriously considered in the United States in what was called DuMont Plan, which the Com- mission finally rejected in its Sixth Report and Order on Television Allocations in 1952.22 It said: This Commission ... believes that on the basis of the Communications Act it must recognize the importance of making it possible ... for a large number of communities to obtain television assignments of their own. In the Commission's view as many communities as possible should have the opportunity of enjoying the advantages that derive front having local outlets that will be responsive to local needs. [emphasis added] 23 ,0 47 U.S.C. § 307(h) 2 "47 U.S.C.§ 303(i)gives the Commission authority to "make special regulations applicable to radio stations engaged in chain broadcasting." 21 There was a considerable amount of language to that effect In National Broadcasting Co. v. United Staten, 319 U.S. (1943), which upheld the right of the Commission to regulate the practices of the networks. 22 Dockets 8736, 8975. 8976 and 9175, 1 P & P Radio Reg. 91 :599 (part 3) (1952). 231d., at paragraph 79. 42 F.C.C. 2d -.'frkallSOS, Louisiana and .11;s8;88i/liii 11177 RCM' Wit18 31 This allocation decision was by no means a minor one. either, sine, it required a far greater chunk of the valuable. limited frequency space thau any system of national or regional broadcastinp. would have required. As the, Commission reiterated in the course of its 1t)(() en bilni, Programming Inquiry, it had long since determined that "the /in- o/pal ingredient of the licensee's obligation to operate his station in the public interest is the diligent, pbsitive and continuing tfl'ort by the licensee to discocer and fulfill the tastes, needs and desires of his community.. .."21 Despite this conscious attempt to emphasize local service concerned with local politics. education, sports. entertainment, religion. and so forth, for network affiliates the concept has largely been a failure. The statistical analysis of the local progrfunming of the stations in this study indicates that the, average station did little, more than 13 hours of local programming in a. week-13 hours out of a broadcast week that sometimes stretches to 135 hours and beyond. And with most stations, fewer than one-fourth of all "local" hours were programmed in prime time. The. rest of the broadcast week is ]eft. to be filled by the network feeding often as much as 17 continuous hours a. day with national entertainnmnt, news, and sports. Moreover, any gap is often taken up by syndicated o purchased independently by the local stationsprograms like The Mike Douglas Show or The Dating Game, or old movies. The networks simply dominate "local" television. Most viewers know their local television stations by channel number, but few iden- tify those channels with local stations. Tlw identification tends to be with the network. Without the occasional station "I.D." required by the FCC, the local stations could very well slip into total anonymity. Variety's Les Brown blames the profit-motive : It was a noble theory to make the station the basic component of the system and hold it responsible for what it broadcasts, but in practice it has been about as effective as holding the newsstand dealer responsible for what appears in the papers. Like the newstand operator, all the average statical owners really want to do is se11.25 it is simply cheaperand, therefore, better businessto let the network provide the programming. For each network program that the local station carries it receives a small percentage of the network's advertising revenue from that program in return. In addition, the network leaves open a number of conunercial "spots" within and around the program that the local station can sell. During prime time hours, and for sports events, those benefits can generate a tremendous amount of revenue for the local stationcertainly far more than producing and selling a local program. Instead of creating a local program, paying people to produce it and perform in it, and then worrying about selling it to an advertiser, a local station merely carries its network's programming or acquires nationally syndicatedprograms. Moreover, an advertiser, whether his product is sold locally or nationally, is far more likely to buy time on ft network or syndicated Report and Statement of Policy Re: Commission Ea Banc Programming Inquiry, 25 P.R. 7291. 20 P & P Radio Reg. 1901 (1900). 2.5Les Brown, TeleviSion: The Business Behind the Boa', 179 Harcourt Brace Joanovich, Inc. (1971). 42 P.C.C. 2(1 32 Federal Communications Commission Reports program than on itlocal program. With in the Family." 'for example, an advertiser knows he has a successful program, he knows how many people he will he reaching, how- old they arc, and whether they are male. or female. With a local program, lie seldom can have that information at all, let alone in advance. It's the di fferenve between the favorite and a long-shot in a horse race. Every one of these factors helps explain why there is so little local programming, and even less high quality local programming. Ranking television stations on the basis of thehr local progrannnin!E is particularly difficult. The FCC license renewal form sets out a lengthy definition of a "local program": . any programoriginated or produced by the station. or for the produc- tion of which the station is primarily responsible and employing live talent for more than 50% of the time. Such a program, taped or recorded for later broadcast, shall he classified as local. A local program fed to a network shall lw classified by the originating station as local. All non-network news programs may be classified as local. Programs primarily featuring records or transcriptions shall be classified as recorded even though a station an- nouncer appears in connection with such material. However, identifiable units of such programs which are live and separately logged as such may be classified as local.' It is a flexible, confusing definition that different stations interpret differently, but it leaves no doubt as to the importance of local programming. In addition to this definition, the Policy Statement attached to the renewal form identifies 14 major elements as "necessary or desirable to serve the broadcast needs of ninny communities." 27 Local programming is necessarily an important part of at least. seven of those elements, although only threenews, public affairs. and local programmingtm singled out for special attention on the license renewal form. 2S In ranking the stations based on their local prorramming the ra w total of hours is used rather than the expression of that total as a percentage of the composite week, for the reasons given in this section on news.2" Two factors from the, renewal application are combined to give a total "index" of the licensee's local programmingperformance. The

5' Form No. 303, Section 4. b, page!. See Part I of this Chapter. See text at page 27 of this Chapter. "Total hours of local programming." for purposes of this report was limited to local programming logged between the hours of 8 :00 a.m. and 11 :00 p.m. While we would have preferred to have information limited to the hours between 8 :00 a.m. and 12 :00 p.m. (to account for the :half hour of local news broadcast by most network affiliates between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 11 :30 p.m.), we felt it was inure important to discourage stations from seeking to improve their "rating" by dumping addtional local programming into the virtually vieweriess hours of the early morning. As additional justification for ignoring that "traditional" half hour of local news, we would note : I) this particular programming is generally the same for every network affiliate in the top 50 markets ; and It will have already been accounted for under the category "news, public affairs and other." 42 F.C.C. 2t1 A PIO( LO;.d.r:1 of (01 d 7.'.4.S';88t. p pi .1.01..; L'c lmatures 33 total hours of local programming and the total hours of local programming in prime tune are added to one another anti that total divided by two. The stations are then ranked on the 1/llSIS Of that in,lex. Thus, wi have given additional significance to the thif0 local programming factor. Prime time local programminpr is, in effect, hieing counted t wiceonce by itself and once as ',nut of the total hours of local programming. This additional weight reflects a conscious judgment on our lea rt that the impact of television should he measure(t ill terms of the inimber of people it reaches, which number is far greater in prime time than any other time during' the broadcast week. For a network affiliate to ppopytin. locally in prime time, other than durint. the half hour "returned" under the prime time access rule,"° requires a greater degree of commitment to the local viewing publie as vell as to the local advertiser. While counting the prime time local twice may be arbit nay. ill view of the considerably greater number of viewers during prime tittle, we feel it, is a legitimate and conservative additional weighting.'' The over-all results of the survey of local programming are ;tot et icouraging. With but few exceptions, local network affiliates pay 1i tt le attention to local programming and even less attention to local programming in prime time. And the Commission, rather than set standards for further scrutiny in this area it has supposedly considered so importantportant for so long, continues to look the other way at renewal time.

47 CFR h (i5.Stk). One prohlon encountered in this analysis was the precise definition of "prime time." In same central 1111d 1110tUltaill time sine States. for 1'.X1111111.11!, ()Hine dine NettlallY runs from :1:00 PM to 10:0(1 PM instead of 4; :00 PM to 11 :00 PM. While the recently adopted accuse renewal form Specifically takes that phenomenon into effect, all the data we have gathered has neva subject to the interpretation of "prime time" by the licensee. It has not appeared to have a major effect on the analysis. but should be borne in mind especially when con- sidering the local programming segment of this report.

42 P.C.C. 2t1 104-004-73-- 3 Network a,ffiliates ranked by local programming 1...1 Rank 1 Call letters Net. aff. Mkt. No. 20 Location Prime time local and rank G. 17 Local programming and rank 35.137 1 Composite 'tC..40 o.o 32 K.NKYW 13 C WIAVT NBC it24 Los Angeles_ PhiladelphiaCincinnati 8.006.00 46- 57 21.9225.42 42 20.91714.95815.708 .._..,('"' 654 WS13 WY/.K. DK.A ABCNBCCBS 1917 BaltimoreAtlantaPittsburgh R.539.008.82 162 19..1519.4219.88 1011 8 13.99214.20814.350 <--....aRo0Z.> 1110 WWPLO M A 987It WWJWWLKTA It CBSABCNBC 45191831 New5 Orleans :MiamiBaltimoreDetroitPhoenix 8.007.4.24.536.529. 58 167627 7 22.0220.3019.0318.17.9 92°_ 152114 36 13.13.27513.40813.45813.750 225 0RCf.N.,... 1615141312 WK.WTMJWCCOWI'VI Y W117, NBCABCCBS 412113 64 Boston_PhiladelphiaMilwaukeeMinneapolis-St. Paul 6.206.504.008.008.02 412980 4 7 21.9219.3219.3517.9517.25 20321312 4 12.95812.97513.08312.75312.925 C..-g0 191817 WBWIKT IC AIIK L NABCNBC 13 C 1915 9 Baltimorellou.stonPittsburghOklahoma City 7.807.356.50 15101829 17.5617.3017.9018.83 27312216 12.12.55012.64212.667 542 ,cQco.-.Z.i0 23222120 WWI3WBNSKN D XTRCSU ABCCBSNBC 3828 Birmingham31Columbus New2 LosOrleans Angeles 7.027.505.236.6.50 67 25202065 17.1019.6218.3318.55 061817 9 12.30812.42512.50012. 525 `"'C:'cQ. 28272152524 WSNIKCWMALK KDFW HOU It A ANBCCBS BC 30 15102711Nashville Houston WashingtonSecrameono-S1I Mllas-Fort WorthD.0 oc k t on 3.507.107.676.03 4411011712 18.2520.0716.2710.17 333919 7 12.14211.78311.83311.917 ,8..., 32313020 KKOMOIVIAMKI'liC 1'1 X ABC('NBC BS 1639 Dayton8 San Francisco SealI !oast 1 le-Tacomaon 07.005.507.52 00 46571121 10.9316.0017.15.93 S3 3324923 11..19211.50011.661711.725 glo-i 33 W37363531 B WWNK3WRAF BM I I l) AAS (i A13('NBCCBS( 'BS 362312 03 Chicago BostonSt.LouisvilleKansas Louis City 5.W6.505.5715.507.73 7024150To 17.591817.3510.15.23 3315 ''7373053 11.11.11711.65811.47611.183 292 384039 WWM CLAC PC 0 NBCCBS 30 2920Nashville Memphis3 Cincinnati 7.004.4.006. 1592 21785023 1155.17.75 40(7) 7 29255548 10.10.87511.233 858058 44434241 KMWCAWMAKSTP GH. U Q CBSNBC 13 4 Minneapolis-St.PhiladelphiaChicago Paul 6.6.526.00 27 332740 1155.115.. 55870007 54.5544 10.667110.. 747792 IZ7. .47 484045WFA WW11 DT13TV A 10 V. NBCABCCBSC BS 353932 4111Denver_CharlotteDayton Kalamazoo-GrDallas-Fort Worth Rapids 5.00Ii.9.005.706.00 00 467055 2 11.15.9315513530 92 42794051 10. 4676176L0500 .1,3 z23ti 5149 SCATWK FMBRC U CBSABCNBC 49 San2610 Washington Diego9 D.0 Port land 3.1 "_45.. 0097 101 7073 15.1156.. 708550 31474156 10.10010.LI. -15588 250 C;)t.-.1 52 W TA E ABC Pittsburgh 19 . 53 W LS ABC 3 Chicago 7.03 13 1113(2:.. 55180° 71174 11c0; 1(1%7 c-3rr. 5-154 WKCKO BEN MOA CBSNBC 32 502523Denver BuffaloKansas City 3.7.58 50 Iii 437591 13.5815. 42 614035 I100. 141:22 . 58 59WOAI.57 KS L K.N1 ON CBSNBC 45 12San Antonio St.Salt Louis_ Lake City 6.006.270.0(1It 3846 1333. 61:782 666502 6261:100 KWNBC WLCY OC 0 ABCNBC 4124 OklahomaTampa-St.1 New CityPetersburg York City 5.353.1.83 75 127 (1.811487 13.6217.83 8537 1)74523 14 50U 46, 6463 WLWW ABCRTV I NBCABC 1614 1 New York City Indianapolis 5.505.17 118i5.') 57 1151.1133.7452 4fl2 587165 6867 KWT6966 OW KIRO IC W.1 W CBSNBC 2220 Hartford-NewPortland7 Haven ClevelandSeattle-Tacoma 5.3.3.83 1000 117 69 15.13.20 25 527349 9. 117 .. 6..., .. 70 W AGA. 17 Atlanta 2k(51i ....F155 5500 2057 12.-3'211. 67 5377 9. 108 <6.. 7371 WISHWITIweKT (.713SABCNBC 20142118 Miami IndianapolisMilwaukee 3.776. 00 20 1141.11.11.42 !010532 578154 8.888. !11: 858 .551888 C.-,6,-...z. 7776 KW7574KING W TV CBK RC S CBSNBCABC 254116 1 New York OklahomaSeattle-Cincinnati Tacoma- City City 6. 50 1142.111i 9124 10.14. 7203 02(1158 8. 750 YiVi 6.!'-'-3- 78 WKISW ABC Buffalo 33:6: ..... 25427815551 37 50I2 liss!II191( 14.1192:::1)...... i.2371.48383C(80(1):013(5257575:880758833585 ^3 SI8079 WTNIIWTOPWTVT ABCCBSC BS 222410 WashingtonBart ford-New D. C]laver Tampa-St. Peterburg 3.03 107 -10 133(11. 81. :1802) 6490 8. 238 4.! c. C0.., Network affiliates ranked by local programming -ContinneCi Rank Call letters Net. ail. Mkt. No, 30 Loeatlon Prime time lora) and rank 4.522 77 Loratl protiraminiou and rank 10.11.82 17 100 82 Composite 8,8 107092 868.5848382 KTVWSIXKOINKUTVWCHS I ABCCBSNBC 33 Charleston-1Juni122650 Portland ing,ton St.SaltNashville Louis Lake City 2.503.9041.025.502.50 118122 578445 12.8010.13.2513.4712.13 18 7500727078 7.8007.81_27.8777.8x)8.015 91898887 W.XKBWTOLKSAT TVYZ K.Tv.K. ABCCBS 45 32SanPhoenixToledo Denver Antonio75 ClevelandDetroit 0.505.22((.505,2.80 504.04) 134 806721?57 10.8314.8510.1710, 0))!).00 104)115tin 5918) 7.3337.4177.57.57.6027.75)7.750 0392 WEWS9504 WF111WAVEKGB Y. IV JB K ABCCBSNBCABC 214836 MilwaukeeUnsb-HighLouisville45 85 SanDetroit Pt-Win Francisco Sal. 3. 584.774.003. 005.50 108 577480 10,4.211.4211. 08 8.829.55 118108 95816793 7.211,46.9587.1587. 208 101 KXTV97 99WISHKOOL WWR TAM 0 B NBCCBSNBC 273728 Albany-SchenectadySaeramento-StoektonColumbus -T Phoenix 3.256.0(15.503,50 10310) 570146 10 6710.2510,428.337.58 130124 9598 0.7756.9176.9531;.71146. 7!)2 104102105103 WEBKMBC WS 0 PA. 11"PV.I NBCCBSABCCBS 23 1840Kansas GMiami nvIlle-S City tunbg-Ashvi (1 nville-Sptnbg-Ash vi . 3,034.3,1103.30 02 108 8401579 10.127.1130.9.36 53 112128104 95 ti.6.6080.7)6) 583 110100103107 WTWKZKMSP KENSWEE EN 0 CBSABCC139 413145 SanKalamazoo-CrNew3713 Albany-Schenect Antonio_ Orleans Rapids ady-T Minneapolis-St Pant 3,003,5.23 0800 108101 10.01)10, 089.95 1111107103 Ii. W:0..5008. 517 112111 WZZNIKGTV NBCABC 4149 San Diego Kalamazoo-1;r Rapids 3.500.75 133 91 12.11) 9. 42 114111 79 Iiii..317558 114113 WKYCMAR NBC 34 7 ProvidenceCleveland 333... 573033.55 919190 9. 12 121117 (6;11.333 .. ill.i3i7 115 WP RI CBS Providence 8919:11875;7730 ,...). 117110 WSWIINII Y It NBC 43 Syrae1 Lanford-New use Ilaven 1.50 102122 0. MI0.000 1 .i."..i-.), 118 WXII NBC 48 (1nS14-111g11 PI-Win Sal :333...N3:1101 11S.1111815 11.2130113115) 5.1)59 . 120.Ill). WSAI: WELA NBC 442433 Charleston-Hunt ingt on Ttimpa-St . Peterslairg 3. 50 78,7S... :11:12722 555.: 7771c18.9) ,a. 120 WAVY NBC Nor(.-Newp News-II:imp . 081. 8.33 .! 122 WSDC NBC 11 (C.: 35 C 1) ark) 1 e 3.00 . (21(1111 14111:.' ssl130 120125123 W.AWIIM'WSP1) KABC P I(1 CBSABC 3845 2 Los Angeles BirmillgballtToledo 2,33.00 501. 1(2'152 8.17 1221111112;3.2t1.7111)11 5. 51:415. 517583 130129128127 WQXWI1F.NWTVNWI:EV 1 ABCCNBC BS ((.1: 2))3428174338 BirminghamColumbus ..ktSyracuse MumProvidence 0.503(.15.10) 0.0 1.20 91 170..5.1(5)18)71. 59735" Po137 91 5.:555... 513197015732505. 275150 ..oz 132131 IVBWR AEC P NBCC138 11 Dallas-FortMemphis Worth 2.671.17 11113333:? S9.31:717.75 1)3 9. 208451...5118°1737 133 WCC 11 ABC 35 Charlotte 0.93 1:122' s1111 1,01.. 11571 1131:13121 130135134 WLKWAIT Y KON: R ABC 3637''7 AllSaeramtint Louisvilleian y-Scheneet o-Si ockt ad on y-T 0g.121.12.07I. II 13) 7.139.75 139 4. 408I. 375 v....,,....z: 137 WV EC ABC 21144 Norf-Newp News-11 amp 13.1 7.737. 92 131 '1115°17s :oz 138 W111114 I:. . , AB (: 45 ToledoMemphis (01.1; 7.9! 8 1391.10 WDI1 0 ABC 123:3321)1; W11 TN ABC 3325 Charles! on-1 hint ington _ 2.500. 50 . ii. ,752 , 141 WG R N BC 50 Ibiffalo 131 Ii..t71i... 10 1151(1311 1.107 ....., 14.11431.12 WLOSWNKC YPX S ABC 4340 D uvidc-Spt id ig-Ashyi SyracuseSalt Lake Cit y 0.500.93 O. 0 2.02 14011111321:12311) .3. 287I. 7)18 -1....., III ,.03.....4. ...,rt.,C...,:, oz.z...,)-.=-'01 38 Federal Communications Commission Reports

V. CONFIDEN"rL PISAN C1AL J N FOIMATION We believe that. financial information is of special reh.. ince in evaluatinp. stations' programming performance. To the extent. that "quality" or "local" prop-ramming costs more than old movies, a station's gross revenues, profit, and programming expenses are relevant in evaluating whether more should be expected of the station, Thus, it would often be of advantage. to poorer stations to make this information public. Financial information is traditionally available for public utilities and other companies regulated by government. Getting financial information from the FCC is, however, another matter. The Commission originally collected financial information from broadcast, licensees as a. way of enabling the government to keep up with the growth and development of a relatively new communications industry. It was thought that the data would be of importance to the broadcasters themselves. Even today the Commission accumulates and publishes market-by-market reports of revenues and expenditures for the industry. Over the years the Commission has gradually expanded its use of this information into more substantive policy areas. Profits are deemed relevant, for example,, in determining how much a station should be fined for a violation of Commission rules. It is used to determine whether a mark _ can sustain economically an additionaltdio or television station.. It can be used inchangeof format cases to support (or challenge) the argument of a licensee that significant losses justify a different programming format. It is our contention that financial information should also be used in determining whether a licensee leas met its obligation to operate in the "public interest, convenience or iiecessity." Specifically, the amount of money spent on programming, particularly local programming, compared to the station's profits, or gross revenues, can be a valid indicator of its commitment to public service. Our premise is that a station spending a greater percentage of its revenues on local programming is doing a better job, and accordingly we have included a financial factor designed to reflect a licensee's performance as a fourth (and iinal) ininit into our overall progamming ranking. There. are, of course, severe limitations upon the effective use of financial information in a. report of this nature. Despite the fact that all licensees are required to file financial forms annually, there is no uniform system of accounts; so there is no necessary consistency between licensees' reports. Nor does the. Commission do an audit on the information it. receives; so there is no guarantee of accuracy. Further- more, the information currently required is not particularly detailed or specific. For example, it is impossible to tell how much of its total program expenses have been spent by a licensee on locally originated programming or live-on-air talent, as opposed to extensive libraries of old movies. Perhaps the most significant obstacle to the analysis of this information, however, is its confidentiality, This has made it exceedingly difficult, for the Commission staff to analyze and report our findings in the context of this study, And it makes it virtually impossible for a concerned citizens group accurately to gauge the performance of a licensee. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 39 On Mardi 23, 1938, under the authority of the Communications Act of 1934 32 and the Rules 33 the Commission ordered that each licensee of a broadcast. station 34 file information about its earnings and expenditures.35 In April, 1945, the Commission, in seeking to update the rules regarding the filing of financial data, also invited comments as to Nvhether any or all of the information required to be filed should be open for public inspection.a° In August of that year the proposed rules were adopted, including for the first time a very limited public disclosure provision commented upon by Commissioner Clifford Durr as follows: . the amended rules are a move in the right direction, but in my opinion they stop far short of making available to the public information to which it is properly entitled. Section 1.5 still withholds from public scrutiny balance sheets and income statements of broadcasting licensees filed with the Com- mission pursuant to Section 1.301 and network and transcription service contracts filed pursuant to Section 1.302. It is true that the Commission ... announced "that it is giving consideration to expanding its annual statistical report so that the report will contain certain financial data with respect to the operations of individual stations." This, too, gives promise of a further move in the right direction, but I can see no reason for giving the public less than complete information.37 In 1960 the Commission staff undertook extensive revision of the annual financial report with the purpose of obtaining more detailed, current data on all stations. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was adopted and published in November 1960,38 and the currently applicable. financial Form 324 was adopted in a Memorandum Order and Opinion in January of 1963.3" The comments received in the course of the proceeding mainly spoke of the additional burdens on the licensees to furnish more complete information. The question of confidentiality \vas not fully considered. The information collected on April 1 of each year remains "confidential," subject of the provisions of August, 1945, its disclosure permitted only upon a "substantial showing of relevancy and need." ° Two provisions of the Public Information Act of 1966 are pertinent to the Commission's authority to disclose or withhold confidential financial information :5 U.S.C. § 552 provides tbat the general requirement of each administrative agency to "make available to the public" certain types of information does not apply to "...trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential." Notwithstanding this language, § 552 does not inwhibit the disclosure of such financial information ; it

3247 Il.S.C. § 30S (b). 3, Then numbered § 1.341 of the Commission rules. Today that authorization may be found at 47 CFR § 1.611. "4 Id. Today the language requires the reports of "each licensee or permittee of a ennumbrcially operated standard, FM, television or international broadcast station (ns defined in Pnrt 73 of this chapter)...." "At that time the forms were 705 and 706 and were labelled "Annual Financial Report fur Standard Broadcast Stations and Networks." By 1940, Section 1.341, note 33 supra. was deleted and redesignated Section 1.361. In August 1943, Section 1.361 was revised and forms were thereafter referred to as 324. 328, )and 329. Information regarding ownership, operation. interests and contracts was also required by that date. ' "Tn. the Matter of Promulgation of Rules and Reps. Concerning the Filing of Financial Ownership and Other Reports of Broadcast Licensees, Docket 6756,, 10 Fed. Reg. 4364 (1940). lfemornndum of Commissioner Clifford Darr, dated August 3, 1040. ng 23 Fed. Reg. 10735 (1960). ,5 2R Fed. Rea. 36 (1963). ' See 47 CPR § 0.431. 0.461 (19118) : Multivision Northwest, Inc., 8 2i1 892, aril on reconsideration, 10 F.C.C. 2d 391 (1967). 42 F.C.C. 2d 40 Federal Communications CommiSSIOn Reports merely exempts it from compu/sory disclosure, leaving the release of financial information to the discretion of the agency. The Commission has explicitly recognized this discretionary authority in the text of its rule,41 which states that the Commis Sion is "authorized to withhold" not prevented from withholdingsuch confidential information under Federal law. The second pertinent provision of the U.S. Code is contained in 18 U.S.U. § 1905, which provides in part: Whoever, being an officer or employee of the -United States or any deprri- ment or agency thereof. publishes, divulges. discloses, or makes known in any manner or to any extent not authorized by low any information coming to him in the course of his employment or official duties.. which information concerns or relates to . .. the identity, confidential statistical data., amount or source of any income, profits, lcsses. or expenditures of any person. firm, partnerehi corporation, or associationor permits any income return or copy thereof . to be seen or examined by any person except ern provided by law; shall be fined...." [emphasis added] Once again, Section 1905 does not. bar an agency from releasing otherwise confidential financial information. It merely imposes sanctions for the "unauthorized" release of snch informationthat is. in a manner not approved by the agency in its official capacity. As the Court explained in Consumers Union .of U.S., Inc. e.eterans Ad mi »ist ra- t ion. 425 F. 2d 578 (D.C. Circuit 1970) : Unlike other statutes which specifically define the rruge of diselosable information. ..,Section 1905 merely creates a crimintal sanction for She release of "confidential information." Since this type of information is already protected from disclosure under the Act by §552(b) (4), Section 111(n should not he read to expand this exemption, especially because the Act requires that exemptions lie narrowly construed, 5 U.S.C. § 552(c) (Stull). 1tX19)." The scope of Section 1905. therefore, is governed by that. of Section 552. which. in turn, leaves disclosure to the discretion of the individual agency. Where the "public interest" is concerned, the Public Infoma- tion Act and its legislative history has been interpreted to place on the government, agency the burden of justifying denials of disclosures : This law was initiated by Congress and signed by the President with several key concerns: (a) that disclosure be the general rule. not the exception : that all individuals have equal rights of access: (c) that the burden be on the Government to justify the withholding of a document, not on the person who requests The. Commission rules containits principal guidelines on non- disclosure of confidential information : The Commission iauthorized to withhold from public inspection materials which would he y,--c,";teged as a matter of law if retained by the person who submitted them :au.. materials which Would not customarily he released to the public by that person. whether or not such materials are protected from disclosure by a privilege. 44 in the same Section, the Commission !roes on to include the following material :n non-public status : "(i). Financial reports submitted by

broadcast license, the. group alleged. it must find that the station's past three-year performance has sufficiently served the "public interest. convenience., and necessity." A critical element in judging past performance under that standard is the past, programming. Discussing one critierion in evaluating past. programming. Alianza stated : "there no longer seems any question that the adequacy of a station's programming must, be judged in substantial part by the extent to Nrhiell it re-

4, 47 ( 0.457(d) (1) (10001. a Id.Indeed. the Commission has exerciseditsdiscretion on numerous ()evasions. veleasing otherwise confidential information for "nubile interest" reasons. See. r.g.Capr cod Broadrastina Co., Inc.. 23 P.C.C. 2d 277 (1070) : Fetzer eablo Vision,11 201 510 (10081Stultirision Northwest. Inc., S P.C.C.2t1302 (1007)aff'd on reconsideration, 10 P.C.C. 2,1 301 (1007) ; cf. Sioux Empire Broadcasting Co., 10 F.C.C. 2d 132 (1067). 47 See the procedure outlined In 47 § 0,461, "Requests for inspection of materials not routinely available for inspection." Rec. e,g.. Request by Reuben B. Robertson, 25 P.C.C. 2d 942 (1070) (more than two months token to resolve a simple inspection reouest). 41 See, e.g.. 3IeKron Construction Co.. 27 P.C.C. 2d 370 (1071) : Inc., 24 P.C.C. 2d 305 (1970) : cf. Sioux Empire Broadcasting Co., 10 F.C.C. 2(1 mm. ,".1lianza Federal de Pueblos Litres v. Federal Communications COMM178i011, 25 P & Radio Inc. 2d 20001 (D.C. Circuit 1072). See the Commission's orlcinnl Allanza decision. 31 P.C.C. 2d 557 (1971). See also Sioux Kien;re nroadcastina Ca.. 10 P.C.C. 2r1 132. 134 (10971. 4,2 Rowb. Inc_ 24 F.C.C. 2d 305 (1970). A fuller discussion of the confidential treatment evorrINI to normal financial reports and of past treatment of shnilar requests may he found at 24 F.C.C. 2d 300. 42 F.C.C. 2d 42 Federal Communications Commission Reports invests an adequate percentage of its profits into locally originated and community-oriented programming." Alianaza maintained further that a broadcaster is a "public trustee," whose profits derive from the use of publicly-owned property. The public, it asserted, is entitled to a "fair return" on their investment in the nature of programming. This "fair return" is the value of the programming benefits received bv the public expressed as a function of profits. Consequently the profit figures lind programming expenditures contained in FCC forms 324 are necessary to determine the "fair return." 53 The Court of Appeals, in a brief per curiam, opinion upholding the Commission's contention that Alianza's arguments were not sufficiently substantial to warrant disclosure, merely accepted the Commission's argument that the issue of financial disclosure is prematurely before the court ... because the licensee may be denied renewal for deficient pnblic service programming without reference to financial circumstances, or, in any hearing which the Commission may hold, disclosure may become necessary if the licensee attempts to justify inadequate public service programming by reference to its financial necessities." "In any event," the court concluded, "if renewal is granted, petitioner may seek review of that action in this court and urge as error the Com- mission's handling of the financial disclosure question." 55 The second major recent landmark in the area of financial disclosure was the request by Citizens Communications Center for inspection of the financial reports of Metromedia, Inc., licensee of KTTVTV, Los Angeles, California,5° decided just one month after Alianza.. KTTV the Commission chose to uphold the decision of its Executive Director to allow Citizens Communication Center, on behalf of the National Association for Better Broadcasting and others, to examine the licensee's financial reports for the years 1969, 1970 and 1971. Metro- media, in response to various petitions to deny the renewal of its KTTV license, has asserted that the Commission should examine its programming performance "in the light of its income picture compared to the huge profits of the three network owned stations," and also that "Com- mission records reflect that... the 'large profits' in this market are being made by the network owned stations. The rate of return for Metromedia on capital invested in KTTV has been less than the Com- mission permits a public uti1;ty to make." 57 The Commission felt that these assertions relied suffic ,intly upon the confidential information contained in the .financial reports to require the disclosure of that information to the petitioners to deny.58 The Alianza and KTTV cases epitomize the case-by-case approach the Commission has been taking with regard to disclosure of financial

m As authority for its argument, Albums cite Wichita-Hutchinson Co., Inc., 19 F.C.C. 433 (1969). a Case involving the transfer of KTVIITV in Hutchinson, Kansas. to the owner of WKYTV, in Oklahoma City. In that case. the Commission compared the two stations' percentages of programming expenditures to profits and gross revenue to attempt to determine if the transferee would better serve the public interest than the transferor. Alianza also cited Citizens Communications Center v. FCC, 447 F 2d 1201 (D.C. Circuit, :rune 11, 1971) in which the Court suggested that "... one test of superior service should certainly be whether and to what extent the incumbent has reinvested the profit on his license to the service of the viewing and listening public." " Alianza, supra note 51, 25 R.R. 2d at 20002. ms Id. " FCC 72-1068 (Released December 1, 1972). '57 Id., at pp. 2-3. 5, In so holding the Commission pointedto n series of analogous cases, including, Multivision, et al, supra note 47. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1.973 Renewals 43 information ; in neither case was there any cogent discussion of the value of making all financial reports available to the public. as Com- missioner Dull- had suggested in his Memorandum some 28 years ago. In the course of oral argument of the Alianza case before the Court of Appeals, however, the FCC did go on record with the assertion that if all financial information were to be made public, it should be done in a formal rulemaking mid not in the course of resolving an individual case. The Stern Community Law Firm, counsel for Alianza in that dispute, took the Commission at its word and proceeded to file a petition for just such a ruleznaking, looking toward the adoption of rules (1) to permit public inspection of all FCC forms 324, "Annual Financial Report of Networks and Licenses of Broadcast Stations" at the offices of the Commission and at the offices of individual networks and broadcast licensees, and (9) to amend FCC form 324 to require each broadcast licensee to list its programming expenditures in four programming categoriesnews, public affairs,allother (excluding entertainment and sports), and total local programming. Earlier this year the Commission staff, obviously feeling somewhat, boxed in by its position in the Alianza oral argument, brought up a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, based on the Stern petition, for Com- mission consideration.'" While the Notice proposed no specific amend- ments to existing Rules, it did invite comments on the Stern Firm suggestions and indicated an open mind rather than any specific position on the proposed changes. The, Commission majority was not nearly so troubled, however, by the considerations of inconsistent prior positions, and it quickly consigned the proposal to an early demise, with clear instructions to the. staff to withdraw its proposed Notice and substitute a decision denying the Stern Finn petition. The latter document has not yet conic up for consideration, but one would have to assume that the cumbersome case-by-case process will continue to be the law in this area, and that the result will be simply to ensure that future licensees will no longer attempt to defend themselves on financially - based grounds." The form 324 financial information, Avhile not available to the seminar students, was available to members of the Commissione's staff. It has been utilized in preparing- this report in such fashion as not to reveal any information still currently held to be confidentia1.61. Ideally, we would have preferred to rank the stations in this report by reporting their total "programming expenses" in dollam (the only "programming" item listed separately on form 324, a sample of which is included at the end of this Part) and their profit. This could be expressed as a ratio. We were unable to do this for a variety of reasons. For one, it would have been difficult to rank the stations in such a manner without revealing something more than we feel we, are allowed by law to reveal. In addition, a small handful of the stations on our list reported no profit at all, and any ranking based on a program expenses

1Threleased staff memorandum. 6.1,,cen though this document Alms never publicly released, Idiscuss it here because Irecorded a dissenting vote to the decision to "recommit"the staff document for modification. 61 It is possible, however, for a member of the public to obtaincomplete financial infer- mathm, in totals for any three stations in a broadcasting market. 42 F.C.C. 211 44 Federal, Coln nu Commi8sion Reports to profit ratio would have necessarily eliminated those stations. Never- theless, we feel such a ranking would be useful if and when the financial information is ever made available to the public. The method we. have chosen to use, and the basis for the table below, is simply to rank the stations in the study on the basis of programming expenses as a percentage of gross revenues. This method leaves much to be desired, primarily because of the differences in methods of accounting and the lack of specificity in the figures reported, but this is the only information available to the Commission, and we feel it can be significant. in a relative perspective. That is, the station that can be shown to be spending 47% of its gross revenues on programming is, we feel, doing a better job than fir station spending just 25% of its revenues. The stations have ham ranked, then, on the basis of that factor, although the table eliminates any reference to either the dollar figures or even the percentages involved.u2

Network Affiliates Ranked by the Ratio of Prot/rain Expen,sTslGross Revenues

Rank Call Net. 31k1. Location letters att. No.

1 WABC ABC 1 Now York City 2KUW NBC 21Portland 3KING NBC 10Seattle-Tacoma 4WAST ABC 37Albany -Schenectady-T 5KOVR ABC 27Sacramento-Stockton ii KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 7W BC NBC 10Washington, D.C. 8WIIC NBC 9Pittsburgh 9WMAL ABC 10Washington, D.C. 10WS Y R. NBC 43Syracuse 11 KUTV NBC 50Salt Luke City 12KOIN CBS 26Portland 13KAT U ABC 26Portland 14WEZNI ABC 41Kalamazoo -Or Rapids 15WTAE ABC 9Pittslaugh 10WSJ[ NBC 30Nashville 17KABC ABC 2Los Angeles isWNYS ABC 43Syracuse 19KT VI ABC 12St. Louis 20MIAS CBS 311 Louisville 21 W.XIL NBC 48(limb-High Pt-Win Sal 22WS1X ABC 30Nashville 23WLK Y ABC 36Louisville 21W.1Z ABC 19Baltimore 25KWTV CBS 41 Oklahoma City 26WXYZ ABC 5Detroit 27WC BS CBS 1 New York City 28KOMO ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 29WIMIO ABC 45Toledo 30KOO AB.; 8San Francisco 31WWL CBS 31New Orleans 22wTF:v ABC 34Providence 33WCPO CBF 20Cincinnati 34WV UE ABC 31 New Orleans 35KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 36KMOX CBS 12St. Louis 37W LW' ABC 14Indianapolis 38KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 39WTEN CBS 37Albany-Schenectady -T 40KCPX ABC 50Salt Lake City 41WITT ABC 21 Milwaukee 42Kiln' ABC 32Denver 43WKYC NBC 7 Cleveland 44WLW T NBC 20Cincinnati 45WPVI ABC 4Philadelphia 46WT VS CBS 18Miami 47WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 48KTA.R NBC 45Phoenix That percentage W11.8IINCIL however. in the computer analysis to determine more aeeursrely the stations' relative positions. See the more detailedIlisetussionof the methodology In Appendix A, 42 P.C.C. 2d Ar /calms, Louisiana and .11i8sissippi 107.3 Renoca18 45

Network Affiliates Ranked by the Ratio of Program Expenses /Gross RevenuesCont:

Rank Call Net. Mkt. Location letters MI. No.

49W LAC 111IS 30Nashville 50WTOP CBS 10Washington D.1'. 51 W"I'VT C BS 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 02W PIA 1 Ali(; 18Nliaml 53LOCO ABC 41 Oklahoma City 54WHEN C BS 43Syracuse 55II' DS U NBC 31Ne w Orleans 56WFAVS A BC 7Cleveland 1,7 K DKA CBS 11 Pittsburgh 58WN BC NBC 1 New York City 59W NA C ABC 6Boston 60W L OS ABC 40thiville-Spudig-Astivi 61 Wli NS CBS 28Columbus ((2KG TV NBC 49San Diego 63 NBC 38Birmingham 61W wry NBC 14 I tabanapolis (31 WIl BM CBS 3Chicago 66KX TV CBS 27Sacramento - Stook) on 67may NBC 41Kalamazoo-1;r Rapids 68111.5 ABC 3(litit. ago 69K(' RA N BC 27Sacramento-Stockton 70WKY N BC 41 Oklahoma City 71 1

Nctwork Affiliates Ranked by the Ratio of Program Expenses/Gross RevenuesCont.

Rank Call Net. Location letters aff. No.

128K FMB CBS 49Sim Diego LnW Itt; 11 NBC 37Albany-Scheneclady-T 130WPM! NBC 40Onville-Spnibg-Aslivi 131W DA 1, NBC 23Kansas City 132K OA NBC 32Denver 13311'KI1C ABC 20Cincinnati 131KENS CBS 45San Antonio 135WISH CBS 14 Indianapolis 135WIlNit NBC 22I lartford-New Raven 137WCCB ABC 35Charlotte 13S NBC fi Boston 139WSAZ NBC 33Charleston-I I untingt o 140WCIIS CBS 33Charleston-Ilimti»gto 141 KDFW CBS 11 Dallas-Port Worth 142MUD CBS 41Kalamazoo-Ur Rapids 113W IMO CliS 38Birmingham 1441113 RC ABC 38Birmingham F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 47

Form 324 19 7 2 SCHEDULE 1.BROADCAST REVENUES USE THIS MAKE ENTRIES COLUMN FOR IN THIS YOUR TOTAL LINE CL ASS OF BROADCAST REVENUES COLUMN FIRST NO. ING ONLY (omit cents) (omit coats) (t.) 04 (.) $ $

1 A. REVENUES FROM THE SALE OF STATION TIME 2 (I) Network 3 Sale of station time to networks: 4 Sale of station time to major networks, ABC, CRS, NIBS, NBC (before line or service charges) '...trrei 5 Sale of station time to other networks (before line or service charges) 115.321 6 Total (lines 4 5) 7 (2) Non-network (alter trade and special discounts but before cash discounts to advertisers and sponsors, and before commissions to agencies, representatives and brokers). 8 Sale of station time tc national and regional advertisers or sponsors. , /3.01 9 Sale of station time to kcal advertisers ar sponsorsioio( 10 Total (lines 85) 11 Total sale of station time (line's 5 101

12 B. BROADCAST REVENUES OTHER THAN FROM SALE OF STATION TIME (after deduction for trade discounts but before cash discounts and 'Defers commissions): (i) Revenues from separate charges made for progiams, mate. rials, facilities, and services supplied to advertisers ar sponsors in connection with sale of station time: 13 (a) to national and regional advertisers or sponsors ....WAS, 14 (b) to local advertisers or sponsors I s7.1)1 15 (2) Other broadcast revenues 4811.7 II 16 Total broadcast revenues, other than from time sales (lines 13 + 14 15) .

17 C. TOTAL BROADCAST REVENUES ( lines 11 16) 18 (I) Less commissions to agencies, representatives, and brokers (but not to stall salesmen or employees) and less cash discounts t7rr1/

19 D. NET BROADCAST REVENUES (lines 17 minus line 18) * Report here the fatal value of trade outs and barter sections. This 20 value must °Ise be included a. sales in the appropriate lines above ..

21 II this is a report tor a taint A/44 ld operation, indicate t,elow the ornount, if any, of total broadcast revenues in line 19 which is applicab)e separately to the FM station:

22 FM revenues from sole of station time (otter discounts, comets- sions, etc.) i 17g2.1 23 FM revenues from providing functional music or other special services 121-3)1 24 Other FM revenues rts.cri 25 Total (lines 22 23 24)

*Revenue figure used in financial analysis 42 F.C.C. 2d 48 Federal Communications Commission l 'eports

Fotm 324 1 9 7 2 CALL 1..e7TCAS SCHEDULE 2.BROADCAST EXPENSES USE THIS MAKE ENTRIESCOLUMN FOR LINE CL ASS OF BROADCAST EXPENSES IN THIS YOUR TOTAL. NO. COLUMN FIRST ING ONLY (01,11 cent 8) (0014 cents) (0) (b) IC)

1 TECHNICAL EXPENSES: S S 181,81 2 Technical poyroll 142.m 3 All other technical expen,.. 4 Total technical exp-e-

5 PROGRAM EXPENSES: 6 Payroll for e:r.ployees L-onst.lered "talent" 07.80 7 Payroll for all other roman: emPlc'r's 1185.121 8 Rental and amornuotion of film and tape 171.801 9 Record:: and tran,criptions 1120 W Cost of outside news services 121.321 1/3.80/ 11 Payments to talent other then reported in In(6) 17 Music license leer 181-411 13 Other pel to:mance end program rights ids ..01 161.041 14 An other program expenses 4.:* 15 Total prootam expenses

16 SELLING EXPENSES: 11110(72( 17 St,Ilins payroll' (71.801 18 All oth r rellsiu expe .rc (.. tC.:11t :101111; expense, .

23 GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES: 21 General cnd administrative payroll' 1174411 t'epecialicn mid amortization txtt.sxt 23 All other cieneral aid administrative expenses tss..ot 24 Total genel.r.1 and administrative expenses

25 TOTAL BROADCAST EXPENSES (fines 4 + 15+ 19 + 24)

Payroll lbC/14dCS. salaries, wages, bonuses Ond commissions.

SCHEDULE 3. BROADCAST INCOME LINE AMOUNT NO. (omit cents)

S 181.4'1 1 Broadcast revenues (from Schedule I, line 19)

2 Firomicast expenses (from Schedule 2. line 25) 140.08$

3 Broadcast operating income or (loss) (line 1 minus line 2)

4 Total of coy amounts included in line 2 al....ve which represent payments (salaries, commissions, management fees, rents, etc.) for services or materials supplied by the owners or stockholdets, or any close relative of such persons or any affiliated company under common control (see page 3 of instructions ) . . 17481

5 Note:If no such payments were made, check here 0 **Program expenses figure used in financial analysis 42 F.C.C. 2d .1 konvm, Lon Liiinia and .11;88;s8;pp; 107.; 49 CHAPTER 2 Enri.ovmEx-i: r.ix-rivinucric In .Tune. 1969. the FCC issued formal rules forbidding employment discrimination by radio and television stations based upon race, color. national origin, or sex.' The Commission's duty to issue such rules is rooted in the national policy against discrimination in employment, as embodied in Title VI r of the 1964 Civil Rights :VC': as well as the Communication Act's broad directive that all broadcast licensees serve the "pnbl iv interest, convenience and necessity." The public interest standard and the national policy take ou added importance when the unique nature of broadcastino._is considered. The broadcast licensee. as a "public:. trustee" given profitable. private use of an influential piece of public property. can only continuo to be en- trusted with that use if it lives up to the Cominis,sion's affirmative and enforceable public interest obligations, including obligations relating to employment. To enable the FCC to monitor station compliance with its equal employment opportunities ruling, the broadcaster is required to submit two documents: (1) his station's equal employment. opportunity plan. and (2) an employment report. The equal employment opportunity program is submitted as part of the applicant's license renewal form.' The employment report (form 395). which records the immix.i and position of workers by race and sex, is by far tie more objective and significant of the two and must. be submitted annually.' It is data from this second document that. is the basis for the employment rankings and statistics of our network affiliates study. (A. sample of the form is included at the end of this chapte.) The Commission has been collecting form 39:i only since 1971.5 Nevertheless, it has become clear in that very short time that neither the Broadcast Bureau nor a majority of the-Commissioners have any intention of improving the questionable employment practices this data has revealed in a large percentage of the licensees. There arc two tough questions that must be answered before any gains can be made in the employment of minorities or women in broadcasting- today. Neither has been treated seriously by the Commission. They are: (1) What are to be. the standards for licensee compliance with the Com- mission rules (and the federal law) concerning equal employment Op- portunity? (2) What arc to be the penalties for non-compliance? The latter question should be easy enough to answer. Theoretically. the FCC penalties fey non-compliance could range from temporary deferral of license renewal, pending further Commission inquiry into 1 47 C.F.R. § 73.680. 2 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e-2 (1004). 3 t Viibl of FCC Broadcast Renewal application form 303 calls for the apolleant to outline for the Commission his proposals for conforming his policiesto the FCC rules regardinc equal employment opportunities. *47 C.F.R. t 1.612. See Report and Order in Hatter of Petition for Rittetnaking to Require Broadcast Licensees to Show Nondiseriininationin their Employment Practices, 23 FCC 2d 430 (1970). 104-004-73-4 42 F.C.C. 211 50 Federal Communications Commission Reports the applicant's employment program or practices, to an outright denial of the application for renewal following a hearing. A penalty between deferral and denial might include subjecting the licensee, to the forfeiture (fines) provisions of Section 503 of the Communica- tions Act. All have their precedent in other areas of Commission regulation, and proper penalties could be readily determined once, the standards for compliance were set. The Commission's derogation of its responsibility to answer the first question, therefore, is a far more serious one. Prodded perhaps by the presence of the first black Commissioner in the FCC's history (Commissioner Benjamin Hooks), the, Commission finally decided last August to do "something" about, the equal opportunity information received with the license renewal applications!' But the majority was content merely to send letters to a small handful of licensees, "requesting additional information on the, licensees' efforts to provide equal employment opportunity to minority persons and women." It seemed to me we should have conie up with something more than that weakly-plum-Td missive, 'and I dissented.? But even that letter was only sent, to stations having eleven or more employees, in areas with five, per cent or greater minority population, when the form 395's reported (1) a decline in minority employees from one year to the next, or (2) no minority employees in the past year, or (3) no women employees in the past, year. 1Tote how severely restrictive those standards are. For example, a television station with sixty employees, one of whom was black, would not get a letter of inquiryso long as it did not experience a decline in minority employment. There aro. other serious inconsistencies in this method of dealing with the problem. A station with sixty employees whose minority employment, had declined from thirty to twenty eight, for example, would. under these guidelines, receive a letter despite its fine overall showing. A station with a serious deficiency (and decline) in female employment would not even be considered unless the station's area had a five per cent or greater minority employment., thus requiring enforcement of solutions to the former problem to rely on a completely unrelated "threshold" criteria related to the latter. Even within this restrictive, (and illogical) "solution" to the equal employment problem. the Commission has failed to demonstrate any positive concern for effectively dealing with discrimination. Although the first of the letters were sent out ini August, 1972, the responses from the licensees were in most cases still awaiting action by the Broadcast Bureau staff in mid-1973, and no further Commission- initiated action has been taken with regard to even the most blatant offenders .s "We're just kind of waiting around with the [broadcasters'] replies [to the FCC inquiries]," was the response of one Broad- 6 See my dissent in Letter to Reverend Everett C. Parker, FCC 72-4:1S, P & F Radio Reg. 2d :Me. S9S (1972). a Commission decision handed down just two months before Commissioner Hooks' arrival, See also my extensive Chicly of employment discrimination among stations in the Pennsylvania-Delaware renewal package, which may also have hail some Affect on the Commission majority, Equal Employment Opportunity Inquiry, 36 FCC 2d 515.51T (1972). 7 PO/NSW canto and Delaware Broadcasting Stations, AS FCC 2t1 153 (1072). struh.ed, a number of the stations, after nothing but the passage of time, were simply renewed. 42 F.C.C. 2t1 _12, lmmas, Louisiana and Tllississippi 197-1 Renewals 51 cast Bureau official to the query of a concerned citizen, "We don't really know what we could do about licensees who don't employ fairly anyway." v This attitude is taken despite the same official's earlier ad- mission that any of the potential courses of action outlined above (hearing, denial of renewal, fine) could be easily initiated at any moment. Thus, the Commission leaves itself open to the charge that it. is quietly searching, not for an effective course of action that would begin to reverse the tradition41 patterns of discrimination in the broadcasting industry, but for some course of action that would mollify critics without adversely affecting its"business-as-usual" rubber stamping of renewals.'" That this is the Commission's true attitude is further evidenced by its "reassuring" statements to the effect that the data on form 395 annual reports is "chiefly" valuable to determine industry-wide employment trends, and that, in regard to individual stations, it is not to be suggested "that such data for any particular year would demonstrate the existence of discrimination of any station." in this study of the network affiliates in the top 50 markets we take issue with that contentionthat a case for discrimination cannot be based upon a reading of the annual employment data of an individual station. We also dispute the implied contention that discrimination in employment has no important relation to the service of a licensee in the "public interest. convenience or necessity" We have not included our employment analysis in the overall station ranking found in chapter 1. We have omitted it, however, only because that ranking was designed to evaluate programming, not because we consider employment discrimination any less important than programming. Indeed, the argument could well be made that licensee discrimination against minorities or women, especially in those jobs with a greater degree of influence on programming creation and cl-cision- making, is as directly related to the station's programming as any of the other factors on which we have been able to gather information. Ike that as it may. we have chosen to treat employment separately from programming. (1) We believe that community groups other than those oriented specifically towards quality programming will be able more effectively to consider employment if the information is presented in this manner. (2) It is our intention that, this chapter complement. an excellent, survey of all GM commercial TV stations already conducted and published by the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ in 1972.12 ° Interview with an anonymous analyst in the Renewal Branch of the FCC Broadcast Bureau, March, 1973. io All the interested reader need do is compare the Commi,:r4on's disposition of the WI,1317 renewal proceeding, Lamar Life Broadcasting Co., lit FCC 2d 431 (19081, with the stinging reversal of the D.C. Circnit Court of Appeals, Office of Communications of the United Church of Christ V. FCC, 359 F. 2(1 994 (1909) ; the Court outlined in detail the flagrant, long.standing discrimination of the licensee, in areas of programming as well as emnlostnrvrt. 11 23 F.C.C. 2d 430.431 (1070). .Thuninzs. Television Station Employment Practices: The Status of Minorities and Women, Mice of Communication, United Church of Christ. November. 1972. 42 F.C.C. 2(1 52 Federal Communications Commission Reports

ANALYSIS OF NORITY 1'IMY.31 ENT A. Total Employment We have made the assumption t hat minority employment statistics for the top 50 markets can be compared and ranked most effectively and fairly to the broadcastersby taking into consideration the percentage of minorities in the population of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA) of the stations involved.'" For example, it would be less defensible, we felt, to compare the minority employment performance of a network affiliate in Washingto,., D.C.( with an SMSA minority population of 28.3%) with that o: one in Minneapolis t. Paul (with a minority population of juit 3.7% ) without accounting, somehow, for the differences between the minority employment pool of the two cities. Thus, we have ranked the licensees by relating their minority employment to the minority population in the SAISA. The result is a "factor" conrdaring two percentages. A station receiving a factor of 1.000 would be employing exactly the:-;;1111ep( wattage of minoritivs ill the ,4tation as exist in the population of his area. The station ranked 20th. for example, WKYC, Cleveland, employs 17.62(A minorities in an SMSA with a minority population of 17.0%, for a "factor" of 1.001. The top station in the ranking, WI:EV. Providence, employs 8.33% minorities in an area with a 3.4% minority population, for a factor of 2.451. While this method of ranking does tend to favor stations in a region with a lower minority population, we would joint out that a number of such stations, in markets like Salt Lake City and Minneapolis-St. Paul, nevertheless found themselves at the very bottom of our study. It is our opinion that a. licensee with a factor of less than 1.000 deserves. at a minimum, sonic further inquiry into its program of employment. It is rather appalling to note that some 82% of the stations in our st tidy have total employment factors of less than 1.000, and more than3:-.1%of them have factors of less than 0.500. Certainly the latter group deserves a more serious inquiry.

18 Our source for this information was the U.S. Bnrenuorthe Cer us. Th precise figure we required. however, Included Spanish-surnamed people;intent;"minorities"inan 1.;NISA and was nowhere printed in an official publication. We had to go directly to the Bureau in Washington for the information. 42 F.C.C. 2d Nelwork Affiliates Ranked by Ratio of Penult Minorities Employed to Pe-reent Minorities in SM SA Rank Call letters Net. Aft 31kt. No. Location SM SA employes'i' al Number Minorities employed Factor Pz.---, 1 WT RV ABC 34 Providence _ 777(1,_ So Peri:se:33% 342 WPRI.WNYS IVBZ NBCCBSABC 3443 Syracuse6 BostonProvidence_ 175 81 23 7 5 p6). 3660.1 221.... 9!04) 333758511.R30 -, 765 WSAZKOWKING ,NNINBC BBB CCC 201633 C harleston-litu 'Wigton SeattlePortland - Tacoma. 8, (r.;, 136 1119 11.. 764795 .7:".. 98 WHENWHTN CBS 3343 Syracuse Charleston-Huntington 434563541..1:5. 80:7i, 0% 1547265(11 64 113838..:1:1;71! 7.84% 1. 669 ":...,--Z. 10 WCHS11 ACITI3C:'.CBS 33 C harleston-Hun9 Lingua i 157 IS 4 1.111 ... 453 (5.1271131i j 12 %VAST KI) KA 37 Pittsburgh 53 4 1(811.15; ,-- 1314 WS Y R KW11' V NBCell:: 4341 Syracuse OklahomaAlbuily-SeIteneelady City 101 KS 16 11687: . 1.1.113 386 z,...... ,Z.' 1615 WWOTV IAVC NBC',NBC 4128 Columbus Kalamazoo-Ur. Rapids 111425272.,,12, 4:1! 6% 6, 1% 109 (2227793 13 9 187: 222 s941381i 1. 365 18 15WTVN17 WNAKOCO e ABCCBS 3728 Columbus6 Boston AlbanyOklahoma - Schenectady City (1.8%4,4% 157 71 15 (14 la 67!!,4 5.26%8.98 % 1.11.: 196 143I ot, C.OS'. * 2321'2220 WHIOKATWTEN U 11723,1 ABCCBS 394120 9 DaytonKalamazoo-Or.Portland Rapids 11, 9% a. 2%6, 1% 122144 7198 12la 5 7.6. 12%04% 1. 1770681. 1172154 ...,...... _,-,....c-, . 272624 W1CYCKO2825WHO WWKIIIV IN COO CBS(N.!BBSCABCNBC 262513 7 Cleveland Minneapolis-St.PortlandBuffalo..Pittsburgh Paul 17. 6%9,7.8% 9%3.5. 7%2% 201111 87 34 759 10.34% 5. 10% g.18111. 05 4....,"'- 3. 29 W II It NBC 25 Buffalo 9, 9% 8485 98 11 t3601.1 70346181 (11111 3230 31WTAEWKRC KMOX ABCCBSABC 20 12Cincinnati9 PittsburghSt. Louis 12,17.11.5% 3%,6% 7, 8% 127130148 2314 9 118307.... 33:61,212::.n. l'i.,0. 8:1805888 :-...-. '''-'2,rz 353433 KAWBNSWJAR 8 C ABCNBC 28 2034Columbus2 Los Angeles Providence 32. 9%,11.8% 3. 4% 102 -5521 3 28. 65% °O.0.871 8184 'Ili ----,:--_, .f -= 39383736 WLW{VTOLWLWT I) CBS .11311 SCC 451630 Toledo CincinnatiDayton 10.511, % 9% .21(77, 11 87 6. 72%, t t0i. 881'1'44 11118203(11..... 0.x40 21:, 41 W40 FLAWI B K Kilt() NBCCBS 24 Tampa5 -St. Petersburg Seattle-TacomaDetroit 19, 9'r-;,16. 8%8.0% 111121:04) 3117 13.7116. 32%, %, t.720C11! 0. 815820 c A., r.$4, Network Affiliates Ranked by Ratio of Percent Minorities Employed to Percent M:norities iii SM SA-Conti Rued SM SA Total Minorities employed 0,P Rank 42 K GO Call letters ABC Net. Alf. Mkt. No. 8 San Francisco Loca'ion 28.9% employes 227224 Number 5152 Percent 22.47%23.21% Factor 0.7940.803 4746454443 WWLW1WTMJKTAWKY R C R ABCNBC 1441452110 Washington, D.0 OklahomaPhoenixMilwaukee City 13.4%12.6%20.0%28.3% 9.8% 119113146 93 II1711 9 15.01% 9.68/09.24787.53% 0.7340.7520.769 0.77." R0..,Q., 504948 WWRTVWTIC LOS ABCNBCCBS 401422 Hartford-New Haven IndianapolisGnville-Sptribc-Asbvi 13.6%13,4%11.8% 127144 76 12 7 9.15%9.21%8.33% 0.6770.7050.706 0.....:0,(... 51 WMA Q CBSNBC 73 Chicago Cleveland 17.6%23.4% 152342 1854 11.84%15.79% 0.6730.675 ,.^...t 5655545352 ICNWJWWSPDWPVI B C IC:M.0C ABCNBC 45 1423Toledo Kansas42 LosCity Angeles Philadelphia 32, 9%19.8%10,14,69 5 , 153229103 8086 205010 76 13.07%21.83% 8.6.98%9.710 75 0 0.6010.6530.6600.6640.665 0-..004.gl,.,...,-... . 59 61605857WCAU KCWIWFBCKPD: SIIMO CBSNBCCBS 2340 Kansas4 CityPhiladelphia8 San Francisco Onville-bptnbg-AshviIndianapolis 14.6%13.6%19.8%28.9%13.4% 149165 709657 31 95 12.18. 86%7 49.38%8.77% 0.6420.6150.6190.650 (...0.ca 646362 WWAVE BLS AL NBCABC 36 Louisville19 3 ChicagoBaltimore 2.5.1%11.8%13.0%23.4% 110274 81 2441 96 14.96%16.11%7.41%8.18% 0.6280.62'9O.0.642 639 Z.7!...2 ... 68676665 KOWNBCWTOPWINH OL NBCCBSABC 451022 Washington,Hartford-NewPhoenixI D.0 Haven New York City 30.3%28.3%20.0% 237105136 69 442413 5 18..57%12.38%17. 65% 0.6190.624 ,--.co.%...... 7372717069 WAWSIXWHNBKYWKFMB GA NBCCBSABC 40493022 SanHartford-New17Nashville Atlanta Diego_4 Philadelphia Haven 20.6%,g13.6%19.8%23.6/18.11.8% 7 0 202141113 7074 241420 86 11.4311.88%14.12.39% 0 18%7.25 o 0.5960.6000.6010.6110.614 0Q. 797877767574 WKATOWSPAWQXIKTVI CB S II IC CITV NBCABCCBS 4932 San1217Denver Diego1 New York City 9.1.LtlantaGnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi Louis 20.17.3%23.6%30.0% 6%16.8% 132107280114120 1611501216 12.10.V.10.00% 04%2.6%12%17. 86%8.11% 0.5580.5940.595 co0o4.*-3 IV1...8382Si80 WBBMWPMICDFWKOM Y0 CBSABC 481611 3 Chicago CISeattle-TacomaDallas-Fort ns11-11 igh Worth Pt-Win Sal. 20.3%23.4%21.3% 8.0% 158300134 89 103916 7 11.24%13.00%11. :14'I 4.43% 0.5530.5540.5500.561 84 36 56 4 88878685 ANALKCKCPXWLKY RA ABCNBC 44102750 Washington,Sacramento-StocktonSaltLouisville Lake City D.0 28.2Z,0%13.0;'0 3% 6. 0% 140 7181 102115 3 1151. 70027%o 37.. 71074%o O. 516 is, .--- 9083 WS°WWAVY OKP C ABCNBC 3548 Nori-NewpChGush-High arlotte_ News-Hamp Pt- \\!t Sal 27. 3%23.20. 0%3% 67 14 7 14. 08%1120. .N15C%/o 00011C10...:. 53525.531! 930192 KSTPWITKTVK I NBCABC 214513 MilwaukeePhoenixMinneapolis-St Paul 683 11058. r2178%/ I. 90% 000.0. -5116 551103513 969.594 WFAAWW1' ABCNBC 1111 5 Dallas-ArtDetroit Worth _ 2221111:1....: 33981 141 152015 10. 64%75% 0. 505 co 999897 WLACWXWBAP YE ABCN BCCBS 30 15 NashvilleDetroitDallas-Fort Worth 19. 9% 1892131111111828472511:69854) 1121 149. 8211%% 9. 86% 0. #9# rt''''i 100 WTWABC VT ABC 24 New York City 3a 0%10. 8% 123 10 (01))...il . .412 .4:3;5) 101103102 WSBKT RK ABCNBCCBS 231517 HoustonAtlantaTampa-St. Petersburg 23.6% 101149 73 1517 5 11841.854131i (01..0. 482440692 106105104 WTARWDKHOUKENS A F CBSCBSNBC 444515 7 HoustonNort-NewpKansasSan AntonioCity News-Hump 30.52.v3180...378:0%. 6%8%14. 6% 106 9470 131317 13.12.246. 2985%% 83%26% 0. 449 I:Q 108107 WEIS'S ABC 27 Cleveland 17. 6% 103140 1011 97. 7861%% : . . -..EZI 110109112111 WMAWHBOWRFCKOVR R ABCCBSABC 19292!) 2 MemphisBaltimoreSacramento-Stockton 25.1%38.38.4%22. 0%4% 44161312 1136..16. 8687: 90% 0 Co' CBS Los Angeles 3:144778: (00001.. .44411344:86: al." 115114113 WDSUKBTVKKNXT RON NBCABC 3132 8 SanDenver Francisco 353:13162 6% ... Ili 113136 2025 8 1164: 173111270. ,7,,,I, ;SSW I; 0 413 ....ill: ,...,,,..1.:. s.., 119118117116 WISHW'.'WTVJ ::: E CBSNBCCBSABC 38213118 MiamiNewMilwaukeeNew Orleans Orleans 35.6%39. 1% it 8% 101155 00 2513 4 123.14. 8126%7' 44% 0.00: 401413 LI ...,q0to...... ,, 120122121 WWBNIG 11KSDK RC SAT CBSABCN BC 384512 BirminghamSt.San Louis Antonio 30. 0%52.6% 115 838033 1017 8 126.21. (9156c%; 25% , (0),0.41N 1122 1/41,0 125124126123 KXTVWCKWOA IT CBSNNBC BC 274518 MiamiSaeramento-StoekiSan Antonio or 137131 8190 2119 7 251..15. (ill:, 67% i:'... 3411:1311 7.,,"" 128129127 WWCWPM.; SMWJZ PO t!1,ABC 1111SCABCCBS 302019 MiamiBaltCincinnati imore 2155.. 717.;.. 114137134 13 6 17151, .... ;IR U.:(1),... :317751 :33i 77982) ..o Nashville :'2.33511t30.27:211...... t.°1111!1':' s5 . 130132131 W IIK\VI EN P I RCAS NBCCBS 362515 HoustonLouisvilleBuffalo 30.8% 136125105 14 5 3. 6ti'';.1 .72 .(11i 4.; tt 3t3i0.3111 CTi cn Network. Affiliates Itanked by Ratio of Percent Minorities Employed to Percent Minorities ht Ili:ACnti 1111ed C.4 Rank call letters Net. Alt Mkt. No. Local inn SMSA en9IcToayies Number Minorities employed ;721 131133 WIITVWCC ABC I15 35 ChariotCharlotte te L34.. 121 21 10 12 135137136135 KOA WMCWWX ROB NBC 4831322037 Memphis Denver

Well pay Rank Call Not. Mkt. Location / I igh pay Ali oorities employed letters att. No. positions Number Percent

1 K ABC ABC 2 Los Angeles 102 45 27. 7'';', 2K.F.N 8 CBS 45 San Antonin .57 12 3 ECU A BC 8 San Francisco 1;4349. 38 2.2i1; (11.11:1;',. 4 KSAT 45 San AutoMo 12 5 EN BC NA 1111( 2Los Angeles 174 '29 1181..I7I75q:' 0 W IIC N BO 10\Yoshi igton 11.0 170 27 15. 88e,I; 7 WRFC C 11 s 20 Memphis 52 8 15. 3W.;, 8 W LW C N BC 28 Columbus 73 11 15. 07':;; 9 WV CE 31 New Orlear 74 II, 14. .06'.I, 10 WIIIIQ 'At il il CC 29 Alemphi M. 9 11 WN BC N BC 1 New York Oils' 179 20 144: :7-).35ei: 1211"POP C BS 10 Washington 11.0. III 10 14. 4rl. 13 KIN G N110 10Seattle-Tacoma 112 10 11: 211,:.,, 14 WIWI. CBS 18 Miami 127 IS' 15 K P I X ClIS 8San Francisco '110 15 13. 61% 10 WOAI 4.5 San Antonio 00 $ 13.33"':, 17 \VMAL NA1111tC3 to Washington D.C. 128 17 13.28q 18 WKYC (,111:sC 7 Cleveland 155. 20 12. !IVA Pi WC BS 1 New York City 181 23 12. 71% 20 W BM G C IIS 30 Birmingliam 24 21W811 NBC 17Atlanta 104 13 22 WSI X ABU 0 30 Nashville 58 , 23 WLOS Alit) 40Gnville-Sptubg-Ashvi 58 7 24 WA GA CRS 17Atlanta 13 11.13'i, 20 WC K F 18 Miami 1110(2121) 12 1111:75t7l ,, :;;,:, 26 WPVI .N9.1111CC 4 PhiladeIphia 14 27W.MAQ, N 11C 3Chicago 27 11. 44''';. 28 W 13 A L NBC 19Baltimore 29 W Y V N ABC 28 Columbus. 30 W LS 3Chicago 1111.1g4,

31 KNXT (A:1141SC 2Los Angeles 2212533(12:2.:1 2 11114:71: 32\VIA II C BS 94 Narf-Newp News-llamp ___ 82 9 10.90% 33 WMC NBC 29 Memphis 61 7 34 K RON NBC 8 San Fran:isco 165 35 KOOL 011S 45Phoenix 83 18 1(0)11,, 30 KSOU CBS 15 Houston 75 8 10. 07% 37 Kl RK ABC 15 Houston 75 8 10. 67% 30 W li Fl I, ABC 48Onsb-lligh Pt-Win Sal _ _ _ . _ _ 57 0 11(0)11... 1511434E 39 WK RC ABC 20Cincinnati 57 6 10. 53% 40 W A V Y NBC 44Norf-Newp NOW'S-M(1BR._ _ _ 58 0 10. 34% 41 K (ITV .49San Diego 98 10 10. 20% 42 KOCO ABC 41 Okahoms City 59 6 10. 17% 43 WIITO 39Dayton 82 8 9.76% 94 KOVIt ABC .,7SaCraInento-S tock ton 83 8 45 WA B 0 _(11313SC 1 New York City 138 13 14.12% 40 KNTV 27SacramentoStockton 66 6 9. 09% 47 51'500 NBC 35Charlotte 78 7 8. 97%

" One 11114,11only scan the pages of the various organs of the trade press such as Broadcasting magazine, TV-Radio Age,and so forth, to see that management personnel, on- camera talent. licensed technicians and engineers and other skilled print fiction personnel form a finite national pool which advertises for employment (and are advertised for by the broadcasters) on a nationwide basis 42 F.C.C. 58 Federal Communications Commission Reports Nelivork affiliates ranked by percent minorities employed in high paypositions- Continued

High pay [lank Call Net. Mkt. Location High pay Minorities employed No. positions letters aff. Number Percent

CBS 4 Philadelphia 55 5 8.93% 48 W C A U 8. 89% 49ll'FlIC NBC 40(in ville-Spt bg-Ashvi 4.5 4 50 Kr RC NBC 15Houston 102 9 8.82% 51 WQ X I ABC 17 Atlanta 80 7 8.75% 52 WJW CBS 7Cleveland 115 10 8,70% 53 WPLG ABC 18 Miami 105 9 8.57% 54 WF I,A N BC 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 82 7 8.54% 55 WW.1 NBC 5Detroit 129 11 8.53% 56 WNYS ABC 43 Syracuse 48 4 8. 33% 57 W 11TV CBS 35 Charlotte 109 9 8. 26% 58 W11 BM CBS 3Chicago 211 17 8.06% 59 KF NIB 0115 49 San Diego_ 87 7 8.00% 60 WI IIK CBS 5 IMrolt 138 11 7.97% 61 WWI, CBS 31 New Orleans 88 7 7.95% 14 7.73% 1)2 WX Y Z. ABC .5 Detroit 181 63 K I ) FW CBS 11 Dallas-Fort Worth_ 105 8 7.62% 64 WNAC CBS 6Boston 132 10 7.58% 65 WAST ABC 37 Albany Scheneetady-T 53 4 7,55% 66 WIINB NBC 22Hartford-New 11 aven 54 4 7.41% 67 KB W NBC 26Portlar d 9 0 7 7.21% 68 WO It NBC 25Buffalo 55 4 7.27 % 09 K IITV ABC 32 Denver 83 0 7,23% 70 W RTV NBC 14 Indianapolis 97 7 7. 22% 48 Onsh-lligh Pt-Win Sal 70 5 7. 14% 7t WFNIY CBS 7. 14% 7211' B IW ABC 38Birmingham 56 4 73 KTS'K ABC 4.5 Phoenix 56 4 7.14% 74 KC RA NBC 27Sacramento - Stockton 101 7 6.93% 75 W 11Z NBC 6 Boston 131 9 6. 87% 76 KCNIO CBS 23 Kansas City 59 4 6.78% 4 6,78% 77II' P RI CBS 34Providence_ 59 78 WS A Z. NBC 33Charleston-Hun. Mgt°. 59 4 0.78% 70111' I C CBS 22I Tart ford-New .11 even 119 s 6.72% 80 WI IC NBC 9 Pit tsburgh 120 8 6.67% 81 W TAD' NBC 21 Milwaukee 105 7 6,67% 82 K WT V CBS 41 Oklahoma City 60 4 0.67% 83 WTEN CBS 37 Albany-SchenectadyT. _ ...._ 61 4 6.56% 84 K I) KA CBS 9Pittsburgh 107 7 6.54% 7 &I K31OX CBS 12St. Louts 110 6.36% 6,2.5% 85 W BAP NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 112 7 87 W1511 CBS 14Indianapolis 65 4 6.2.5% 88 WTN IT ABC 2211 artford-New Haven 6 4 .15% 89 KWIC ABC 23 Kansas City 82 5 o. 10% 90 WEWS ABC 7 Cleveland 116 7 6.03% 91 KIWI ABC 12St. Louis 83 5 6.02% 92 WNIA It CBS 19Baltimore 100 6 6.00% 93IVICIi1V ABC 25Buffalo 67 4 5,97% 94 WJ Z ABC 19 Baltimore 86 5 5.81% 55 KNIGH CBS 32 Denver 88 5 5.68% 4Philadelphia 159 9 5.66% 90 KYW NBC 5,41% 07 W FAA ABC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 148 8 98 WSYR NBC 43Syracuse 75 4 5.33% 9!) KTA It NBC 45Phoenix 75 4 5.33% 100 BIRO CBS 16Seattle-Tacoma 94 5 5. 32% 7 5, 22% 101 WLIVT NBC 20CI ne :anati 134 102 WSM NBC 30 Nashville 97 5 5,15% 103 WIINS 0 BS 28 Columbus 98 5 5.10% 104 WC CB ABC 35Charlotte 20 1 5.00% 103 .5 4.85% 105 11' TA E ABC > Pittsburgh 106 WHEN CBS ^5Buffalo 103 5 4.85% 107 K DA NBC 3.1 Dative 60 3 4.55% 108 WS l' D NBC 45Toledo 67 3 4.48% 43Syracuse__ 4.5 2 4,44% 109 WI I EN CBS 4.21% 110 WIT[ ABC 21 Milwaukee. 95 4 111 W MI ABC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 48 2 4. 17% 112 WX. I I NBC 48Onsb-High Pt-Win Sal 73 3 4.11% 113 WAVE NBC 31) Louisville 76 3 3, 95% 114 WL A C CBS 30Nashville 76 3 3.95% 115 W DA F NBC 23 Kansas City 51 2 3.92% 116 WC PO CBS 20Cincinnati 103 4 3.88% 117 KOIN CBS 20Portland 78 3 3.85% 118 WJA R NBC 34Providence_ 78 3 3.85% 119 KATU ABC 26 Portland 79 3 3.80 120 KOMO ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 132 5 3. 79,0 121 WHAS CBS 36Louisville 83 3 3. 61% 122 WOW NBC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 83 3 3.61% 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 197.3 Renewals 59 Network affiliates ranked by percent minorities employed in high pay positions- Continued

highigh pay Rank Call Net. Mkt, Location High payMinorities employed letters aft. No. positions------Number Percent

123 IIP EV ABC 34Providence 56 2 3.57% 124 KO PX ABC 50Salt Lake City 58 2 3.45% 125 WTOL (711S 45Toledo 59 2 3.30% 126 WDS II NBC 31 New Orleans 80 3 3.37% 127 W KY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 90 3 3.33% 125IV TV T CBS 21Tampa-St. Petersburg 02 3 3.26% 129 W D110 ABC 45Toledo 33 1 3.(13% 130 W L KY ABC 36Louisville 37 1 2.70% 131 W LIM NBC 30Dayton 75 2 2.07% 132 WA PI NBC 38 Birmingham 40 I 2. 50% 133 W (' 11 S CBS 33Charleston-Huntington 44 1 2.'27% 134KSI) NBC 12St. Louis 04 2 2. 13% 135IVV PC ABC 44Norf-Newp News-Hump_ 47 1 2.13% 138 W LC Y ABC 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 52 1 1.02% 137 W C C 0 CBS 13Minneapolis-St Paul 162 3 1.85% 138 KSTP NBC 13 Minneapolis-St Paul_ 119 2 1.(18% 130 WLWI ABC 14 Indianapolis 66 1 1.52% 140IV ISN CBS 21 Milwaukee 78 1 1.28% 141 KSI, CBS 50Salt Lake City 101 1 0.00% 142IV SPA CBS 40(4 nville-Sptithg-Ashvi 45 0 0.0% 143 W RG B NBC 37Al hany-Sche nectady-T _ 61 0 0.0% 14l K UTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 62 0 0.0% 145 WIITN ABC 33Charleston-Huntington 30 0 0.0% 14(1 KMS P ABC 13Minneapolis-St Paul 48 0 0.0% 147IV KW CBS 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids M 0 0.0%

III. ANALYSIS OF' FEMALE EMPLOYMENT Women comprised approximately 22.1% of the employees at the 14 stations in our study, but only 6.4% of the employees in the five high- paying categories discussed in the previous section. That tremendous disparity points up an urgent need for affirmative action programs designea to get more women into the high-paying, decisionmaking end of broadcasting. In Table 10, therefore, we rank the network affiliates on the percentage of women employed in those five categories. Network Affiliates Ranked by Percent Wo»zen. Employed in High Pay Positions

High pay women Rank Call Net. Mkt, Location High pay employed letters off. No. positions Number Percent

I WCA II CBS 4Philadelphia 06 14 225.00% 2 W NIA L ABC 10 Washington D.0 128 21 16.41% 3 WTOP CBS 10Washington D.0 111 15 13.01% 4 WLKY ABC 36Louisville 37 5 13.51% 5 10111C ABC 23 Kansas City 82 11 13. 41% 6 KA BC ABC 2 Los Angeles 189 21 1'2.68% 7 W GI IP ABC 48Grisb-High Pt-Win Sal 57 7 12. 28% 8 WLWI ABC 14Indianapolis 66 8 19.12% 0 WSIX ABC 30 Nashville 58 7 12,07% 10 KOMO ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 132 15 11.36% 11 WA ST ABC 37 Albany-Schenectady -T 53 8 11.32% 12 IVH TN ABC 33Charleston-11 untingto 36 4 11.11% 13 WCBS CBS 1 New York City 181 20 11.05% 14 W TVJ CBS 18 Miami 127 14 11.02% 15 WV UE ABC 31 New Orleans 74 8 10.81% 16 KTVK ABC 45 Phoenix 06 6 10.71% 17 WNBC NBC INew York City 170 19 10.81% 18 WX YZ ABC b Detroit 181 10 10.00% 10 W PLO ABC 18 Miami 105 II - 48% 20 WTOL CBS 45Toledo 59 6 10.17% 21 WCCB ABC 35Charlotte 20 2 10.00% 22 WIIC NBC 9Pittsburgh 120 12 10.00% 23 WCXI ABC 17 Atlanta 80 8 10.00% 42 F.C.C. 2d 60 Federal Communications Coninassion Reports

Net work Affiliates Ranked by Percent Women Employed in High Pay Positions-- Continued

'licit pay Acumen Ralik Call Net. Mkt. Location I ligh pay employed letters arr. No. pU it ions Number Percent

24\V HZ NBC 6Boston 131 13 Ii. 5-2'; 25W LS A BC 3Chicago 224 22 5. S'2':- 20IV X II NBC 45Gnslidligh Pt-Win Sal_ 73 . CI. 55,; 27W ',WC NBC 28Columbus 73 7 5.55 %, 28WIS11 CBS 14 Indianapoli 64 a 9. 38% 29 W C C 0 C BS 13 Minneapolis-St Paul 1312 15 a. 26% 30K HMS CBS 49San Diego_ S.,' 8 9.20'; 31 15'0110 ABC 45Toledo 33 3 11. 00';- 32Knox C BS 12 St. Louis 110 10 5. RC 33 W 111331. CBS 3 Chicago 211 19 9. 0(1%. 34K CO A BC 8San Francisco 185 17 S. ble:I 35KIN G NBC 16 Seattle-Tacoma 112 10 5.113% 3611' F BC NBC 40( Inv ille-Spoffig-Ash r i _ ____ . 45 4 5.811% 37W FA A A BO 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 148 13 S. 7S% 38KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 174 15 8.(72;. 39W TA R C BS 44 Norf-Newp News -1I amp__ _ S2 . 5.51 40WV EC ABC 44 Norf -Newp New:611am'). .__ 47 4 8. 51% 41 WM AO NBC 3 Chicago 230 20 8. 47';:. 42WT I C 0135 221 I artford-New Haven 119 10 S. 40% 13 K MS P A BC 13:11 inneapolis-St Paul 48 4 5.33% 44W RTV NBC 14Indianapolis 117 S 8.25% 45%VMS CBS 2S Columbus 58 s 8.16% 46wry N ABC 28Columbus 62 0 S. 06% 47W C KT NBC ISMiami 1(12 8 7, S4% 48K S AT A BC 45San Antonio 64 5 7. SI% 44K D FW C BS 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 105 8 7.172% 511 K X TV CBS 27Sammento-Stockton 60 .5 7.55% 5111'1'1'1 ABC 4 Philadelphia In 9 7.44% 52W PTV 0138 35C harlot I P.. lot ti 7. 34%, 53K P I X CBS 8San Francisco 110 S 7.27% 04WSM NBC 30Nashville 57 7 5.22_ "'4: 55W 13 BC ABC 38Birmingham 56 4 7.14% 50WBAL NBC 111 Baltimore 114 II 7.62% 57WIZ ABC 15 Baltimore 86 (1 6.:10% 58WAVY NBC 4 Norf-Newp News- 1 lamp._ 58 4 6. 90,2j. 55W LOS ABC 4JGnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi.. 58 4 (1.90% 60WCIIS C BS 33C harleston-1 I un tingto 44 3 6,82% 61 NWT V CBS 41Oklahoma City 60 4 11.67% 62KTA R NBC 45Phoenix 75 5 6.67% (13 K RON NBC 8San Francisco 165 11 6.67% 64WHEN CBS 43Syracuse 45 3 11. 67% 65 WA BC A BC 1 New York City 138 9 6.52% 66W RC NBC 10Washington, D.0 170 11 6.47% 67 WK YC NBC 7Cleveland 155 10 6, 45% (ISKAT U ABC 20Portland 79 5 6. 33';;. 65WITE ABC 21 Milwaukee 55 0 Ii. 32% 70KY II' NBC 4 Philadelphia 159 10 (1._11 71 KOA NBC 32Denver 66 4 (1.181% 72KN X T 0135 2Los Angeles 253 15 5.98% 73 KSTI' NBC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 115 7 5. SS% 74WS B NBC 17Atlanta 104 6 5.77% 75WFM Y C118 48G asb-iligh Pt-Win Sal 70 4 5.71% 76WT Ilti NBC 21Milwaukee 105 6 5.71% 77WDSU NBC 31 New Orleans 89 5 5.62% 78W11 N B NBC 22Dartford-New Haven 54 3 5,50% 711 WO It NBC 25 Buffalo 55 3 5, 45% 00WT EV A140 34Providence 56 3 5,36% 81 WLW D N BC 39 Dayton 75 4 5. 33% 823s110 U. CBS 15Donston 75 4 5.33% 83KSD NBC LISt, Louis 54 5 5.32% 84KENS CBS 45San Antonio 57 3 5.26% 85W LA C CBS 30Nashville 76 4 5.26% 86WK RC ABC 20Cincinnati 57 3 5.2(1% 87 WLWT NBC 20Cincinnati 134 7 5,22% 88KG IV NBC 211 Portland 96 5 5.21% 85KOIN CBS 26Portland 78 1 5.13% 50WISN CBS 21 Milwaukee 78 4 5. 13% 51WP Ri CBS 34 Providence 59 3 5. OS% 92WOA f NBC 45 San Antonio 60 3 5.00% 93111..k E AB C 9Pittsburgh 103 5 4.85',, 94KUTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 62 3 4.84°;, 95KAITV ABC 32Denver- 83 4 4.82% 56WMC N BC 29Memphis 64 3 4, 65% 9711' It (I 11 NBC 37Albany - Schenectady- T_____ 64 3 4.65% 58KIII1111 CBS 32Denver 88 4 4.55% 10) WWL CBS 31New Oricanc 88 4 4.55% 100WBAP NBC 11Dallas-Fort Worth 112 5 4.46 42 F. C . C. 2(1 Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi llencinals 61 »t»:10,7 A yilmffm Ranked pereent Wow», Employed in High Pay Po8ition8- Continued High pay wonem Rank Call Net. Mkt. Location High pay employed letters all. No. positions Number Percent

MI WS P A CBS 10 0 n ville-Spt nbg-Ashvi . 45 2 4.44% 102 WNYS ABC 43Syc..o.:, 48 2 4. 17% 193 W11510 CBS 3811)nningh4m 21 4.17% lot KGTV NBC ,19 '.'an Diego. _ 98 i ;.98% 108 WMAR CBS 19 Bah imore 100 4 4.00x; 106 KT R K ABC 15Boast on . 75 3 4.40% 107 KP RC NBC 15 HMO On. 102 .11 3 92% 109W C P 0 C BS 20Cincinnati 103 . 3.88% 109 WWJ N BC 5Detroit 129 5 3.80 110 WSOC NBC 35Chariot t e 78 3 3.85% 1/I1V11EC CBS 29 Mem ph ,.., 2 3. 85% 112 WN A C CBS 6Boston 132 5 3.79% 113 \VELA ND^ 21Tampa-St, Petersburg 82 3 3.66% III W1110 CBS 39MINI. an 82 3 3.06% 118 KOOL CBS 4.5 Phoenlv 83 3 3.61% 110 KCI'X ABC 50Salt Lake City 55 3. 45% IT KOCO _ABC 41 Oklahoma City 55 2 3.39/ 118 WKY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 90 3 3.33V 119 WIT BQ ABC 29Aloinviik tit 2 3.28% 120 WT EN CBS 37 Albany-Selicnectady-T 61 2 3.28% 121 W T V T CBS 21 Tam pa-St . Petersburg 1+2 8 3. 3o% 122 K I RO CBS 16Seattle - Tacoma 1.1 3 3.10% 123 WKII\V ABC 23Buffalo 67 2 121 KC RA NBC 27 Sam:unman-Stockton 101 3 2.117% 125 K I / KA CBS to Pittsburgh 107 3 2.80% 120 W A CI A CBS 17Atlanta 109 3 2. 75% 127 WAVE NBC 311 Lanisvi Ile 70 2 2.63% 128IVJ W CBS 7Cleveland 115 3 2.61% 129 WA PI NBC 38Birmingham 40 1 2.50% 130\V HAS CBS 31Louisville 83 2 2.41% 131. KO V It ABC °7 Sacramento Stockton 83 2 2.41% 132W.1 B K CBS 5Detroit 138 3 2.17% 133 WM1 ABC 1 KalaniazooGr Rapids 48 1 2.0h% 131 W KZO CBS 41 Kalamazoo-Cr Rapids 51 1 1.116% 135 WRAF N BC 23Kansas City 51 1 1.96% 136 M'BEN CBS 25Buffalo 103 2 1.94% 137 W LC Y AB C 21 Tampa-St . Pelersburg 52 1 1. 92% 138 W EW S ABC 7Cleveland 116 2 1.72% 1311 WSAZ NBC 33Charlestomlluntingto 511 1. 69% WO KC510 CBS 23Kansas City 59 1.69% 141 MINI' ABC 22 Mal tord-New Unveil fi5 1.54% 112 WS VD NBC 45 Toledo 67 1.49% 113 IVSY R NBC 43Syracuse 75 1.33% 145 WJAR NBC 31Providence 78 1.28% 145 WOTY NBC 41 Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 83 1.20% 146 KTV I ABC 12SI. Louis 83 1.20% 147 KS]. CBS 50 Salt Lake City 101 0 0.0%

IV. REMEDIES FOR CI.AI MS OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION Claims of emplowent discrimination against any television station may be filed with both the FCC and the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commissi 011 .rE0C). The claim can be ded with the FCC b V any individual or interested community group if there is reason to believe that an employee has been discriminated against. on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex. Any claim of discrimination filed with the FCC should allege- and demonstrate, to the extent possible-that the broadcaster is in violation of his public interest responsibility to engage in fair employment practices, and that he has failed to comply with the FCC's equal employment rules." The FCC's action on a discrimination claim it considers legitimate will be geared toward bringing the broadcaster

1, 47 C.F.R. 1 73.0S0. 42 F.C.C. 2d 62 Federal Communications Commission Reports into compliance with. those rules, mid a complaint before the FCC is thus brought on behal4" -4 the Conm fission rather than the individual or group against whom the discrimination is alleged. if an employee or group merely wishes to bring a claim of discrimination to the attention of the FCC, without further pursuing the matter, it may write a letter of complaint to the FCC, stating the par- ticulars of the claim against the station. The FCC will review the coin - plac in nmeh the same manner as it might review a complaint based on a violation of the fairness doctrine or another type of programming violation and may request a response front the broadcaster. At, the very least., the complaint is placed in the station's complaint file for review when its license comes up for renewal. If the complaints division finds that the complaint at, issue is significant enough, it will forward the complaint to the renewal branch at the appropriate time." A fuller remedy at the FCC might be pursued in the form of a petition to deny the station's license renewal." The petition may assert discrimination against particular employees or it may cite a general trend or pattern of employment discrimination, both of which. are a violation of the FCC's equal employment rules. The petition to deny provides a remedy separate from the. Commission's independent, inquiry into a complaint. about the station's equal employment practices. It icrptim the Commission to confront thi issue directly, and is therefore somewhat More likely to result in further inquiry by the Commis- sion, a tine, uncle.. Section 50 of the Communications Act," or the outright, denial of renewal of the broadcaster's licenseat. the very least, the issues involved will be given a fuller airing than they might receive if the complaint merely takes the form of a letter of information to the FCC. Unlike, a claim of employment discrimination filed at the FCC, a charge, of discrimination filed with the EEOC is aimed at providing relief to the individual employee who feels he has been discriminated against. The followiin is but an abbreviated description of the process to be followed at the EEOC. More information can be acquired by writirur or calling: U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1800 G Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. '20506 or District or Regional Offices of the EEOC (listed in local telephone directories under U.S. Government) Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which created the EEOC for- bids discrimination in hiring, upgrading and all other conditions of em»loyment, where the discrimination is based upon race, color, religion, sex or national origin." Title VII, as amended, covers all em- ployers with 15 or more employees, so all the television stations in this " Unfortunately, time and the renewal process hove proven that what citizens would consider significant and what the PCC would consider significant are often leagues apart in areas like employment. r See the procedures described in greater detail in Chapter 4 of this Report. "47 U.S,C. 6 503(bl (1) provides for a forfeiture of up to $1000 per violation, up to limit of $10.000, against any licensee who "willfully or repeatedly fails to observe nay of the provisions of this Act or any rule or regulation of the Commission... 1942 U.S.C. § 2000 e-2 t19641. 42 F.C.C. 2(1 Arkansas, Louisiana and illississ;ppi 1973 Renewal. 63 survey (and all other television stations as well) should be required to comply with its provisions. A person who believes that he or she is a victim of discrimination by a broadcast employer may file a complaint with the EEOC at the above address. A complaint may also be filed by an individual or a group beliiI.f of any individual who may have suffered discrimination. An individual who feels he or she cannot file a charge because of a need to reniainP.onymons may write One of the EEO('s live Com- missioners in Washington, 1).0., requesting the filine. of a Commis- sioner's Charge, and setting forth the facts which warrant the li)ing of such a charge. The individual Commissioner may, at his or her discretion, proceed to file a charge, permitting the complaint t-) remain anonymous. It is important that an individual file the charge as soon as possible after the discrimination takes place. In most cases the charge unist, be tiled within 180 days of the discrimination coniplatued of if the EEOC is to have jurisdiction of the matter. When the EEOC receives the charge, a representative reviews the facts and contacts the complainant V the charge is one Nvhich can be handled by.the EEOC, an investigator gathers all the facts from the complainant and from the parties charged with discrimination. The "01E0C is required by law to furnish a copy of the charge to the parties charged with discrimination. If the I4',E0C. does not find that the facts support. the complainant's charge, the complainant and the parties charged with discrimination are noti tied that the charge has been dismissed. If the EEOC finds reasonable cause to beli.3N e that the individual has been discriminated against, it then attempts to conciliate and reach an agreement satisfactory to all parties involved. Before the passage of the Equal Employment, Opportunity Act of 1972, the EEOC was limited to this process of conciliation ii:. seeking a resolution of the charge. Noce,Now if the EEOC cannot reach e, settlement agreeable to all parties, the may go to a United States District Court to obtain .an order prohibiting the discrimination.2° The person filing the coinplaint is also entitled to request notification of his or her own right to fileu suit if the EEOC cannot 'well a settlement or if the EEOC does not take the use to court within 180 days after the complaint is filed. In some instances, however, the EEOC may not act directly on the charge until state remedies are sought. If the, individual bringing the charge lives in a state or locality which. enforces its own fair , mployment practices law. the EEOC must initially send the case to the state or local agency for investigation and notify the individual thatit has done so. After a minimum of 60 clays have passed, the F,E0C automatically reactivates the charge, unless it has already been settled to the satisfaction of the individual bringing the charge, by the state or local agency. Finally, an individual charging discrimination should remember that it is illegal for anyone to penalize or retaliate against the individual in any way. In the event, any attempt is made to penalize or retaliate against a person in any way for filing a charge with the EEOC, the EEOC should be notified immediately. 2°- - (1972 Sum). ?. Federal Comm miicatioo8 Commission, Repo..ts For .further information about this avenue of relief, you should acquire. in addition to the United Church of (twist materials described in Chapter 4. the EEOC pal n phlets Facts ((bout Title 171. of the Ciil Piyhts A of of .1964 and Toward Job Equality for Women, from the EEOrs Washington office.

V. NATIONAL E.MPLOyMENT ANALVSIS Total Employmeht The 14television stations included in this study, the major network affiliates in the nation's top 50 television markets. reported 17.641 full- time employees in 1971 and 17.737 in 1972, an increase of 00, or . Employment of minority group employees among full-I-utile employees at the 147 stations was 1.759 (10.0%) in 1971 and '2,043 (11.5(:; )in 1072. Women were employed iii 3,893 of the fall-time positions (22.1`.; ) in 10711111(13.9.20 (22.1f,4 ) in 1072. TABLE 11. Total Fall-time Employment-147 Staii?vs-1972

Total employees 17.611(100%) 17.737(100%) +96 (+0.5%) Minority employees 1,759(10.0%) 2.013(11.5%)+284 (+16.1%) Women employees 3,893(22.1%) 3,926(22.1%) +33 (22.1%)

Of the 147 stations, the following 19 reported fewer than five minority employees:

TABLE 1 2.---leewer Than. Five Minority Employees-1972

Call Number of letters Channel Location Market minority employees

KSTP 5Minneapolis/St. Paul 13 3 KMSP 9Minneapolis/St. Paul 13 0 WISN 12 Milwaukee 21 4 W LC Y 10 Tampa/St. Petersburg 24 3 KOA 4 Denver 32 4 WIITN 13 Charleston/Huntington 33 4 WC ITS 8 Charleston/Huntington 33 4 WJ A It 10 Providence 34 3 WC CB 18 Charlotte 35 2 WLKY 32Louisville 36 4 (PAST /3Albany/Selieneetad y/Troy 37 4 ll'TEN 10 Al bany/Scheneetudy/Tr 37 4 WROB 6 Albany/SchemetadY/TroY 37 1 WAPI 13 Birmingham 38 4 WKZO 3 Grand Rapids /Kalamazoo 41 0 %MHO 24 Toledo 45 1 KC PX 4Salt Lake City 50 3 KUTV 2Salt Lake City 50 1 KSL 5Salt Lake City 50 1

B. High Pay Positions Of the nine job positions in the annual employment report, five have substantially higher pay scales than the rest.. They are: officials and Managers, professionals, technicians, sales workers, and craftsmen. In 1072, the 147 stations reported 13,448 full-time workers in the. upper five job categories. This represents about MS% of all the full-time employees at the 147 stations. 42 F.C.C. 2t1 Arkansas, Laai,Piana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 65 Minority employees comprised 9.2% (1,241 jobs) of the stations' full-time positions in the upper five job categories in 1972 (compared with 11.5% of the total station work force), and women held 866 jobs, comprising 6.4% (compared with 22.1% of the total station work force). In short., comparing the differential between high pay and total jobs, women are move discriminated against broadcasters within their organizations than minorities. TABLE 13.Total Minorities and Women in High Pay Positions-1978

1072 number Percentage

Total full-time 13, 448 100% Minorities ftilltime 1,241 9.2% Women full-time 866 6,4%

Of the 147 stations, the following 16 (10.9%) reported employing one or no minorities in the upper five job categories in 1972: TABLE 14a.Stations Employing 0 or 1 Minorities in High Pay Positions-1978

Total Minority Call ltrs. Location Ch. # Mkt. # high-pay high-pay employees employees

WKZO Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo 3 41 51 0 KMSP Minneapolis/St. Paul 9 23 48 0 KSL Salt Lake City 5 50 101 1 KUTV Salt Lake City 2 50 62 0 WROB Albany /Schenectady /Troy 6 "37 64 0 WDHO Toledo 24 45 33 1 WISN Milwaukee 12 21 78 1 WLCY Tampa/St, Petersburg 10 24 52 1 \I'VE C Norfolk/Newport News 13 44 47 1 WADI Birmingham 13 38 52 1 WLKY Louisville 32 36 37 1 WC 118 Charleston/Hun tington 8 33 44 1 WHTN C I larlestonni u n tington 13 33 36 0 WSPA G reenville/Sptn burgasheville 7 40 45 0 WC C B C horlotte 18 35 20 1 WLWI Indianapolis 13 14 66 1

Of the 147 stations, the following 17 (11.6%) reported employing one or no women in the upper fivejob categories in 1972: TABLE 14b.Stations Employing 0 or 1 Women in High Pay Positions-1972

Total Minority Call ltrs. Location Ch. # Mkt. # high-pay high-pay employees employees

KSL Salt Lake City 5 50 101 0 WOTV Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo 8 41 83 1 Knit St. Louts 2 12 83 1 WIAR Providence 10 34 78 1 WSPD Toledo 13 45 67 1 WTNII Hartford/New Haven 8 22 65 1 KCMG Kansas City 5 23 59 1 WSAZ Charleston /Huntington 3 33 59 I WLCY Tampa/St. Petersburg 10 24 52 1 WKZO Grand Rapids /Kalamazoo 3 41 .51 1 WDAF Kansas City 4 23 51 1 WS Y R Syracuse 3 43 . 75. 1 WZZM Grand Rapids /Kalamazoo la 41 48 1 KITTY Salt Lake City 50. 62 1 WREC Memphis s. 20 52 1 WAPI Birmingham 13 38 40 1 WBMG Birmingham 42 38 1

104-004-7 3----5 42 F.C.C. 2d 66 Federal C om man ;cations Commission Reports It should be especially noted that there ;ire double offenders among the ranks of these, the most egregious of high-pay discriminators. Stations KSL, Salt Lake City, KUTV, Salt Lake City, WLCY, Tampa-St. Petersburg, WKZO, Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo and WAPI, Birmingham report a combined total of some 306 high-pay positions, but employ as total of just three minorities and four women in those positions. C. Increase or decrease of minority and female employment from, 1971 to 1972 100 stations (68%) reported an increase in the number of f.1.11-time minority group employees in 1972 over 1971; 47 (32%) reported a decrease or remained the same. 67 stations (46%) reported an increase in the number of full-time women employees in 1972 over 1971; 80 (54%) reported a de-crease or remained the same. Once again, by this measure, we see that more efforts are being made to improve the employment picture for minorities than for women. The following 64 stations reported decreases in employment of minorities, or women, or both : TABLE 15. Slalions Showing Decrease in. Employment of Minorities or Women- 1972 21

Call Location C h.# Mkt.# M=minorities ltrs.

WCBS New York City 2 1 W KNXT Los Angeles 2 2 W WPVI Philadelphia 6 4 W WC A.H Philadelphia 10 4 W WJBK Detroit 2 5 M,W WWJ Detroit 4 5 W WNAC Boston 7 6 M, W WJW Cleveland 8 7 W W RC Washington, 1).0 4 10 W W MAL Washington. D.0 7 10 W WRAP Dallas/Ft. Worth 5 11 W KMOX St. Louis 4 12 W KTVI St. Louis 2 12 W WCCO Minneapolis/St. Paul 4 13 M KSTI' Minneapolis/St. Paul 5 13 M, W KMSP Minneapolis/St. Paul 9 13 M WRTV Indianapolis 6 14 M, W KTRK Ifonston 13 15 W KOMO Seattle/Tacoma 4 16 W KIRO Seattle/Tacoma 7 16 W WA a A Atlanta 5 17 M, W WKRC Cincinnati 12 20 M, W Ivor() Cincinnati 9 20 W WTMJ Milwaukee 4 21 M, W WITI Milwaukee 6 21 W W'PNII Hartford/New Haven g 22 M, W WHNB Hartford/New Haven 30 22 W WRAF Kansas City 4 23 W KMBC Kansas City 9 23 M KCMO Kansas CaY 5 23 W WLCY Tampa/St. Petersburg 10 24 W WFLA Tainpa/St. Petersburg 8 24 W W OR Buffalo 2 25 W KO IN Portland 6 26 W WRNS Columbus 10 M, W WTVN Columbus 6 28i WLWC Columbus 4 WSNI Nashville 4 30 M WWL New Orleans 4 31 W KOA Denver 4 32 M KMB II Denver 7 32 M KBTV Denver 9 Ng.,,,i,,3,/ W WP RI Providence 12 42 F.C.C. 2d -4rkansos, Louightna and 31is;ssipp; 193 Renewal. 67

TABLE Vi.Stations Showing Decrease in Employment of Minorities Continued

Call Location Ch. # Mkt. # M = minorities Itri. W= women

KSL Salt Lake City 5 50M, \V 11'0C11 Charlotte IS 35M WI [AS Louisville 11 30NI, \V WLKY Louisville 32 36\V WAVE Louisville 3 36W WAPI Birmingham 13 38Ni \\'1110 Dayton T 39W WhoS Greenville(Spartatilwg/Asheville 13 0W KOCO Oklahoma City 5 41W WKS' Oklahoma City .1 WZ/ NI Grand Rapids/ Kahn nizoo 13 :111 1., W won. ciratidnapidsiKatamazoo S 41 NI, W IV VEC Norfolk/Newport New, 13 44M KOOL Phogni 10 46 11' KTV K Phoenix 3 45M WO AI San Antonio 4 45M WTOL. Toledo 11 45W WO ILO Toledo at 45NI, W W81' I) Toledo 13 45W WFMY Greensboro/Winston Salem/Iligh Point 2 48W KuTv Salt Lake City 2 50NI, W

.. . 21 it should be noted, however, that certain of these stations are relatively speaking among the very best in our employment rankings. W CA C, for example, ranks Number 1 in employment of women in high pay positions, even though it experienced a decline.

42 F.C.C. 2d 68 ,leral Communications Commission Reports,

Form 395 1 9 7 3 Annual Employment Report

SECTION IVFULL./)ME PAID EMPLOYEES (appliroble to .11 rr )04 441.7

ALL EMPLOYEES' MINORITY GROUP EMPLOYEES MALE FEMALE Total CATEG30%)E51 (fol. 7.2) M.I. Female Negro Ont.)R",e()04020''4'''' Negro OrientIAme""'n 0,0)40 Inc San)SYM.,,e, In.. Surnamed Americo,. Arve,T45,an (I) 0) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (6) (0)

LMIcial. and...sager......

'Fent...along.

Tachniciar a ..

Ale. MO rItrrs

01/I1e ao0 ctrr)cal

Csaltonrn (Skilled) . OP11.041, ($ron..(lird) ...... Labor.,. (Ens4Illed)

Service Aoritrr.

TOTAL TotI empla.ment from errvinta (yr.,. 'I 0.1 '61)11 )4 login( Dona los explanation DI.)title func.100.. 2Include "Minor ty Group Employee.' and 40 ..... S.. Inanuclion 6. 21.1 Ala.)... Inc' dr Eskimo. nd Aleut. with "American Indlan."

SECTION V PARTTIME PAID EMPLOYEES (0 ppl(4011 to II re aponderda) ALL EMPLOYEES' MINORITY GROUP EMPLOYEES MALE FEMALE

JOB To.) Sprii Spaish CATEGORIES( (Co) . 2.3) Female Negro OrientIArneNcar Nemo Orienia)Arnrican Indlan3Surnamed Indian Surnmea Ambr:car Arnarican (I) (2) 01 (4) (S) (6) I') ((0)

01101.). and manager.

Techrirtana Sle. Viontrra Office and clerical

Grahame() (5)1111,3) OPasativr. (Selz, .1.(111.1)

Laborer. (En.LI)led)

St/vie. Arnie..

TOTAL 111.) empl.,"")) pre) toy. 10) yr!

'R ler to Inatruc Ion. for nation of .)) Nth tune lona. lude "Minority Group Emp v ...... and oth rra. Se InalruLlon 6. 31.1 Alaska. includ. Ealelmor 4 AGM* AID. "American Lndlan.. Chapter 3 PATTEIIN-s or OWNERSHIP The question of who should (or should not) own the facilities and control the prooTamming of radio and television stations has beeii at the very heart of broadcasting since the decision was first made to regulate the use of the, public airwaves by licensing them for private profit,'

See Johnson and Honk, "Media Concentration : Some Observations on the United States' Experlenee.- 56 Iowa L. Rev. 267 (1970). 42 F.bC. 2d .2'b.kan8us, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 feenauyals 69 For, -while the allocation of frequencies to local rather than national broadcast service committed an almost wastefully-large chunk of the spectrum to broadcasting, there have always been fewer desirable frequencies available than parties requesting the opportunity to exploit them. No less true today is Justice Frankfurter's 1943 dictum that. broadcasting must be subject to governmental regulation because. "unlike other modes of expression, radio 'inherently is not available to all.... Because it cannot be used by all, some who wish to use it must be denied 2 The concentration of broadcast outlets in the hands of a few wealthy individuals or corporations would seem to be inimical to the manner of regulation contemplated in the Comn.unications Act of 1934. Not only -would those few use up the opportunities of many others (and particularly ininority groups who have been alinc,st completely shit out of station ownership), they would provide the basis for an extremely unhealthy situation in which the "voices" utilizing the spectrum NVOUld be, expressive of far fewer viewpoints than Congress originally intended. The Commission has -dways waxed schizophrenic in the promulgation and enforcement of miles and policies designed to alleviate the problems of media control. Diversification of ownership has always been recognized as a valid means to the goal of diversity of "voices," of viewpoints available to the publ ic,5 but there has also existed considerable confusion regarding the achievement of that goal. The Commis- sion continues to acknowledge that a proper objective should be "... the maximum diversity of ownership that technology will allow in each area ...," 4 but its words have become irrevocably clouded by its actions. In 1971, for example, the Commission decided that ownership interest by anyone, in more than seven AM, seven FM or seven television stations of which no more than five may be VHF) would be contrary to the public interest (the so-called "7-7-7 rnle").5 In late 1972, however, the Commission allowed Cosmos T3roadcasting of Louisiana. to purchase television station IVDSTT-TV in New Orleans. The purchase gave the assignee's parent, Cosmos Broadcasting Corporation, the license to its fourth VHF station, three of which are in the same geographic region of the country, but it also gave the South Carolina Na- tional Bank of Charleston an interest in its ninth, VHF station, and a Mr. John Smith an interest in his ei gh IA°

. Another aspect of media ownership regulation has been the intol- erably fragmented promulgation and enforcement (or non-enforcement) of rides and policies regarding different types of ownership problems. The 7-7-7 rule, for example, took no cognizance of cross- 2 National Broadcasting Company v. United States, 310 U.S. 100 at 226 (1043). 'See Multiple OW710'811'4) of AM, FM, Television Broadcast Stations, 18 FCC 288, 201 (1053). Although there is no provision in the Federal Communications Act of 1934 dealing specifically with the concentration of ownership. the power to promulgate rules as the multiple ownership rules has been found to lie within the administr.,tive discretion of the FCC under the broad purposes of the Act. See United States v. Storer Broadcasting Co., 351 U.S. 102 (1056) 4 In the Matter of Amendment of 6§ 73.35, 73.240, and 73.636 of the Commission Rules Relating to Multiple Ownership of Standard, FM and Television Broadcast Stations, 18 P C F Radio Reg. 2d 1735 (1070). One presumes "technology" would allow each individual station in any given region to be licensed to a different person or corporate entity. 247 C.F.R. 73.636(a) (2). WDSUTV, Inc., 39 FCC 2(1 534 (1972). 42 F.C.C. 2d 70 Federal Communications Commission Reports ownership among the various broadcast media, thus theoretically permitting each broadcaster to acquire AN FM TV combinations in single markets, so long us it did not exceed its "limit" of seven of each. In March of 1970, in an attempt to remedy this omission, the "one-to-a- market" amendment to the multiple ownership rules v,-as adopted.7 It provided, prospectively only, that the FCC would not approve applications for construction permits or transfers of licenses if more than one full-time broadcasting outlet would be owned or controlled by the same. owner in the same market. The one-to-a-market rule created such an outcry among broadcasters, however, that by March of 1971 the Commission had amended it and made it applicable only to combinations of VHF television stations with aural stations in the same market.8 AM and FM stations in the same market could be commonly owned, and combinations of UHF and aural stations were to be handled on a case-by-case basis. The Commis- sion also noted that the problem of cross-ownership of newspapers and television or radio facilities was perhaps more important, but that Commission regulation in this area would be, far less effective because the Commission does not regulate newspapers. The Commission has long been charged with the language of the Supreme Court holding that "Congress intended to leave competition in the business of broadcasting," ' and that the Commission "should administer its regulatory powers with respect to broadcasting in the light of the purposes which the...[antitrust laws were; designed to achieve." 1° Other recognizably antitrust aspects of the media ownership problem, such as regional concentration or local monopolization of all media, inc./qui/fag newspapers, could therefore well be reached under this broad mandate. However, the Commission continues essentially to igno:T that mandate and to grant new or assigned broadcast facilities to established media interests, as in Los Angeles, where the transfer of an AMFM combination to an applicant with an interest in the. L.A. Times was approved;11 or in Georgetown. Texas, where an FM license IV11.5awarded to an applicant who owned the city's only newspaper, its only AM radio station and its only cable television franchise,12 or in other cases right down to the present.33 Only when monopoly abuses can be documented does the Commission take any positive action, as in Mansfield, Ohio, where. it denied the application of the Mansfield Jour- nal Company for licenses to construct an AM/FM combination because it found that. the Company had used its position as the sole newspaper in the community to exert pressures on adva.tisers." Other equally complx facets of the ownership question have arisen in the course of Commission deliberations, but the majority of Com- missioners has rarely been inclined to resolve the unique problems at- tendant each of them. One example might be found in the potential

Amendment of Multiple Ownership Rules, supra note 4. s Amendment of Multiple Ownership Rules. 21. P & F Radio Reg, 2d 1551 (1971). F.C.C. v. Sanders Bros. Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470, 475 (1940). 10 National Broadcasting Co.., supra note 2. 319 C.S. 190. 223 (1943). 11 John Poole Broadcasting Co., Inc and ERN. Inc., FCC 09-115 (1909). 12 Charles R. Fallow, Jr., FCC 71-203 (1971). " See, e.g., my dissent in McPherson Broadcasting, Inc., FCC 98757 (1973). u Mansfield Journal Co. v. FCC. 15 F2d 28 (D.C. Cir. 1950). More recently. see Greater Boston TV Corp. v. FCC, WHDH, Inc. v. FCC, et al., 444 F2d 801 (D.C. Cir. 1970), in which the Court upheld the award of a newspaper company's Boston VHF television to a competing applicant. 42 F.C.C. 2d 11,.(1118(18, Lou WO Mt (Ind .Mississippi 11)73 Re1it'ig(11S 71 ad -ele. affects of allowing one owner to build a regiona7 concentration. This can often occur with far fewer than the "allowable" seven AM, seven FM or seven television stations. Yet it has been difficult (if not impossible) for the Commission to visualize the harm to the local population, There are al ways, it seems, "sufficient outside media influences" in the aireven if they originate in a large city some 75 miles awayto rationalize a. majority conclusion to diminish further the, diversity of media voices in a given region. This was the case, for example, earlier this year when the majority granted a new FM facility to an applicant in Muskepon Heights, Michigan, who already owned four AM and two FM stations within the same general Grand Rapids- KM a ma zoo metropolitan area." Another distressing line of owneeship precedent concerns the ten- (hum. the Commission mitjoritv to grant. to an owner new stations or major improvements in facilities, either of which essentially "de- cides" that the owner is qualified to be a broadcast licensee, at a time when those very same qualifications are being called it :o question 111 the, course of other proceedings before the Commission. Late, in 1972, for example, the Commission granted an application for the assign ment of WAXY FM, Fort Lauderdale, Florida to RICO General, Inc., even though RICO's most t,fisic qualifications were being challenged in hearings concerned with the renewal of its VHF television licenses in Los Angeles and Boston.'' In undertaking to study nearly 1.50 television stations in our 50 largest media markets, we bad hoped to be, able to compare the performance of the "media barons"the corporate owners possessed of conglomerate interests both within and without the various mediawith that of the independent, local owners who would have no such outside interests. That comparison has proved to be impossible, because it. is apparent from a. brief glance at our ownership tables that virtually none but a small handful of those network affiliates would qualify as even re- motely resembling "local" owners. On the information available, just three of the 147 stations in our owne---Ip "sample" were owned by independent ownersi.e., owners with no reported outside interests (including, but by no means limited to broadcasting or other media) .17 And while those three were ranked numbers 54, 56 and 97 in our composite progranuning rankings (certainly an average, enough showing) they hardly constitute, a sufficiently large group for adequate comparison with the multiple or multimedia owners. Multiple owners, on the other hand, seemed to have something of a stranglehold on the television audiences of the top 50 markets. Just 17 large corporations account for the ownership of 63 of the stations in our study, each of them owning three or more affiliates, and the 17 also account for some 137 other reported broadcasting interests. Thirteen other owners each held two of the affiliates in our top 50 study, and that group accounted for some 70 additioval broadcast holdings among them. In other words, just 30 corporate owners hold the licenses of 94

15 Muskegon Heights Ernadrosting , 39 F.C.C. 2d 475 (1973). it KO General, FCC 72-1201 (19721. 17 Of course. it is impossible to tell which cf even these independents have unreported outside corporate interests. or which of their stockholders or officers might have similar unreported interests. We have been necessarily limited in our study to data available at the F.C.C.. and as noted in the text at footnote 22, that data is very often incomplete. 42 F.C.C. 2d 72 Federal Commotications Commission Reports of the top 50 market network affiliates and also appear to own, among themselves, nearly 4% of all the broadcasting stations in the country 18with, of course, access to decidedly more than 4% of the nation's audience. Multimedia owners, with major interests in media other than broadcasting, appear also in epidemic proportion among the licensees of the network affiliates in our top 50 markets. No fewer than SO American newspapers 1 are co-owned with network affiliates in our study, including at least 38 of our largest urban dailies. A partial listing should give you some feel for the extent of the incestuous cross-ownership between the nation's most profitable television stations and its most powerful newspapers :

Albuquerque Tribune Fort Worth Star Telegram, Baltimore News-American Houston Post Baltimore. Sun Los Angeles Herald-Examiner Boston Record-American Los Angeles Times Chattanooga Times Milwaukee Journal Cincinnati Post and Times-Star Minneapolis Star and Tribune Cleveland Press New York Times Columbus Dispatch Newsday Daily Oklahoman Oklahoma City Times Dallas Times-Herald Pittsburgh Press Dallas Morning News San Francisco Chronicle Dayton News San Francisco Examiner Denver Post St. Louis Post-Dispatch Detroit News Washington Evening Star ,Fort Worth Press Washington Post In addition, it is worth noting some of the numerous other publishing interests represented among the network affiliates in this report: Fairchild Publications Random House Pontiac Press World Almanac Holt, Rinehart and Winston Time Phoenix Magazine Fortune Cosmopolitan Sports Illustrated Vogue Time-Life Books Good Housekeeping Mademoiselle .Better Homes and Gardens Glamour House and Garden Harpers Bazaar Sports Afield Newsweek Avon Books McGraw Hill Popular Mechanics Corinthian United Technical PublicationsScience Digest Successful Farming Money 18What's more, even those figures do not come close to telling the full story, since among that 4% are probably well over hal,: of the most highly profitable radio and television properties in the country. 10 The precise number isdifficult to determine. since sonic licensees list merely the corporate owner for a group of smaller newspapers in their form 323. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Hississivpi 1973 Renezml s 73

To these publishing interests must be added the myriad cable television systems and franchises still held by these licensees.2° How, then, are we to analyze the information we have gathered from Commission records? In the first place, we would do well to note that the information accumulated by the Commission,largely from the form 323 ownership reports,'' is by no means complete (or even absolutely accurate). For e,:ample., nowherein the. FCC files can we locate any information about the type or extentof defense subsidiaries known to be owned by licensees like Avco or Westing- house or General Electric. Often, multi-billion dollar conglomerate holdings are merely summarized, for purposes of the form 323, with innocuous phrases ince "additional manufacturing interests" or "various product, subsidiaries." Moreover, the major stockholders and/or officers of those corporations the persons who can actually be found to be exercising the most significant control over-the policies of the stationsare rarely identified satisfactorily by the anonymous corporate 'licensees. and the outside interests of those individuals are rarely enumerated for the FCC's information. A thorough report. on patterns of ownership, which would study conglomerates and subsidiaries, ties through directorships or individual shareholders or financial institutions, and so forth, would quite simply require as many man-hours of well-structured research as were spent. on this entire report, even if we were to limit ourselves to the top 50 markets. It once took the FCC 18 971 09? ths to prepare a simple. report ofits ownership information for a, Senate Committeeand even then the Com- mittee was able to point out errors. We should use this section, then, primarily to underscore the current state of media ownership in America today, and secondarily to make note of the relative performance in areas of programming and employment, of our "media baron" licensees. It can be seen, for example, that some of the conglomerate owners have done markedly better than others. There can be no question but that the Westinghouse Cor- poration, whose five stations rank a truly remarkable 1, 2, 4, 5 and 31 in overall programming, cares more about its audience (amongthe conglomerate owners) than, :;ay, Taft Broadcasting, whose five stations rank 49, 120, 123, 134 aid d 136, or ABC, whose five were ranked 13, 76,102, 115 and 117. Other results were not nearly so clear-cut, however, with curious spreads for owners like Hearst (8, 48, 132) or Cox Broadcasting Corp. (15, 31. 57, 126) or Combined Communications (23, 91, 142) scattering their stations all over the programming charts. Given greater manpower and more time, the programming ownership data would perhaps have been analyzed further; until that opportunity occurs, we have attempted to gather as much information aspossible in the &wnership tables that follow, and leave it to others to assimilate that information. 23 These are too numerous, and often too Ill-defined, to set out here. There are hundreds of cable systems and franchises cross-owned with the broadcasting properties in this Report bowever, Commission Rules specifically prohibit cross-ownership of cable and broadcast facilities in the same market, and require divestiture of all facilities so held of one type or the otber by August 10, 1973. 47 C.P.R. 76.501. Required by 47 § 1.615. 42 F.C.C. 2d 74 Federal Communications Commission Reports The Tables below are designed to provide a maximum amount of information about each of the owners represented in the study. Table 16 simply lists the stations alphabetically by their call letters and provides a cross reference to the name of the owner as it will be listed in Table 17. Table 17 contains 17 separate columns, with entries for the owner (listed alphabetically), the stations falling within our top 50 market study, the market number, location, channel number, and network affiliation of each station, its composite programming rank, its rank in each of the major programming areas, and its rank in employment of minorities and women. The remaining columns list the owners' additional interests, to the extent available at the Commission, in other broadcasting stations, newspapers or publishing media, and other unrelated corporate interests. An asterisk (*) next to a listing in one of these three columns indicates a controlling (though not necessarily 100%) interest in the company, if under some other corporate or individual's name. A doable asterisk (**) indicates less than a controlling interest in the company.

TABLE 16.Cross Reference of Owners to Call Letters tAlphabetically by call letter]

Call Itrs Location Owner

KABC Los Angeles American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. K tAT U Portland Fisher Companies, Inc. KBTV Denver Combined Communications Corp. KCMO Kansas City Meredith Corporation. KCPX Salt Lake City Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. KCRA Sacramento/Stockton Kelly Broadcasting Co. (Partnership) KDFW Dallas/Fort Worth Times Mirror Co. KDKA Pittsburgh Westinghouse Electric Corp. KENS Sail Antonio Harte-Hanks Newspapers, Inc. KFMB San Diego Midwest Television Inc. KGO San Francisco American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. KGTV San Diego McGraw -Hill Inc. KGW Portland King Broadcasting Co. Ki10 U Houston Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. KING Seattle/Tacoma King Broadcasting Co. KIRO Seattle/Tacoma Bonneville. International Inc. KM B C Kansas City Metromedia, Inc. lal Gil Denver McGraw-Bill Inc. KM0 X St. Louis Columbia Broadcasting System Inc. KMSP Minneapolis/St. Paul Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. KNBC Los Angeles RCA Corpotion KNXT Los Angeles Columbia Broadcasting System Inc. KO A Denver General Electric Company KOCO Oklahoma City Combined Conimunications Corp. KOIN Portland Newhouse Broadcasting Co. (50%) (Orig Own 50%) KOMO Seattle /Tacoma Fisher Companies Inc. KOOL Phoenix G. Autry (55%), T. Chauncey (20%) A. Kerney (10%), F. Beer (5%); listed under KOOL Radio- Television, Inc., licensee KOVR Sacramento /Stockton Met Broadcasting Corp. KPIX San Francisco Westinghouse Electric Corp. KP RC Houston Houston Post KRON San Francisco Chronicle Publishing Co. KSAT San Antonio The Outlet Company KSD St. Louis Pulitzer Publishing Co. KSL Salt Lake City Bonneville International Corp. KSTP Minneapolis/St. Paul Hubbard Broadcasting Inc. KTAR Phoenix KTA It Broadcasting Co. KTRIC Houston Capital Cities Broadcasting Corp. KTVI St. Lauds Newhouse Broadcasting Corp. KTVK Phenix E. McFarland (41%) (various small Ws); listed under Arizona Television, Inc. licensee 1 KUTV Salt Lake City Standard Corp. (80%) CIC (20%) KWTV Oklahoma City Griffin Television Inc. KXTV Sacramento/Stockton Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. KYW Philadelphia Westinghouse Electric Corp. WABC New York City American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. WAGA Atlanta Storer Broadcasting Co. 42 P.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 75 'TABLE N.Coss Reference of Owners to Call LettersContinued [Alphabetically by roil letter]

Call Ws Location Owner

WAPI 73irmingham Newhouse Broadcasting Corp. WAST Albany /Schenectady /Troy Sonderling Broadcasting Corp. WAVE Louisville Orion Broadcasting, Inc. WAVY Norfolk/Newport News Lin Broadcasting Corp. WBAL Baltimoro Hearst Corp. WRAP Dallas/Fort Worth Carter Publications, Inc. WP BM Chicago Columbia Broadcasting System In,. WBEN Buffalo Buffalo Evening News WBMO Birmingham Southern Broadcasting (33%) (various small %'s) WI3 NS Columbus Dispatch Printing Co. WI3 RC Birmingham Taft Broadcasting Co. W I3TV Charlotte. Jefferson Pilot Corp. WT3Z Boston Westinghouse Electric Corp. WCA IJ Philadelphia Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. WCBS New York City Cohnnbia. Broadcasting System, Inc. WCC13 Charlotte Mecklenburg Television Broadcasters Inc. UCCO aliimeapolis/St. Paul Mid-Contir out TV (53%), \lpis Star (47%) \\VII S Charleston /Huntington Rollins, inc . WCKT Miami Sunbeam T tinvision Corp. WC PO Cincinnati Scripps-Hot nrd Broadea,!ing Co. WDAF Kansas City Taft Broads sling Co. WDII 0 Toledo Ovcrnaeyer Co. lac. WDSU New Orleans Cosmos Broadcasting Corp. WENS Cleveland Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co- WFAA. Dallas/Fort Worth Dallas Evening News WFB 0 Greenville./S part anburg/A sheville _ Multimedia, Inc. WFLA Tampa/St. Petersburg_ Media General Inc. WFMY Crecnsboro/Winston Salem[High Landmark Communications Inc. Point. WGIIP Greensboro/Winston Salem/High Southern Broadcasting Co., Inc. Point. W GR Buffalo Taft Broadcasting Co. WHAS Louisville WIIAS Inc. WIIIIQ alemphis RKO General Inc. WIIEN Syracuse \Icreditli Corp. 11'1110 Dayton Cox Broadcasting Corp. W I !NB I la rtford/New Haven Plains Television Corp. WIITN Charleston/Huntington Reeves Broadcasting Corp. WIIC Pittsburgh Cox Broadcasting Corp.' WISII Indianapolis Corinthian Broadcasting Corp; WISN Milwaukee Hearst Corp. Will Milwaukco Storer Broadcasting Co. WJAR Providence. The Outlet Company VJBK Detroit Rorer Broadcasting Co. 1VJW Cleveland Storer Broadcasting Co. WJZ Baltimore Westinghouse Electric Corp. WK13W Buffalo Capital Cities Broadcasting Corp. WKEF Dayton Springfield Television Broadcasting Corp. WKY Oklahoma City WKY Television System, Inc. WKRC Cincinnati Taft Broadcasting Co. WKYC Cleveland RCA Corporation WKZO Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo Fetzer Communications, Inc. W LAC Nashville Life & Casualty Ins. Co. (50%); T. Baker, Jr. (25%), A. Beaman (25%) WLCY Tampa/St. Petersburg Rahall Communications Corp. WLKY Louisville Sonderling Broadcasting Co. SILOS Greenville/Spartanburg/Asheville_ Wometco Enterprises, Inc. WLS Chicago American Broadcasting Companies WLWC Columbus Ayes Corp. WLWD Dayton Avco Corp. WLWI Indianapolis Avco Corp. IVLIVT Cincinnati Avco Corp. WMAL Washington, D.0 Evening Star Newspaper Co. WMAQ Chicago RCA Corporation WMAR Baltimore A. S. Abell Co. \I'MC Memphis Scripps-lloward Broadcasting Co. WNAC Boston RKO General Inc. WNBC New York City RCA Corporation WNYS Syracuse The Outlet Corp. WOAI San Antonio Arco Corp. WOTV Grand Rapids/Kalamazoo Time, Inc. WPLG Miami Post Newsweek Stations, The. WPR I Providence. Poole Broadcasting Co. WPV I Philadelphia Capital Cities Broadcasting Corp. WQXI Atlanta Pacific & Southern Broadcasting Co., Inc. WRC Washington, D.C_ RCA Corporation WREC Memphis New York Vines Co.

42 F.C.C. 2d 76 Federal Communications Commission Reports TABLE laCross Reference of Owners to Call LettersContinued [Alphabedealty by mill letterl

Call Ills Location Owner

AA* R. i ;13 Albally/Sclaincetady/Troy General Electric Co. AS' IITY Indianapolis Mc 0 raw-Bill, Inc. AV S AZ c Itarle.ston/ I Itmtington I ee Elam-irises, Inc. WS13 AtUnto. Cox Broadcasting Corp. WS IX Nashille General Electric Company WSM Nashville NM` Corp. WSOC Charlotte. Cox Broadcasting Corp. WSPA Greenville/Spartanburg/Asheville. Spartan Radiocasting Co. W SP D Toledo Storer Broadcasting Co. WS Y R Symons'. Newhouse Broadcasting Corp. WTAE Pittsburgh Hearst Corp. \VT A R. Norfolk/Newport News Landmark Communications fnc. AVT EN Albany/Schenectady/Troy Poole Broadcasting Co. WI` E A' Providence WGAL -TV WTIC I fart foril/New Haven Travelers Corp. WS" Milwaukee The Journal Co. WIN If 1 I art ford/New Haven Capital Cities Broadcasting Corp. WI' 0 L Toledo Cosmos Broadcasting Corp. wroP Washington, D.0 . Post- Newsweek Stations, Inc. AS"I'VJ Miami Wometco Enterprises, Inc. WTVN columbns Taft Broadcasting Co. WTVT Tampa/St. Petersburg WKY Television System Inc. WVEC' Norfolk/Newport News Peninsula Broadcasting Corp. AVVCE New Orleans. Columbia Pictures Industries Inc. WSW Det rani t The Evening News Association WWL New Orleans Loyola University WX I f 0 reoeilliitsb.oro/WinstonSalem /high Multimedia, Inc. Point. WX YZ Detroit American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. WZZM Kalamazoo/Grand Rapids_ Synercom

42 F.C.C. 2d ' (_::::_m AID li- Mkt. TABLE 7.Ownership Information Wont- Interest or ownership A. S. Abell Co__ Vi'MAR-TV Owner Station(s) nel 2 CBSalien Baltimore_ Market No. 19 Rank Local News Comm.34 Fin. 11 25 78 101 Min.110 105 en PSA 41 WMAR-FM(Bal-Other broadcasting Baltimore Sun Publishing Other 7 2 102 123 115 96 17 34 6 43 WBOJ-TVWBO"-FMWBOC-AM (Salis-bury,timoro). Md.). American CO.,Broadcasting, Inc.:. WABC-TVWLS-TVKGO-TVICABC-TV 7 ABC ChicagoNewSanLos Angeles_Francis- York__ co. 3 18 115 1376 536394 617770 143 9956 6830 1 639842 253465 106 8762 WDAI-FAIWLS-AMWPLI-FMWABC-AM (Chicago) (N.Y.)(Chi- (N.Y.) cago). ABCABC Int. Records,Films, Television.Inc. WXYZ-TV 7 ABC Detroit 5 117 89 116 135 26 97 18 141 WXYZ-AMICABC-AMKSFX-FMK(30-AMICLOS-FM (S.F.) (S.F.) (L.A.)(De- (L.A.)trait). ABCA BC PicturesRecord andCorp.SalesInc. Tithe ICXYZ-AMWDVE-FMKQV-AMWRIF-FM (Pitts- (De- (Hous-(Pitts-burgh).troit). ABC Sports,Theatre Inc.Holdings, rili Arizona Tele- (licensee)vision Co. KTVK-TV 3 ABC Phoenix...L. 4b 97 88 122 49 75 91 16 111 KAUM-FM (bons-ten).ton). 5tr,,-:-.4rif[s - land).E.interest AleFar-(controlling by 2.c) Owner Station(s) Chan- Affi II- net ation Marizet TABLE 17.Ownership informationContinued Mkt.No. Rank Local News Comm. Fin. MM. Worn- en PSA Other broadcasting Interest or ownership Publishing Other ...'C.. Avco Corp WLWC-TV.._ 4 NBC Columbus, O. 18 131 99 67 121 118 15 27 91 W1VD C-AM (Wash., Avco Embassy '.-S.'.'0 . WOAI-TVWLWT-TVWLWI-TVWLWD-TV 13 452 NBCABC SanCincinnatiIndianapolisDayton Antonio 45201439 58256583 586430 1 118 428826 137129130 31 44839337 123 3647 928781 8 38365079 WWDKOIT-FMKYA-AM-FM WOAI-AMC-FM (San(San Francisco)Antonio) _ D.C.). " " CarteAvco Blanche Radio TelevisionAvcoSales, Pro-Inc.Pictures. '8'Q0,..., Bonneville Int. KIRO-TV 7 CBS Seattle/ 16 114 66 83 109 125 39 EU 140 KSL-AMWRTH -AM (Salt (St. Louis) Salt Lake The Church manufactur-&Ave()gram varioustug Sales,Film interests 0gC.. Corp. K8L-1'V 5 CBS Salt Lake CityTacoma 50 33 57 90 88 8 145 147 118 KSL-FMWFRM-FMWNEW-AMKIRO-FMKIRO-AM (N.Y.)Lake)(Seattle) " " " " NewsCity Desert Brigham Daytheof Jesus ChristLatter SaintsUniversityYoung of 0.'"67co KBYU-FMKXTZ-FMKBIG-AMlaIBR-FMKMBZ-AM (L.A.) (K.C.) " CATV Utah;Logan,Wash.";(Seat I le, co0-2 Buffalo NewsEvening Inc. WBEN-TV 4 CBS Buffalo 25 38 55 21 60 80 130 136 35 WBEN-FMWCLR-FMWBEN-AMKBYU-TV (Buffalo)(Skokie,(Provo, U.) Ill.) "0 Buffalo NewsEvening City,SaltOgden, Lake U.') U.; Capital CitiesBroadcastingCorp, WPVI-TVWKBW-TVKTRK-TV 13 76 ABC Pluladel-BuffaloHouston__ phis 2615 4 507364 147818 106 6295 113 2169 57 109100124 45 102 256665 123106 14151 101 1031 KFWKBW-AM RE-TV (Buffalo)(Fresno, Cal.) Potin°t'ilaFairchild P ublica- Press WTNH -TV 8 ABC Hartford/ HavenNow 22 95 81 81 28 WPAT-FMWTVD-TVKPOL-FM13:POL-AMWPAT-AM (L.A.) (L.A.)(Paterson.(Durham, N.C.)N.J.) Co. Carter Publics- Bons, Inc. WBAP-TV 5 NBC Dallas/FL Worth 11 93 132 50 36 116 96 100 30 WBAP-AMWPWBAP-FMWPRO-FM (Ft. Worth)(PRro°v-i"dence) "" Ft. Worth Star-Ttle-gram HoustonChronicle Post/ Pub.Co.TVChannel Co. 2 KRON-TVKP RC-TV 24 NBCNBC SanHouston Francisco 15 8 41 29 22 79 94 132114 107 63 12 Km.R.OanNe-iscF301,,CP RC-AM (San (Houston) HoustonSan Post Francisco Western Communi- Chronicle by-theCATVcationsCroning,Ca.;Ca. Sea,Chico, iel- Concord,lows,Ca.;MateoOrlando, Wil-San Ca.; Cy., Ca.).SanCATVWTVesthCranbleCa.;) Fran., (S. cC) .0.- Owner Station(s) Chan- AMR-net talon Market TABLE 17.Ownership InformationContinued Mkt.No. Rank Local News Comm. Fin. Min. Worn - on PSA Interest or ownership Other 00 c2. t=4-N..:...?. Columbia Broadcasting KNXT-TVKMOX-TV 24 CBS LosSt. Louis__._ Angeles_ 12 2 4027 2159 11 8 141128105 8836 112 31 7232 8.549 WCBS-AMOther (NewbroadcastingYork). Holt, PublishingRinehart, CBSCBS Intl lIfusical System, Inc. WCBSWCAU-TVWBBM -TV 10 2 CBS NewPhila-Chicago York._ delphia 3 14 742646 337542 18 49 111127 652773 817559 3313 1 225238 WCBS-FMWBBM-AMWCAU-FMWCAU-AM (Chicago)(Phila.) " " andWinston CBSCinema Labora-FilmsCenterInterests WBBM-FMKCBSKMOX-FMKMOX-AM -AM (San (St.Louis)Fran.) "" W.Creative B. Co.SaundersPlaythgstortes KNX-FMKNX-AMWEEI-FltWEEIKCBS-FM -A31 (Los Angeles)(Boston) "" ViacomCBS Schools,Intl. IleraldsburgCATVMc.Ca.;(Fairfax, ...... (Hollywood) Sonora,Valley,Ca.;Ca.;Sausalito,Geroninio San Ca.;Belle- Inc.Telerantatle,Wa.;Angeles,Portvue, W:t.); CATVWa.:Seat- SystemsTele-vietems);(22lne.(17 sys- CATV systems)Inc.CavisionCable-Nor-Caltems.); TV (2 Columbia KCP.:-..-TV 4 ABC Salt Lake 50 109 142 136 16 40 85 116 29 KCPX-AM (Salt Sereen Gems casting)Gemsinc.InduPictures (Screen stries Broad- WU VE-TV 8 ABC New Orleans.City. 31 79 107 112 44 34 117 15 72 WNJU-TV.KCPN-F Juan)Lake(Newark) City). M (San " ScreenSc Gems-MusicProductionsMusicColumbia inc. *1VOLE-TV 3(tguyatgl'illielzia, -P. R.) LearningBell Records _CkioirlepriCPictures coal' oItniili i a combined lionsComnumica- Inc. KOCO-TVKBTV-TV 95 ABCABC OklahoDenver a City. 3241 112 91 9162 124128 142 81 4253 113 17 11795 123 33 KTAR-AMK(TPAilmR-VA)1. " Phoenix Mag. ArizonaOutdoor Eller OutdoorAdvertising Cosmos Broad- casting Corp. WKTAR-TV DSU-TV 1211 6 NBC NewPhoenix Orleans. 453145 362398 20878 556471 668265 1224855 115 45 38 627720 10313688 KBLG-AM1VSFA-TVKBLU-TV (Yuma) (Montgonterv). " Cox Broad- casting Corp. WitWI1C-TVWTOL-TV IO-TV 11 7 2 NBCCBS Dayton_PittsburghToledo 3917 9 126 3115 4517 5 123 5653 133101 54 116 87 8 101 2324 114 7422 143 56 WSB-AMWSB-FMWIS-AM (Allanta)_ (Colutn-ISb -TV i a Sc .) " United Teelmitial Bing Crosby Productiolis WSOC-TVWSB-TV 9 NBC AtlantaCharlotte..., 35 57 122 75 18 47 90 110 109 78 WIOT)-AMWiTrg-til.W1110-AM DiNrirl e3,; ttosti 1piouibisti,,, Cox Cable Coltiniu- -9 3 WSOC-AKTVWA IA-FM (7-TV M (Miami).(Oakland). "- CAT' 3p(ortttl7-5nailed)::::owned s, and i ws(ColciarlFoAttle). I-CITY" (2 *s':,(lowland "ins/r::::'Servitiei t 8 11. 85 47 114 75 85 95 37 . 67 (!ompany ea Dallas Evening News WFAA-TV ARC Dallas/Ft. Worth W DWWFAA-AM FM-TV FAA-FM (Beaumont,(Dallas). Tx.) " MorningNews-Texan Mws 6 subtotal'dailiesDallas TABLE 17.Ownership InformationContinued Woru- tD00 Q ow,,t. Station(s) Chart- Affill-nel 10 ation Columbus___ Market Mkt.No. 28 Reak Local News Cemm. Fin.22 22 19 85 61 Alin. 33 en 45 PSA 14 Other broadcasting Interest or ownership Publishing Other Dispatch Print-mg Co. WBNS 11 CBS WBNS-AM WBNS-FM(Columbus). " Dispatch*Columbus Dispatch.Co.Printing Dun & Brad- street. KXTV-TVKROU-TV 10 CBS Houston____Sacra- mento/Stockton 2715 105 70 101 25 3630 122110 127 66 125105 8250 7460 WANE-TVKOTV-TV (Tulsa)_ (Ft. Worth). Corinthian Editors, Corinthian lownedBroadcast- by . Evening News Assn. ', WISII-TV .0-TV 13 4 NBCABC DetroitIndianap- oils. 14 5 104 69 73 9 3165 131 80 112136 9467 109 28 8367 \VWJWW,I-FM -AM (Detroit). Detroit N f WS _ " Bradstreet.Dun & Evening Star Broadcasting WMAL-TV 7 ABC Wash., D.C 10 7 4 6 30 57 87 2 17 WAIAL-AMWALA-TVKOLD-TV (Wash.(Mobile)(Tucson) D.C.) Et'Nefttsititp.,Bler Co. WCIV-AMWCIV-TVwL(Lvyit-cAhrirg,WLVA-TVWAIAL-PM Va.)(Charleston, S.C.) " D.C. Petzer lac.munivations1 Corn- WKZO-TV 3 CBS llrandRer12411111Z00Kala- 41 138 108 100 91 142 147 1' KOIN-TVKOLN-TV ((band(Lincoln) " rCablevisionWolverine ATV WJEF-AMWKZO-AM*KM E G-TV (Grand(Kalamazoo)(SiouxIsland, Me.)City) Rapids) Creek,NIL(Albion, Battle Mi.) WWTV-FMWWTV-AMWW TFV--F(Cadillac) TM V Fisher Com- patties, Inc. KATKOMO-TV U-TV 24 4 ABC Seattle/ Tacoma 2610 113 1824 5032 9666 2861 1328 2161 716810 846125 KOMO-AM (Seattle) Grimm! Electric Co. . . KOA-TVWRGB-TVWSLX-TV 68 NBCABC Denver_Portland__Albany-Nashville______323730 118 61 100 5682 121125 79 108 3932 132129 22 138135 70 97 9 138 26 KOA-AMWSIX-AMKOA-FM (Denver) (Nash- " Mannfaeturinging inei.thandis-financial Troyectady/Sc-hen- WOY-FMWOY-AMWSLX-FM (Belie-nectady)vine) "" i lenral Elm:-Atwater,(Merced-CATVCorp.(Isiblevision file Ca.;Anderson,Creek,Walnutville,Ca.; Tracey, Vaca- Ca.; Ca.;teeat ur; II.; Witt12N.Y.;lane,Ms.;In.; ertown, fran- Biloxi, Baffles-Als.; and Harte-HanksJohn T. Griffin_ KWTV-TVNewspapers KENS-TV 59 CBS SanOklahoma AntonioCity 4541 130 54 106 77 9382 8377 134 2.5 104 12 8461 64 8 Express Pill). AngeloCo. (San chises) Herald;SpringNews;ReAbilene porterTimes;Standard- Big .?I Herald:DenisonChristiCorpusTimes;Caller PI,Pts0 ituIMastNewsMarshall feral aGreenville tier apeIl- r: GO Chan- Af1111- TABLE 17.Ownership InformationContinued..Mkt. Worn- Interest or ownership GO Hearst Co p. Owner 1VBAL-TV station(s) 11 NBC Baltimore__ ation Market No. Rank Local News Comm.19 Fin. 48 19 33 95 WI. 61 en 56 PSA 21 WB A rAM Other broadcastingmore) Baltimore Publishing ws- Other WTAE-TVW1SN-TV 12 CBS4 ABC Pittsburgh__Milwaukee__ 21 9 132 8 5297 6008 123 10 15S2 118 32 9300 58 \YHA16 WISN-AM L- FM (Mil- WTAE-ANI (Pitts-waukee)burgh) " SanLos Francisco Angeles IiiAmericanETamincr'Liam iner WAI'A-AMw'r A E-FM (SaltJuan) BostonSeattleSan Antonio Post- InlelligenerAmericanLightRecord- SportsharpersCosmopolitanGood House- "I field Bomarkeeping Hubbard Co.Broadcasting rue. ICSTP-TV 5 NBC Minneapo- 13 59 43 91 63 71 91 73 126 SOB-TV (Albu- KOB-AMquerque) " AvonSciencePopular books .P:grst Mcchanirs Paul WKWTOG-TV SIT ca0-AM -AM -FM (St. press(Minn.Petersburg) Gardens, St. Paul) Jefferson Pilot WSTV-TV 3 CBS Cniulotte_ _ _ 35 82 46 52 93 120 134 52 63 WBT-AM (Char- WWBT-FM \VB'FWBIG- -TV AM (Rich-lotto)(Greensboro)mond) " Jefferson Productions Journal Co 11"1'51J-TV 4 NBC Milwaukee__ 21 74 13 - 92 107 89 44 76 135 WT51_ -AM (11i1- WT211J-FM Wauke). " '511hr:tut:ea itotroai 5111v:ester!' payRelay (closed tIi Iont- jilt) 1Vi.;Wausau..ing,Point,GATV(SivVOIS Whit- Wi.) Wi.; KellyKing Broad- Broad- casting Co. KCRA-TVKGW-TV S NBCS NBC Saeramen- Portland__ tonto/Stock- 162627 1020 3 677627 483514 5373 6 69 32 86 7 6 124 35SS 133 3277 KCRA-AMKING-AM (Scat-(Sac- KCITC-FM tie)ramento) King Video- eat& Co. casting Co. KING-TV 5 NBC Seattle/ Tacoma KRE111-1,111KREM-AMKI1E51-TVKING-PM (Spokane) " Lakeville,Ga.;Los(Lodi,CATV Angeles,Placer- Ca.;Os- Cu. KINK-FMKGW-AM (Portland) CI Montesano,burg,t'a.;Portland,wego, Ellens- 1Va.; Ca.; "VatteF vt-!itatSeattle,Kelso,port,ll'a.)Bothell,Wit.; Wit.; %,'a.; Wit.; West- KOOL Radio- KOOL-TV 10 CBS Phoenix 45 140 99 76 140 119 ti7 115 11 KOOL-FM inittelibies)and;3lie. systems GATV2 te,gt. Television,Geneinterest(controllingInc. (licenses) Antry). by ( B hoettix). PA,1:1 C.71 Owner Chan- Affi nel Market TABLE 17.Ownership InformationContinuedMkt: No. Min. Wom- en Interest or ownership Lan;Imark Communica- W FM Y-TV StatIon(s) 2 CBS ation Greensboro/ High 43 Rank Local News Comm. Fin. 9 06 38 2 76 83 75 I'SA 91 \\UTAH-AM[Not legible]Other broadcasting Norfolk PublishingVirginian-Pilot Te livable Corp. ('ATVOther Lions Inc. 1 NTA H-TV 3 CBS Norfolk/ Hampton.News/NewportWinston-Point/Salem. 44 105 39 \VTAR -FM (Norfolk).(Norfolk). GreensboroLedger Star Daily News. Al.;Opelika,cater,Ga.;lumbus,(Auburn, Selma,Co-De- AI.; N.C.;nokeIn.;Kokomo,ington,Al.;Rapids, Roa-Bloom- 11.; andW.Va.;Princeton,ley,Va.;Wytheville, 7Racine, W.Va; Beck- WI. Lee Enterprises WSAZ-TVInc. 3 NBC Charleston/ tonHunting- 33 124 119 58 71 139 5 13", 01 KGLO-AM KGLO-TVKEYC-TV (Mankato,(Mason City, Mn.) Ia.) ". " Various daily . Wisconsin,Illinois,innewspapers Iowa, franc:1113es) WMWTAKIIQA-TVKEYC-FM D D-FD-AM R-P31 Al (Quincy,(Hannibal, 11.) Mo.) " andMontana,Nebraska, Oregon Life& Casualty WLAC-TVinsurance(half-owner) Co. 5 CBS Nashville ___ 30 56 39 101 114 49 9s 85 135 W LAC-FM ( Nash- KFAB-AM-FAI vill)(Omalia)(Moline, 11.) American suranceLifeGeneral in- CO. Lin Broadcast- WAVY-TVing Corp. 10 NBC Norfolk/ News/Newport 44 81 121 54 37 84 88 58 20 WAND-AM (Be- WAND-TV catur, B.) Hampton WAR`-:KAAY-AMKAREEL AY-FM -AM (Little-FM (Shreveport)Rock) "" WBBFWIL-AMWBBF-FMWIL-FM (St. Louis)(Lov.:sville)(Rochester) " " Loyola University WWL-TV 4 CBS New Orleans 31 11 7 24 72 31 139 99 95 WWL-AM (New WWL-FMKILT-AMKILT-FMOrleans)(Houston) " " MecklenburgMcGraw-Hili Broadcs3tersTelevisionInc. WCCB-TVWRTV-TVI::ITV-TVKMQH -TV 1810 NBCABC San67 NBCCBS Diego___ Indianapolis Denver____._Charlotte__ 32351449 144112 3799 133111 6544 129102 3973 118 844089 137 649862 133 497579 101 214498 112121 WKAB-TVKERO-TV8851 WABG-AM (Green -(Montgomery)(Bakersfield) Mt.:arr.:v-11111 Inc. WLBJ-AMWBBJ-TVWOLO-TVWAB G-TV (Bowl (Jackson. (Colum-In.)wood,bia, Ms.) S.C.) " wi)0D-AMKXEL-FMKXEL-AMW LBJ-FM (Water-W WOloo,(Lynchburg,Green, D-AM Ia.) Ky.) VA " toP9- WKIN-AM (Kingsport,WDOD(Chattanooga) -FM In.) " 00 00 Chan- TABLE 17.Ownership Mkt. f or m ationContimted Worn- nwner Station(s) nel S ation Alaikei No. 24 Rank Local News 127Comm. Fin. 120 51 134 78 Bin, 41 en113 PSA 54 Other broadcasiimg Interest c. 'ovnershiP Pimlishing Other MeredithMedia General, Corp__ KCMO-TVInc. WFLA-TV 5 CBSNBC KansasTampa/St. City Petersburg 4323 87 127 54 8909 102 90 5497 91 9 140CO 115109 WHEN-AMWFLA-FMWFLA-AM (Thin-Pa) " Rater I fame,' CA'l'V burg,( Fredeeicg,i_ Va.) WHEN-TV CBS Syracuse_ log WP110-AM (Syracuse)(Phoenix) AA Su cce.vxful and Garden,'Fanning WOW-TVWOW-FMWOW-AMKFMU-FMKCMO-AMWPHO-TV (Omaha) (Kansas City) " " NewAp:ileton-Lyons Century & Cornelia!'CroftsCentury Metromedia KMBC-TV 9 ABC Kansas City 23 135 102 133 94 00 53 5 47 KMET-FMKLAC-AMWNEW-TVWNEW-FMWNEWtVNEM (Now-TV (Los (Flint) York)Angeles) "" WolperBeiromodia Pic- LuresCorp.Producers Ltd. WTTO-TVWASHWXIX-TVKTTV-TV -1'9I (New-D.C.)(Washington,port, Ky.) "" IceWolper ( 'amides Pro- dilutions,Inc. WOMC-FMWIIK-AMWMMRWIP-AM -FM (Phila- (Cleve-(Detroit)land)delphia) " WCBM-AMKSAN-FMWTCN-TVWM31S -FM (Cleve-(Baltimore)(Minneapolis) land) Metropolitan BroadcastingCorp, KOVR-TV 13 .ABC Sacramento/ Stockton 27 44 134 120 20 5 108 131 97 KMJland)KNEW-AMKMJKAIJ-FM -AM -TV (Fresno)._ (Oak- Fresno Bce____ " SacramentoModesto lice C AT V Inc.CablevisionNor Cal coCe KBFK-AMKB E E-F3.1E-AM (Modesto)(Sacramento) " Bee franchises)emitCity,Ca.;((Anvil Tuba Ca.; le, dO. MidwestMideentinent Tele- visionTelevision Inc, KEMB-'WC C O-TV TV 84 CBSCiltf' Minneapo-San Diego__ Paullis/St 4:313 9684 5112 2074 13213'J 128 72 2871 3029 116 37 KFMBNYCOKBFK-FM O-AM -AM (San(Minneapolis)Diego) "Lindsay-"Minneapolis SchaubStarTribune and Co. CA TV ( Rice Lake, \Vi.) WMIID-TVW3111W31BKF3111-FM D-AMD-FAI (Peoria) "" GazelleNewsChampaignNewspapers co Multhnedia Inc_ WFBC-TV 4 NBC Greenville/ Ashevilleburg/Spartan- 40 72 101 63 14 130 60 36 85 WFBC-AMWMWFBC-FMW C AIA-TV Z-AM (Greenville)(Champaign) AshevilleGreenville PiedmontNews cATVlu.)(Columbus, N.tico W$ :I -TV 12 NBC Greensboro/ PointHighSalem/Winston 48 63 118 105 29 21 137 26 112 W131WMAZ-F,fWB1RWI-Mt-AMWA1A Ft-FM Z-1-TV ' (Knoxville)(Macon) " AlabamaNI ontgomery JournalAdvertiserTimesCitizan -.4 WWNC-AM (Ashy Nine) " cA) Ce2 GO cb Owner StIllion(s) Chan- nel anon Market Mkt.No. Rank Local News Conlin. Fin. ner$hip 1nf or nialionContinued Min. Wom- en PS A Other broadcasting Interestorownersltip Publishing other Newhouse BroadcastingCorp. WAN-TVKTVI-"WKOIN-TV 13 326 ABCNBCCBS Binning-St.Portland__ Louis__ ham 43382612 526821 117126 8684 127141) 4629 13172659 10631(112 143 147827 143146129 89 137 17 5 WAN-AMWSYR-FMWSYR-AM (Syracuse) " Jersey City JournalPestDenver CA1A- A l.:lg..(Anniston, cart N.Y.;ii- WSYR-TV NBC Syracuse__ 47 WTPA-TVWTPA-FMWAN-FMWS YE-TV (Birmingham)(Harrisburg) " " NewarkLong Star-Press JournalandLedger Star NIN.Y.;('inning, esseialone, Delhi, et. KOIN-FAIKOIN-AM (Portland)(Elmira-Corning) Staten Island Adrance N.Y.;IN.i ).2densburg.Meonla, Y.;Romp, ClamourAladernoisclleLogueNews and RepublicanSunday New13N.Sidney,N.Y.; othersV.; York and in 0C)ztFo' Now York Times Coin- WREC-TV 3 CBS Memphis__ 29 128 131 108 114 109 111 130 WHEC-AM (Memphis) New YorkRouse & TimesGarden .)3,-..,,c..°..' Pany WQXR-AM (New Chattanooga 37' NTL Corp WSNI-TV 4 NBC Nashville_ 30 28 24 97 67 16 129 54 142 WSNI-AMvqxR-FAI (Nashville)York) ii Times Third Na- tional Bank -....., 0 Orion Broad- casting Co. WAVE-TV 3 NBC Louisville_ 36 106 95 85 92 86 64 127 83 WMT-AMWAVE-AMWSM-FM (Cedar (Louisville) (ATV ( ( ;randSi.N111.of Nashville Ranids,Peter, Mi.; c,3-5?:5 W.1WMT-TVWAIT-FMWFIE-TV MN -TV (Eyin.:-(Escanaba,vine,Rapids) In.) MO "" Outlet. Co KSAT-TV 1210 ABC San An tonio 45 7891 99 131 28 38 91 I IS 48 128 %VIA R-AM W I? nv-Tv ((km!(Providence)Bay) Retail de- partmcnt Overmaster Inc. WDIIOWAR-TV -TV'INN I'S-TV 24 9 ABCNBC ToledoSyracuse_PI ovidenca._ . _ _ 454331 100107 139141III 144143 47 70 78 29IS 142 35 2 144102 31 117 WX73 IX-TV WDBO-FM7 WDBO-AM WDBO-TV (Cincinnati)(Orlando) " stores KDJO-TVWATT,Kh1MO-TVWPGII-TV -TV (Rosen- (San(Atlanta)Francisco)(Pittsburgh) Pacific and Co.BroadcastingSouthern WQXI-Ti: 11 ABC Atlanta 17 143 129 126 112 99 75 23 44 WQXI-AM KIION-TVWSAI-FMMaWS AI I-FM -Ails (Cincinnati)(Atlanta)berg, Tx.) " " KKDJK IIICAII-TV AVV-TV -EM (Los (Wailuku,(Hilo,(lIonoluln) IL)IL) N.rAGoc",z- WWDJKYXI-AMKIMN-AM -AM Angeles)(Oregon(Deliver)(I Iackensack) City, tiN. Peninsula Broadcasting . WVEC-TV 13 ABC Norfolk/ Newport 44 137 137 135 42 95 131 411 91 WVEC-AM (Hampton,Ore.) Va.) ( A hoskie, (7 m INft Corp. HamptonNews/ WV F. C-FM " burg,N..;NI orttees-Emporia N.C.; . cea^..----, P 011,...,4)v...: and 5 C.CD co Owner Stationts) Chan- A11111-nel ation Market TABLE I7.Owner 8hip information--ContinuedMkt.No Rank Local News Comm. Fin. 111in. Wort- eu PSA Other broadcasting 101,rest or ownership othcr l\D b2 Plains Televl- siou Corp. *WIINB-TV 30 NBC Hartford/ HavenNew 22 103 116 23 64 136 78 144 WICS-AMW1CD-AM (Spring-(Champaign,lield, II.) II.) Publishing CA '1'V Mi.;(Muskegon, Me- oiiesburg, t7.1 ' Poole Broad- casting Corp. Ii.TEN-TV1VPRI-TV 1210 CBS Alba:71,1Providence_ Sell-nee- 3734 9051 110115 103 :LI 76 3 113 39 29 3 1?091 105 5" WTEN-AMWJRT-TV (Flint) (Albany) lib)l'a.;11 and ichmond, tiC: ' ' Pulitzer Pub- lishing Co. KSD-TV 5 NBC St. ',Ail, Tr,ytad. 12 66 36 68 74 108 121 83 45 KSI)WC DC-A -AM M(St. Louis)(Adams, Ma.) St. Louis l'atl-Ills- CA TV 51o.)( clay I,,n, (578f- Rahall Coin- WLCY-TV 10 ABC Tampa/St. 24 70 61 44 86 00 140 137 4 WLCY-AMKOAT-TVK VOA -TV (St. (Albuquerque)(Tucson) patch CATV (Hills- asO Corp.mmileatioils burgPeters- NVKAP-AMWFBM-FMWFBM-AMWLCY-FM (Allentown,(Indianapolis)Petersburg) Pa.) " FL)borough, C: RCA WKYC-TVKNBC-TV 34 NBC Cleveland__Los Angeles_ 72 116 14 113 3 86 3 126138 4335 2654 673S 8899 WNBC-AMWWNR-AM (New York)(Beckley', W.Va.) Random House RCA Global Communi- P..;"j VWNBC-TVWMAQ-TV .CC-TV 445 NBCNBC Washington_NewChicago York City 10 13 123943 496041 1517 2 103136 97 5874 7 436751 664117 101 9665 WRC-FMWNBC-FMWMAQ-AMW RC-AM (Wash-(Chicago)ingtan) " " 111'A InsibemionsCorp.Servic.;ternatRCA halal In- osO(t) KNBC-FM(LosWKYC-FMWKYC-AMWMAQ-FM Angeles)(Cleveland) " RCAliC Dis- .\ Sales ItributingCorr. 'orp. this Inc. WJAS-AMKNII It-AM (Pitts- (Sanburgh)Francisco) Merle. Corp. Reeves Tele- com, Corp. WHTN-TV 13 ARC Charleston/ tonHunting- 33 110 107 19 102 8 12 .19 WKEE-AMWITH-FM (Huntington)(Baltimore) M " Tt'Itn'romC ATV (owns ownspartially127Ter 6 systoms;(other 'top. W131,WKEE-FM (1-TV (exington) " r, +:s SIY7, of Alarmsfrom:lases)otherholdssystems: Ti owns Tiff':, of Inc.Corp.CATVIlidustriesParker & Owns Tele- sionTransmis-PrompTerCable'PI of iota ()wits Tele-Inter- blierowavamountainKansas(1; Montana Ine ' ()wits Tel- MexicosionTransmis-Prom of Noss' O'er .siratnlnllie': ofOrog011'Crimsons- heell'rompTer 115 Inn. mak Corp. CC, 4?) Owner Station(s) Chart- MOH-nel anion Market TABLE 17 .-0 ICH CISill P In:format to nMkt.No. Rank Local News Conun. Fin. Min. nit Worn-inued en PSA Interest or ownership ..... u Wier . . G P. RICO General 29 141 138 139 52 111 HO 119 134 KII-J-AMOther (Los broadcasting Publishing 11 KO Radio (--, Inc. WNAC-TVWHBQ-TV 13 ABC 7Memphis ABC Bzzion 6 17 37 41 27 50 19 112 22 WOERTII-FM R-TV (New Angeles)York) " RKO StanleyTheatersWarnerPictures ^...1-- W1113Q-AMV.XWOE LO -AM -1, A I " " 14 General Tire andInc. Rubber (7.. WIIW II 1.1Q-FMKO-AM (Memphis) Cablecom- General,. ...,,...... ,0 WOMS-FMRUMS -AM (Bethesda)(Boston) partly-systemsInc.(owns C ATV and 0 s....,z:.,.7.-. ICKE E-AM (SanKF Francisco)(Bethesda)RC-FM (San franchisesandofholdsothers;owns 3 con-other 1007012 0ec...... 'Mountain interestStatestrolling11 in 011terS) 0,....--.,:4.,, Rollins Inc WCIIS-TV yr r8 CBS CluCeston/ 33 121 85 132 21 110 10 60 69 W:.-.311-(-AM c A.Tv (Wil- franellises)CVideo ATV Inc. (20 'i0 ---i tonHunting- W13wWEAR-TV pTV-TV E E-AM (NorthPole,(Pensacola)(Charleston) N.Y.) Be.)likington, s3 cn0' KDAY-AMWWAMS-AM RAP-AM (Santa(Norfolk)(Wilmington)(Harvey, Monica) 11.) Sripps- Corp.BroadcastingHoward WMCWEWS-TVWC PO-TV -TV 59 NBCABCCBS Memphis--Cleveland__Cincinnati__ 2920 7 125 8942 389240 134 8U49 115100 98 925033 134107127 :,,810, 96 100121127 W1'TVWMC-I(WMC-AM -T M \' (WestPalm(Memphis) Beach) " Scripps- NewspapersHowardPress;(Pittsburgh WNOX-AM(Tulsa)KTEW-TV (Knoxville) ClevelandCincinnati1'mlTim(Prtss; and s-Star; :4....:-----.. Pr(limp;NIKnoxville R.,-;Irs FortSell- Al- Wort Ii ... Cz:.:c. AlmanacbuquerqueIITribune) 'odd 72:--74. ....:zz . Sounderling Corp.Broadcasting W LK Y-TVWA ST-TV 32 13 ABCABC Louisville._Albany/ Troynectady/Sche- 3637 9230 130135 142119 11 9 23 4 8412 11 4 130 48 1','WKFOX--FMKFOX-AM R. L-AM (New (LongYork)Beach) " ModernSBC Man- TeleseragementCorp. vices 2z: WWOPA-A GLI)-FM M (OakPark, 11.) " Bernard Inc.!Inward fi WOL-WAIL)WD1A-AMK DIA-AM -AM -F\1 (Memphis)(Oak)aiul) " & Co. Southern Co.,Broadcasting Inc. WGHP-TV"WBMG-TV 42 8 ABCCBS Greensboro/Birmingham Winston- 4838 139 125 117 50 143 118 39 103 7 119 KWBMG-AMW ULF-AMMO D-F M (Houston)(Birmingham)(Washington) " PointHighSalem/ 1,),W RVHVQ-FM KOTOB-AM A-A Y-AM M (Phoenix)(Richmond) " WYYWS%VI:IX-AM 1)-FM G N-AM (Birmingham)(Raleigh)(Winston-Salem) " CnCJ TABLE 17. Ownership Informal ionC011tilMedMkt. Rom- Interest or ownership P.,Pttz Spartan Owner WSPA-TV Station(s) Chan- anti-net 7 CBSation Greenville/ Market No. 40 Rank Local News 129Comm. Fin. 103 57 117 121 Min. 74 en101 PSA 104 WSPA-AMOther (Spar- broadcasting Publishing Other Corp.Broadcasting 22 Ashevilleburg/Spartan- 39 WT110-FMWTI10-AMWSPA-FM (Thomson,taiMurg, S.C.) Ca.) " " Springfield Corp.BroadcastingTelevision WKEF -TV 2 ABC Dayton 50 53 83 104 63 11 144 94 106 WRLP-TVWRLP-AMWWLP-TV (Greenfield,(Springfield, Ma.)Ma.) " Standard Corp__ KUTV-TV NBC Salt Lake City SaltOgden Lake Standard . Storer Broad- casting Co. WAWITI-TV (1A-TV 256 ABCCBS AtlantaMilwaukee 2117 5 133 4560 937270 111 99 5 124116 22 106 4179 407193 132126 09 132120100 W DEE-AN1 (Detroit) Tribune CATVNortheast (20 systemsAirlines in WJW-TVWJBK-TV 13 8 CBSCBS ToledoCleveland...Detroit 45 7 119 77 124 09 113 43 104 41 107 77 5452 128142 108 71 WSPD-AMWJW-AM(Boston)WSBK-TV (Toledo) additionalandFlorida;tentsCalifornia 3 sys- in 3 WSPD-TV NBC KGBS-AMW PKG NA-FM 13S-FM (Los Angeles)(Philadelphia)(Cleveland) andfranchisesFlorida)California 3 in in 7 Miami 18 56 71 27 40 117 123 47 45 WIIN-AMWGBS-All (NewYork)(Miami) SynercomSunbeam LionsCommuidea- Corp. WZZM-TVWCKT-TV 7 ABCNBC Kalamazoo/ RapidsGrand 41 35 1,2 95 43 t 14 22 133 24 NUM-FM (Kahl-mazoo/GrandRapids) 1-. Taft Broad- Casting ('o; WRAFWE RC-TV -TV 48 NBCABC KansasBinning- haw 2338 134 -19 3423 72I:: 141 51 131141 11)3121 135 55 SI8l WKWl;KR-PM 11C-AM .l 'in-union' i) 4.-c.4.- i IVOR-TV 12 2 ABCNBC CincinnatiBuffalo City 2025 120123 141 74 13810,.1 3445 133 81 3029 8670 41_a W'rWI'VN-A\1 VN-FNI (Columbus) -1c WTVN-TVWKRC-TV 6 ABC Columbus 28 136 128 13)) 68 105 18 46 7)) W);W(111.-AMW11 It11C-FAIBC-AM -1,l1 (Buffalo)diirmingliani) " -I WI/AV-FMWDAF-All (Kaasas City) " .....,...r.Z.C 8 41 62 48 37 106 67 16 115 74 WN E 1,-TV (Wilkes-Barr) --:7:---, Time, toe WOTV-TV NBC Kalamazoo! (1ratmlRapids KOCO b'Al (San Ng") Tim,. 1,,r- )u.11"utIlhigfrith 5 'I. ill. ;:voris z..---, -,.. Times Yin-or Corp. KDFW-TV 4 CBS Dallas-Fort Worth 11 101 2)) 31 125 111 SI) 4)) 45 Dallas Tinos- Thne-Lifemaa-tinesII(Books raid "Cliorell of Jeans Christ ..:.-...... ,,.._, oraageLos Angeles Coa,1 MillY.Vt irsda177nr Mho( y 0 nationalVilleof Latter(seeDay 111ter- Bonne-Saints ':..--....:.:, T-AI Com- intinitionCorp.)co. CATV :.'; t-.I...... ,7-J in4andill franchises CaliforniaCalifornia,Nee:(Si Flori. sySlm, York. la: ,....4...,',:..., -Travelers Corp__ WT[C -TV 3 CBS Hartford- 22 16 68 28 5 110 48 42 13 ITTIC-A Al Mart- andFlorida) Sin 2,.,. 122t 20th Century Fox KM SP-TV 0 ABC Minneapo- PaulitsHavenNew -St. 13 122 101) 141 - 15 126 147 43 122 W T I C-FM ford-New Ilaven) " ''(,(11 Century Corp.Pox Film --.1CD Owner Station(s) Chan- ABM-nel anon Market TABLE 17. Ownership InformationContinuedMkt.No. Rank Local News Comm. Fin. Min. Worn- en PS A. Other broadcasting Interest or ownership Publishing Other 00cf) Washington Post Co., Inc. WPLG-TVWTOP-TV 10 9 ABCCBS Washington,Miami D.C. 1810 55 6 7910 10 1 120 87 5052 126 66 19 3 56 WTOP-AM40 WTOP-FMWJXT -AM (Jacksonville)(Washington,D.C.) " " Wa.Thiagtongewswerk Pos Home Theater TV)Co.Network (pay Westinghouse Corp. KDKA-TV 52 CBS SanPittsburgh__ Fran- 89 14 31 4 13 6 30 1 103 57 5811 125 53 14 W 11Z-FAI9 WHZ-AM (Boston) WCKY-AMWJXT-TV (Cincinnati) " Manufacturingof home ap- WJZ-TVWBZ-TVKYW-TVKPIX-TV 13 43 ABCNBC BaltimoreBostonPhiladelphia ._ eisco 19 64 31 25 15 62 5916 7 5523 4 138123 24 128 73 4 572170 17 23 KYW-AMKDKA-AM (Plata- (Pitts- delphia) electronicapparatusforequipmentplialaies; industry WIND-AMWINS-AMWOWO-AMKDKA-FAT (New (FLWayne)York)burgh) " includingofandtraumnssioa, electricity,utilizationeration,for the gen- C KFWB-AM (LosAngeles)(Chicago) cATv energyatomicthroughvelopedthat de- CsoCO' Milledge-ville,lin.FlitTallahassee,City,(Panama (Li.,, Dub-cia.,Fla., ti OCO N.Y.)Voldnsta,Swainsboro,"Brous,(ia.,asville,Ga., Thom- (la., CA TV (fran- Closed Circuitvtn,Lviiiichise(Micro- Fla.) in lia- ... WGAL-TV,v11AS, Inc_ Inc WTEV-TV WENS-TV 11 6 CBSABC Louisville_Providence 3634 1988 130 35 110 84 3348 2032 131 1 130 80 6533 WIWGAL-TV I AS -A M (Lan-cluster) Itehly Inc.) .....7,-;.-,'"?. WI:Y Television WK(licensee)System Y-TV Inc. WTVT-TV 13 4 NBCCBS OklahomaTampa-St. City 2441 8029 8016 7832 119 38 7051 10046 118121 1 6 %YEAS-FMW\TV -TV (Mil-(Louisville)watikee)( Louisville) Oklahoma Pub.So ( nday.0.,Daily aunt a c.;S--.,.._ Petersburg WKKTVT-TV Y-AM (Okla- (Dallas-Ft.4 mina Worth) City) f %klahomaplusCityOklahoman, occas'lTimm Z.0.<--.. Wometco VLOS -TV 13 ABC Greenville- 40 111 143 137 12 60 50 59 125 WLOS-AMKIITV-TV (Green- (Houston) materialsother printed Automatic food and Zii-:;1-.... Inc.Enterprises 4 Ashevilleburg-Spartan- 18 105 87 46 115 14 112 KVOS-TV (Bel-ihigham,vale, N.C.) Ta.) vending;refreshment Z<-..., , WTVJ-TV CBS Miami 66 35 taurants; chainfoodindustrial service; of res- c*CZ"--p-Z,'. turechain theaters; of tioufilmmotion andProduc- pic- c*,....rcZ" cuitclosedproduction;TVprocessing; slide cir- TV; '" Q..)c1...., Miami Sea- vertisingoutdoor ad- c..ce.'.-7j . !.1ts. CATV quariuinNBrunswick,La., ..J(Thibodaux, ,, East ac.,----Z...- , 9!="' N.Y.)N.Y.,Keeseville,Plattsburg, COCID 100 Federal CominunicatioaColaini:oaReporI8 Chapter 4

How YOU CAN. IMPROVE TKL.EvriiloN YouR , m uNin-

I. WHAT ("AN' you no Now that you better understand how the quality of television bromic:14in.- ill your community compares to service provided in other markets. you may have other questions. One of these is probably .where to ,oo -from here. in this chapter we will attempt to answer that question. explaininfl just how von can use the results of our report, as well as ways in which von con expand on our information within your own community. Most citizens today believe that television broadcasters have an absolute right, to program by whim, to present to millions of daily VMS Nvlia toyerthey might, choose, in whatever sequence, at what ever time. But while that ma v he the heritage of Anierivan television. it most certainly is not the law. The law, in fact, is just the opposite. Our system of broadcasting was estaldished pursuant to a statute that -clearly provides that radio and television belong not to any business- man but rather to the public. A television station can only lawfully operate by serving the needs of its su clip nee. The Supreme Court recently emphasized this view' in riding that. "it is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters which is p:113111101111t." 1The Federal Communications Commission in 'Wash- ington is authorized and directed to enforce this concept of piddle service. but as you have seen from our study, illneatly vatq'Sits en force- ment has not been as thorough as wethe viewing publichave a right to demand. Precisely how do we go about, demanding our rights as the "public" for whose "interest, convenience or necessity" the broadcast. lieensee is supposed to operate?2 In thefirst, place, there are a set of procedures within the Commission's regulatory process that have always been available for public input, although they were 'never adequately used until Dr. Everett Parker, Director of Communications of the Foiled Church of Christ, convinced the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the Commission's policy of excluding the public in a ease involving a television license renewal ill Jackson, Mississippi.3 That, case perhaps the most significant landmark thus far the area of citizen involvement in the regulatory processeventually resulted in the refusal of the Commission to renew the lieense of the Lamar Life, Iroadeasting Company for WLBTTV, Jackson, Aississ:ppi. at. least partly on the basis of racial discrimination in programming and employment. Later, in MUD!! the television license held by a Boston newspaper, theHerald Tareler,was awarded to a competing I fled Liar It 1.0 a ra sting Co.r. Federal Communications Oa/mission, 395 U.S. 397 at 390 (19991. 2 As we have noted before, that hunningc was made an Irrevocable part of each liconsee's obliffatIon by the Communications Act of 1934. 47 T.T.S.C. 5 309(a). wore of 06mInuoiciftioo ofthe United Church of Christ v. Federal Communications Com mission.:159 F. 2v1 994(1).C. Cir. lf,69). irimn,Inc., 111 FCC 2d 1 (1909). 42 F.C.C. 2( Aileansa, Lott;,siaaa and .1lissisRippi 1973 Renewals 101 applicant partially composed of leaders of various community groups, whose proposed programming carefully took intoconsidera- tion the needs of the entire Boston viewing;community.8 Current FCC Chairman Dean Burch, in a speech before the NAB, has called 1I'll/H/ "a mistake we aren't likely to repeat soon;"nevertheless, it has established a precedent for license challenges that will not be taken nearly so lightly by licensees, whatemr the "reassurances" of Chairman Dwell. Besides these, inajoi successful effortsat, broadcasting reform, involving many years of litigation and thousands of dollars of expenses, there have, bi recent years, been scores of smaller achievements by citizens and COM munity groups in the constant battle to upgrade the quality of tclev.sion broadcasting. Those have included reforms in programming p' actices, employment practices, concentration of control and other a:eas of local concern, and have often been brought about by pressures, publicity and negotiations in the community itself, completely outside the regulatory structure and jurisdiction of the FCC. But there have been many failures as well, due in part, to lack of adequate citizen preparation for the herculean task of taking on the broadcaster. Many more intolevahle, situations remain unremedied because groups that could be exerting influence simply do not know how to do it effectively. In this chapter, then, we will try to tell you how to use the information in this report, how best to use the additional information and techniques that will be available to you in your own community, and where to turn for more complete assistance than we can provide. We can only outline here the approaches we feel are the most potentially effective. But there are others who stand waiting to aid you in considerably greater detail if you choose to make a tight of your discontent with the inadequacy of the licensees in your community. Although Congress and the FCC has promulgated a number of specific standards that a broadcaster theoretically is charged with maintaining, you should not assume that your grievance with your local station is hopeless merely because it does not fit neatly into one of those pigeonholes.' Explicitly a part of the license of every broadcaster is his statutory mandate to operate in the "public interest," and the Supreme Court long ago held, in an opinion by Justice Frankfurter, that the "public interest standard is a broad one to be interpreted."nterpreted." The Commission, Frankfurter cautioned, was not to be merely a "traffic policeman" concerned with the technical aspects of broadcast regulation, but was to have a wide regulatory flexibility in determining the outer limits of the concept of the public interest.8 The license was, in fact, taken away from WHDII for reasons that included the licensee's relationship with Its commonly owned newspaper, the Boston Herald Traveler, its de facto transfer of control, and Its essentially absentee ownership. The incumbent's programming was held not to be a factor unless it has been "either quite good or very poor, [thus giving) some indication of unusual performancr! in the future." Thus, the Commission allowed itself to weigh the "average ' expectations for future WHDII, Inc. programming against the civic-winded proposals of BBI, Inc., the challenging group. The latter was granted the license. See 16 FCC 2d. 8-9, 15-17. Speech delivered Wednesday, March 2S, 1973, to the NAB National Convention. 7 Some of those might include the fairness doctrine, overcommercia Nation, meth] dls elimination, or violation of rules pertaining to lotteries or personal attacks. and so forth. "National Broadcasting Company v. United States, 319 U.S. 190, at 215 (1943). 42 F.C.C. 2d 102 Federal CommunieotioP Cc nmi8sion Reports Nevertheless, the current bias of the FCC issufficiently pro- industry that your complaint or petition will have a much greater chance of success if it relates to one of the established guidelines, which we will develop in greater detail below. For the moment-, you should think of the following requirements: limulcasters ore required to ascertain the needs of a cross section of their audiences and to program with respect to these, needs.9 They must. he fair in handling controversial issues of public importance.'" They cannot, discriminate in hiring and employment." They are fully responsible for the advertising they broadcast.'" Consolidation of ownership and control of the medi,t (newspapers and broadcasting stations) is not unla wfid, but is disfavored in the belief that it threatens the range of information available to the public. "''Finally, there are some specific restrictions on such practices as broadcasting to defraud or t.OerCe.1 as members of the public, have a number of different ways in which. yon can enforce these broadcaster obligations, as well as the more, general requirements of the public interest. Short of formal legal .iet ions, you can deal with shortcomings of the television stations in your community by publicizing them via public relations campaigns, picketing. boycotts, novinglarge number of citizens to complain, or by establishing a sufficient -power base in your community to -force a licensee to negotiate an agreement to upgrade his below-standard practices (if only out of fear of more serious legal challenges). If these :nethods fail, there are more formalized lep..al procedures you can follow, including general complaints to the FCC, "fairness (loc- i rine- complaints, petitions to deny the broadcaster's application for renewal of his license, and (although this requires the backlit, of more substantial moneyed interests) the :WI-WIT style of "competing. application" for the. broadcaster's -facilities. Citizens may also have. significant input into the FCC rulemaking procedure, including (but not limited to) the tiling of requests for Commission changes in its rules. This was the route chosen by the group called "Action for Children's Television." Several overriding general principles deserve additional emphasis. Tit any of these actions you must know your facts thproughly so that your position appears as well-reasoned and reasonable as possible, and you won't be shaken by station managers' threats or public relations rhetoric. Know precisely what it is you are trying to achieve. Don't, muddy the issue with overly broad demands. Try to involve as many community. groups as possible, so that you can move in a unified front Primer on the A Seert(11)1 meat of Community Problems by Broadcast Applicants, 27 2d 650 (1071). lielOrf on Ed it OrifaiZillg by Broadcast Licensers, 13 FCC 1246 (1949). See ,t1Ro A ppl'eabili ty of Fairness Doctrine in the Dandling of Controversial Issues of Public Imaanrc (Cie "Fairness Primer"), 40 FCC 59S (1961). T C.F.R. § 73.680. See discussion of employment rules in eh:Inter 2 of this Report. i' :'.'he FCC does not directly regulate the content of commercials. but the Federal Trade Commission will consider complaints about false and misleading advertising against the advertiser (rather than the licensee). For a discussion of FCC "standards" of overcommercialization see the appropriate section of Chapter I of this Report. 13Sec Tr /MTh The., NH nra note 4. See also the discussion of Commission ownership rules in Chapter 3 of this Report. It specific provisions of the Act or Rules forbid such practices as rigging contests,. 47 § 509, accepting payola. 47 U.S.C. § 508, broadcast of lotteries, 47 C.F.R. § 7:1.656, or fraululent billing, 47 C.F.11, § 73.678. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 197,1 Renewals 103 NV.1 ili a maximum power base. Strenothen vonr "informal- bargaining, position and support your public relations and education initiatives by showing a willingness and an ability to plot. a leg-al course. Finally, always be aware of all the options. A complaint. can ba. WeVy effective, means Of enforcing a specific standard, but in son-tases a letterwriting campaign Nvill actually aecomplish the purpose of your complaint. On the other hand, a letterwriting eami.iign is often more effective if Vol can con vineimdy threaten a petition to deny. Do you understand all the alternatives? Remeniber, a petition to deny by a citizen group with a good power base potentially sends the broadcasrer down nu arduous and expensive road. during which he risks some chance of loss of the station. In many cases this alone will strongly influence the broadcaster to settle, your grievance ''out of court." But don't use this procedure frivolously, because it wastes everyone's time, energy and money. and gives legitimate demmuls for reform a had name. There are enough serious failings in most television liecnsnes -.o- day that the, few who arc doing NV011 S11011h1 1w allowed a little breath- ing space. Remember, we've identified the best stations in the country in this report as \yell as the worst.

H. 110W DO YOU PREPARE? Your first step in attempting to upgrade the standards of your local broadcaster should be to acquire "A Guide to Citizen Action in Radio and TV," (Citizen Guide) written by Marsha, Prowitt and available Ivithont charge from the Office of Communication of the United Churell of Christ.i5 It describes FCC programming and performance standards, explains the acknowledged avenues of ciTeoiive public action. and indicates where to go it von need assistance. It's the best available manual for citizen participation in broadcasting. You might also want to take a look at How to 7'a11,; Back to Your 1'elevi8ion A third source, Nvhich lawyers will find particularly useful, is "The Primer on Citizen's Access to the Federal Communications Commis- sion," published by the Citizen's Communications Center in Wash- ington, D.C.17 Finally, there, are helpful materials available, from the FCC itself. One of the best is the ": rocedural Manual" ("The Public and Broadcasting"), a special issue of the Federal Register of Septem- ber 09., 1972.18 A. Your Community Organization If you have not already formed a citizen's communication group, there are instructions for doing so in the Citizen Guide. In addition, yon should check the Sources Appendix of this report (Appendix B) for a description of already existing national or regional groups with which you can affiliate or who can provide a model for your local operation. If your primary interest is in children's programming, for ex-

13 For address. see Appendix B. 1^ Nicholas Johnson. how to Talk Rack to Your Television Set, Bantam Books (1970). "For address, see Appendix B. 18 The Public and Broadcasting: a Procedure Manual, Federal Register. V. :17. No. 190, p. 20510 (September 29. 19721. See also the Primer on Ascertainment, supra note 9, and the Fairness Primer, supra note 10. 42 F.C.C. 2d 104 Fedepc7 Coin Conintiion. L'epoits ample, you should get in touch with ACT (Action for Children's Tele- vision) ; if it is the treatment of Minorities in broadcasting. then B EsT (Black Efforts for Soul in Television) may be able to guide .vou.''' in each case. however, there are other ,groups in the midst of tin' fray. and there should be no reason why you or your ;croup should have togo it alone. If you are just one concerned citizen. or at most a smallgroup. your next step should be to broaden your base by cid ist ins! the support (and hopefully the resources) of existing groups right inyour own community. It may even surprise you how many of them there are, not knowing how to effect changes but as concernedas you about the low quality of broadcast service. Lc,ok. for example. to your local chapter of the N A XCPor ACLV". Most cities in the top 50 markets have them. and while the organizations may not he capable of formally endorsing your plans. tin individuals involved may well be. able to help with the sort of activity you have in mind. See if the. National Organization for Women tNOW ) or a similar women's rights group exists in your ommunit:.. Try the membership of the League of Women Voters. or the ever-present vari- ation on flue theme of -Committee for Good Government." Look to the campuses of local or regional colleges or universities for interested faculty, students or groups. The journalism classes of the local high school pay become convinced to turn your ideas for improving local television into year-long class projects. Churches often have civic.action groups. Some labor union locals may be persuaded to take np your banner. Consider Senior -Citizen Chiltr9, as many of the members have considerable leisure time and are often therefore both the greatest victims of the shortcomings of television and the. greatest. potential source of monitors. Use your imagination. If television can stand a. heap of improving in your community, an awful lot of people are going to be dissatisfied with it.. It's up to 'you to find them and let, them know that something can be. done. If none of the above groups is interested enough to be aroused into action, or when you feel its neussary to broaden your base, consider the particular shortcomings of you), broadcasters and find organizations that would have a special interest in them: I)oes a station's program logs show it runs just sixty public. service. announcements a weekand mostly at 3 :00 in flue morning to boot ? Very well, call on the local charities, boys clubs and civic organizaricus and explain to them what broadcasters in other cities are doing for groups like theirs. The same could be clone with local programming or any other category; the 'rganizational permutations and combinations are bounded only by your inmagination and energy. Local groups should be convinced that television service should be better for a number of reasons. First, you need demonstrable community support when dealing with the broadcasters and when going before the FCC, if that becomes necessary. Also, broadcasters, like everyone else, begin to get the message once they hear something enough times from enough sources. Community support is also nece,s-

" Address for these and all other groups mentioned may be found In Appendix B. 42 F.C.C. 2d AricaaNa.9. Lort;.s.,:aaa and m;s;.58;.iap; ityTJ weal.!.; 105 sary to raise limo. ...or newspaperadvertisements, supplies, and other expenses. Moreover, these groups may provide volunteerhelp for mail- ings, observation and even (in the face of hard line broadcaster in transigence) "confrontations via picketing, 'ealleting. and so forth. Filially, here are a few public relations hints on dealing with other people and groups in your community (common sense for the most part, but worth repeating). Work with, not again8t, the leaders of others groups in your community every group of peopleis going to have a different set of priorities, and the, beauty of getting different groups together to improve television service is the broad front. on which your broadcaster's actions can be challenged, and tithu8ht8tIcai/y, by a variety of divergent opinions. In other words, don't, try to force your priorities on odic-vs, but allow them to find their natural position in your concerted attack, to work throughthe contacts you make, not in spite of them. If the minister or rabbi in one congregation canbe convinced by his membership to take up the shortcomings of television in a. sermon or in his weeklynewsletter it might. be more productive than your own direct intercession ;allow people to in colthem..0 re. rather than directing them (except. of course. 111 the stages of data collection and observation that requires trained guidance).And remember, it will always inure to your benefit to rally a wide range of viewpoints and philosophies to your cause; a troadoWer by definitionhas a special knowledge of ho(-111 support he knows when he has itbecause the rating services tell him so, and lie is easily tuned out by small numbers because small numbers have come to mean "no profit." Hewill know, therefore, when your support, is broadly based. Andwhile there are effective things you can do in a small group (or even as an , the clout you will have. in the, early stagesof your observation amt .0.otiation will be considerably greater if broad segments of your entire community are behind yon. B. Gathering Information Once you and your group have determined, either on your own or through the. information provided in this Report, that one or more of the licensees in your conunimity could stand some improvement, your next step is to accumulate information about flue broadcaster and his ;u'actices from as wide a range. of sources as possible. In this section will briefly discuss each of those sources and suggest ways they can be put to good use. Basically, there are three major types of research to he done, and each will be covered in turn. They utilize.: 1) independently published materials. such as the 7'Y FaetbooL TP (aide and the program logs in your local newspaper; ,.)..) the various types of information on file athe. FCC. most. of which is also available in the local community in the public file each licensee is required to maintain; and 3) the actual programming practices of the station, as observed and recorded by the members of your group. These three major sources of information may also be augmented by such additional methods as interviewing members of the community (as a check, perhaps, on a station's ascertainment of community problems) or interviewing the broad- 42 F.C.C. 2d 106 Federal ConunanicatimiCOill'ilt8ion,Reports casters themselves. You may well discover other methods in your community that are -elated tor can lie adapted) to your specific needs and requirements. I. "nu, most elementary tools of the citizen's gt.cittp are the daily or AVVPId plIT:1111 102'S f01111(1inn 11 Mthic or your local newspaper: they are an important source of information and a.:; good a place as any to bPUrin your analysis of the stations iu your community. You will find you can use these lo5,.5 as a rough check against the in forma... tion found in the more complete logs filed the licensee with his renewal application. and a close 1...ok at the entire programming week in sand, a log should reveal sona, important facts about the station inimednitelv to which you can la,,gi» to apply the criteria and stoml- ards discussed in the course of this report.. It should not be difficult, to estimate. from pro,ratil logs. such factors the total "Jour, a station broadcasts per week: the extent of a licensee's news propani- ming. includinr total hours of news per week. news as it per cent of all programmin,.. local/11710mi] news. total local /regional hours of news, local/regional news as a per cent of all news; similarly with public affairs. live programmine% local programming. other non-entmlain- ment, programinimr. and the type and amount of different types of programming. dnrint, prime time. You can also use TIT Gaide, or some other program log. to begin to analyze types of information flint cannot be adduced frcati a glaio at a renewal application. When, for example, is the local news usually rim? If it is a network alibi:de., does the station normally substitute old movies fo- the net work's public affairs pro:rrams? What proo.roms are normally broadcast, to children ? This procedure should. in fact. become an important step in preparing a list of items with which you eventually hope to confront the broadcaster, and you may even be constrained to analyze such things as the diversity or sameness of programming offered by all the stations at one piven hour or the. practice of a network affiliate in tilling his prime. time "across" priod (does he use tired game shows or innovative local programs) ? A word of caution, however: many stations have developed techniques for giving the false imprssion to viewers (and even to networks) that they are carrying shows (often network public affairs pro!rrams) when in fact they intend at the last minute to switch or an old movie. Thus, the (-''aide or local newspaper may not give an accurate record of a station's program week. and mvv, he checked against your own observation. There is no legal penalty for such last-minute switching unlcss. of course. the licensee represents in program logs bled with the FCC (nr to flue network in question) that hehas carried ashow he has in fact pre-empted. But a. pattern of such behavior cal, clearly be used to fuel the claim that the licensee is operating on principles of self, not public., interest. Additional iniormation about a licensee can be obtain ,d from the tools of his own trade, including sources like TV PaetbooZ!, by which advertisers inform themselves of a licensee's audience size, advertising, rates and so forth. andBroadcast Yearbook,which contains comparable and additional miscellaneous information. Even the re- 42 F.C.C. 2d Apkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1913 Rchwals 107 ports of the various rating services would be helpful (if you can get thew). 2. Your second major source of information will be the files of the FCC in Washington or the "public files" maintained by the local sta- thms in your town.2° Much of this data will consist of filings of various FCC-required forms, a brief survey of which is given below. For a more complete description of the forms as well as the rules regarding their public inspection, see, another publication available :rout the United Clmrch of Christ, A 65iidc to Understanding 1;roadea4tLi een.e .,Ipplioati0118, by Ralph M. Jennings. The -following material is available for public inspection at the Federal Communications Commission, primarily in files in the Public Pelcrence Room, located on the second floor at 1019 M Street, INAV, Washington, D.C.: 1) the license renewal applications and related filings for the previous two renewal periods; 2) "history cards" briefly not ing the major events, including renewals, assignments and violations, in a station's history: 3) (locket, files, for those licensees engaged in a bearing on some issue, such as one whose renewal is being challenged or one which is applying for some IleNV or improved facility; 4) employment. information; 5) fairness doctrine complaints against a station; 0) ownership information; and 7) .files containing petitions for milemakings affecting the licensees in your community (or television broadcasting in general ). This information is available for public inspection bet Nveen the hours of 8 :00 AM and 4:30 PM on working days. The same application forms, ownership and employment reports, and many types of viewer complaints must, by Commission rules. be hide available for public inspection at the station or at some other readily accessible place. In addition, every station must also keep de- taled logs of its progrannuing (and every other aspect of its operation as well), with notations made, on a minute by minute basis. for every iirogram, commercial. and psa that has aired. (Logs do not. however, contain transcripts of the contentg of the programs.) The station files set of these logs for its "composite week" (see definitions at the end of Chapter 1 ). with its renewal application, and while these logs are destroyed in' the FCC after a station's license has been ipnewed.,21 rmposite week duplicates must lie bent in the station's public file at al: times. These logs are of considerable, value, since they reveal many facets of a licensee's operation not apparent from the brief sninmaries and percentages spelled out in the renewal application, or in newspaper TV program guides. An FCC rulemaking may soon make, them available to the public for the entire three-year period of the broadcaster's lieense.22 For a number of reasons it is always advisable to expend a considerable effort', studying the files available at the local station. First,

2'. as required by Munmission Rules, 47 C.P.R. § 1.526. This is done becoosn the FCC claims it lacks storage space for the unwieldy logs. even though the logs would he far more helpful to public Interest researchers than the "small! ries" of tlat Information that Zo into the renewal I-molten tion. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Matter of Petition for Rulemaking to require broadenst licensees to retain certain program records. Docket No. 19667, FCC 73-23. 38 F.R. 1511, 3 P C F R,R. Current Service 53 :353 (January 8, 1973), 42 F.C.C. 2(1 8 Federal Conli1111nicatioie.e Commlss;op Reports von will thereby let the broadcaster know that you are concerned with his performanceand that you mean to do a thorough job of studying it. In addition, the information kept, at the station is .,ionietinies both more accessible and more complete than that found at the FCC. in all likelihood you will here encounter your first expression of broadcaster hostility or the evasive tactics with which he, will attempt to avoid showing on his file, or withhold some of it from you as "mis- placed" or "not available this week," or generally to intimidate you while you are examining it.. This is a. useful lesson for you to learn early. Just remember, the law is crystal clearthe files must be con- veniently available to you,23 and if you find they are incomplete or if you are not well received or otherwise denied access by the station, you should immediately bring it. to the attention of the Complaints and Compliance Division of the, FCC, by telephone if necessary, and demand an immediate investigationinto the broadcaster's intransigence.24 The FCC forms themsel-es should be, relatively easy to understand, with the aid of the United Church of Christ manual described above. The license renewal application, Form 303, is the most important application in the tile (and the source of most of the quantitative conclusions reached in this Report). For most large television stations, the exhibits attached to it make the 303 a major dorAtment indeed, often measured in pounds rather than pages. But while it will be useful and informative to read the numerous exhibits submitto.d by a broadcaster with his application for renewal (if only because this is the same type of document you might. w,l1 be challenging the next time his license expires), the ci itical programming information will be contained in just. a few short sections. Section IV-B of form 303 contains the basic information on television program service, and the most important parts of Section IV -B are : Part. I, on ascertainment of community needs, Part II, concerning past programming (news, public affairs and other programming are .tressed), Part III describing proposed programming, Part IV setting out past commercial practices, and Part V indicating proposed commercial practices. Each television licensee must also file a form 395 employment report with the FCC every year. These reports focus on the employment of minorities and women and are the source of Chapter 2 of this study. The general policy of equal employment as expressed in the Commission's own rules and policy statements 25 is that no person shall be discriminated against in employment because of race, color, religion, national origin or sex. Form 395 is set up to provide information as to the number of minority (and female) employees relative

a 41 § 1.526. Stations often will attempt to withold part of their files, and especially t7 eir composite week program logs. Since these logs enable you to determine how many connercials ( for example) are being run during children's programs, or howmany of aAation's psas are ran at 2 :00 AM. they are important and must lie shown to you ; the license does otherwise he risks possible tine for violation of Commission rules. 24 Local FCC offices will not be of much assistance in matters like this, since they are gear: ally equipped only to handle technical complaints or problems. Inquiries should be fiddregned .lirectly to Washington. 25 :.ee pueral discussion of these rules and policies in Chapter 2. 4.2 F.C.C. 2d iricails(IS, Louisiana and .111..5/..sN;1111;libsj ll,iwee,11,). 109 to the total number of employeer in categories such as Oiliriak and MaHagers, pro fessioi la Is, laborers and service Workers. Each broadcaster must, also tile ownership reports on form 3.2:3. OwershOwnershipn reports provide detailed information about the licensee's business affairs, his interests outside broadcasting, and Niarious contracts and ziTeements involving the licensee and his principal employees. New forms are tiled whenever there is a change in the required information. 3. The final area of major citizens group research should 1w the careful observation, monitoring., of the licensee's programming, the one major type of research truly beyond the scope of our particular study. 'There is a difference. of course, between merely observing a station's programming and actually monitoring it for specific info- mation. How much you do will depend in large measure on how many people, von have and how dedicated they are. But you must remember that. the more ambitious vonr goals the greater the attention that will be paid to your final p-minctand the more difficult, it. will he to coal- pike with a staff consisting of unpaid volunteers. The -United Chinch of Christ. Office of Communication has madc an art of the process of monitoring television stations. (.it to the point of achieving' official FCC recognition in a radio license companion case to TY/XT. of the equality of a "monitored- week (properly eNecoted) with the commission's own composite week for the purpose of procrram analysis.'" But Dr. Everett Parker's monitors are all carefully trained, and they work in teams that inehale ( for each station) two monitors, two "back up" observers (or supervisors) and one aural tape emineer, all of whom are on duty and recording at all times during the broadcast. week under consideration. Tf you feel the resources of your group are sufficient for such an undertaking. contact 'Ralph Jennings (in New York) or Jane Goodman (iii Washington) for further information about the Church's training techniques. Many of the same facts ran also be gathered with fewer people. with more simple recording forna:, and a couple of stopwatches to time commercials, interruptions. progr;on segments. and so forth. Even this process. if you are careful to limit the information you seek. will pro- (haw. valuable data about the service it licensee is giving. which can always be used to augment data available from other sources as well to adduce significant conclusions that could not otherwise be made. It is crucial, whether on are, monitoring or observing, to know precisely what it is von are looking for. and to have simple, forms that can be filled in while the programming is being observed. Again, the 'United Church of Christ experience should be in N,aluable in this regard, since, it has developed speci lie forms to satisfy the needs of various types of monitors or observers. A selection of those are, attached at the end of this section. The list of things one might look for in this process is almost endless. Your particular interests will no doubt give you sonic, direction. You or your group might well began by holding one or more sessions in which you all merely observe the. pogranniiing of the station or sta-

Latnar Life Insurance Co., 35 FCC 1143 (19415). 27 For addresses see. Appendix 11. 42 F.C.C. 110 Federal C onimao lea tions .Commission, Reports tolls of interest to you, discuss what you see among yourselves. and don't bother to record any information. It might, be useful to include child psychologists, social workers, psychiatrists, and so forth. in these early sessions if they are available to you. Once you break down into smaller units for actual monitoring, the experiences and observations of others in your group will prove invaluable. Even if you are acutely aware of the needs and predilections of your organization, however, you cannot hope to insure accuracy and corroboration of your findings if you attempt to monitor alone. A minimum of two people are required, and they must be spelled every fe\v hours by fresh workers. Many believe a supervisor is necessary to monitor the. monitors, and later bo available to corroborate the test imony of the monitors as to the procedures used. For even two people working without supervision will have a difficult, time of it unless their data recording forms are as simple to use as possible. You should start the actual process of monitoring with a form that has columns for time of day, name of "program," category of the program (entertainment, news, education, commercial, or psa). What you. will be doing is writing clown the entire broadcast day from sign-on to sign-off. Or perhaps you will want to start by em- phasizing "prime time" (6:00 to 11:00 PM on TV or 5:00 PM to 10:00 PM in some areas). It is important to list name of slm, nature of show (is programming category) and duration. You should also include a column in which you indicate whether the show was produced nationally or locallythis is usually done from general knowledge, and by noting the opening and closing credits. You should plan to monitor for at least an entire weekand pref- erably one in which a degree of programming normalcy can be as- sumed. You would not, for example, monitor during Christmas week or election weekor the first week of the new fall schedule. In the end you will have amassed a list of all progrannning offered to the audience by all the stations in your community (or the network affiliates, or others which you have selected for emphasis). If you are comparing all the stations in your community, it. is important that you monitor them during the same week so more accurate comparisons can Lo made. An important ingredient in your data collection process is the attention paid to time. Use several clocks in your monitoring exercise. If several television sets are to be monitored in one room simultaneously one master clock can serve all monitors, but each individual group should have one or two cumulative stop watches in order to time the separate segments in the broadcast day (this is especially true for shorter segments like commercials and psa's). In evaluating the performance you will want to compare your findings to what the broadcasters proposed to do in their last license renewal applications. This should be done regardless of the more specific black-oriented or children-oriented) programming you are seeking to evaluate, since it will give your effort a wider scope and the broadcasters proposals (from his form 303) are readily available for your inspection. If on the 303 a licensee proposed that W;lo of its broadcast week would be devoted to news and public affairs 42 F.C.C. 2d W.kansaR, Louisiana and Ali8sissippi 1973 Renewals 111 pro!,ramming. for example. you can easily acquire monitoring data that tolls volt whether or not the licensee is doing. that. II f the broadcast day is 10 hours long that means that 31) minutes sluitdd have been devoted to that category of programming. By the same token. von will probably want to add up the amount of programming. in each cateuory. if the station was on the at for a total of 130 hours during the Nveck you will want, to know Hie percentage of time devoted to news broadcasts. entertainment shows (variety, "soap operas." game. Act vs. religious programming. com- merical messw,es. public Service zumouncements, or old movies. -You will also most likely want. U.Ote the percentage, of programs locally produced as opposed to those fed directly from the network. those syndicated. or those produced by any source independent of the local station. In addition to corroborating (or challenging) the proposals and reported categories of he broadcaster's1Vh0W:11appheat1011. you will quickly lind that monl::-)t.ing. can also add dimensions to those same categories that would not otherwise he available through inspection of a station tile or TV GI-tide-type prog.ram log. 14'orm 303 will tell you how many 00-minute segments of the broadcast, week include. more than 12 minutes of commercials. butt it will not tell you whether those segments occur in thc. early evening hours, when the majority of people am watching, or di: Hug children's programs. Form 303 will tell you how many public see, ice, announcements the. licensee. runs in the course of a week, but it will '.;ot, tell you when they are run (are they bunched togethe between old movies at 2:10 in the morning?), or how long they are (some psa's ale just 10 seconds longor less) . or how responsive they are to local needs (as distinguiFlA from Army recruiting spots, or Red Cross appeals). As you can see. the dimensions for anafy- sis are virtually endless, if the monitoring is clone in sufficient, detail. By putting it all together you will beanie to obtain a far more precise view of your broadcasters' performance than is available even in a report, of this magnitude., which surveys all the material available at the FCC. What else should you specifically look for in monitoring a. station's performance? The Citizcd, Guide asks several questions which monitoring and other information gathering will help answer: Has each station lived up to the pr6mises made in its license, application? I-Tas each station properly ascertained the needs and interests of the entire community? Do the programs offered truly respond to the needs of the community as identified on the license renewal application? Is fair employment, opportunity reflected in the station's employment figures or only in policy statements? In the few paragraphs that. follow. we will attempt to set out a few of the many specific things you ran look forin doing so, we hone to spur you on to develop a more precise list well attuned to the needs and shortcomings In your own community. Yon might start, for example. with commercialization. Although the license renewal application tells you little that is specific. it is important to know how many commercial vihotteN per hour are being shown during. prime time, or during children's time on Saturday and 42 F.C.C. 2d I ZI pdd10,/. f//1/10,) NO0//0.)/1/0 1(0!Nkl1/11110,) SMOildU

.tuputis satiiti.iotti 111 ilooippu . .101 0014 /e'mf.),,/,,tif Jo spli.moitittio.) pull Jo Iiiu.174),o1 sm) .10u Istil .014 soutitott Jo sit)!..)imiittio.) 41014 5! `.4111.\0111111 S.41 0114 a:Willi/Hi 40 11111.1.1-4).1(1-11011 '11110111,),)11110111111 1)1111 OM j0.10(41(11111 (1111.1.40.111 (*:-111014(111.1.10)111 M011 .1111111 4511,11 51111.1,101111110J 0,111 .10i4 p.)0/ S.N14011IS1111 :1110.101144 0.111 Z111141.\ -,1111014 011 M011 .0111114 A10401110.1 111 0114 0.1114 40 11 114)01 (,),)1A.1O5 1)1111 :C111101 ,C1(iitits 11)0014u11 )s4.)11po.ol mori o1114 51o4su.)1,001/ uoims )5,1!..,i10(1 sou(I) ,014 t1oi41)45 ,),)100,001) oJiAl.110).i Him 00..1 .)1.0101 }0 1J4 uoilurs thmil )1110.111 .101 xls -moo (;),quid.totii o.tus4,0ipo.ol 1),));!4.1)Apurlitimi 04 1101111111.) 'e ;S11111)11 - 110.k, HU.) 111,1).1.1041 11 .10110115 1.11SA1111111 1141M .)111111(1 il.)1.1.10ti 0011110111111 uotul atu omolis 4111.11 5! .10)114 4.),)!'citis .0)441011 o.tu) .0.014 Jo pool (4so.1.1i(ti ) .Coti4 Diu4s (limp s.100.04s (.C.imoiii .10 ;it:01.0104 o(i 45001 JO u s.tio!)(141.4 :4.us(I onto.) 1(10.14 alp outos -,).!--o.),Itios imp .71u!si.4,to.yv pun°, tiopim 51 u .totip.1 lu.uosu).) JO )u s,1os1 B1141.1 (11:11},111( (10 mil (1110,1.11 4,to., .1((lotout 115(1 .10 all} )s... 4tooto.nAol oz.Ciutty .014 011 S.\\ ti! iutd),) ti4dop puNsiii Jo isu! .1,uputili JO owl - po451! Ilt 0114 soul JO smoti 111i11.ii0.11.1 S01)111:r .1011 .1111:1 104 ()10,)M )1.004.1 0114 .10411111111 3.0 50411111111 .1411114.41.1 1)040.(01) 04 )111.).q1 411114 11S1.)0.1(1 11M00 04111 .1011414)M 0111084 511014045 1)110(IS 01010 1111114 (,)11-i: 40 0 Olt 111111111 ,.S.M,)11 MOI1S (U) i)(14 :(-111111,11111.1 41111110S14011 4.0 .11.)11.1 ,10114110M ,1101440(i `S4.10(IS .4111)111111114.104111) [(1111 11.11111 )1.10114 0114 411041100 40 .1110.' 1101S1A01,44 SMJ11 M0115 lsoitalu ,014 111,)41i0.) Jo .111): 111.0)1 op-,n)(1101 ,3114 suo1404s '45Itc .1).)o..) 0,.n} Jo alp 4sarLrIN otiiipuoti 5o1.1o4s puu Oti4 iisat 0.1y ann14 oitios s4)or(iis 411114 .10,1011 WOO:: 04 ll[1111 alp ,4.1411 1110S F411411r1S JO .110).0 .14rutitititio.) ,41014 ode -.1.1.10 450111 J.0 .,)114 s4iii),t)) ss,),n1 so.ntan)J(10..) 4sou1 mu stos.imi pomot.)0,414 siivioilii00 .10 n0140 illimilisipp!4so so.1101,) .1,010.1 111011 ,C.tuutp.io isoozi410 moll tiouot Jo 'alp ;,11)101 smolt otis iodoj smini ptiv moli 'lotto( st outos .1)).)tinotniu olim Jo 110101.4101 .10 itol0ir).1 .)ton. (1.)1101 soop ott4 liot4i)4s 'pod *zo!,n).)oa 0114 i,S.11J11 SI 41 .C14,)!.14s po4111i 04 ,.1)14).1-puu-cl!.1 oi.C.is Jo h)4.10dat40.1 (Him oil iett0ispd.)0 !!!4s 040(1(1 patisup (u) alp o,),).1.)s .10 soot) .41 :Clumpy :Coitittii) u.nmut),) smi).1;) pm: s.1a.nol0uou (14 .).().) suto4t 30 lso40a,Cri pool .1110.0 .C4(.) soli (low:pawl '4u114 'S! A:US )IJ11I(1 PIL.kk a:Fit:4(100.10d .10 i4.kka1l Si 1)1440,111) 04 ;1(11,10.10;) 011. 01.1 S0141A1 ,40 )l[4 )1J111(1 .c41111111111140 Olf ll.)11111 '011114 S1 1414SUM 1.10 SMOU SMO(1S 5o).101 1)011 1004 dl[} su) uo .Ctouti slitatuas JO s.,,)llv s,;ao4imi),C,i s.),)K -.10J .ituiturilui).1-(4101i of 4110A: ail1.10A11 (n: q)411111111 0i SM MOlp; .cutti .cillo 11(1 lit11440.41 sapoiou ss'ai Jo 11014.0: ba..,/,w(ida 01 tii:40/1 (14im ouloo;xrd s.uoapp40 Zio!ututu.i.110,1(1 .10J 1) :3pi 's.104o9. Zutpuidui `uoiwitiulo.lottouo,) .4011(0011 Jo (Nato 110!putt!ou SUS.I.M :Tiotlupout4s '4uaoutiu4.1)4110 roomy Jo s.udapiiti.),, .rloputou,Cdoati '411114 S4S1S410,) 40 014411 010111 111N4 4110[01111 St41,114S S1141.10,1 .10 'SaIit0111 .10 .10 imixds sal:C400,0.is 00 sua.ipipp tio!s!.vaia4 '4131.1A1 po41iostmd 1°.F (1""4°(1 00:t Iva Imu 00:9 11:c1 tioui) iAup sI atly pa410411a.14 4.ifttottuom.110.1(1 k)ittutIvAu .103. 1s0t14 zap.tul :9 9 04 -ea -tiaa4 s.n)V0 put: Os }so[ .suo.iputp-) Oluitutouiziaicl Zr, '0'0U PZ Apkai?8, Loti;.,;etiota1(1 .11;:;;;;.;..8;pp; 113

\'iolenee scales similar to the One recommended recently hy the Na- tional Institute of Ilental Health 's might he employed to OW nidolilit of violenceill television programming for ;1 particular .,ttion. Is there more violence in television programming -for 1 pa- ticular station ?Is there more violence in children's porommin? Is it, oninumly presented as an effective means of achieving desirable ends? Are the goals and values reflected in television programming. really acceptable at all ? "2" :Nlonit or for violations of the Fairness I)oct rine.'" To meet his obligations, the broadcaster has to fulfil] two basic teytlireitleuts. controversial issues, or issues of public importance, must he discussed. Second, balanced coverage of different viewpoints on t hese issues noist be present-al. The broadcaster has to bear the expense of meeting the fairness ohligation ii no paid advertising or programming is available, and lie also must, seek out spolesittai representing the other side of all issue. Yon 'nay want, to determine Nv het her or not, and in NIlat manner, broadcasters are 'nevi these ITquirenients A third aspect of Fairness I)octrine monitorial would he determining the percent: 0:e of controversial issues presented that are local] V relevant. For example. inflat,ion and the war ill Southeast Asia may NVel Ihave localarierh and impact, but they are not, strictly speaking, "local.' issues. arguments On either side of whether to Intihl a new fr.4.swav thou0.11 the heart of town might 1)e The wealth of information available from careful monitorim, is. as you can see from this partial listing, enormous. If you can possibly muster tilts resources from within your organization. it is an option well worth the time and effort. 'Examples of the United of Clri t, "Observer's Report, Form" are !riven in tile, next four imges.

See onurtock and Ind .nsteln, ed., 7'elecision and Social Behavior: ,Media Content and Control, 29-34,Nu I tonal Instituteof Mental Health (19711. See, e.g . the Staff Reports of the Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behadior, published by the National Institute of Mental Health. Deportment of Health, Education and Welfare I1971). See especially the voiuine entitled Telerision and Gowiny The import of Televised Violence, 5 see Fairness Primer, anpra note 10. See also Prowitt. Guide to Citizen's Action, at 10. 42 F.C.C. 2d

104-004-73--8 114 Federal Commankat;ons Com772;88;011, Reports

OBSERVER'S RESORT YOR31

Vieolef

Station Channel Location

program Title Source Type

Brim/ca. Date Time Proem. Begins Time Program Ends

Obeerver Information

eeeee r's Vane Phone

City State Zip

Sex: (Circle) Mate Female Kattonalityr(Circle)5:3.1.h-surname AnnrieWT Other

Age: (Circle) 15-20 21-30 31.40 41-50 51-60 62.70 Over 70

Bisheet Coed. in School CImpleted: 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 6 9 LOIL 12 /3 14 t5 16 16+

Detterintion of Program

DERECTICOSt Complete this box while you watch the cosigned program. Se objective and accurate. The epee* betty hem been divided into five cola's.. ln Column l, deceribe each incidentwhere a Spanish-surname American appears or where a minority iteue Involving Spenleh-aurneme American,. is dlecuened. In Coltman 2, indicate the number of Spanish persons that were pictured in this incident. (Hark .0. if noSpanish appeared.) Note the number of Spanish who spoke in the incident in Column 3. If this incident involvedthe dine...ion of en lee. concerning Spanish - surname Americana Check (u') Column 4. In Column 5, indicatethe approximate length of the incident described.

t. Description 2. Swish 3. Spaniels 4. Spanish 5. Time Appeared Spoke Minority (cumber) (number) Iesue Diesunsed

42 F.C.C. 2d ..likansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1,970 Renewals

OBSERVER'S REPORT FORM - Side 2

After thr_pqoaram is over answer the following questions. Here we seek your thoughtful reactions to what you have stet.. Be sure :,ou explain your nswers.

1. Were racial issues Crested fairly? (Do not answer if racial issues were not discussed.) Yes No Don't Know Explain below.

2. Were blacks accorded the same treatment se whites? (Do not answer if black, did not appear.) Yen No Don't Know Explain below.

3, Dvyou feel rhea this progra, adequately treated the Interests of.rhe black coomunity? Yet No Don't Know Explain below.

4. How could this program have better served the black community?

5. If you have further commfnts about this program, please give then in the space below.

Return this form to:Off:. of Communication, United Church of Octet, 239 Park Avenue South, New York, New York 10010

All data and materials that are gathered will become part of the permanent files of thii project and cannot be Teturned. 42 F.C.C. 2d 116 Federal Communications Commission Reports

onsiavtros0EP0.19 FOElI

-...t.i.t.oxx .57 BOL-Vo Gc.--- P-ogt sea TitleArip--W-2-) Source L Type Broadcast Datet-t-4,itshif 7( Tice Program Begins 6.30 PM. Time Program Ends 7°PM-

ObserverInfotnatian Observer's Vase BETr blow° 'PA Phone ME 100 I Street/50 B, D 57: City BEISC) State S D. Zip Sec:(Circle) Male Cre=) Pace: (Circle) a Other Are:(Circle) 15-20 C777-30) 31-40 41-50 51-(0 61-70 Over 51)

IlIghear Grade in School Ctv9tetedt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 0 13 14 15 16 16.

Description of Proccam D/PECTIO:73: Complete rills Toe while yod vetch the assigned prorraiu.he ohJective and accurate.The space below has been divided Into five col -ns.In Luther: I, deserfi, each incidentwhere an Indian appears or where an Its., involving Indians Is discussed.In Column 2, Indicate the n,rtber ofIndians that vete pictured in thl incident, (Mark "fr if no Indians appeared.):rote the ntsher of Indians who spokeIn the incident In Column 3.If this Incident Involved the discussion of an issue involvini; India!, check(d) Colossi 4.In Colwell 5, indicate the approximate length of the Inc 'dent described,

1.Descr iption 2. /tidier. 3. Indian 4. Indian 5. Sine Appeared Spehe Minority (amber) (number) tsaue Disetit,,ce R4.,-,z_a ,,,,-t- 1_ ,9 -A.-; -vi a0,40 t-'"-d-'' -a--.-...§..-.... -.SV;...0....,,, e.,,,....A.;-..1 110-.....t...V ...:-.±.- t,,,L- :,. ,,,,

1"..-,-....., ar.a...... - ...,....-A.-1- A-..--our..-0.--.1. i151141, 2,,,,.,.___+.6,..A. _I., ,.,....,...,1.-,. I' 1 v

ys-.... 4,,Q.. F.9...:_ta,-0,.

P.,-.-i-i-Q cru4^-4---,.., crc *.:4_,-,-, .1-...... 4.. -,-.46.,-÷:-...-a J.,-,--0-;-,--0- .,,..A...... -,.A....----t,.....4.---? 444 .A.C.1*k ...1.1.0.,.....

c3..cr.K.Sk. CL...... -e31/4 -^"-..r.-Q- .

42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Afississippi 197.3 RC/WWI/1 117

Rev Jersey Project =MIR'S IMPORT PORN

Viewing Aesignment

Stationk...1-/C BS Channel 2. Location NEW YOR We "Eis Yost k

Program Title6 0' C i.a< NEWS [source L Type I\1 Broadcast Date 4/.11 71 Time Program Begins 6 PM Time Program Ends6F.C.PM

Observer Information

Observer's NameLeSTeRHctRai s Thee,CIAO V2 a.7C) 2 /(Home)

Street/I/ Elm TemmcE CitySo. Of0406e StateNevi TemseYzip 07/17 Bev (Circle) CD Female Length of Rew Jersey Residence5-Yeck 5 Age: (Circle) 15-2' 21-30 10 141-50 51-60 61-70 Over70 Highest Grade in School Completed: 1 2 3 45 6 7 8 910111213 111 15 1616*

Description of Program DDIEGTETs: Complete this box while you vetch the assigned program.Be objective sod accurate. The space Lelow has been divided into41.xcolumns. InColt= 1,describe eachincident where a Res Jersey resident appease or wheresoissue involving New Jerseyisdiscussed. In Column2, indicate theumber of flew Jersey residents that were pictured in this incident. (Mark''O" itno NewJersey residents appeared] Mote the Dauber of New Jersey residentswhospoke in the incident in Column3. If this incident involved the discussion of en issue involving New Jersey cheek()ColumnA. Ifthe incident involve a film made in Rev Jersey, check(I)Column 5.IsColumn6,indicate the earn...abatelength of the incident described.

1. Description 2.C.J. 3. R.J. 4. 12..7. 5.111m 6. Resident Resident Issue ReportTime Appeared spoke Discussed

R eA.,r.AJ 1 afrc.a Cali2 .3S13.4JA' facall-64-CI. a5 sv,,,A.L.) P. --J.*_.- /-.-,:-c, QA a- aita-t....-,.., 1 N )v--..-----t"b.I- 0 .c0.1...,....-tfL..-., ..;,,.,-,A. 1(2-:2-11-- 44....,....* A-o-o-va. --to- j..).T. tyr..Q....,)-0-tu-4-'.

./...... c....0...."..... *Lk. "R.--P.:A. il.--x...... ------._., co ,...._,Q, 81,4-D-A C -"td-- C dArn.- V -b2C. E-n,..v.L.;_. , 'R P\ '-s. -4-4,Q -.- 6k.:...c...... ,(....L., -A-sr-Qs_ GL-o-.).-7-A-1.-1L-.1., Bans* .:-... . . C I A - cA-8u1A-0-0, A-A-0--It-k. 1 1 in-t es.,., ct-4-f-t . Z .1,...ua. R tI\ ...I'

Coae.....±.A.,..../...... /c,..n..).T.-rrgE - . 42 F.C.C. 2d 118 .17Q1eral Communications Commission Reports

III. WHAT ACTION CAN YON TARE? Once you have gathered your relevant information about a broadcaster's practices. what are your available lines of attackand which will be best, suited to changing those practices to make them more responsive to the needs of the local community? In this report we will merely outline the various avenues for reform. since there is no need for its to go into the detail you can find in other sources. Specifically, the Prowitt. Gera e to Citizev. Action dismissed earlier in the chapter al provides detailed guidance in each of the areas outlined below, and additional sources vrill be suggested in Appendix l3."2 One category of potential community action involves the use of leral machinery: the Min!, of petitions to deny the renewal of a broadcaster's license (or the grant of transfer of control nr any other ap- p/icat ion he might make), informal objections to such applications, formal complaints regarding the alleged violation of an FCC role or policy, or competing applications designed to acquire. the right to broadcast over the licensee's frequency for yourself or your gronp. Other action might include edneational or public relations campaigns designed to bring the station's shortcomings to the atient ion of rite community as a whole. complaints made to the licensee himself regarding specific aspects of his operation, or direct, negotiation with the licensee. regarding specific suggestions for improvement or reform in his service to the public. A. Public education awl public relations Once von have familiarized yourself with the performance of the stations in your market area and zeroed in on the specific problems or shortcomings, you Trill almost certainly want to bring your findings to the attention of the community. This should be done. in order to draw additional support, from that community, as well as to bring some initial pressure on the licensee to correct the shortcomings himself. The methods of publicizing your finding's can be as varied as your imagination allows, and cold() include issuing press releases for use by non-broadcast media.33 including such disparate sources of potential publicity as student newspapers or shopping ad weeklies (or even other broadcast media, that may be willing to cooperate with your effort)organizing letter-writing campaigns or radio talk show call-ins; arranging to discuss or lecture at meetings of church. social or community groups or at high schools or colleges; enlistin!, the sup- pot of local politicians (or political candidates) ; and so forth. " Hereinafter (11(.4 as rili:TWA Marie. "2 Lawyers Amok! ner cApecialln two Office of CominunleatIons. United Church of Christ Pnblleations: .1 copings, Goole to t7narr,Inniiing ilronarnAl LieenAce AppliT,:fionm and Other FCC Forpis, and the forthcoming Bennett, RepreAenting the Audience in 11rOff denslin9 l'roterdwys. 'Tun will run into problems, of course. in communities where the broadcast nmi non broadcast media are Wholly or partially controlled by the Sa II1P That isIho situation, unfortunately, in far Ion many of the cities in our study. See the illsclisr-lon of this problem in Chapter 2 of this Report. 92 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi. 1973 Renewals 119 B. Informal complaints Complaints can sometimes achieve. results if wade in sufficient quantity (or with sufficient legal specificity). Their major drawback, of course, is that they depend on the goodwill of the broadcaster for their success. You will therefore achieve the hest results if von are careful to avoid overly-general complaints and limit yourself Co alleg- ing the violation of specific Commission rules or policies, such as the fairness doctrine, equal employment rules, equal time provisions, and so forth. Such informal complaints should, as suggested by Ms. Prowitt in the Citizen Guide. 1) state the facts clearly as you see them, including your name, the station's call letters. and the specific actions complained of; 2) cite i standard to which you can relate your grievance or proposal; and 3) request a specific remedy, sueli as a new kind of program. an increase in minority employment or the opportunity to present the other side of a controversial issue or respond to 0 personal attack. 31 In addition to complaining directly to the station you may want to broaden the scope of your action by complaining at the same time to its biggest local or national advertisers, the network with which the station is affiliated (if any), the local chamber of commercein short, anyone you feel might be in a position to care about or perhaps attempt to influence the licensee's activities. Lt Sonic cases. the Subject matter of the complaint may dictate additional parties who should receive it : if tine complaint concerns the absence of local public service announcements, for example. complaints might be delivered to local hospitals or boys clubs or service organizations which would benefit from improved performance as well as to the station. As a final step, of course. you should bear in mind that. complaints can also be made to the FCC or. indeed, to otlow government agencies, such as the. FTC or the liE0C, at state and city levels as well as federal. These will he mentioned again under "legal action" below. C. Negotiat;on, Direct negotiation between your group and the broadcaster can conceivably bring about the greatest, degree of change possible with limited organizational resources. Once you have set specific goals for improvement of the service of broadcasters in your community. and have acquired relatively wide support for those goals. much may be accomplished in face-to-face negotiation with the broadcaster provided: 1) your goals have as their basis one or more of the specific obligations implicitly or explicitly required of the broadcaster by statute or Commission rules or policies, and 2) you can demonstrate to the broadcaster your determination to pursue, your goals through more formal legal remedies if negotiations are not successful. For far- ther information regarding this tactic. We would refer you once again to the Citizen. Guide, which includes as an appendix a copy of just such

31 Citizen's Guide, at 19. 42 F.C.C. 2d 120 redemi ('oninomicatioh.9 Commission I?eports an agreement negotiated between community groups and broailcast- ers in Texarkana, Texas." I). Formal legal (maid(' ints If informalactionsfail to induce the necessary changes in broadcast service to your community, you will probably want to pursue the various legal remedies available to von. We can do little more than enumerate these. remedies within the scope of this report; but again, there are a number of sources for la Nvyers iind laymen that set out pretty clearly the procedures you can pursue.n" You have four basic avenues of FCC legal attack available to von. In order of increasing difficulty, they are: complaints to the Commission; informal objections to a licensee application ; formal petitions to deny an application, either for renewal of a license or some otheroperat.iiUmodification; or a competing application for the frequency on which the current licensee is operating. Complaints to the. CommissionIIre perhaps the least effective -eorm of legal action. but they liave the virtue of being simple to generate. Moreover, if a complaint is carefully drawn. so that it raises a significant legal issue concerning the licensee's violation of some Commis- sion statute, rule or policy, it. can require at the very least that the Broadcast Bureau act to determine whether or not, it has merit, thereby creating a ruling capable of being appealed to the full Com- mission and, ultimately, to the 'United States Court. of Appeals." Don't allege generalizations in complaints to the Commission, such as "this station discriminates against blacks and Spanish-surnamed citizens." Go into stafieient detail, based on your observations or research, to aliege. specific instances of violation and to request specific remedies.Force theCommission to accept ordenythe premise of your complaintnot merely dismiss it. as "overly vague," or thank you for providing information which merely be "associated" with a station filebecause Ly doing so you will almost certainly be forcing the station to defend its policies. The more specific your complaint and your request for a remedy, in other words, thc, more likely is the station to feel the pressure of your desire for change. E. In forma objections Informal objections are generally associated with the application of a licensee for renewal of its license." Unlike a petition to deny, however, this type of legal action may be taken at any time up to the actual grant of a licensee's application, and must be considered by the Commiss.'in in its process of weighing the evidence for against the licensee. The element of time is therefore not so important with

Id., Appendix D, at 39. as See sources cited in notes 18 and 32 Supra and Appendix B of this Report, '7 Appeal to the courts need not he prosecuted in the D.C. Circuit Court alone, although most end up in that circuit. You should bear in mind that the Circuit Court of Appeals sit- ting in your part of the country, although it might not neessarily possmss the communications or regulatory "expertise" of the D.C. Circuit, could conceivably bring a fresher outlook on local problems to their decision. 3847 C.F.R. § 1.587. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 121 an informal objection as with a petition todeny, and that is perhaps its chief virtue ; however, it stands to reason that an informal objection, in order to be taken seriously, must involve allegations of considerably greater importance than those which are acceptable in a normal petition to deny. It is well to reserve this legal tool for serious allegations, such as fraud or some other such gross malfeasance, dis- covered when it, is too late to file an actual petition to deny. And while the procedural rules regarding the content of an informal objection are less stringent than those coneerned with more formal petitions. you would do well to treat this type of application every bit as seriously as you would any other (particularly if it is the only option open to you be;.ause you have not been able to complete your research before the cut-ott (late for petitions to deny has been passed). F. Petitions to deny Petitions to deny must be filed by a "party of interest" in the licensee's application proceeding. pursuant to rather stringent rules of procedure set out by the Commission in a number of sources to which we've alluded above.3" As members of the community the broadcaster is supposed to serve, you should have no difficulty establishing yourself as a "party of interest," 4° and you should be prepared at each stage of your research and negotiation process to put together a well-documented petition setting out carefully all the reasons you feel the licensee has failed to serve the public. The Citizen Guide spells out this requirement in greater detail : If, for example, one of your charges is that the station discriminates against minority people in its employment, you should support this allegation with specific information which might incluee statistics on the low employment of minority people in each category of station responsibility as compared with population of minority groups in the city or of minority people who have applied for employment; signed statements (affidavits) of minority persons tvho have been denied employment, citing specific violations of the equal employmmt rules and other relevant material." In other words, the more carefully organized you make your allegations, the greater the likelihood of a positive FCC responseand the greater the pressure on the licensee, to compromise with your group on reform of his programming or other practices. Since, as the Citizen Guide points out, the petition to deny is a "severe action ...costly and time consuming [to both parties]," you should only consider it as "the last resort when other means of achieving necessary change... have failed." 42 Nevertheless, you should from the beginning be prepared to demonstrate to the broadcaster that you have the patience, the

0, 47 C.F.R. § 1.580. See also the Procedure Manual, supra note 18. 40 See, e.g., Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ v. FCC, 259 F2d 094 (1966), in which the Court of Appeals beta that the Commission's "traditional position that members of the listening public do not suffer any injury peculiar to them and that allowing them standing would pose great administrative burdens" was erroneous and not in with the Commission's own pronouncement that "individual citizens and the communities they compose owe a duty to themselves and their peers to take an active intermit in the scope and quality of the television service which . has a vast impact on their Jives and the lives of their children ..." [emphasis in thethe opinion], 359 F2d 994, 1000-1006. 41 Citizen's Guide, at 27. 42 Id., at 26. 42 F.C.C. 2d 122 Federal Communiffttions Commis8ion Reports resources and the It gal capacity to carry through with a challenge to the renewal of his license.43 A petition to deny a licensee's application for renewal has one major temporal drawback: such an application need only be filed once every three years, and once. a station's license has been renewed a community group may find itself with considerably less influence for the next two years or so. There are, however, other ty-es of proceedings in which you may be able to participate, and you will do well to determine whether any of the licensees in your community are or will be involved in any of them. Any time a licensee makes a major alteration in his facilities, for example, he is required to file au application for such an alteration which may be challenged by a community group. If he seeks to move, his principal studio, for example, or shift his antenna, to a 11PW location or increase his power he is required to apply just as f he were seeking a new facility. Yol-e carefully the business plans of the licensees in your community; are any intending to sell their stations in the near future, assign- ing or transferring their license to a new licensee.? You will want to insist on becoming a party to that sort of transaction, especially if it involves a television station, so as io ensure a higher level of service by the new licensee. Examine. his proposals, and bring to his attention the shortcomings of the previous licensee. Finally, you will want to apprise yourself of the nature and extent of a licensee's holdings other than the station in your community. An overwhehning majority of the licensees in this study,.for example, own two or more broadcast facilities,14 and it will be the rare licensee whose licenses all expire in the same renewal period. You may well be able, successfully to apply pressure on the substandard licensee In your community by working with groups in other cities in which it holds licenses. This type of activity requires little but increased coordina- tion, and this as well as each of the other activities mentioned above are simply illustrative of the axiom that the more you know about opery aspect of your licensees the more effective you can be in dealing with their shortcomings in 350.11r community.

c(pnimilitg upplieciOno One last, drastic measure. you may be inclined to pursue, particularly if you are saddled with a licensee who blatantly refuses to servo the public, interest, is n competini application for use of the frequency itself. Such an application can be made, pursuant to Commission rules, whenever a broadcaster's license comes up for renewal, It should not be made frivolously, but only after careful deliberation and accumulation of sufficient operating capital and programming and technical expertise; if each of the latter is available, however, and your allegations

43You shmild always attempt to include (me or more 1^wyers In your group. and your legal counsel sh 011111 1111Vflys he nrepared on the vnious fifittgs thet P0111,1 lip made against a station relatively (mkt:1y. His or tier preparation should therefore begin as early as possible. and nreferaltly before any eontaet with the station has been made. Many of the people cited in this eimpter or listed In Appendix B stand ready to help you understand tile legal vagaries of the potential challenges and complaints outlined here,inthe Citi:en's anide nnrl in the SOUTPPS 4 See the extensive pros, ownership tables in Chapter 3 of this 'Report. but hear fn mind even they are far froi complete in terms of various individuals' or corporations' non- broadcast Interests. 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 123 of misfeasance are sufficiently serious, you maymay wish to compete. for the frequency, which does, after all, belong to public and not the existing licensee. Note carefully the rules and policies that must be followed by a competing applicant, however, and make certain you are both willing and able to meet the requirements of each step in the procedure.'5 APPENDIX A

SYSTEMS METIIODOT.OGY*

I. INTRODUCTION In this section, we hope to give the reader some insight into the computer programming methods implemented to produce the results of this project. It should be noted that because this was a pilot project and the goals that were to be accomplished were not clearly ascertained at the inception of the analysis stage. tile computer programming algorithm hereinafter set forth is not the most efficient : however. it has proven to be viable, BasteallY, the analysis was conducted in two parts. The first part concerned the analysis of the data relating to female and minority employment practices of the broadcast licensees. The information processed pursuant thereto was ac- attired from the FCC Form 305. which is an annual employment report filed by all broadcasting stations. The second stage of the analysis concerned the licensee':; programming profile and included an analysis of the station's news, public affairs, local programming., eommercialization, public service announcements and financial data. The source of this data was the FCC Form 303 which is filed by the broadcaster every three years in application for renewal of his license. The computer language used in this analysis was Fortran 1compiled on an IBM :160 model 40. Other languages might have been usedhowever, Fortran or a similar type of language was necessary to perform the numerous computations on the raw data from the FCC forms. The language may become inefficient when many sorts and cross-tabulations have to be performed but a balance had to be found between the flexibility of the type of output and the efficiency of the computer program itself. The Fortran 11" language, in contrast to cross-tabula- that and sorting languages. is adaptable to any form of input and output. data. The programs themselves lire simply too lengthy to be included in this report, but a copy may be obtained by writing to Larry Harbin, in care of Commissioner Nicholas Johnson, Federal Communieatimis Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554 (mail will be forwarded).

EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS The input data for the employment programs was comprised of the computer card for each licensee and 50 additional cards containing information pertaining to the top 50 market areas. such as the name of the city in which the lieensee is located and the percentage of minorities in the SMRA, The format of the employment data cards is shown at the end of this appendix. The first step performed by the computer program was the reading of 50 data cards containing information on the market numbers, the percentage of minorities in that. particular SMSA. and the name of the city designated by that market number. Then, as each data card pertaining to the employment profile. of the individual licensee was read, a first array was formed that contained the elements of the output data. Those elements were the station identifiers [call letters. market number. ete.1. pereentage of minorities in the market area. the number of job positions in the top five job' categories, the number of minorities in the top five jog categories. the percentage of minorities in the top fire job categories. the total number of employees, the total number of minorities em-

4Afire.rm.. flue FCC Polley glatement on Comparative Trwrripart.1 FCC ejl non (Iwo. commutations for this project were carried nut at the Georgetown 'University Academie Computation Center. 42 F.C.C. 2d 124 Federal Coininiiiiicatioris Co;nmission Reports ployed. and a ranking factor.: second array was formed with the saute station identifiers aimig with the number of top five positions, numloer of females employed in those positions, and the percentage of females in those positions. three all the data cards were read into the computer and all the manipulations and computations were performed to create the arrays. a simple sort routine (operated on the arrays to order the first array [minority employment] according to the magnitude of the ranking factor, e.g. from highest to lowest. A numerical integer was assigned to each station front one to the number of stations analyzed [200 maximum]. A similar ordering was performed on the save array acciording to the magnitude of the percentage of minorities employed. With regard to the second array [female employment], a single ordering was performed according to the percentage of females employed in the top five jolt categories. The results of this employment program produced three different rankings containing the information as previously described. Those three ranks include two ranks re minority employment, one by ranking factor and the other by percentage of minorities employed ; and one ranking re female employment by percentage of females employed in the top five job positions.

Input Format For Employment DataSource: FCC Form 3D5

Label Card columns Data type

Call Letters 1-4 Alpha Market Number 5-6Integer Network Affiliation 7-9 Alpha Total Official a Managers 10-12 Integer Total Professionals 13-15 Integer Total Technicians 16-18 Integer Total Sales 19-21Integer Total Crafttnen 22-24 Integer Total Employees__ 25-27 Integer Female Official a Managers 28-29 Integer Female Professionals 30-31Integer Female Technicians 32-33 Integer Female Sales 34-35 Integer Female Craftmen 36-37 Integer Female Total 38-39 Integer Black Males Official a Managers 40-41Integer Black Males Professionals 42-43 Integer Black Males Technicians 44-45 Integer Black Males Sales 96-47 Integer Black Males Craftmen 48 -49Integer Black Males Total 50-51Integer Other Male Minorities: Top 2 52-53 Integer Top 5 54-55 Integer Total 56-57Integer Black Females Official a Managers .58-59Integer Black Females Professionals 60-61Integer Black Females Technicians 82-63Integer Black FemalesSales 84-65 Integer Black FemalesCraftmen 66-67Integer Black FemalesTotal 68-69 Integer Other Female Minorities: Top 2 70-71Integer Top 5 72-73 Integer Total 74-75 Integer

III. PROGRAMMING ANALYSIS The analysis of the programming of the licensees is somewhat more complitated, than that of the employment analysis. The input data comprised three sets of data cards. The first set of input cards included one data card for each station, 42 F.C.C. 2d A plum sa8, Louisiana and M ississi p pi 19'7.3 Rene wills 125

containing information relating to fluidic serviee annialnoments, netvs. public affairs, etc. 'file format and exact contents of such data cards are described at the. end of this text. The second set of cards is the same as that for the employment program containing information relevant to such of the top fifty market areas. The third set of cards contained confidential financial information for each licensee, eoded as to reveal relative information about a licensee's performance, fait not specific figures. Similar to the employment program, the first step performed was the reading of the fifty data cards: containing Information ahout the market areas; into a market array. The second operation was the reading of the financial information fur the licensees into what will he called a financial array. Aseach programming data card was read. 111Oil/IS Wore OrOVillell for retrieving market area information from the lintrliet array and financial information from the financial array. Computations were performed to convert figures of hours, and minutes into a decimal representation of hours in order to facilitate other computer functions. A maximum of 200 broadcast stations may he analyzed with this program. first output from this program is a ranking, of the licensees according to a local programming indieia computed by the sum of the prhae time local programming and total local programming divided by two. 'flat second ranking is situ ply an ordering of the licensees ac( 1.111h to the stun of the quantities of news, public affairs, mid "other"prograniming, as depicted on t lie 1" ('C Form 303. The third ranl:ing is au ordering of the licensees attcording to the tiiimher of public service announcements, and the fourth ranking is an ordering according- to the number of hours in the composite week having more than 12 minutes of commercials. The latter ranking is ordered from lowest to the highest. The financial ranking is 1111 ordering of the licensees according to the magnit 11101' of t he ratio of prograinthing expenses.over broadcast 11,0.1111os. The (.0111 posit° ranking is a conglomeration of four different ranking criteria. They include ) local programming. (2) news. piddle affairs and -other." 131 commercialization. aml (4) financial evaluations. In order that each element N'o 11 11 pima] weight or have equal effect on the composite ranking-. the licensees wore assigned a number bt\N'tri zero and 100 for onell of tile four evidnation criteria. and the composite ranking is then based on an average of those four 11111111a0rs. With regard to local programming. the number one licensee sets1 110 scale, i.e. 110 11101(.111 of 20,02 represents 100/100. An 01(1018 of zero is represented by zero. however, the lowest indivia 1.11is 8.111100, rePritsenting the worst station in the top fifty markets with regard to local programming:. A similar analysis is made with the nevi's. public affair::. and -of 4:1.53 lours- represents 100 and 12.40 hours represttnts 27.0:5/11t0, zero being the lowest. Ito the commercialization caulking, the worst licensee sets the scale on the low end. The licensee with the highest number of 00 minute segments having 12 or morayminutes of commercials is assigned a value of will on the scale between zero and 100...1 licensee with zero segments having 12 or more minutesO,commercials is assigned a value of 100; however. the hest licensee in this report is rated 96.61/100. with two segments having 12, or more minutes of commercials. f.'oneerning the financial factor,the licensee having the highest program expense /revenue ratio is assigned 100. A ratio of zero is assigned zero on the s e. Once all of these factors have been computed. a final composite figure. by Mild' the composite rank is ordered, is defined by an average of the four factors. 'Thus, the optimum performance of a licensee, according to the four pre-defined criteria. is 100. The best licensee is rated at (13.5, which is well below its peak performance of 100, assuming that any station con perform .100 in each of the four evaluation criteria. 42 F.CC. 2d 126 Federal Communieut;ons Commission Reports Input Format For Programming DataSource: FCC Form 303

Label Card column Data type

Call Letters 1-4 Alpha Market Number ;,-6 Integer Network Affiliate 7-9 Alpha Composite Week: Hours 10-12Integer Minutes 13-14Integer News: ]lours_ 15-16Integer Minutes 17-18Integer Public Affairs: Hours 19-20Integer Minutes 21-22 Integer "Other": Hours 23-21Integer Minutes 25-26Integer Local Programming: Hours 27-28Integer Minutes 29-30Integer Prime Time Local Programming: Hours 31-32 Integer Minutes 33-34Integer Public Service Announcements: Hours 35-36Integer Minutes 37-38Integer Commercialization: 12-16 68-69Integer 16+ 70-71Integer

Input Format For Financial Data

Label Card column Data 111,0

Call Letter 1-4 Alpha A4 Ratio: Program Expense/Grosz Revenue 5-9 Real F5.1

Input FormatMarket Area Data Cards

Label Card columns Data type

Call Letters 1-4 Alpha A4 Number 5-ti Integer 12 True Market Number 7-8 Integer 12 SMSA 9-12Real F4.1 Location 13-32 Alpha 5A4

APPENDIX B Listed below are selected citizensorganizations and resource materials that might be useful to you. CITIZENSORGANIZATIONS Mr. Thomas Asher Professor John Banzhaf Media Acces Project George Washington University 1910 N Street, N.W. National Law Center. Washington, D.C. 20036 720 20th Street, N.W. ;qv. Charles Baker Washington, D.C. 20006 Institute of American Democracy, Inc.Mr. Bill W. Wright 1330 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Black Efforts for Soul in Television Washington, D.C. 20005 1015 North Carolina Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20003 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 127

CITIZENS ORGANIZATIONS Continued Mr. Robert Choate Action for Children's Television 13.:6 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. :33 Hancock Avenue Room 535 Newton Centre. Massachusetts 02159 Washington, D.C. 20036 American Council for Better Broadcasts Mr. Allen Ferguson 17 West Main Public Interest Economics Center Madison, Wisconsin 53703 1714 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Comnumica t ions Policy Committee Washington, D.C. 20036 American Civil Liberties Union Mr. Ted .Jacobs 156 Fifth Avenue Center for the Study of Responsive LawNew York, New York 10010 1908 Q S':eet, N.W. Corporation for Public Broadcasting Washington, D.C. 20009 SKS-10th Street. N.W. Mr. Frank Lloyd Washington. D.C. 2000(1 Executive Director Institute for Policy Studies Citizens Communications Center 1520 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. 1812 N Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington, D.C. 20036 National Association for Better Broad- Mr. Joseph thick casting Center for Law and Social Policy 37:3 Northwestern Avenue 1751 N Street. N.W. Los Angeles. California 90004 Washington. D.C. 20036 National Citizens Committee for Broad- Mr. Richard L. Ottinger casting Hydeman and Mason 609 Fifth Avenue 1225 19th Street. N.W. New York, New York 10017 Washington, D.C. 20036 Rev. Everett Parker Mr. Tracy A. Westen Director.(alsoJane Goodman and Stern Community Law Firm Ralph Jennings) 2005 L Street, N.W. Office of Communication Washington. D.C. 20036 I7nited Church of Christ Mr. Ralph Nader 289 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010 Public Citizen. Inc. Television, Radio & Film Commission 1346 Connecticut Avenue The Methodist Church Washington. D.C. 20036 476 Riverside Drive Mr. Mali:: Green New York. New York 10027 Project on Corporate Responsibility The Network Project 1609 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Earl Hall Washington, D.C. 20009 Columbia University New York, New York 10027 THENETWORKS American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. National Broadcasting Co. 1330 Avenue of the Americas 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10019 New York, New York 10020 Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. Mutual Broadcasting Co. 51 West 52nd Street 135 West 50th Street New York, New York 10019 New York, New York 10019 INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS National Association of Broadcasters Television Information Office 1661 N Street, N.W. 745 Fifth Avenue Washington, D.C. 20036 New York, New York 10022

FEDERALGOVERNMENT Federal Communications Commission 1919 M Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 42 F.C.C. 2d 128 Federal Collimlinie:atione Commission Reports

RESOURCE MATERIAL 1..1 Public Citizen's Action Manual, by Donald K. Ross; Grossman Publishers, New York, 1973. 2. Corporate Power in America, ed. by Ralph Nader and Mark J. Green; Gross- man Publishers, New York, 197:3. 3. The Monopoly Makers, ed. by Mark J. Green ; Grossman 'Publishers, New York, 1973. 4. Action for a. Change: A Student's Guide to Public Interest Organizing, by Ralph Nader and Donald Ross; Grossman Publishers, New York. 1971. 5. The Closed Enterprise System, by Mark J. Green with Beverly C. Moore. Jr., Bruce Wassusteln; Bantam, 1973. Teierittio and the Public, by Robert T. Bower ; Bolt. Rinehart and Winston, Inc.. New York. 1973. 7. Representing the Audience in Broadcast Proceedings. by Robert W. Bennett ; 17nited Church of Christ, Office of Communication. New York. 197:3. S. Guide to Understanding Broadcast License. Applications (mil Other J'( Forms, by Ralph M. Jennings; Office of Communicathm, United Church of Christ. 9. Federal Communications Commission Procedural Manual (from F.C.C.). 10. Policy Statement. Comparatire Broadast Bearings, I F.C.('. 2d 393 1 1965). 11. Polley Statement Concerning Comparat ire Hearings Inrolring Regulat Renewal Applicants. 22 F.C.C. 2d 424 (1970). 1.2. In Re Formulation of Policies Relating to the Broadcast Renewal Applicant. Stemming From the Comparative Hearing Process, Furtherotice of Inquiry, 31 F.C.C. 2d 443 (1971). 13. Atiplicability of the Fairness Doctrine, Office of Information, Federal Com- nmnica tions Commission. 14. (;aide to Citizen Action in Radio and Telerdxiuu, United Church of Christ, ( Mice of Communication. New York. 15. Use of Broadcast Facilities by Candidates for Public Office, F.C.C., Office of Information. 16. In the Matter of a. Personal Affect:, (FCC 67-795) Office of Information, 17..1 shot./ Course in Cable, Office of Communication, United Church of Christ, New York. IS. (*Wile Television, a Guide to Citizen Action,.by Monroe Price and John Wick- loin : (Mice of Communication, United Church- of Christ, 1971. 19. Thor to Protect Citizens Rights in Television and Radio, Office of Com. nnutication, United Church of Christ, 1969. 20. Guide to Citizen Action in Radio and Telerision, by Marsha O'llannon Powitt; Office of Communication, United Church of Christ, New York, 1971. 21. Racial .1ustice in Broadcasting, Office of' Communication, United Church of Christ, 1)2. How to Talk flack to Tour Television Set, Nicholas Johnson; Bantam, 1970. APPENDIX C ADDITIONAL TABLES OF INFORMATION These additional Tables deal largely with the same statistics analyzed in the text of the study. Except for Tables 1-a and 8-a, they present the information of Chapters 1 and -2 bit market rather than in order of their rank, in order to enable the reader to compare the performances of the three affiliates in each of the :10 cities. Table 1-a is the same composite ranking found. in Tables 1 and 2. but with the relative performances of each station more precisely detailed by the analytical tool of relating the hours-and-minutes '(etc.) performance levels toa 0 Yn 100 scale, as detailed in Appendix A. 42 F.C.C, 2d Aileart.sat, Louisiana and i1is8;86.ippi 1973Renela78 129 Table 8-a ranks the affiliates solely on the basis oftheir total percentage Ill minority employment (without adding in t les in the S:NISA). the factor of the number of minori- The Tables in this Appendix are as follows (withreference to the corre- sponding tables in the main text iu parentheses): Tawei-a (Tables 1 and 2) Composite Rank of all Programming Criteria (on 'ruble 2-a (Tables 1 and'_) a 0-100 scale) Composite Rank of all Programming Criteria (bymarket) Table 3-a (Table 3) Hours and Rank of News, Public Affairs and Other(by market) ruble 4-ct (Table 4) Public Service Announcements (by market) Table 5-ct (Table 5) Commercialization (by market) Table 6-a (Table (I) Hours and Minutes of Local Programming (by market) Table (Table 7) Ranking Based on Ratio of Program Expenses market) to Gross Revenues (by Table 8-a (Table 8) Network Affiliates Ranked by Percent Minorities Table 9-a (Tables 8 and 8-a) Employed Network Affiliates Ranked by Percent Minorities Table 10-a (Table 8) Employed (by market) Percent Minorities Employed/Percent Minorities Table 11-a (Table 9) in SMSA (by market) Percent Minorities Employed in High Pay Table (2 -a (Table 10) Positions (by market) Percent Women Employed in High Pay Positions(by market)

104 - 004- 73 ----9 42 F.C.C. 2d QIt Rank Call let 1 ers Net. aff. . Mkt. No. Network Affiliates Ranked by Composite of All Programming Criteria Local ion Local News, l' A Coin mer. . Financial Composite w01--, 2ts, 1 54 -95 and of her 51.44 :xi. 61 56. 30 :3.118 ,j...... co' P. 2 WJZ KPIX NBCABCCBS 1619 98 San Francisco Seattle-TacomaBaltimore 9841.831111.89 -61 ;21.9968.1566.15 50.856!1.4977.97 67.40!15.7177. IS 68.9969.5572.06 ...... cz3 - 76543 WWMALKDKYWKING PL KA G ABCNBCCBS 1018 Washington,Miami(I4 DX PhiladelphiaPittsburgh 48. 21)56.3363.4775.10 110.1X) 65.81)70.5889.05 1111.104.5.7(133.9055.93 82.1.291.2768.1151.01 11.5.4465.6065.9966.3867.77 (7,- 1110 KWWL OW98 W F3,1T A EY CBSNBCABC 312648 GashNew Orleans-high Pt-Win Sal PortlandPittsburgh ______34.4650.18165.7444,02 70.9182.8776.72,58 29 28.8137.294-1.0793.22 92.2875.2599,7763.18 03.4903.0465.11 zr..,.. 141312 %VileWABCKNBC NBCABC 10 Washington.92 1 14.0 NewLos York Angeles City 45.42-13.7160.71.51 56 74_9567.93.4261.89 16 28.811144.07 -86 100.00 91.7374.41 61.8162.)1762.5062.84 ...... ---..;',..-, 1918 WKAT171615 HAS WNWHOWTIC LI A C CBSABCNBCCBS 36272622 6 LouisvillePortlandBostonHartfordPittsburgh New haven 55.5754.7850.0053.98 60.1983.7555.6769.78 37.21)49.1551.2454.74.58 2-1 64.1879.3984.5366.7353.03 60.5'260.8861.1161.18 CI)z,--c'D,.... 252423222120 WKC.KOMOKIAKOIN B NRA. II S %V LWT ABCNBCCBS 2016452826 Columbus Seattle-TacomaPhoenixPortlandSacramento-Stockton 1011.00111.3459.7(138.3354.94 64_3601.9878.6974.95 38.33.10 9840.6840.1181)1.95 119.7576.31169.2765.7984.911 58.8659.0959,3959.5351.74 2 272)1 28KMOXWC WSM BS NBCCBSCBS 413012 Nashville1 New York City St.Cincinnati. Louis -41.53 17.2161.0058.81 91.5361,8955.6785.458.73 47.4638.1)3'2-.8.25. 1281 61.2781.517:174.00 74 58.6558.7559.81)58.84 Z1...._% ..--, 313029 WWSB KAST Y NBCABCNBC 1737 Al bany-Schenectady-T AtlantaOklahoma City 61.7967.9321. OS 81.7867,0248,55 44.074-40767.80 44.5853.2395.71 58.0658.11658.21) ...:;_,.? ,,,',--Z' 3635343332 WSVDSIJWNIAKSWBZ ZZ L M R NBCABCCBSCBS 31 New14411950 Orleans6 Boston Kalamazoo-OrBaltimoreSalt Lake City Rapids 45.2230.4863.''.347.8559.96 70,7367,0969.0959.4576.18 47.33.9045.7635.5932.20 46 65.0567.8484.3655.8192 -30 57.1157.2057.4257.7057.95 8..t 3837 W42414039WBEN RTVWCWNKPKNXT RCPRC 0 NBCCBSNBC 202515 Houston2 1 CincinnatiLosNewBuffaloIndianapolis_ Angeles York City 59.865156.0647.0148.01 -99 76,6988, !1867.7881.3877.24 30.5135.5918.6132.2040.08 58.73715057.39116.9662.15 56.1956.511.5656.8957.02 43 - 43 WMAQ NBC 27 3 Chicago 51.9121. 12 91.0018.07 15..2557.63 95.63.50 72 55.6356.17 484?454644 WCAWSKOVWBAL win Y 1.1 RIt NBCCBSABC 432 t19 4 SyracuseMilwaukeeSacramento-StocktonBaltimorePhiladelphia ' 59.60.0028.6951.42.83 5940 84.5572.8044.87.51.02 22V 41.0732.2059.57.63 3218.64 33.1956.5389.64.0671.01 36 65.3855.3055.4055.455.5.62 .5053525149 W1313C. WPKUTVwAK RI WPV I CBSNBCABC 50383478 BirminghamSalt Lake4 City ProvidencePhiladelphia 41.7538.6926.2929.6t. 9508 61.1353.2768.9856.2565.610 37.38.9857.6381.3623.73 29 76.9786.5065.53.8469.73 28 54.54.3654.1565.1365. 2925 565554 WWC57.58KWTV TOWSOC KT P WC)A1 NBCCBS 4535181041 WashingtonMiamiSan13Oklahoma Antonio City14.0 . Charlotte. 27.42.8351.4347.41.55 61 09 62. 0759.59.6175.86.29 1302 40.6850.8557.6345.20.34 76 61.2357.69.2753.1768.87 68 53.8453.51.0254. 942254.26 CowO 62616059 WAUWOTVWSIXKST PA ABCC BSNBC'NBC 4130 Kalamazoo-OrNashville17 Rapids AtlantaMinneapolis-St. Paul :X50.39.(443. 490455 52.71.2045.90. 7195 76 552.527.50.8518.61 -1 12 78.1;1.78.6162. 692284 53.53.5:153.79 1753.31) 6766656463 WX WLWI.WTVJKTRK 11 ICS1) CBSNBCABC 1218141548 Miamilimb-nigh Pr-Win Sal St.Indianapolis HoustonLouis 37.6532.54.11845.2260.41 03 .5.5. 37.8959.0764.3676.0093 54.2449.37.111.9538. 1598 29 86.69.54.72.9656. 3(1(136702 52.52.62 45ti353.1X) 78 71706968 WWWJKTVI LC Y IC [IOU ABCCBSNBCABC' 15 Houston5 St. DetroitLouis 32.47.0158.0.564. 0710 65.2769.73. 0191678 33.91)25.16.'.75 42 50.57.50..5753.88 1018 51.6',151.8151.52. 01 96 rAC.73* 747372 WKIINVWWI3BMWTMJ F BC CBSNBCABC 40 212524On Tampa-St. ville-Sping-Ashvi3 Petersburg ChicagoMilwaukeeBuffalo 3.5.065-62.0341. 1.'111 as 63.2781.3158.52. S787 59.3230.27..57. 5112CZ .5. as 75.65.11158.51. 315528 51.51.5851.80 11151.5.8 79 WVUR787776 WJWK(10 ICS AT CBSABC'ABC 3145 NewSan Antonio Orleans78 San Francisco Cleveland 40. 7631.4737.0.543.59 73.0.150.8441..1969. 16 _0.3445.7652.28. 5481 6874.4872.9062. 3266 50.541.51.1X151.06 0361 LJ 8483 WWCCO828180 LW WWAVYWTVT BTV1) CBSNBC 393524 131144Tampa-St. Minneapolis-St. Petersburg Paul DaytonCharlotteNort-Newp News -Ramp .55. 7850.2081.5550.27. 29 76 50.62.69.67.67.09 45253ti27 32. 2010.13.5647.46 17 110.111.0860..56.51.(9). 3331 8/ 49.8149.49.795)1.50. 51Sl t-JCJ 86 Vi'LAC88878.5 WTWKeld FAA EV 0 ABCCBS(7135 30 3423Nashville Kansas City ProvidenceDallas-Fort Worth 25.48.52.39 0110 .51.63.8554. 5527 28. 8145.22.21337.29 76 75.57.(18.95 19 or, 49.3349.1349.48 I' Rank Call let tem Nt. alt. Network AffiliatesMkt. RankedNo. by Composite of All Programmi»g Criteria-Continued Local ion Local News,and PA other Trimmer. Financial (7inn posit e 93929190 WTEWWLK89KOCO BAI'WM I YN C NBCABCc B8 3637 Albany-114129 Memphis Schenectady- T______.___Dallas-FortLouisvilleOklahoma _ -. ----- City Worth 34. 0324.7020.9246.1853.71 53.3332.1567.7146.4161.71 37.2947.4635.22.03 9062.71 53.7671. 8478.4067.57.87 93 48.4148.5448.6148.6648.83 9897969594 1VJAWTOLWTNI{KFSIBKTVK II ABCNBCCBS 45492234 Hartford-NewSanProvidenceToledo Diego Haven Phoenix. 51.0037.4937.2949.0039.482x9.48 62.6.563.2747.1677.6061.5668.'25 _0.3138.9841.0715.2.540.6837.29 56.9963.5050.5550.8851.3657.91 47.7447.7848.0048.48.23 1015 as 103102101100 WKATIKDFWMIN 99D HO KM CB OIL NBCABCCBSCBS 1422451132 Hartford-NewToledoDenver2 Los Angeles Have^ Dallas-Fort Worth 42..5928.9226.6956.9718. 69 64.5576.1050.1172.6027.05 35.38.9832.2018.64419.49 59 45.0341.8345.80.7175.59 44 47.0147.3347.4347.5147.70 UG 107106105104 WAVEWNYSWISHKXTV ABCNBCCBS 433627 Syracuse LouisvilleIndianapolisSacramento-Stockton 34.4633.07 8.17 29.6761.71.31 11 67.81132.2018.64 80.6760.2964.86 46.5846.7746.97 .44:1 11211111010910$ WLOSWHENWIITNKKCPX QV/ NBCABCCIS 324940335043 Onville-Sranbg-AstiviSan Diego DeliverCharleston-HuntingtonSaltSyracuse Lake City 48.0130.8815.6217.9316.5726.06 61.8554.1839.7152.8039.8959.49 25.4232.2057.6361.0257.6332.20 46.3565.7466.7350.5371.67.86 18 45.4145.7545.7748.2246.3246.40 tiCZ 115118117116114113 WLS W WXYZWKYCKOA It 4111 ICI R 0 ABCNBCCBSNBC 3716 Albany-Scheneclady-T3 Chicago57 DetroitClevelandSeattle-Tacoma 30.48.1344.82 2833.2_737.05 49.4965.8560.6247.676).00 25.4217.'161.5.2..518.64 1.69 76.7470.'1464.5350.76.50 19 44.41544.7344.8045.0545.40 119 WSP D NBC 2045 Toledo Cincinnati 42.3.5213. 69 39.6459 SO 45.7649.13 45.9754.33 44.2841.45 1231212121120 WWK WCIISKMS 0 RRC P NBCABCCBS 153313 BuffaloMinneapolis-St.Charleston-I Itudingtol'aul 3811716.7331.16 31.7351.4541.05 45.76.39.31.21 32 61.5250.6743. 12 4143.9744.14 87 ..... 126125124 WWSAZWHIO EWS ABCNBCCBS 243933 7 Charleston-HUntingtoDaytonCleveland.. 27.2)36.2250.9227.49 67.4940.3666.5146.76 1.5.2530.5137.2915.25 62..59.8467.43.89 SO45 43. :5' 'I. 72 .79 ;1--'Tz.'. 13112) 1301a3127 WSWLWC WELAWRECKENSPA NBCCBS 2140284529 MemphisSanColumbus Antonio Gnville-Sptnbg-AshviTampa-St. Petersburg 34.33.2732.3924.90 2231.59 61.38.1160.5.552.29 367.5.38 18.33.20.3440.68 619018. 61 60.6853.4.5.8251.3953.82 00 42.42.3642.9243.I2 672332 -NI°, 134133132136135 WISNWUAFWJBK WTVNKMBC ABCNBCCBS 2823 ColumbusKansasa City_City MilwaukeeDetroit 54.86'3.5.4618.110.25.7032.47 42.3662.555.31 8740.91 38.32.'2'.2. 98In03 0.0 55.1497.9347.4054.91 40.5540.41.41.93 IN88 Z.,7.. ,...,CO . 141140139138137 KOWHBQWBMGWKZOWVEC OL ABCCBS 384144 Norf-Newp5)45Birmingham News -Kamp Memphis.Kalamazoo-GrandPhoenix Rapids ______.. 31.2736.18.9234.22_- 77 37 5.5.2740.0)43.0238.5562.0049.38 44.073'2.22045.71144.0715..781.69 .93.9037.8940.57.28 8370. 2 2.90 37.9838.8635.9739.433!1.8!1-In. 90 `'.,....R 144143142 WCWQXKB TVCB I ABC 331732 AtlantaDenver Charlotte 21.112.5. 22 42.534 I. 76 33.9023. 73 -15.0056. 86 35.8437.614 Co Coc,...... ,-, Rank Call letters Net. alt. 1'.1kt. No. Network Affiliates Rattled by Composite of All Programming Criteria Local loll Local andNews, other l'A Coninter. Financial 14;sCAD 39 13WNBC WABC NBCABC 1 New York City Now York City 7563GO 7717 4 los 49SS 2758 1 cocp^...atrje--, 102 KABC744026 WB1151WCBS14KNXT WNBC ABCCBSNBC 32 Los21 LosNow Angeles Angeles York City ChicagoLos Angeles 123 334121 3 I l l Is 283 132111121136 68 7465883517 (...(5t"...., 115 WLS5043 WWMAO P V I ABCNBCABC 43 PhiladelphiaChicago 4253I1 (7!01 9 121112142 1.56873 .*"...z.'' 117133 WXYZ46 WCA69 WW1 U5 KYW %SUB K CBSABCNBC 545 DetroitPhiladelphia 0380 97 110 !1931 7 111132129 13 100112123 20 --...7-j'7-t 125 WEWS11117 WNAC WBZ ABCCBSNBCABC 76 Boston67 Boston Cleveland 69923715 134 434116 101 984924 138 775659 C..,:eJ7----,co 110 WKYC7677 WJWKG()1 KP1X ABCNBCCBS - 987 San Francisco Cleveland 113 523104 4 141705613 121 9810 I 103 304315 ,CO 5515 WTOPWIIC748 WMALWTAEKDKA ABCNBCCBS 10 Washington10 9 1).0D.0 Pittsburgh_Pittsburgh 792817 1053 0 101117101 1130 5057 708 jf,Z-Ot7C.CC 101 KDFW8812 WFAAWRC CBSABCNBC 11 Dallas-FortDallas-FortWashington Worth Worth 1).0 492647 111 34II 121 70 141 85 co- '3 2703 KAIOXWBAP NBCCBS 12 St.Dallas Louis -Fort Worth 132 59 1150 101 36 _ 115 30 ,..1 122 ICMSP846866 WCCOKSDKIVI NBCABCCBS 1312 Minneapolis-St. Paul Minneapolis-St.St. Louis Paul 109 43361286 145140 917468 139 57132170 IN108 7119 co-, 104 WISII59 7037asKSTP WLWWRTVKIIOU I CBSNBCABC 1514 HoustonIndianapolis ,,,-)7301 311306520 108129 3678 127135 0437 15 13 95 63 100 114 K64312441 RO KOMKPKIRK RC 30 KING NV SII ABCNBCABCCBS 171615 Houston lloustonSeattle-Tacoma 763266 5 564866S322 108 495778 6 116125 2894 3 143 WQX6660 1 WAWTVJ GA CBSABCNBC 1817 11liamiAtlanta Atlanta 1015129 7071 126 87 5 121112 33 467999 ,...',...7;--4--.. 4856 NVWCKT BAL6 WPLG NBCABC 1918 Miami__Miami Baltimore El10 3327 1 SS8141 1 11)1117 52 120 NVK34 RC25WMAR WL1VT2 WJZ ABCNBCCBS 2019 CincinnatiBaltimore 7411 16 13S118 2559 Eli 3378 133104 4424 ,;' 'ettye:-., 7442 WWC LM PO J CBSNBC 20 21Cincinnati Milwaukee 971340 989249 121106 98 828933 '1:;.2-e- . 132 WISN45 9516WITI W1NHW Tie ABCABCCBSCBS 2122 Hartford-New Haven MilwaukeeHartford-NewMilwaukee Haven 116 816871 111 238128 635716 5 135124110 41 Q--> 134135103 1VHN13WDAFKMBC87 KCMG ABCNBCCBSNBC 22 Hartford-New24232:3 Kansas City Haven Kansas City 192 548034 133 316972 117101144 KS 131 519790 .... . 123127 WFLA737180 WKBWWLCW1VT Y NV 0 R NBCABC a;2524 Tampa-St.Tampa St. Petersburg BuffaloTampa-St. Petersburg 141120 7860 1017106 4351 132 411681 1O) 819678 c. . 44211018 1COVRKATKGWKOIN U WBEN CBSABCABCNBCCBS 272625 Sacramento-Stockton_BuffaloPortland Portland 134 84674954 120 29359621 57492416 121380 52 ..,,z. , C.°-1-.4,-- : 131136105 WLWCWTVNKKTV20 KC RA ABCNBCCBS 2827 Sacramento-StocktonColumbus 128101 992227 130 19(11436 121 816370 118105 616966 "(.Z..... --j 128141 WRFC8922 WWBNS M C W111311 CBSNBCABC 297J28 MemphisColumbus 131138 38 108139 80 114 5749 114Ill 92 -zF.,...7s. 7928118661 W WSMWSINWV LA EC WWI, ABCCBSNBCCBS 31 New30 Nashville Orleans Nashville 107 398224 7 1121(11125 2497 114 41706330 3431164922 -,,,:,0 Rank Call letters Net. MT. :111:1. No. :Vet work .1ffiliotes 1ooked by Coolpo.Ote of .111 Programming CrilcrioCon. Location Local News,and PA other Commer. Financial I. 142 KBTV36 99WDSU KM G 11 ABCCBSNBC 3231 NewDenver_Denver Orleans 914120 12?3 7355 117112 SI 429555 ti 121110124113 WCSIS WSAZ%MTNKOA ABC.CBSNBC 313332 Charleston-11Charleston-HuntiligtonDenver untington Providence_ 110119 14551 137132 5879 105 .1170Ili 101110139132 575188 WSOCWP94WTEV Wi RI A R NBCCBSABC 3.5353433 Charleston-Huntington Charlotte.Providence 130133122115111 110129 759147 817016 3 113 479132 106144 WAVEWCCB1982 WHWBTV AS NBCcCBSABC BS 3635 LouisvilleLoulsviCharlotte Ile 136 9533-16 HS 858t32 KS33881 t 120137 238620 118 WROB52309092 WAPWWTWAST LKY EN I NBCABCNBCCBSABC 3837 ABirmingham lban y-Scheneetady-T Albany-SchcnectAlbany-SchenectadyLouisville ad y-T -T 126135110 99 121119103 4012 1631170 8 129 6339 4 129139126 WW BM Sl'AW11108349 G W13WLWI) RC CBSCBSNBCC133ABC 394038 Birmingham_BirminghamDayton Gnville-Spt libg-Aslivi 103125 304523 123117 57IS 117137132 49 143121141 8387 O(71 111 WLOS3572 WZ7.51W PBC NBCABC 4140 KalamazooGlivilleSptilhg-AshviGoville-Spinbg-Ashvi -tic Rapids 11171112113III 137 4503 88411312 142130 5914 138 WKZ29.5462 0 W WRYKWTV 0 TV CBSNBCCBS 4141 KalamazooOrOklahomaKalamazoo-Or City Rapids Rapids 112774816 Ps) 778237 106 813670 702.567 co ABC Oklahoma City . 124 53 107108137 WNWHEN WV Y814791 S EC WAVYWSYRKOCO ABCNBCABCCBS 4443 Syracuse.4443Syracuse Norf-Newp News-Hamp Norf-NewpSyracuse. News-II amp ..... ______.. ______120137144117127 127135143 3489 36418813 8 8495181054 O 140 KOOL589723 WOAI78RTAKTVK NSA R T NBCABCCBS 45 San4.546 Antonio SanPhoenix Antonio 5589s8¶17 S 131122 887664 140 30284903 119 93387447 130119100 WSPDKENSWDII098 W TO L CBSNBCABC 454840 UnsbToledo -111511 Pt-Win s.,1 SanToledo Antonio 106I123139 IS 87 105113144 9370 28634181 6 122107134 2921 96 KFM63 WX11 B9 WFMY CBSNBC 4048 SanOnsh-lligh Diego Pt-Win Sal 111 5195 291.34 132 2 . - t28 02-76. 109112 KCKOTV5333 PX KUTVKSL NBCCBSABC 50005o.49 SaltSan DiegoLake City_City 142 8307 104136102 00 63868816 1140 6 rAec70 Rank lettersCall Netatt.Network Affiliates Ranked by Total Hours of News, Public Affairs, andMkt. "Other"No in Composite lVeek Local ion News Rank affairs Rank 01 her Rank 1'01)118)5141 ts.6 7717 WAWN BC ABCNBC 1 New York City 15.0816.1(1.58 13 279839 11.13-L5.3; 10 8352 6 12_.4212.0.8 6640 1 20.36737.300 115 KAM,: 3 KNBC4 WC BS Gl13SABCNBCCBS 2 NewLos York Angeles City 2_'-0117.059.75 110 49III 1 10.034.-1.83 10 468462 9 19.6310.7821.728. 38 111 70 !I5 -10.4210741.950 78322.06; o- 626118 WBWWPVI LS BM28 WIUAQ.KNXT ABCNBC 43 Chlet'oChicagoPhiladelphiaChicago ______19.9811.2816.379.3.20.50 117III 25 4 9.7.255.57 2510 142815 IS 20.12IL13.4314.0017.42 50 573021 3 40.1013(1.01730.18343.08337.267 nonoti 31 9 WCA7 KYW CI 1VWJ NBCCBS 54 DetroitPhiladelphia ... _ _ 14. SO10.3018.55 103 12 6 11.433.8.2-1.753.62 9364 3 13.9510.83 1114 22G9 22.8673340.817 -500 7.41, 134116 WXWEWS1109 YZ WIBIC16WNAC %VD?. ABCNBCCBS 76ti5 ClevelandBostonDetroit 11.4310.0518.538.12 128197 81 7 11.17 2.037.783 -28 137110 19 4 11.1712.11 -2 8.35!1.388.75 112 64..355013 37.31.11S325.35(1 -18318.50)) ti 8643 WICWJW13 Ye ABCNBCCBS 1387 SanCleveland Francisco 10.0511.57IL 73 108 7681 11-15 5.153.43 101 56 5 10.6216.707.80 121 75 29.00027.5(031.70) ti !IIit GO70 KOOWTAE(1 RD KA IC PIX CBSABC 9 PittsburghSan Francisco 20.2_011.8216.62 231370 2 10.729-637.13 31(1412 8 13.5011.37 8.70 110105 ')750 30.40.83330.20038. 783700 R.PI.., 114 W F AA1563 W10WIIC RCWTOWMAL P 'ABCNBCABCCBS 111010 Dallas-FortWashington1VashingtWashington,Pittsburgh on. Worth 1).0 1).0 12.11214.8317.1210.17.55 43 10141DI17 3.239.379.1127.4.83 117 112 131020 13.7812.5.214. 25 7.178 40 131 382320 3!1.55023.03337.32. 983350 CO1-4 Net Affiliates Ranked by Total hours of News, Public Affairs, and "Other" in Composite Week -- Continued n Rank let ti9S Call Net Mkt. No ' Location News Rank affairsPub. Rank Other Rank Composite . . tpPP 31 KDFW CBS all. I111 Dallas-Fort Worth 16.2515.9216.65 262927 7.223.22 70 113 30 18.2213.457.90 119 23 8 29.50(139.16731.03333.317 co 681150 KMKSDWRAP OX NBCCBS 12 St. Dallas-FortLouis Worth 13.54117.47 6.15 138 5814 3.884.2.556.05 124 694091 11.20 8.675.98 107138 63 28.58317.3417 coti 141140 KMKTVI74 SP 91WCC 0 ABCABCCBS 13 1413M,.. Minneapolis-St.Min-^,olis-St.St. Louis PaulPaul jolis-St. Paul 14.108.178.26 126127 51 8 5.622.037.506.83 138126 32441 19.83 7.335.68 127139 4 29.58334.83327.05015.917 396526 WWISH RTV KSTP LW I CBSABCNBC 14 Indianapolis 12.6218.42 9470 7.47 22 12.33867 47 Ms tii)3343 33.81737.417 052230 KTKPRC, RK KI1 0 U ABCCBSNBC 15 15Houston HoustonIndianapolis 15.8014.2311.6510.97 503291 4.407.324.35870 76276116 1012.039.159.82 6111349 27.7833.5.1507.5. 633 <71 56936683 KOMO KI RO ABCCBSNBC 161815 Houston Seattle-Seattle-Tacoma Tacoma 17.4013.4812.88 9.22. 616615 4.1114.505.30 86857253 13.2511.327.229.22 1303297 20.51730.31.23329.500 717 126 WQXI87 27WTVJ5 WAWSBKING OA CBSABCNBCCBS 1817 AtlantaAtlanta_ 12.0517.7214.37 120 734612 5.074.974.087.38 255550 7 12.6810.2318.92 378.512 6 34.43341.60027.354145.833 Se 33 WBAL1 W I'L 0 WCKT ABCNBC 1918 Miami MiamiBaltimore 1.5.0711.5..414.0717.90 70 i-,2 9 11.!8111.126.334.45 3575 2 13.5214.8516.32 6.85 133 26II) 34.91733.36730.333 O _ 118 2559 WJZ 'WMARW1,15"I` NBCCBSABC 1920 Baltimore CincinnatiBaltimore 11.2711.14)5.84 1.111 384060 3.'2.92.503.47 111127106 16.527.920.78 117 9114 31.0718.22.333 167 COJ 138 W KR°980249 WC PO WTMJ NABC(711S BC 2120 MilwaukeeCincinnati 12.In 11.55 2340 113104 71 3.432.4.03 80 105121 87 15. 6010.4012.3510. 50 8442811 18 34.30723.38325.33326.:183 co 111 WITI232881 WTIC WTNIIWISN FIN ABCABCCBS 22 HartfordMilwaukee.MilwaukeeHartford-New -New Haven Haven 15.2013.5.8 7.378.87 131121 3650 12.922.404).5. 1827 132 3755 1 13.55 3.936.43 101136 25 18.75035.28. 017217 aoO 133 72 3269WDAF Ke510 WKMBC B NBCABCCBS 2423 Kansas City KansasHartford-New City Haven 16.7711.17.75 72 207711 4.185.2.23.!132.:69 110908154 11.8511.5213.1'11 6.84 137 5624 30.03333.29.26728.817 500 109106 4451 WPLA WOWKRWWWTVT LC Y R NBCABCCBS 25757424 Tampa-St.Buffalo Petersburg 10.5016.108.7.58.114 10011n121) 28 4.635.827.39 704326 16.238.459.67 100 936215 24. 23.58331.700233 359621 KATWHENKUW U NBCABCCBS 2025 PortlandBuffalo ...... 10. IS1(1.8515. 90 219430 5.732.837.45 120 1123 11.0511.8:31_2.05 -Istissi53 33.26725.51735.400 120 KOV 29R 1436KOIN KCKXTV RA NBCCBSABC 2726 Portland SacramentoSacramento-Stockton -Stoekt on 2(1.1511.0317. 229.57 112 5316 3 4.073.077.67I.80 136142117 8921 10.57I1.4010.6717.25 58737710 38.35333.68322.03331.350 ils4--.. 139 130W II WTVN11 (I1967 WLWCWENS CBSNBCABCABC 28 Columbus25) Memphis 15.13.60 529.337.426.47 133136116 5531 5.139.672.202.335.60 134 475711 16.8710.508.879.807.33 103 SI9011 P.B.36.00729. 500 17.66719.417283 ... :...; 101125108 WSIWLACWREC80 XWMU97 WSIU CBSABCNBC 3029 MemphisNashville29 :Memphis 13.10.8311.05 00 5.35 141 049589 4.352.332.054.17 122135 8277 11.8312.95 8.8.75 17 106113las 5133 25.25.0(1020.95023.907 517 1::, .. 112 WV24 UE WWL55 WDSU NBCABCCBSNBC 323130 NewNewNashville OrleansOrleans______... Orleans _____ ...... 11.5817.1210.16.77 08 106 81)1821 4.533.325.50 107 787149 12.8212.709.919.10 104) 843635 23.31.967 30028.71730.750 .-.,-7.1s),--`; , 128 KBTV79 73KOA KMGII NBCABCCBS 32 Denver Denver_ 14.32 9. 97 109 48 4.326.173.20 115 3851 7.876.55 120135 71 28.19.717 350 -5'-'..'.. 107132110 WCIISWIITN WTEV58 WSAZ ABCCBSNBC 3433 Chadestomnunlingtom. Charleston-BuntProvidenceCharleston-Huntington.. Boston - 11.1310.2214.37 8.85 105122 7847 5.653.482.005.38 103139 45 1G.1(1.73 50 6.'227. 97 137116 82 23.501124.20018.81730.483 1-...,:::...,;-..., 129 WC C 759447II WPWJA RI It %V SO C ABCNBCCBS 343534 CharlotteProvidence 53.3513.5012.98 5.08 142 650359 .1.774.707.401.2X) 141 656924 10.5312.10.18 528.10 115 398079 '..lt25.78331. .283 19.5132450 c:s,,.....a.,or..... 103142 WLX 858452Y WWIWAVE 11TV IAS SS r!' EN ABCNBCCBS 3035 LouisvilleCharlotte 11.4715.2715.134.53 143 97823538 4.(153.302.471. OS 114129143WS 88 12.(4)11.2312.407. 73 122 5)0241 ;'.55027.30.833 58314.733 -..._ '- .... 121119 WWAST BUB NBCABCCBS 37 Albany - Schenectady -T__--T______Albany-Sellet wet ad y-T _ . ______15.11.10.62 03479.22 110 53 3.0013.733.20 118 (54996 11.lo. 05Os7.389.30 126 079674 :2'221:!4.467 250) 6., F; 123117 W1110WIIMG46 WAP12 W 1B RC CBSABCNBC 3938 38BirminghamDayton Birmingham 11.5313.978.387. 73 125132 745433 7.2122.455.406.1174.90 130 185030 lo18.72' 009.50 40711111 7 21.43322.38.75031.617 033 --7:-.7...- 137 W LOS035742 WSPWLWDWFBC A ABCNBCC BS 4(14030 Dayton thiville-SptOlivine-Si/1Onville-Splithg-Aslivi lilig-Ashviithg-Ashvi 11.3311.32 8.(10 130 8087 2.027.3.57 23 123100 29 I1.3515.6212.08 7.58 123 6541 17 30.5x131.83315.2'.I. 254) 917 z4-21: -...;1 100 78823745 WWZZMWOTVKWTV K Y WK71.1) NBC('1)6NCBSABC BC 41 Oklahoma01:111110niaKalamazoo-Or.KalamazooKalamazoo-Dr. City -(1r.City Rapids 14.1'9(14.5812.'25 8.556. 25 124137 43457', 6. -125.553.553.304.30 101lost 344279 12.11.5313.21.1.2 -1522 7.!X1 114 554129 32.113331.66;725.28.01715.333 30; 14=.1-- Network Affiliates Ranked by Total Hours of News, Public Affairs, and "Other" in Composite Week-Continued --....`2''7:8, Rank 124 89 KOCO letters Call CBSABC Netdr. Mkt. No 4341 Oklahoma City Location News 11.37 8.0) Rank 131 85 affairsPub. 3.733.58 Rank 0799 Other 12. 179.70 Rank 92.45 Composite 21. 233_7.2(17 Q:71v-z-oz, ...., 127135143 54 WAVYWVECWNYSWSYRWHEN ABCNBC 4443 Norf-NewpSyracuse News -Hemp 13.5010.63 6.559.'25 135118 6006 3.558.152.431.93 131140102 17 9.6.275.127.47 10 142125143 149 30.75018.33321.26713.600 Z. 131122 6476 KSATKOOLKTVKKTAR ABCNBCCBS 4645 SanNorf-NewpPhoenix Antonio News-Hemp 10.9515.3317.859. 50 115 923410 3.802.524.830.27 125 446336 10. 57 4.7.285.67 27 144129140 78 '8.41721.61721.783111.017 -...... , 113144 719388 WWOA DWSPDKENS HO I ABCCBSNBCCBSNBC 4645 ToledoSan Antonio 13.3715.1712.829.681.67 144111 626737 2.352.500.833.106.75 133144116128 33 13.2811.1010.72 9.905.42 141 31668772 24.(1;10'3.28326.63327.33312.400 ,I,p'z. 105 2038 WPMWXIIwToKFMT1 LY CBSNBCCBS 4948 SanGnsb-High Diego Pt-Win-Sal 19.2712.8210.88 6893 5 4.223.874.45 809274 15.8212.O88.93 102 47it; 3.5.5(1732.24.237 500 ...-_,Z:-...- 104136102 90 KUTVKSKCKGTV LPX NBCABCCBSNBC 5049 SaltSan Lake Diego City 10.3210.13.57 576.00 102139 18157 5.983.774.4.50 75 4195f1773 12.928.7.536.77 12 114124131 31 _4.41727.25018.28324.,833 :Z.Q--.,.-- - f,orfiRiema :117.,,,,ciRgiiip; 1,973 1?enelt.,/7.%, 141

Yrivork Alb Ranked. by Nnytbcr. ofPOI lie Service .4nnounremenlgin Com- poftitc Week

Rank Call Nei. Mkt. Location PSA's lel tors ;Ill'. No.

Npw York ( 'i t y 217 .7 W NBC N it( '(4 i12 \VATi(' .AR(' Nvw York (11 y.....__...... New York Cit y 257 295562 WCISS K NBC N BC Los AT111,S...... lti 243 13 K ABC Los Aogeles...... 3 KNXT (115 Los Atgeles 181 3 W1331 :15 231 101 W31 AQ NBC Chicago 57W1,8 C( II: ii t': :: : g4 : 1186.2'' 10 W PVT Philadelphia 345 3'.W l. 'A ti C I3S Philadelphia 247 4(34 3 K YW N:.4:11.1135((;:' Philadelphia Detroit 154 81 \\V'N"..Y1Z N(A,Iiiriist(: DO roil 1'131 110 132W.113K- Det roil 23 WYA (.7 II Boston.. 287 17WIIZ (I Boston 121 W E W S 7 Cleveland.. :132(1(71 71 \ \ '1 \ V (N''''11.1B1118:(:' 7 Cleveland Ss W K. VC 7 Cleveland 106K 10 ABC it51:m Francisco ItK l'IX 5San Fr:incise° ...... 16 \ARA F. 9 Pittsburgh KDKA- IRS 9 Pit tsburgh 3332C 1(114I1 NI ITC NH(' 1.1. Pitt sburgh. 57 300 15 31 NI Ai. IA. 8115C 10Washington D.C. 10 WTOP 10-Washington II C.- 2174(3; NBC illWashington D.C. ..0 W EC 201 ;31-' A A (.1 :it 5( 11 I)all:is-Fort Wort h 241 I3K DEW 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 30 W BA P II-Dallas-Fort Worth 2t15 237 19 K 310X C BS 1'2St.Louis 46 KSD- 12Sr. Lotti 241 56 177 4:1'1 ISSt. Loin,...... 1 loWen./ 13 Minneapolis-St . Pun! 122 K 31SP AB(' 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 13Atimwapolis-St. Paul .211(234:711 126 KSTP 2a5 211 WI WI AR(' 14 twihnapolis e WISH CBS 34 1 tidianapoli 179 59 IV RTV 14I adlanapoli iioK HO tt CBS 151 Ionston ...... __. 215 (02 KIRK 15Houston 113r7' 12 KP RC N,1113338' 15 Houston NO KI RO 16Sent I le-Tacoma 53 '5KONI 0 16Seattle- Tacoma 253 133 KING 16Seattle-Tacoma 1Cr.i 75WS13 17 Atlanta 1111 41 WQXT 17Atlanta 242 100 WA GA 17 Atlanta 166 113 WTV3 18Miami 149 2(1 -17 WC KT NBC -18Alimul 56 W PLO 18Nliatni 22(1 21 WBAL NBC 19Baltimore 2 WV, 19Baltimore 41 WM A It CBs 19 Baltimore 311 WLWT 20Cincinnati 24421a:1(.1i 12 WK RC NABBCC 20Cincinnati 127ll'CP0 CBS 20Cincinnati 135 WT311 NBC 21Milwaukee. 121(2413.15 5'. WISN 0135 21Ntihvaukee 224 133 1211 WITI A BC 21 Milwaukee 13 WTI (1 CBS 22Ihrtford-New Haven 326 25 W TN 11 ABC 22Hartford-NeW Haven 27:: 144 WIIN T3 2211nrtford-New Haven 97K3143 0 NABC 23Kansas Clty 172 51 WDAF NBC 23Kansas City 183 109":.(.1:110 C BS 23Kansas City 151 CRS 24Tainpa-St. Petersburg 386 6 WTVT 230 54 \VELA: NBC 24'Pam pa-SL Petersburg 4 WI.CY ABC 24Tampa-SC Petersbarg_ 462 31 WKBW ABC 25Buffalo 2t13 691VG R 25Buffalo 203 35 WBFN NCCBS 25Buffalo 258 55 KATU ABC 26Portland n.1 32 K 0 W NBC 26Portland._- 62 5 KOIN CBS 26Portland 98 KOVR 27Sacramento-Stockton 27Sacramento Stockton 74 KX TV CBS 102 77KCRA NBC 27Sticramento-Stoekton 42 F.C.C. 2d 104-004-1:1 -10 142 Federal Communications Commission, Reports

Network Affiliates Ranked by Number of Public Service Announcements in Com- posite WeekContinued

Rank Call Net. Mkt. Location PSA's letters aff. No.

76 WTVN ABC 28 Columbus 194 01 WLWC NBC 28 Columbus 177 15 WRNS CBS 2S Columbus 317 134 W 1113Q ABC 29 Memphis 107 so WNW NBC 29Memphis 186 131 WREC' CBS 29 Memphis 112 13S WSIX ABC 30Nashville 84 139 WLAC CBS 30Nashville 84 112 WSM 30Nashville 75 95 WWL CBS 31 New Orleans 176 72 WV UE ABC 31 New Orleans 198 136 licV 1%DiSoliri NBC 31 New Orleans Os CBS 32Denver 234 123 KBTV ABC 32 Deuva 129 61 KOA NBC 32Denver 216 92 WSAZ NBC 33Charleston-Huntington 177 70 \VCIIS CBS 33Charleston-Huntington 203 59 W I ITN ABC 33Charleston-Huntington 221 33 WTRV ABC 31Providence 959 7 WJAR NBC 34Providence 369 105 WPRI CBS 34Providence 159 110 WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 151 16314 11%%:CmyCB ABC 35Charlotte 149 CBS 35Charlotte 212 66 W I I AS 0135 36Louisville 207 81 WAVE NBC 30Louisville 184 130 WLKY ABC 36Louisville 112 52 WTEN CBS 37Albany-Schenectady-T 231 48 WAST ABC 37All any-Schenectady-T 238 26 W B.G B NBC 37 Albany-Schonectady-T 281 19 WAPI NBC 38 Birmingham 366 82 WBRC A13C 38Birmingham 185 119 \VBMG CBBSSC 38Birmingham 134 143 W1110 39Dayton 60 79 WIAW 0 NBC 39 Dayton 188 104\VSI'A 40Onville-Sptnbg-Ashvi 162 86 W I:13C N(211135C 40Onville-Sptnbg-Ashvi 183 125111.0S ABC C 40Onville-Sptngb-Ashvi 126 21 WZZM ABC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 2'Z. :29 WK' /.0 41 KalamazooOr Rapids 141 75 WOTV NBC 41 Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 195 81 41 Oklahoma City 365 \V KY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 572 34 KOCO ,C1.1313SC 41 Oklahoma City 259 115 WHEN 43Syracuse 148 27 WSY It NBC 43Syracuse 272 73 W IC Y S ABC 43Syracuse 197 93 WVEC ABC 44Norf-Newp News -Vamp 177 20 WAVY NBC 44 Norf-Newp News-HamP 297 90 KTAR NBC 45Phoenix 179 111 KTVK 45 Phoenix 150 11 KOOL CBS 45Phoenix 336 128 KSAT ABC 45 San Antonio 115 39 WO AI NBC 15 San Antonio 247 64 KENS CBS 45 San Antonio 211 117 WD110 ABC 45 Toledo 146 108 WSP D NBC 45Toledo 154 103 WTOL CBS 45 Toledo 163 112 WXII NBC 48Onsb-High Pt-Win Sal 149 04 WE:11Y CBS 48Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal 177 37 KEMB CBS 49San Diego 251 121 KGTV NBC 49 San Diego 132 29KOPX ABC 50Salt Lake City 269 118 KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 135 107 KUTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 155

. NetworkAffiliates Ranked by Number of Composite Week Hours TVith More Than 12 Alin of Commercials

Rank Call Net, Mkt. Location 12-16 Over Total letters all. No. min 16

96 WNBC NBC 1 New York City 0 0 40 54 WABC ABC 1 New York City 33 0 33 109 WCBS CBS INew York City 44 0 44 138 KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 52 0 52 97 KABC ABC 2Los Angeles 39 1 40 125 KNXT CBS 2 Los Angeles 48 0 48 42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 143

Network Affiliates Ranked by Number of Public Service Announcements in Com- posite WeekContinued

Rank Call Net. Mkt. Location 12-16 Over Total letters ad. No. n.w 16

141 WBBM CBS 3Chicago 56 o .,, i alWMAQ NBC 3Chicago 50 0 50 143WI.S ABC 3Chicago 55 3 58 113WPVI ABC 4Philadelphia 44 1 46 124WC A U CBS 4Philadelphia 48 u 48 23KYW NBC 4 Philadelphia 26 0 129WWJ NBC 5Detroit 49 0 49 133WXYZ ABC 5Detroit 50 0 so 115WJBK CBS 5Detroit 45 1 46 20WNAC ABC 6Boston 26 1 03W HZ NBC 6Boston 33 0 33 98%VMS ABC 7Cleveland 41 0 41 103WJW CBS 7Cleveland 42 0 42 12W KYC NBC 7Cleveland 48 0 98 100KGB ABC S San Francisco 40 1. 91 1 K PIX CBS 8San Francisco 2 2 10WTAE ABC 9Pittsburgh 20 Al 30KDKA CBS 9Pittsburgh 20 c: 29 105WIIC NBC 9Pittsburgh 41 1 42 44WMAL ABC 10Washington D.C_ 32 0 32 120WTOP CBS 10Washington D.0 46 1 47 102WRC NBC 10Washington D.0 92 0 42 76WFAA ABC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 36 1 37 122KOFW CBS 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 48 0 48 39WBAP NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth 30 1 31 101KMOX CBS 12St. Loin' 42 0 42 75KSD NBC 12St. Louis 36 1 37 25KTVI ABC 12St. Louis 27 0 27 139WCCO CBS 13Minneapolis-St Paul 51 2 53 15KMSP ABC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 24 0 24 61KSTP NBC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul 35 0 35 130WLWI ABC 14Indianapolis 48 1 49 79WISH CBS 14Indianapolis 38 I 38 38WRTV NBC 14Indianapolis 31 t 31 noKHOU CBS 15Houston 93 1 94 68KIRK ABC 15Houston 36 36 80KP RC NBC 15Houston 36 2 38 108KIRO CBS 16Seattle-Tacoma 44 0 44 60KOMO ABC 16Seattle-Tacoma 35 0 35 6KING NBC 16Seattle-Tacoma 18 0 18 52WSB NBC 17Atlanta 33 0 33 112WQXI ABC 17Atlanta 95 0 45 121WAGA CBS 17Atlanta 48 0 48 34WTVJ CBS 18Miami 30 0 30 48WC K T NBC 18Miami 31 1 32 861VPLU ABC 18Miami 38 1 39 95WBAL NBC 19Baltimore 90 0 40 4 WJZ ABC 19 Baltimore 13 0 13 78WMAR CBS 19Baltimore 38 0 38 131WLWT NBC 20Cincinnati 96 3 49 33WKPC ABC 20Cincinnati 30 0 30 90WCP 0 CBS 20Cincinnati 90 1 1 107WTMJ NBC 21 Milwaukee 43 0 43 128WISN CBS 21 Milwaukee 40 2 48 21WITI ABC 21 Milwaukee 25 0 25 5 WTIC CBS 22Hartford-New haven 15 0 1r, 57W1NII ABC 22Hartford-New Haven 35 0 35 64W1INB NB(, 02Hartford -New Haven 36 0 36 94KSIBC ABC 23Kansas City 40 0 40 144 1IDAF NBc 23Kansas City 49 10 59 101 ii.('.111) (.'118 93Kansas City 42 42 118WTVT CBS 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 47 0 47 1321,1*F LA NBC 24 Tintti-St. Petersburg 50 0 50 s7WLCY ABC 24 Tampa-St. Petersburg 37 2 39 20WKBW ABC 25Buffalo 25 0 25 411 W(3 R. NBC 25 Buffalo 32 n 32 59WBEN CBS 25 Buffalo 35 0 35 24KATU ABC 26Portland 27 0 27 51 K(lW NBC 28Portland 33 0 33 G,.. KOIN CBS 241 Portland 33 2 35 19K DV R ABC 27Sacramento-Stockton_ ...... _ _ '25 0 25 127KXTV ('BS 27Sacramento-Stockton 47 1 48 77KURA. NBC '27 Sacramento-Stockton 35 2 37 691PV N A 11( ' 28Columbus 35 1 39 126WLWC NBC 25Columbus 47 1 48 85WINS CBS 25Columbus 39 0 39 00W II BQ ABC 24Memphis. 33 0 33 114WMC NBC 29Memphis 45 1 46 58WREC CBS 20Memphis 35 0 35 31 WSIX ABC 30Nashville 28 1 29 110WLAC CBS 30Nashville 44 2 46 67WS111 NBC 30Nashville 36 0 36 42 F.C.C. 2d 144 Federal Cootwuniatiow; Commission. Reports

No tfr.ork Minked by Number of Compoxite Week Iloilo? With.11o, Than. I.,Ilin of ConimerciatxContinmul

Rank ("all Net. 3.1kt. Loea) ion 12-16 Over Total letters :at. N. 0011 10

1(1(1, I BS 31 New Orleans 37 0 37 47 WV I; E ABC 31 New Orleans 31 1 32 s2 W1)90 N110 31 New Orlean 39 0 39 117 KM 1; CBS 32Denver 47 I) 47 142 E. IITV AB(' 32 I /Over ...... 57 I 5s IIIRDA NI)) 32Denver ...... 42 ' 44 71 WSAZ NBC 33i !harleston-11 untingtom .. 37 0 37 27 W0 1 IS ('1)9 33 Chaleston-Huntingt on.... . 21 3 27 1.IV HT N All 33CharleMon-11 untingt on. . 25 0 25 s 5 IV T CV All) 31 Providence .. 32 0 32 70W,1 A R NB) 31 Pro vides ice '37 0 37 3WI' Itl CBS 31 Providence 10 I 11 7 II SO C NBC 35 Charlotte 25 0 25 s 1 IV( '011 AB( 35Chariot le 39 0 39 !ri%V IM 0 BS 35Charlotte 40 0 411 351I'll AS i 'BS 3tiLouisville 29 1 30 12 II .V E N 110 3)1 Louisville 90 0 40 I I II I, E V A110 36Louisville 21 1 22 73 %VT EN CBS 37 Albany-Schenectraly-Troy...... 37 0 37 ts WAST A.I30 37Albany-Schenectady-Troy Is 1 19 :17 IV R GB N110 37 Albany-Schenectady-Troy 31 0 31 22 WA PI Nlic 38 Birmingham 24 1 25 56II B R0 A 00 38Birmingham. 29 4 33 1VI17(1 0 ISS 39 Birmingham 31 2 33 135 1111 I 0 0 B s 39Dayton 48 2 50 o 137 111,W I) NIS(' 39 Dayton 49 51 119 WSPA CBS 40Gainrsville-Spartanburg-Ashe- 96 1 47 vine, 11 WFBC NB( 40Gainesville-Spartanburg-Ashe- '24 0 21 ville. 12 W LOS All) 40Gainesville-Spartenburg-Ashe- 23 0 23 Nille, 46W7,7,51 ABC' 41 Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids 31 1 32 91 W KZ 0 CBS 41 Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids_ ..... _ ._ 40 0 40 106 WOTV Nil) 41Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids. 43 0 43 74 KNVTV CBS 91 Oklahoma City 37 0 37 so W K. Y NBC 41Oklahoma City 29 2 31 81 KOCO ABC 91Oklahoma City 39 0 39 .411 WHEN 0 BS 43 Syracuse 40 0 40 13 IVSYR NBC 93Syracuse 24 0 '24 S WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 19 0 10 1'2 WV EC ABC' 94Nor(-Ne'svp News-Hamp 32 0 32 36 W A V Y NB(' 44 Nor(-Newp News-Hamp...... 31 0 31 I5 KTA R NBC 45Phoenix 3)1 0 36 49 KTVK A BC 45Phoenix 33 0 33 1 i. KOOL CBS 45Phoenix 55 0 55 Is KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 28 0 28 32 WO A I NBC 45Sim Antonio 27 2 29 S3 KENS CBS 45San Antonio 39 0 39 7 W DIM ABC isToledo 18 0 is 41 WSPD NBC 45Toledo 32 0 32 115 WTOL CBS 95Toledo 30 0 30 .r WX11 NBC' 48Gush-highPt-Win-Sal 28 0 28 2 IV FM I' CBS 98 Ouch-high Pt-Win-Sal 4 0 4 130 KENIB CBS 99San Diego 47 3 50 S9 KGTV NBC 49San Diego 40 0 40 16 KCPX ABC 50 Salt Lake City 25 0 25 Ss KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 90 0 90 63 KUTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 36 0 36

42 F.C.C. 2d Rank Call Id ters Net. all 01k No. Network Affiliates Banked by Local Progrowntiay Location ('rime lime local and rank Local programming and rank f'tn» 6360 WN13WA75 WCBS BC C CBSABCNBC 2 I1 New YorkYork Cit CityCity_ y .... 8.48)i3l.6. 350800 21.II.13.6213. 006792 886766 4 9.500 ;- ''' 123 KA3321 13( W13BMKN 7 X 3T KNBC CBSABCNBC 32 ChicagoLos AngelesAnglees 6. 54)1.00 I ::!23311:1-)11; 7811 17.15.1105: 51572357 100 532917 10,151.4%83311824. 1751256580 858 ? 145341 WWMAWPY1 LS, 0 ABCNBC 43 PhiladelphiaChicago 6. 00 SO4719 2131. 912°15. 58 4474 5 1150.12.95810, 770892067 !,, 42 WCA D2!I KYW WWI NBCCBS 54 PhiladelphiaDe1roit _ 6.1474: ..... 00 071:53 48 20. 3021(5).. 0042 li 15379389 WWIWNAC X B YZ K 11'13Z CBSABCNBCABC 65 DetroitB6stc;iBoston__Detroit ...... _ ... ______.... ______5. 50006.4.00 60 81573170 19.107:5838 35 106 -,8912 ' 12.926II.1773:471051708 2.02 ,..,.F.-.. 6992 WJWWEIV8 (A313BSC 7 ClevelandCleveland 0. 50 135117 0) 111-51, ... 621525 114 5260 897.7. 333313137575 1(3 WK Ye94 K GO (42.13B5CNBC 8 SanCleveland Francisco 3327.... 5815705 2159 11. 08 1087 11. 500 5231 WTKP1X A E4 KDKA CBSABC 908 Pittsburgh.SanPittsburgh Francisco t8i:3.42 58121 101 36 5 18.5317,..16. 880078 1634 8 14.10. 35010012. 697 8--:' 3-, 792S WWM17 'I' WIIC ()A PI. CBSABCNBC 10 Washing'WashingtPittsburgh v., D. n,C ______l) .0 6.0)334125 . 53 49!i I37 14.20.117 921121..011)0 58 897 11, 783 8.....;. .z..-..,-8... 132 264749 KW D FAAIt KW I' 11'131 1' NBCNBCCBSABC 1211II Washington,Dallas-Fort D. C Worth 71:Ili;¶ 4. 00 12 2 16.17 9. 17 3(179 111800111 ;56417.28 5. 167 .....,-.,.1_ . , 3609 KNIOK81) X NBCCBS 1212 St..St. LouisLouis 6. 27 3.5)4 111322'32.29 16.3313. 4813. 25 11.4179. 875 .'.. so12 W Kiwi ( ' CO ABC 13 St. Louis 8.922. 50 4 17./5 113(3'71:27732 136::08317 --:.. , !?: tt:-) a) KMSP6443 WKSIP ',WI ABCNBCCBS 111413 IndianapolisMinneapolis-StMinneapolis-St. Paul 5.3.08 17G. 52 13.111. 009575 518555 I:" c7,0,5s89. 458 --...,, 73 W1S I 1 CBS 14 154.96./211,8181:: P 2565I w RTVt KTRK KII0 41 ABCC138NBC 1513 HoustonIIndianapolis Iouston _ 7.5.:5I: (1)3013550 18 17.13.4211$1.. on82:, ,,III71 12. 6121,2.1.. 415t28 ('-',1',-..-V-- Network Affiliates Ranked by Local Programming-Continued Rank Call letters 29 KP RC CBSNBC Net. all. Mkt. No. 1615 Houston Location Prime time local and rank 3,837.52 8514 Local program 14.9215.93 ran k ming and 5942 Composite 11.725 9.375 129 WQXI7632 66KING KIRO5 WSB ABCNBC 171716 Seattle-Tacoma AtlantaAtlantaSeattle-Tacoma 6.0.3. 55450011 00 0.0 140100 2651 3 19.4210.5514.16. 0598 8314116133 14.20811. 4925.2758. 750 10.5 19107170 WAWBALWPLWCKT G A ' VJ NBCABCCBS 18 19Miami18 ;Miami AtlantaBaltimore 8,4.4.02 537.5.50 80 76105979 6 22.0219.17.3012.4211.07 45 0.38 112 311077 3 12.13. 550275 8.9586.7009.108 407411 WICB.0WMARWCP16 WLWTWJZ ABCNBCCBSCBS 212019 BaltimoreCincinnati CincinnatiBaltimoreCincinnati 2.776.177. 424.00 110 428210 35.6717.7514.9519.03 255714 1 20.91713.22513.99210.8758.858 816872..)7 WTIWTN 13WITIWISH WISH C II ABCABSCBSNBC 2221 MilwaukeeHartford-New HavenHawn Milwaukee 3.5.6,4.778.00 031050 102107 693374 S 13.4813.2011.17.95 428. 770.55 140108 73842069 12.975 8.9.7. 258158150958 102116 KM13WHNB5434 C KCVO CBSNBCABC 2322 Hartford-NewKansas City Haven 7.333 586.506.00 25 40345213 10.12.16.45 50807.58 136 7036¶10 10.IL 4750426.0506.792 141120 Ni WIC 111155786180 WWBWLCYWTVT KB E WN CBS'NBCABCNBC 2524 TampaTampa-St.Buffalo -St. PetersburgPetersburg Buffalo 3.503,002.501.6.25 83 127110123 0302 17.8316.5813.928.42_4. 50 143123 352302 10.0428.7089.8335.7088.5253.500 73 41 10.458 I01134 KXTV KOVR508467 KATKGWKOIN U ABCABCCBSNBC 2726N PortlandSacramento-Stockton26Portland Portland 5.504.972.673.903.00 120111 176084 15.9512.1315.42 8.336.17 124141 7849 4.4176.9178.0179.208 138128 WHBQWTVN9927 WLWC22KORA. WBNS NBCABC'.CBSNBCABC 2928 MemphisColumbus Sacramento-Stockton 6.673.250.07.407.000.0 142104141 2522 15.4718.3310.6710.757.920.27 129 9391384818 11.83311.23312.5003.9586.9585.375 131 WREC38 WMC243982 WWLACWSIX SM NBCCBSABC 30 3029Nashville MemphisNashville 7.026.9.24.522.67 121 202377 1 17.9217.6015.0011.82 7.75 133 21265682 12.30810.958 8.1675.208 107 WV UE914420 WDKBKM TV SUWI7 WWL ABCCBSNBC 3231 NewDenver_Denver Orleans 4.675.226.277.605.239.58 3975671565 15.4210.1715.0717.58 7.93 101128 6054:*i 10.01210.66712.54213.750 7.6926.583 130140119 WILTWSAZMTEV8556 N WCHSKOA ABCCBSNBC 3332 Charleston-Huntington34Denver Providence Charleston-HuntingtonCharleston-Huntington_ 3.500.502.503.83 134136124 9486 10.0013.47 8.837.007.67 117105139135 70 6.1675.2503.7507.9835, 750 133122115114 WCWSOCWPWJARN C RIWII B 16A SWBTV CBSABCNBC 3534 363534ProvidenceCharlotte ChatProvidence lott e LouisvilleCharlotte_ tidal.° 3.003.505.575.700. 83 131112 565595 17.3515.53 8.338.67 126125121 3046 11,45810.617 4,5835.6676.083 100135110136 WWAWTENWLKY RG13 ST95 WAVE NBCABCCBS 3736 Albany-Schenectady36 -T Albany-SchenectadyLouisville -T 3.5113.001.483.000.0 11S109143113 96 10.4210.0011.42 7.338.75 138104120 9585 6.9584.4086,5004.3757.203 tz, Rank Call letters Net. all. Alkt No. Network Ali 'Mates lea-nked by Local Programming-Continued Location Prime time local and rank Local programming and rank Coin posi le 126 WAIT'23 W B RC ABCN BC ' 3S38 BinBirmingham ninghan i 11)5126 ((0 122 !I 152:542(575.500 cc t 125 W131111 CC'135 BS 3831) 1Birmingham. )ayt on .215:23. 20 53 7. S3 131 51 11 103 WSPA3045 WW1110 LW I) NCBSNBC BC 3940 DaytonI; nVi lle-Sptnlaz-Ash V i ______3. 00 1(51..10.17.II 53304283 ,St ))... 526'52) i.. 7760 (767,57, O 101 WFBC 40 11Duville-Sputhg- nyille-Sptn1 tg-Ashei 4 slivi 0.,35, ...0 3:10 1111311 :t. :1;1 34-311 ABC 11 143 WLOS i4.2'1::.; 31(11... 108112 WKZOWZMI48 WOTV (Al BB ..14C 411141 Kalamazoo-1i:Kulamazoo-GrKalamazoo- Dr RapidsRapid, 6..5.3. 750000 115 2471 10.11 it. 111 72 924380 10. 437 532671257 62 1677K OroWRYRWTV ('BEABCNBC 41 OklehomaOklahoma FitCity y 3. 5(13.6. 7520 8741 15.10. 5732 13746 13 1 812, .. 776 355 036 r-.7...: 127117 WTI WSY EN It C11SNBC 43 Syracuse Syraense 2. 50 07 17:31 29;15421) (511... 71501s11100 3.-:-_ 137144121 WVECWNYS WAX Y 8 KTAR NBCABC 454443 Nor-Newp45 News-llam p PhoenixNor-NSyracuse ewp News-llamp 3.500.200.602.8(18. 00 113826137118 Oh 9 18.8'?7.927.13 134141 13. 4583.0075. 703 88 KTVK ABC Phoenix 12.80 1113i:555) .-% 98 KOOL CBS 45 PI weld- 4t5.50 ;I . 500 3563 9..(108.82 7.(77;.. 750 .875°08 t. 90 KSAT NIBB(C 45 San Antonio. 54 . 1110.111 i s.....,ec- 139106 WD110KENS58 WOA1 ABCCBS 45 San Antonio_ Toledo_San Antonio 3.3 6800 0. 0 11311ti ,s8 1311 ;1:287 7. b,.. 53 132 Iii. 908 118124 WX11WS PD9687 W WTOL FA 1 'V C13:4NBCCBS 434845 Toledo_ Gnsb-II4,11Toledo Pt-Win r-Sal 111..5. 5000h1 lay 62 10. 42 S. 92 12- 99 75.7.8126.583 921138 :St,:.; 111 51 K 1,1113GTV ANCBS .."iC C 504940 San Diego SanGash-nigh Diego_ 1't-Win.-Sal 5. oo0. 831.50 15. 50 til..F0 116): 245058 ,...t.-.-.... ill cr;III1:12772:1 3.467 142 KCPX8357 KUTVKSL NBCCBS 50 SaltSalt Lake Lake City City 11. 136.02 -1543 101. ?.17' 10. 0088.092 . . all(/ iswissipp; 197d flenewaTh 149

rallied 1fii? rriYio'af prograin:pthise. glgross revenues

Raid: Call Net. Mkt. Location letters aft'. _No.

54 WN BC NBC 1 New York City 1 WA B C ABC 1 New York City WC BS C BS I New York Cit y 35 KNI3C NBC 2Los Angeles 17 KABC ABC 2Los Angeles KNXT CBS 2Los Angeles 65 WBBM CBS 3Chicago . 74 WIAQ NBC 3Chieago 44 %VI.S ABC 3Chicago WPVI ABC Philadelphia 73 WC A U CBS Philadelphia 123 K YW NIB' 4 Philadelphia 112 WW.1 NBC I.)elroit 2ti WX ABC Detroit tot;W3 B K CBS .55 Detroit re) WNAC ABC 6Boston 13:55'13Z NBC 6Boston WF,WS A Itt 7Cleveland 77 W.1W (BS 7 Cleveland 13 WK Yr. NBC 7Cleveland 30KCII ABC SSan Francisco 103 P 1 X C 11S SSan Francisco IS WTAE ABC 9Pittsburgh KDEA CBS 9Pittsburgh s WI IC NIIC It Pittsburgh 9W.l1AL ABC 19 Washington, I I . .50 WT4B' GIBS 10 Washington; DJ.% W RC NBC 10Washington., W FA.1. A BC 41 Dallas-Fort Worth 141 KIJFW C BS 11 Dallas-Fort '5'0rd] HS WBAP NIB' 11 Dallas-Fort Worli" 30KIIIIX C BS .12St: 'Louis . KSD NBC 12St. Leah; K T ABC 12 ts 7" W4'.'0 CBS 13* .11lioneapolle-St. Paul 126 1Ills1 A lit 13-, Minneapolis-S1,Paul 71 K SP N 13C , -13: .11inneapolis-SI. Pactl 37 W LW 1 ABC 14 Indianapolis 135 WISH (1135 14 .Indianapolis 1)4 W RTV NIB' 14., Indianapolis 127 CBS Houston . 160 K T RK ABC 15, Honshu' KP RC 15. iioustnn 1:2S K IRO C 16Sault icqaccalint '24 OM° ABC 10Seattle - Tacoma 3 KING NBC 16Seattle- Tacoma 1111 WS IT NBC Atlanta 99 WoX ABC 17Atlanta 79 WHOA CBS 17Atlanta 441 WT V I CBS IsMiand 117 WC KT NBC Itc .52 WI LO ABC IS .135tatutinq 101 WBAL NBC 111 Baltimore St 55',I Z ABC 19Baltimore 1111 WM A R CBS 111 Baltimore 41 W NBC Ciucianut.1 133 WKRC AIIC 20Cincinnati: 33WC: PO C BS Cincinnat I 49 wr Mir NBC Milwanke.e 1. W IsN CBS 21, Milwaukee tlWIT1 ABC 21, Milwaukee 110WTIC (IRS liartford-New Haven 124 W TN 1 I ABC liartford-New 'lava!' 136 WIINB N BC liartforti-New haven 90 KM BC ABC Kansas City . 131 W F NBC 23 Kansas City 97 K CA10 CBS 23Kansan City 51 15 'PVT C1554 24 Tampa-St, Petersburg W FLA NBC 24 Tampa-St. Petersbutg tali W Y ABC 24Tampa-St,. Petersburg WO WE 11W A BC 25llulTalo SI WI.lt N BC .5ISM:tato SO WHEN CBS 25Ilu 'Tato 13 KAT U ABC 95 Portland 2 K NBC 26Portland 12 KOIN CBS 26Portland 5 K057 R ABC 27Sacramento - Stockton 66 K X TV CBS 27Sacramento-Stockton 411) KC RA NBC 27 Sacramento-Stockton 105 WTVN ABC 2.5 Columbus T.C.O. 24, 150 Federal Communications Commission Reports

Network, affiliates ranked by the ratio of program expenses/gross revenuesCon.

Rank Call Net. Mk-t. Location letters all. No.

11814 LWC NBC Columbus 61WBNS CBS 28Columbus 111WilB44 ABC 29Memphis 92WMC NBC 29Memphis 114WREC CBS 2$Memphis 22WSIX ABC 30Nashville 49WLAC CBS 30Nashville 16WSM NBC 30Nashville 31WWL CBS 31Now Orleans 34WVUE ABC 31 New Orleans 55WDSU NBC 31New Orleans 68KMGII CBS 32Denver 42KBTV ABC 32Denver 132KOA NBC 32Denver 139WSAZ NBC 33Charleston-Huntington 140WC HS CBS 33Charleston-Huntington 102WI1TN ABC 33Charleston-Huntington 32WTEV ABC 34Providence 91WJAR NBC 34Providence 113WPRI CBS 34Providence 47WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 137WCCB ABC 35Charlotte 20WBTV CBS 35Charlotte 20WHAS CBS 36Louisville 86WAVE NBC 36Louisville 23WLKY ABC 36Louisville 39WTEN CBS 37Albany-Schenectady-T 4WAST ABC 37Albany-Seheneetady-T 129WR GB NBC 37Albany-Schenectady-T 63\VAPI NBC 38Birmingham 144WBRC ABC 38Birmingham 143WBMG CBS 38Birmingham 87WHIO CBS 39Dayton 83WLWD NBC 39Dayton 121WS1 1. CBS 40Gainesville-Spartansburg-Asheville 130Wir...0 NBC 40Gainesville-Spartansburg-Asheville 60WLOS ABC 40Gainesville-Spartansburg-Asheville 14WZZM ABC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 142WKZO CBS 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 67WOTV NBC 41Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 25KWTV CBS 41 Oklahoma City 70WKY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 53KOCO ABC 41Oklahoma City 54WHEN CBS 43Syracuse 10WSYR NBC 43Syracuse 18WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 95WVEC ABC 44Norf-Newp News-Hamp 84WAVY NBC 44Norf-Newp News -Hemp 48KTAR NBC 45Phoenix 76KTVK ABC 45Phoenix 119KOOL CBS 45Phoenix 38KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 93WOAI NP.0 45San Antonio 134KENS CBS 45San Antonio 29WDIIO ABC 45Toledo 107WSPD NBC 45Toledo 122WTOL CBS 45Toledo 21WXII NBC 48Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal 76WFMY CBS 48Onsb-High Pt-Win Sal 128KFMB CBS 49San Diego 62K OTV NBC 49San Diego 40KCPX ABC 50Salt Lake City 6KSL CBS 60Salt Lake City 11 KUTV NBC 60Salt Lake City

42 F.C.O. 2d Rank Call letters Net. att. Mkt. No. Network Affiliates Ranked by Percent Afinorities Employed Location SMSA employes Tot al Minorities employedNumber Percent Factor r---Is. 32 KG()KENS1 KAB C ABCCBS 45 San Antonio82 LosSan Angeles._Francisco 28.9%52.32. 6%9% 227224192 70 51525517 22.23.21%24.29%28. 47%65% 0.0.81130.462 794871 AOscoF.> "' 654 WKSATKNBC RC NBCABCNBC 4510 WashingtonSan Antonio2 Los D.0Angeles 32.9%28.3%52.6% 229 90SO 501917 21.11%21.25%21.83% 0.4010.661 A11.'1 _ 10 KWTV987 WNBWOAIKPIX. C NBCCBSNBC 4145 San Antonio___18 San1 New Francisco York City Oklahoma City 28.9%52.6%12.6%30.0% 280237165 88 50443116 18.18%18.57%18.79% 1.4430.0.650 619 g;),....c.,S" 14131211 WWLWCWTWKYC CBS OP NBCCBS 2810 WashingtonColumbus7 D.C. ClevelandNew York City 30.0%12.6%17.6%28.3% 1311193 9371 34241216 17.20%17.62%17.65%17.86% 0.4101.3651.0)10.6610.595 F:>A 1918171615 KOWREWHBQWTVNWJBK C C0 CBSABC 292841 MemphisColumbu,5 DetroitOklahoma City 19.9%38,4%12.6%38.4% 155190 907877 25311315 16.67%16.32%16.16.90% 88% 0.8200,43.11.3231.340 es,--,t....., - 222120 WBWMAQ23WTVJ WCKT AL NBCNBCCBS 18 Miami121819 Miami3 ChicagoBaltimoic 39.1%23.4%25.1% 134342148149 21242354 15.67%15.79%16.11%16.13% 0.8980.4010.6750.61220.413 ....,....., c...,....esc;, 25 W).`LG272624 WMALKMOXR.TAR ABCNBCCBS 451018 WashingtonMiami3 D .0 PhocinsSt. Ionic 28.3%20.039.1%17.3% 274140113137 412117 15.33%15.54%14.96,15.00%15.04% %y 0.5300.7520.31x2 c.3....-).....0.. 3029 WABC3128KIRK WLSWDSII ABCNBCABC 1531 New Orleans1 NewHoustonChicago York Cit y ...... _ , . _ __ _ 35.6%30.30.8% 0%35.23.4% 6% 136189101 00 20281315 14.44%14.14.81%14.85/0 71% 0.4060.4130.4940.4820.639 cse,,,p....,(:.,,,,.... 343332 WAWAVYWVUE GA NBCABCABCCBS 174431 Nort-NewpNew Orleans News-II:Imp Atlanta 23.6%27.3% NI114 71 201610 14.04%14.08%14.184 0.5950.5160.601 C ,-.....,t; 403036 WBZ383735WFLAKING WQXIKHOKNXT II NBCNBCCBS 2415It) 26 Boston HoustonLosSeattleTampa-St, Anta - Tacoma. les 151erslurg . 30.8%32.9%16.8%6.8%8.0% 317175124136 94 2344171319 13.13.88%13.07% 83%13.14%13.71% 0.81110.4490.4221.7461.933 c,Q Nei work A ffilblit-zi Honked by Percent AI inurf I its Employed- -Cuutiuued C%1 Rank Call letters Net. an. Mkt Ne 39 Locatieu -5!; A employe, 122 Minorities employedNumber percent 16 1. 012 434241 WBBMWHIGWPVI (;BSABCCBS 43 Chicago4 _ _ PhiladelphiaDayton_ . _ . . .__ '23.4%19.8%,la11.9% 8% 31lc153 .1 au20 . 12,1:1.1(45'6.13.13.11% 07%86% 0.5560.6490.660 -,--s. -.... 47464544 WSOCKOWCAKFMB 0 Lt; NBCCBS 354549 Sim Diego __ CharlottePhoenixPhiladelphia 27.23.07, 37,'20. 6% 106114105113 1314 12. 26%,12.28%12. 38%,39% 0.4490.5140.610It WI -,.7.."' 51504998 WBMGWTA.RKKCTV RON .1"=1IIC NBCCBS 49441138 SanNorf-NewpBirminghamS Diego__ News-liamp_ San Francisco ______._ . .. _ 31128.30.20,6% ti9";0% 1, 207132 8333 ''5tO16 4 12.05%12,12.12% 08"4" 0.41S0.4020.4040. 8SS --C,7. 555453 WJWKY%KD2W CBSNBCABC 2738 Birmingham74 Dallas-FortClevelandPhiladelphia_ Worth 17.19.5'}21.3% f% 102I152134 2S 15182416 11.11.84111.88%11.94% 72% 0.6730.600(1.561 --s.7=.F:7 585756 WSBWSIXKC RA CBSNBCABC 30 Nashville17 9 _ AtlantaSacramento-Stockton 23.13.7';_2.0 6% , 7.8 "; 1671-19 70 11)IIPt7 S I1.11.11.43% 38%41% It 533I. 45011. -12 7. 01 (B62Ill)59KPRC WHNSKDKAWFMY w MC NBC'CNBCCBS BS 2919281548 Memphis_Columbus lIoustonGreensboro-HighPittsburgh _ Point-Winston-Salem 30.8%38.4'12.6';20. 3' ;.;' 117127125 982 0111 9 la10.!1511.II.11.24% N'i':;: 20'4,(r.!';. " ;.. O.0.7551a11.0.553 S75 3114434 Cr.... -4 64 WMgyi65 W w A FAA KRCIt ABC'ABCCBS II2011 CincinnatiDallas-FortBaltimore _ Worth , _ . ______. _5.1'721.11.8'''-1.3% 3'.''', 1411811 s I 2015 . 111.61';';10.71%16.75;.;. Ii.0.0.5165 90.400 -1., t1068 W707167WNYS OilWKBWWBAP P ABCNBC 12254348 SI.BuffaloSyracuse_Dallas-Fort LC/JAS.__Greensboro Worth._ -High Point-Wiled 0 ii-Sii tem 17.20. 3";3';!1.5.0'1- 9% 107 s777ti: 11 s 10.25M.10. 318:', 31%45';', °; 0.51111.0152.078O. 518 'E.,..... 73747'1 KTVK WLW14KTVI ABCNBC 39 45Dayton Phoenix__ . _ . .. 1711.0';ti. fe:; 107 78 2111 8 III. IC10. 28."; 0.513II.11.861 1864 .....; ;-.,CS-::-.. 7776 WXKM75 WWJ GIYZ I 111.1VT ABC'1'11SNB('NBC 3220 5 DetroitDenver..rineinnaIi -. .. 19.1118'',16.!1%11.8';. 9, 11132131201102e', 211215 10.Ill 1)7%19';00%9. 86' , ait0.5(81 495595 ,--S..,, 78 KMBC. ABC 23 Kansas2, City ______. 22. 0%.I t. 6% 1113 10 9. 71'; (1.44111. 065 838281SO79 W KCWJZKOVRWLWI II MOT V CBSNBCABCA B( ' 231419 KansasIndianapolisBIndianapolis.bamarnen all jingle City to-Stockt .. on ...... -25. l',';14.6'513..1';13. -1'; 12713; !I993 13 9.0.6.411°;!i. 681';71(;3,";15'; 00.O. 61270572237N SI 11'(3 12 NICE 25 Bulfalo II. !I'.; MI s 9. 30' , 11. 9III 85 W 1: V NRC' 11 Oklahoma City . . 12.0' :; 110 11 9. 21'.; 0. 731 SIC %VIA( ( Bs 30 Nashville 18, 7'; 119 11 9. 21' ; 0.491 8711'10:4 Alt(' 40Gainesville-Spart n burg.Ash vine _ 13. 6' ; 76 7 31, 21'; 11.677 88 WWI, CBs 31 New Orlenn4 35.6:; 109 10 9. 17"; 11. 2541 80 WNAC Cits 33 Roston_ 6.8"; 3)17 33 S. 9.,"; 1.321 00 c Bs 45 Toledo_ 10. 5; 7)' s. Sti''; (1.511 01 WEilc NIB! GIIVillr431,11111g-ASIWI 13.6' 57 S. 77'.; O. 615 ti :12 W11.111 CBS 11 Indianapolis - ...... 13. 4'.4 50 7 S. 7,1' 4. 0, 653 93 ( tit Port land ...... 126 I I 8.73'2 1.67'.1 ICNTV cits SacmineminStockom, 22, 41"; SI 7 8.111';1'; 0...33 95W8A7. NIB 33Cliarlesc ott-I Imo ngt . -I. 7";. 81 5.61'; 1. 839 =lt: 06 WIIC NIB 9 Pittsburgh_. .. 7. s':;. III 12 S. 33";. 1.065 07 Irccil ABC 35Charlolti- 23.91'; 21 3 S.33"; 0.319 "1'E \' ARC' 34Providence. 3.4'; 72 6 S, 33',: 2.453 00 WTI(' CBS 22 Hartford-New Haven 11.8'3 114 12 S. 33";. O. 706 00 witTv 0118 35Chariot te...... 23. !)':; 121 It) S. 2.33 0,310 "- 01WWII' Nltc 41 Kalm06200-(4 Rapids. 6. ri; 115.1 9 5.-21V..; 1, 351 02 WAVE NR(' 361,011isvi 13.3(; 110 s. 16"; 0. 629 :4 03 WTVT CRS 21Tampa-St. INIershurg 16.8';. 123 In s. 13'; 0. I51 17. 01 WS PA CBS 10 13. lir; 71 6 S. I1; 0. :06 z.. (Ii W II EN CBS 13 Symen5e. 75 11 !LIMY; ;, I. 60 Ofi WEWS ABC Cleveland 17. 6';; 1 10 I I 7 .1,0`7,, II.1 Ili :: N A Bc 33Charleston-II nut ingt 1. 7':; 51 I 7 .s-1"; 1 . 3119 (1$ WTNI.1 21 Tillvailket !kw:). 146 I I 7. 53'; 0. 70:1 (y.) %V'T'N 11 22 I I art fool-New I I aven . 11, W.; N1 (1 7, 11r; 141125 --... Attu ....., 10 WCII CBS 33(.711arleston-11untingio 1. 7".; 51 1 7 . .I1";. I.5713 11 WIINII NBC 22 liar' ford-New Haven . 11.80; WI 7. 25'.'.;. 11.611 WI,K 1" Al))' 36Louisville. -. . . 13.11'; 56 I 7.14e,; 0. 6r.. 13 KIITV 32 Denver M. S'. ; 113 S 7. 0.s"; 0.411 14 c...... I I W7.Z1 ABC 11 Kalamazoo-Dr Rapids- 71 7, Or ; 1.1111 33 WSNI Nitc 341 Nashville.. 16. 7"; 11,! S 7.02'; 0.3711 111 / NBC 15 Toledo . 10.5'; so li 11. 95' ; 11.661 1;KS I) NRC 12SI. LOUIS 17.3'-; 115 s (3.917; 0 402 IS WS1' It NBC 13 Syruei 3,0"; 101 7 6, PT.:. I, 386 7-* 19 1VTAE ABC Pi11Fhtirgli 7.8'; 130 9 6. 9:1`; O. SSA 20 W D AI, NBC 23 Kam1115 y 11.6; 73 5 33. S5"; 1).401 21 KI it 0 (-its if;Seattle- Tacoma $ . 0"; I 19 5 1). 71.' , 11. SIII 2211'plll CRS 34Providence :4 . ,9'; ;6 5 6.58'; I. ((35 23 W A Bi Ni)'' 38 Birmingham 30,(5; it! 6, 56'; 0.'21!1 24 WVEC AII(' 11 Norfolk :Newport Newsila tow ou 27. 3'.:. 7s 3 0.41'; 0. 23 . 25 W AsT AR(' 37.111)any-Selfeneel 4. 4'7, 333 1 II. 35' ; 1. 113 ns 26 KATE ABC 26 I 'or) 111101 . 5.''',. li (1. 12'1 1..177 27 W X II N BC 48(1 reel's] tom-11 -Witts1 on Salton 20.3'; s7 .5 5. 75".;, 0.253 28w'r EN c Bs 37 A tinny-Schenectady:I' I. -P";, 76 4 5. 26' , I. 1111i KOIN rim 26 Portland ,is 5 '",01. , 11,..1S1 341 WITI ABC 21 Milwaukee 101 li 1..txr:. 0. 5111 31 W 11AS BS 36Louisville 13. I r, 103 r. .1. ;Ii' , II. 301 32 K0.1 B ( 32 I ten Vet' ... Ili. S';;. 1,-; I I. C.13 : It 274 WCP4 ) CBS 20Cincinnati . Ii. 131 1. I. Is' , 0 379 f".: Rank Call- _.--letters Net. uIt. Mkt. No. Nctvork Affiliates Ranked by Percent Minorities Employed-Continued Location SMSA employes Total NumberMinorities percent employed Viwtor ri- 1...4 136135134 W KOMoWI.cy I SN CBSAIICABC 50212416 Milwaukee Tampa-St.Seattle-Tacoma Petersburg_ 16.8% 9.8%5.0% 101158 8170 347 3.96%4.29%4. 43% 0.4040.2550.554 ebSy,cotel. 140139133137 WitWC(70KCpx EN W.1 A It AB('( CBS It S 253413 Minneapolis-St.BuffaloSalt. Lake City Paul 0 9%3.0.9% 7% 201102136 375 1 3.48%3.68%3.70% 0.0410.3710.5370.865 C'" 113142141 WKWDI10 STit ( p It NNBC BCABC 3745 Al13Toledo hany-Seheuect ady-Troy Minneapolis-St.Providence Paul 10.5%3.4%3.7%4.4% 158 7841 13 2.94%1.1.902.44% 28% 0.6130.2320.291 0 147116114145 WK%0KMSP KS].KI7Ty N BC(ABCCBS ItS 415013 Kalamazoo-UrSaltMinneapolis-St.Salt Lake Lake City___. City Rapids Paul 6.1%3.7%ti.6.9% 9% 137 095987 0 1 0.0%0. 73%1.15% 0.1060.167 0.0 ...._77.;0:-.- Network A ffi liat es Ranked by Percent M inor it ies Employed O,7.1- Rank Call letters Net. aft. Mkt. No. LOCat 1011 SMSA employes Total Minorities employedNumber Percent Factor r7Z0-....71-1 9 WN BC CNBC BS 1I 1 New York City 30.30.0% 0% 280237 5044 18.57% 0.5950.719 - 30 WABC11 WCBS5 KN1 BC KA liC CNABC.1 ItSBC 2 LosNew Angeles__Angeles York City 32.0%32.9%30 0% 3-12317229192189 44505528 13.88%21.83%28.17.86%14.81 65% >0 0.4220.8710.494 co..e-rj0;-,' 282237 WMWK NXTLS AQ CBSABC.NBC 3 Chicago Chicago 2_3.4%23.4% 300274 3114194 13.14.98%11. 79%00% 0.5580°11.1731 --.. 007.. ''' 51444243 W WKYIVWliBM10 C I'VE WJItA 1.1 K CBSNCRSAIIC BC 45 DetroitPhiladelphia 10.919.19.8% %%38% 202190153 70 312420 9 16.32%11.88%12.86%13.07% 0.8200.6000.0190.660 SO407775 WW.1WWXW13 it%N WK Y%A C VC NCBSNBCABC BCNBC 6 705 ClevelandBostonDetroitDetroit 17.6%19.9%1!). 0% 6.8%6. 5% 19316717521314!) 34231521 17.62%13.14%10.07%8.98%9.86% 1.0011.9330.4950.5061.321 7 152 18 0.673 106 WEWS55 WJ W3 I: ( ; ( ) ABC:ABC( 'BS 67 San Francisco ClevelandCleveland, 28.9%28.9%17.17.6% 6% 16522-1140 31II 23.11.84% 2177.86% , a(01: 650-11,-0316 (61:Al51 8 KP1X W111'KIltiNis: I ) K A NCCBS 11SBCNBC 98 San Francisco Pittsburgh 28. 9% 7.8% 207144167 251219 111811: 73i ;',,, .,. 11..L590.413 Ii.s 119 wrA E 4 W 11C CBSNBCABC 10 Washington,9 D.C. Pittsburgh 136227130 2451 9 22.47%1687.. 9336525: 0a.0.7040. 530624888 'S 67655312 KWWY wTo 1 11A / A411' A t,l' W MA L ABCCBS 1110 WashingtonWashington,1211 D.0 D.0 Dallas-FortDalles-Fort Worth 2L21.3282822781.38331 3% % 141186131140 152111(121 11. 94% (01.. 3511 9 142139117 KWCCKSI) S I P 72240 KTV 1 ii it):17 ABC0158NBC0135 121312 Minneapolis St. Paul St. Louis 17.17.37 317.3%3. 7 201158115107148 1123 3 78 13.6. . 4890% o 0.898 384'549.1 0t'l . NBC 13 MinneapolisSt. Paul 0000. 705.912.4(1)03221 146 KMSI'80 W 1.111 ABC 14 IndianapolisMinneapolis-St, Paul 1133.13. 4%3.3.7/, 7o . 127 9359 12 90 0. 0% t( )). t7l.(5153 4;) 38299282 KWWISHK7 I ItTV toIt KU 0115,C111.138CNBC 15 Houston1514 Indianapolis 30.5 4:0 125101 so94 141315 7 11.13.14. 857020%8358.75% 00..444892 1.., 61 KP 11C NBC Houston 111119t009055; .....:. ,76:567i'55.21170, 13-1121 36 KIN 0 K. ON10KIltO ABCCBN BC S 16 Seattle-Tacoma16 Seattle-Tacoma ' 33080.. 088! 8. 0%8. 0% 119136141155 19 7S 11 344 I. 941 75; ,; 0.00 .. 55131 1.716:01 co:5.Co 583533 %VOX'WA 0 A 1V.S11 CBSNBC.,CklillSo 17 Atlanta 39.23.6% 1%23.6%23.6;0 114 25201716 10.1114.10112%'' 13.0 ' 00.0.551 -518933 '''Z.1., ' 21252320 WWTVJWBAL CPLO KT NBC..Nk j111 (C:, 1918 Miami Baltimore 25.39.10 1 147149137134 162421 16.11%15. 33%67% 0.612(0°1.1311091231 ,.0,,,, 6118164 WMAWJZ WKRC It ABUABCCBS 19 Baltimore20 Cincinnati Baltimore 25.13191.:25.1 ,, 206137 84 2113 9 10. 88%9. 49%1180: 71:11%%, 00..34738400; 980081 -..z ., 108133 WCWTMJ74 PO WLWT ABCNCI:1SCNBC 2120 Cincinnati MilwaukeeI ilwankee II,11.8% 8% 9. 8% 120146134 1 I 0 4.48% 0. 769379 re-:C.--.., 130 WITI 21 101 4 ;11) 11 19.1136 W1SNwTN99 1wT1C I ABCCBS 22 I1Milwaukee II artford-Nartforil-New c w 11avenHaven 11,11.8%11091. 8% 144 0981 12 .5 (1 . . 0.(0: 1 ;1'51 ; , it i 111 WIINB NBC I I artford-New haven ,.3778357, 00.6154 12(1 W 8378DA KCMOK3IIIC4' NBCCBSABC 2323 Kansas Cit y_ Kansas City 14.14.6% 6% 103 7396 10 59 6. 85% .:: 37.23!3.1 0.1090.642 C.7101-'1 It- V....C21 Vet troll,- :Affiliates Minket/ hy i'crer,/, f .11 . i ;writ icm Ein ',toyed-0110 itIllmt .. .. tt.. ... _ _ a.p Ralik (2.i1 lecto Ncl. 1111'. ;%11.:1. Ni'. Location S.Ms.1 employes To.1 xiiimritiesNumber percent ,tiployca -- - 1:6-tor _. -r.., 103 IVTVT39 W 1,1A N 11C 21 2-1 Tamp-St. Petersburg ...... In.10. s!';"sc,; 123121 - 1017 13.71": s. 13c;. 0,0:310 4sli .. .ss...... 7ft' 135 $47(1 W 111W W1,('%V(1 V I1 (Ali('A(lIIS ' 11$Iii-NBC 212025 'Cumpa-St.Tampa-St.BuffaloBuffa Peters1turg,PelersIntrg 70, 10.W;19.10-..e.:; t. 91:: it',.; N',S;711 s!I3 I O. 34c; 4. :sr; H.2511. 015 ,--- 1211120 93 KtIW Wit KA'TEN 1 ABC.NUC 21120 ,i'0141:111dPortlandBuffalo s 5.5.2';0.2'; 2('; 131;12$ fIN is 11 5 5 li.S.3. 1'273'.';tlsf:; : 0.11,10. 3711. li79 94755(1 KOV It KCKO1N ILA ABCCBSN11.1' 2727 Sacramento-StockSaemmeol 6-$1.ttekt tom on ...... _ 22. Oc;I r; 10312s 15 I I. 7:.".;11. 71';5. 10'; 0.11I0 533 171-1 W 1,W( KX'I'N' ' ABCNBCC BS 2$ ColumlnisSarramen to-Slitel: I col ._...... 22. 01';.12, 0''; . 90141Al 15Iii10 10. 07';17. 21Ys.1:1(.; ; 0. 31131.323I. 305 .,..-C--. , 1502 WWI1NS It EC W'I'\'N CBS 2925 Columbus25 Columbus ...... - 12.IS. ti'.;(r: 127 71 1'21 I 10.101-; 11.0..-; 0. 1100 575 .--. 0315 W11 11t4 'IS*1(,' NIB'ABC 3021,29 :110111phis..MeinAlmullis.. phis._ ...... 3s.3:3.4;2$.4'; -1'..;i 52Ts 13 S.1 I10.la Ii7'; ssf'; 11.0.IL 131 2sn011 F.i. I 15 WSN157 WSISO WLAC X NBCC 115ARC 303(1 Nashville. ... _ NaglivilleNW/11,111e . . .. . Is. 7;.S. 7c; 119 7t, il 7.9. W..'21r.t. ;43': (I:.0. :3171 19 i z.-- 32 WV711SS31 WDSUWW1: F. L (11SAli('NBC 3231 New 01-141:111.s NewNow Orloaos()rIean, ...... 35.35.6', Ii,,';15.7.; t; 109III131; 15? Si t12Jo13 , 1.1.4r;14. 71'7;9, 17'.; 0.0. 10n 25.s C...;.. K11(111 CBS.1 11C 32 11eliver . . . 16.to. l-11-;s,,; 120113 10. 00('; 0. 595 :: 132113 KOAKWI'V N111' 3332 Drover1 /enver . . . 10. S'; s7 ,-/- I N.7. IP1';1. f;(1',; o. 1211. 271 :::, no107 wciisW I ITNus WTis WS F; V AZ NIB*ABCCBSA l i ( 313335 Providence Charleston-110MCharleston-CharlesIon-11 I I0 mil 01 itog( i niztoogt o 0,...... - - ...... 3..1.4 . 7'';7r;.r;I. 7",; 5172551 1 5o I1 S.7. 11'33'.,s)' ,.: ii l' , 2..151I.1.51"1, 57053., .... C:-4.. 11012-2 WJA WP it11 I NBC(71is 3531 Providence.Providence 23. 10', ; 3. r; I102 1 70 1 3 '2.6. 5S';;111'; 11. 5051.1.!35 1i4' W 11TV5747 WWSOC e C It C BSARCNBC 3535 (.16011111P_1Charlot 'harlot l ele...... 23.11'; 3.1'; 121 2.1 I-I . l'.... 2S, ;s.N. 2,1'., 331.: ...11.511 0-I!, 142Ill? WAVEW I. I:: l' AlitNIic ' 3030 LfloisyLottiville. ill, .. . .. 23. 9,:;13.11';13. ii'; 110 51; Ii, '' I 7.S. IS'. I l' , v. 310 131121 WHAS WA ST IA.CBS il: sc 37 Alba30 iy-Scheilect ;Lily-T. .. Louisville 13. 0,, 111711i 7 I1 1. 71V, ; 1. 113 ,-. 12(4 WT .; N :17 Alba i y-Scheneetinly.T. I 12561.1 .7-11 !6::-. ',.;;; I. 23:;:: 143 WRGII50 11-111.110 4-110NIB ' 3s Birmingham..37 .11budy-Sehenevintly--T_. . ... 33337S I o I 11.0. 10-1 102 -..: c.6. 123 WA62 PI WBRC ABCCB:4NBC 36 Birmi»gliain.3916 DaylIlion ingon Inuit 30. 0% 122 01 i10 I 1123.. oil.15:::;;11. MT, 1-._....: 7.4-.1 I 41 W111072 WIAV I / 39 (1:1111V$V01-Spi111,011,111V.-ASIIV1111..Dayton 107 70 ...-.z.: 10 ,..,.:,.,,4.21i11;i1t7,521,,I Si WI.06 ABC 10 10NIB' (.01i111$17.*. .Sp:111110111117-ASIIV111o. 77 inilii ...... -, 01 W r11(7 33:1,1.114)Ii.....: :(1.111111:",",.. 74 'sit,. 21 Si: i 104 WSPA CBS 11III (1 ailiesvila.-Spartantotrg-.1slirille . . . 13. tit:;- 11P. 114101 W OT V WZZ:11 RISCNBC 11 Kt1111111aZW.Air:11111Kolimulzoo-t irand Hapilis.. Rapids. .. 1113:::... !ii11;[;?:;..:, (5'71 1. 7.111r; 11. 3:15.414 z,...... :^-. - 147 WKZO (115 4I Kolaniazoo-(1 rand 10 pills_ .... 12. tir.'; l''sfs ..,.... 2:21 sts71:;;;;;; ,:. . $310 KWTV16 Kiln t WIC I' CBSABC IIII Oklahoma CityCity. . 12. 07, ss77 II13to :1. 2C -,.., ''-'-a; : 69 (A.1181NBC sC 43II Oklahoma City .... . 't 10. 39; 10511$ WHEN 11'N lS 43 SyracuseSyracuse______...... ___ ...... ' 6r;:i 117717; ,6s 9.19w; I .. 1:111 34 WA V Y WS Y It NBC 4144 NorfolkSymettse Newport ...... News-111001,ton...... - 221755275. ., 3(3(°1: 170tst 71 1013 : (It. 3.:'It 5. 48 W OA It CBS 4-1 Norfolk-Newport News-II:1013)1mi 1 U.4,211/1...: 235 4771,3751! 124 WV FC ABC 45 Norfolk Newport News-Hampton 113 17 111:12251: ..... !4(3,(2:7:1::::..;;;;;; 76 KTA7346 K1VKK001. R CBS(7115N IIC 45 SonP110011iXPhoenixPhenix.. Anti» in). 105 17Si13 s 21. 211'7;111. 26!:; 11.: 41 .. 462 t5i1139 --r...... -.... - 410 762 1V0AKSATKENS 1 (N711:SCABC 45 San Antonio_ . 'Toledo_S'nn Antonio_.. S''.15:,7112; 51 i::::; 79tS77)1 19 , 't 4; . .t..:: ;; (04110. 101 N...... ,, "c:::- 141116 WS I'D410 11'1)110W101, .111CN 1St 4-159IS Toledo _ . _ 11111. .57;: ;; , 1130 6 1 0. 671 5137 --.... . 11'INI Y K1 10 22111511 ,.. II, 24',"-; : ...... '4,1:;.,411:s'lioro-lligli Point-Winshin-Stilent . 22.2._;.171:(2):: ...... 7-21:75154::....;;,;;.. 66 WOHP CBSABC -IS49 Creenshoro-11Oreenshoro-I itgli loll Point-Winston-SalemPoitit-Whistim.Saloni 20.3,;; 33:0:::;:,..'".. ;;;;;; f 1 ' . ; I 1 5 , 5. i5',-; II ; .: 25' :1 ''': z...., 127 WN I I NBC -19 ...... 11#3:1;137: 2.100. 12. :D. ; 4915 KGKrN111 I'1 NC116 BC 5(3 Sam Diego...... 6 ' ' ; 16 3 I :It' . 71 li''' -;; 1,,0.601 i .55 : .4. .:_;. :... 145144137 KCPX KOl.K UTV 4'1ISNBCABC 5049 San Nam_ .... Snit':illSalt LakeLake Ct1 City..1 it y y ... 6..41.,1.,'.,14,. I .': -,:i I 1, ire ; 11.106 :--.4.- COCat Rank Call letters Network Affiliates Ranked by Net. att Mkt. No. Ratio of Percent Minorities Employed to Lot:titan Percent SNISA. Minorities in SMSA-Continued employes 'cola 3linorities employedNumber Percent Factor OS W N li 1" NBC 1 New York City 30.0%30.0% 250237 5044 15 57%17. 86% 9,5950 619 55349976 KWWCKA NABC BCIts A IF INAC118C .11.s BC 2I LosNewNow Angeles York City 32.9%30.0%32.95. 317229199192 5144507.529 21.83%25.05%It. 91%13. 9S% 00.11610.s710,491 6750.422 112 KNX816351 T W111015156 1,SM W AQ Pk' I 111CAlit'1N ' 11:4BC 432 LosChicagoChing° Angeles ChicagoPhiladelphia 19.9%23.4% 300274312153 70 203941 9 12.9)1%13,07%13.00%%11.917%15.79% 0,0190,0)30n0,639 556 91407359 WCAKYW IT 111VJ'WJII K. 0118NCBS!alit; 11C 4 54 DetroitPhiladelphiaDetroit 19.9%19.19.8% 9% 213((9)202175149 3123111524 13.14%10.07%11'.11.98% 32% 9.911% 0,495(1.51X60,9200,4911I. ',33 2697 W19WXYZ K WNAC VC4 W13Z NBCCBSNIl)ABC 760 Boston ClevelandBoston 17.6%6.9%6. s% 14(1152193167 3111Is15 11.17.62% 84%,S. 99% 0,4460, 6731,01111,321 107 W ENV584252 SKr1K(10Wjir X CIISABCCBS 87 SanCleveland Francisco Cleveland e 28.28.9%17.6% 9% 167'207165221 25315219 21 21%12.18, OS%79%7.56% 1.4590.0.6500,903 418 111 KRON322411 WWTAV.KDKA TIC NBCA1ICNBCCBS 9 Pittsburgh98 San Francisco PittsburghPittsburgh, '.I8.28.3% 3%7.8%7.8% 136227130141 241251 J 11.35%17,65%22.47%8.33%6.92% 0.8581.18780.1240.794 8714143 W1111W'MA 50W TO Kl)FW FI. 0115CBSABCN BC 1110 Washington10 Washington 11.0 D.0 DS! Dallas-Fort Wort\\*mitt h 21.21.3%28. 3% 141186131110 15201621 15.00%10.61%10.75%11.94% 0.4990.5050.5614530 121 317815695 W KMOXW FAAI1AP KS()KT1-1 ABCNBCNB('CBS 121112 St.SI.Dallas-Fort Louis_CollisImui. Worth 17.3%21.3% 115107148 1123 5 10.28°,15.51% %g6. 06% 0.41)'20.5940.8'98 146 K MS9125 PW CCU K ST P ABCNMI;)4 ' II ':4 1113 Minneapolis-81.Nlinneapolis-St.Minneapolis-St Paulrani . Pa4.1 3. 7%3. 7% 201158 5)1 03 7 0.0 1.3.% 90%,46% a00.941 5130 102lo r, KT4947 "1: WW57 I RTV,WWISII I CNBCAB.. BS1111' IS151114 IndienapolicIndianapolis1Indianapolig I ouSt on 30.8%13.4%13. 4% 127101 918093 131512 9 7 14.85,',,y79.65%ft9.45% 75% 0.4820.6330.0.732 705 ''.:''t::.,.. 132 3:) 0 KING KK!'KII11Il I lit>RC CBSNIB)NBC1'118 161015 scathe-T:1,0nm Seattle-Tacoma1Houston I OUStOn 30.8%.8.15%8.0%8. et% 1551191311125 19I I 78 13.97%II.13.83y 20% 6. 72% 0.5,5411.8100.361a 4491, 716 eoco..., 101 777252 WKOM AI 1 A0 W811\1'(1X1 ABCC118NBC 17 AtAtlantaSeattle- lanta Tacoma 23.6% 14911.11 1 1 201716 11.41%14.01%11.13% 4.43% 011.59511.601 4)13 "^--1:::) 126121116 WWTV.1 Wein' P I.( I NBCACBS BC 1018 Miami Atlanta.:Miami 25.39.1%3!71%:19.1^'23.6% I% 14913713115.5 2121Si25 16.15.33%15.67%111.13% 11% 11.61:10.3121.1110.413 "itl-G.;: III WMA62 WIt RAI, CBSNBC 19 Baltimore '25.11,25. 1% 137117 Ii)13 10.88%9.49% 0.3780 431 7,11 127128 WJZ,WC3630 PO WKWLWT IR CBSNBCABC.ABC 20 Cincinnati Baltimore 11.8%11.5%I I. 8% 2011131 81 21 69 10.11%10. 71%4.45% 0.71510.0.8010.9118 370 ""--Z 118 WISN4844¶13 MAI WIT! CABCNliC 118115 21 MilwaukeeCincinnati 9. 41%.8% 101120110 12I I 411 3.96%3.118%7.53% 0 7(161).1040 510 EZ. - , 69)(B WTNWI1N 41 II 17T10 NABC /II: 22 HartHartford-NewHarlford-New ford-New Haven!lave( 11.6%II.11.8%11. 8%3% 103III (Si61 50 9,7.25%7.41%8.33% 71% 0.6630.6140.628 ....".:1 - ,c.73-, , 103 W 53DA 13111C 61F KCNI 0 CBSABC 23 Kansas City 14.6%11.6 7396 I() 59 6.85%9.38% 0.4690.612 ...... , 1401(k, WTWWI" VT41 W FLA ABC()BSNBC 25242-123 Tampa-St.Kansas City Petersburg Tampa-St. PetersbUrgPetersburg le.16. S'';S"6%9.9';; 9'.; 123II) 8770 1017 93 10.31%13. 71,:,;,4.8.13' IN'T ;, 0.2151.1)450.1810.819 -.7."--'=...r.. :30 :SIW11 23WO E WI:11WN II 7 KOW NBCABC0118 26252625 BuffaloPortlandBuffalo 5.9. !1'.:,2%.2%9% 120130 9886 11 65S 6.12%8.73%3.9.30% IX:. 1.1771.07800. 371910 ....-1.,.I.) !a,'t.D..... Si)2721 RATKCKOIN RA1.7 NBC(1)8ABC 27211 Sacramento-StocktonPortland id _2.0%5. 2% 128 118 15 5 11.72% 5.1117% 0.533a 931 1=..... PP41,5 1-1 .r.ttz.4-. tCIP11Z, (t.rl'I Hank Call letters Xuf work Affiliates Ranked by Ratio of Pereent-Minoritics Employed to PercentNet. Minorities an. in liibtiaContinued Mkt. No. Loention Tot al Minorities c at do& edNumber percent Factor ,-..Q...-_,.:. 125108 KOV 15It WLWC INIX15- CBSABCNBC 2827"7 Sueramento-Stocki of i SacramentI:Winning; u-St NA ton .2.1.42.0'.'"12. 0'..;. 103 81 13 1016 7 11 it. 12r ;';X..7611:.;;. ()AU0.113 tr:Z.'--; - lot WRFC33 WBNS18 WTVN CBSABC 22.12128 Columbus_Memphis Colon] bt15__ . _ ...... _ 12.1r; 127 789071 11131215 11.17.n ill. 137'171I. 323 ::. US110 Wwmc HBO70 WSIX ARCNBCABC 30 Nashville2.1 MemphisMemphis ...... 3:11:8288.... tiii!. 7082 11 S9 1:16.67%t!°11:. 2771384:i 120 WS3l98 WLAC . CBS 30 Nashville Nashville ail 5;1 :7 ;: 8 7.(r.ri 110((111))1. 3..2'44:17131:111513111: ' NBC 31. O'L. III 2 s.''....,1::: 115 WDSIT NAN:7! 31 New Orleans . . . _ 13 14. 4-1`;;', 139117 WWI.KV UP CBS 323)31 New Orleans Neer Orleans_ ..... _ . _ ...... 3355:60;i . 111. 31,21::1 ,:-:):I 1216 11,4; 007 nil:. 524415:851 ,74 74, 13$113 KIITV75 K31(111 KO A ACBS BC 32 Denver Denver_ _ 16.11 S'-';. $tlit s 1 . 0.271O. 121 '''' 5 IVSA Z. NBCNBC 33 ChariestCliarkston-1Denver_ on-11 lion tint MgtBO u.o , .. , ...... 4. 7;',:- 51 7 1 1. 839 .:,...; 8 W II TN (71tSABC 33 ...... __.. 340- .51 I :87..... 1141-131,1 10 WCI1S 31 Pros:Charleston-11nm /deuce ingto_ 361 ....; (4784;;;;;;;; 6 .7111.,.. (11157:1! ., ABC . (2111.....ev!-51:57i151;1 9035 WS()WJA CIt3 wpm1 WTFV NBCNBCCBS 3531 P rovidence. CharlotteProvidence _ ...... _ . 213. il 311 1111 i77tt2" ti 35 12. '2.`V:- 0. 511 ti"."*"... -.4.1. 133134 WCC WIITV 04It 'W A V E NBCCBSABC 35 CharloDe LouisvilleCharlotte 2313.1tfl..:i.: Ill 2i 15 9-1 . 78.8: .2f331:"1:;;;82.. :1st : 1111 ik. 5631 :: 131 SI WL K Y CAL(' 3530 Louisville ... 1133. Itr::::: :11,..44:-,;) -15 40. li .557: 0. 34;0 135 WRIDI2912 wAsT WTMIAS. EN NBCCBSAB(' 3787 Albany-Schenectady-I'Albany-Schenectady-TAlbany-Scherteclatly-TLouisville ..... 4. 1'.'';I.1.4% 1(; 7876 1t 5. 2ric..;1.214" I:).I. 106 4.; SO 145 106 O. 73% 0. I 13; 6.1,6; City_ Lake Salt CBS KSL y 144 0.167 1.15;1, I S7 6.99 (ii Lake Salt 50 NBC KUTV N- 50 ABC KCPX S.5 (.51(7 3.711%, 3 51 16)1';; (II. Lake Sall 49 NB(' TV 0 K 70 12% 12. 16 132 2)1.6% . Dieu° San 49 CBS 13 KEA( 71 ROW 39.e;', 11. 11 113 711.0% Diego San 48 I i WX 137 2S3 O. 3.75% S s7 311.3% Sa1 .-Win Pt nsb-lligh 0 NBC 7 67 311.3% Sal PL-Win Cush-High 43 ABC WGI1P 89 11.515 v.q 10. 45 CBS WEMY 53 10 St I 3. PL-Win Gush-High . 1.253 11.2-19. 20.39; ...... _ .. 142 241% I II :, -.a 10. Toledo 45 ABC W11/10 0.232 0 45 51 tint n. '5% Ii. 6 86 10.5c- Tok.10_. NBC WSPO 013S WT01. 33 0.1441 56% S. 70 10.5% Toledo 45 0.401 PI Oil Antonio Sun 45 NBC WOAI 123. 21.119 52.0% 120 $1,401 21.259- 17 sO Antonio. San .)5 ABC KSAT 104 11.4)12 24.29q 17 70 52.6% Antonio. San 45 (713S KENS Pliornix 15 I3C A K KTv 72 0.513 10.269 s 7S 20.0% _. _____ ...... 45 CBS 1(7 619 O. 3.s%. 12. 13 06 0.,,,- 20. Phoenix,. K001. Phoenix IS NBC KTAlt 45 13.752 01% IS. 17 113 20.10; ...... _____ . .. . _.... p 44 A 141 235 0 0.41% 7.s 17.3% New-Ilanip. Norf.-Neu BC WVEC .14 CBS 105 410 0. 12.269 13 11/1: 27.3% News-Ha/0p Nort-Nvolt )'TA( 41 WAVY 45 0.516 )(%. II. 10 71 27.39, News-II:nun Noul-Nunli NBC Syracuse 13 BC N It WSY 14 1.356 6.939 7 1111 9 ni s. 6 75 5.01% Symeme 13 'BS ( EN WIl 1.60) N4 WNYS 2 2.1(78 301;; In Syracuse 43 Altc 1 1 41 NIB Y WK 1 6 1 61.:i 12. City Oklahoma . ;31 0. 21r,'; 9. II ...... City Oklahoma 41 '.RC KOCO 17 1.3-10 (6.5.3% I3 12.6,7, y. :3 IS. 'II A., 2. , Cit Oklahoma 41 Ills KWTN" 1.413 ISe;:. 04,-;. 147 0 I). It 0 0 1.1% Rapids Kalamazoo-11r. 11 CRS KM) W (r:;. . 22 71 1e.,;, Ii. Rapids. Kalamaztio41r. 41 ABC WZZN1 1.151 7.111% 16 S. 9 /09 11.1% Rapids Kalamazoo-6r. II NBC WOTV 1.331 2/1% t 51 74 0.596 'f; I I S. 6 71 4;1%1 \ viI1e-Nunbu-(10 10 :BS SPA NB( 11' 60 0.615 S. 5 57 13.69 1_ sin- nInz-5 Gm-Mc-So -in PBC 779 Gnville-Sptlibg-Ashvi... 40 ABC WLOS 50 677 0 9.219 7 711 13.69 37 0.561 III II !1c Dayton 39 NW.. WLWI) ..,-. In; IL 23 I. I'7'. I 13. III v.... i. i Dayton 39 CBS W1110 lot tiq 143 0. 6. 4 61 13iMingham_ 33 NBC WPAI 219 191% 30.0% 122 11.402 10 83 80.0% TJirmingham.. 38 ABC C BR W 12.05% - 119 11.401 12.12% 4 33 0% 30. Birmingham. 38 CBS WI3A10 162 Federal Comnittlikat;00x Com.no'ssion Reports

Network A honked by Pcicent Alinor:lbs Employed in high Pay Posillomq

High High pay nntiorities RankCall let ters Net. Mkt. Localion 'ay employed all. No. posi lions. Number Percent

II WNBC (N: iiiisC 1 New York City 26 l4..53'...., 19 WCBS I New York City 1St 23 40 WABC ABC 1 New York City 138 13 1 KA BC Al,,c! 2 Los A ilgeles 102 15 217'2'. 7715-1": 5 KN BC NBC 2 Los Angeles 174 29 16. 67'.; 31 KNXT CBS 2 Los Angeles 253 20 I 1. 071, i17 WMAQ 3Chicago 235 _, 11. 41`.; 30 WLS AN1131t? 3Chicago 224 .:5 II.1St'; Zs W 11 B.11 CBS 3 Chicago 211 17 26 WPV1 ABC 4 Philiale!phia 121 I1 45 WC A U CBS 4Philadelphia 56 5 96 K YW NBC 4 Philadelphia 55 WWJ NBC C Detroit. 1122)91 11

60WJ1.11,7 rii i'r (0) ii It 135 11 85017s...... (.-..5113737;;":i;''.

52 WX YZ ABC rt; Detroit 181 14 7. 73% 114 W N AC C145 Boston 132 10 7.58 75 W II Z. NBC Ii Boston 131 9 657''..';:', 18 W E. Y C NBC 7 Cleveland.. 155 21) 52 WJW CBS 7 Cleveland 115 10 S. 70!"; 90 W E WS ABC 7 Cleveland 116 . 3 KGO ABC 8San Francisco 38 15Ki'IX CBS 8 Sun Francisco 1181(1 15 34 KRUN NBC 8San Francisco lti5 IS 10. !i15;: 80 W I 1 C NBC 9 Pittsburgh 120 S 84 KDKA CBS !I Pittsburg!' 107 105 WTAE ABC 9 Pittsburgh 103 5 6\V RC NBC 10Washington, 1).0 170 -.: 1561.:8'.'5S5It'''':.;;;': I2 WTOP CBS 10Washington, D.0 111 IS 17 W MA L ABC 10Washington, D.(' I28 17 (i3 K It FW C BS 11 Dallas-Fort Wort I' 105 5 SU \ V 11A. P NBC 11 Dallas-Fort Wort II_ ... 112 , It31.2.25S::";;,' 117 W FAA 11 Dallas-Fort Worth_ ... 1 Is 5 56 KMOX CBS r!l'2st. Louis 91 KT V I ABC 12 St.Louis 51''. 3-1112111; 134 KSD 12SI, Louis 2. 13'; 137 W CCU 15135 13Min 1w:11>o/is-St. Paul__ 1I t'sI12.:I1: 3 138 KsTP NBC 13MinneapolisSt. Paul.. 119 146K \ISP A BC 13Minneapolis-St. Paul._ -in 5 70 W 13.TV N RC 14Indianapolis 97 7. 6 57 WISH CBS 14Indianapolis 11 4 III! .I. I.tS2:.s,2(55I:': ,'";;;;;:: 139 WLW I 14 Indianapolis 1)6 1 36 KII0 1: I 16tionstial 77 III. c7;, 37 KT RK ABC 15 Houston 75 s 1 0. 67';;, 50RI' RC N BC 15Ilonston. 1 »! r, 13 KIN ti 16Seal 110-T:worn/I ...... Pi RIO K 1 11(.) CBS 16Scat' le-Tacoma ...... 3 15... !st122r: '1 120 RONIO ABC(C3 15seutt le-Taeonia 5 21WSII 17Atlanta 13:1.2:1'1 13 1:823...7575'0:`;;;., 24 WA GA CBS 17Atlanta 13 51 WQX I ABC 17Atlanta 7 14WIT./ CBS 18Miami ill !t''ji ))2(71 IS 25 W C KT NBC 18Aliumi 12 53 W Pl. C. ABC 18Miami__ 105 28 WBAL NBC 19Baltimore Ili 13 92 W IA R CBS 19Baltimore 100 6 94 WYZ ABC 19Baltimore 81) 5 39 W K. RC ABC 20Cincinnati 6 111(51S111.::78('''1)4(3(7:)1":1:' 101 WI.AVT NBC 20Cincinnati 115 WCPO CBS 20Cincinnati 1;3:1731 3. 81 WTMJ NBC 21 Milwaukee 107 110 WITS ABC 21Milwaukee 97 1 140 WISN CBS 21 Milwaukee 75 1 22'.'5S1`1;;i: (30 W 11 N 13 NBC 22Hartford-New 11 ;even . 74 I 7. Al% 79WI' 1 C CBS 22I Iartford-Now I I aven . _ . 119 5 11.72`;';" 88 WTNII ABC 22I Iartford-N ew I I a veil 67 4 5.15% 76 RCM() CBS 23Kansas City :01 -1 89 KAIBC ABC 2:3 Kansas City 82 5 115 W DA F NBC 23Kansas City 71 54 W FLA NBC 24 Tampa-St . Petersburg 82 7

128 CBS 24 Tampa-St. Petersburg 92 3 3S366.:.,295.f :08171;7%7: 135 WLC V ABC 24Tampa-St. Petersburg 52 1 I.9 % 58 WC It NBC 25Buffalo 57 4 7. 27%

42 F.C.C. 2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi 1973 Renewals 163

high High pay minorities RankCall letters Net. Mkt. Location pay employed MI. No. post lions Number Percent

931VKBIV A BC ',5Buffalo 67 4 5.97% 106IV B EN CBS 25Bu train 103 5 4.55 67KGIV NBC 211 Portland 96 7 7 20% 117KOIN CBS 20Port land 78 3 3.85% 119KATU ABC 26Portland 79 3 3.50% 44KOVR ABC 27Sacramento- Stockton 89 5 9.64% 46KXTV CBS 7 Sacramento-Stockton 60 6 9.09% 74KC RA NBC 27Sacramento-Stockton 101 7 6.93% 8WLWC NBC 28Columbus 73 11 15.07% 291VTVN ABC 28Columbus 62 7 11.29% 103WB NS CBS 28Columbus 98 5 5.10% 7WRFC CBS 29Memphis 52 8 15.38% 10WIT BQ ABC 29Memphis 61 9 14.75%. 33WMC NBC 29Memphis 64 7 10.94% 22W SIX ABC 30Nashville 58 7 12.07% 102W SM NBC 30Nashville 97 5 5.15% 1141VLAC CBS 30Nashville 76 3 3.95% 9WV C E ABC 31New Orleans 71 11 14.511% 61 %VW L CBS 31 New Orleans ss 7 7.95% 126WDSU NBC 31 New Orleans 89 3 3.37% 69KIITV ABC 32Denver.. 83 6 7.23% 05KNICHI CBS 32Denvvr. 88 5 5.119% 107 KO A. NBC 32Deliver 60 9 4.55% 78IVSAZ NBC 33Charleston-11 untingto 59 1 ti. 75% 133WCIIS c 13S 33Charlesi m 1-11 lint ingto 41 1 2. 27% 145W !ITN ABC 33Charleston-Mint ingto 36 u 0. 00,:.7, 7711'PR1 CBS 31Providence 59 1 0.78% 118WJA R NBC 34Providence 78 3 3.85%, 123WTEV ABC 31Providence 511 ' 1 57% 47WSOC NBC 35Charlotte 75 7 8 97% 57W 13TV CBS 35( 'harlot te 109 , 0.26% 101WC(:' li ABC 39Charlotte 20 I 5.011% 113WAVE NBC 311 Louisville 711 3 3.95r; 121 IVII AS CBS 311 Louisville 83 3 :s. 61% 130IVLKY ABC 36Louisville 37 1 2. ;9% 65WASP ABC 37 Albany -Schenectady -T 53 4 7. 55 '1 83WTEN C BS 3;A I hany-Schenectady-T 61 4 6. 56' . 143W Run NBC 37Albany-Schenectady -T 61 0 0.0' 20WBMti CBS 38Birmingham__ 24 3 12.500,, 72WB RC ABC 38Birmingham 56 7.14' 132IVA PI NBC 35flirini ugh:tin 40 1 2. 51 % 43W1110 CBS 391 myt Gil 82 6 '' 72% 131IVLIVI) NBC 39Dayton 75 2 2.67% 23W LOS 1130 40thiville-s pi nbg-Ashvi 58 7 12. 07" i 49W 1.3C NBC 100 nville-Sia Wig-Milli 45 1 8.80'; 142'WS P A CBS 10i 1 nville-Sptithg-Ashvi 45 0 0.0% 111WZYM ABC 41 Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 48 4. 17% 122W 0 TV NBC 41 Kalamazoo-Or Rapids 83 ;t 3.61% 147WKZO CBS 41 Kalamazoo-Or Iimilds 51 0 0.0% 42KOC 0 ABC 41 Oklahoma City 59 0 10.17% 82KWTV CBS 41 Oklahoma City 60 4 6, 67% 127 WKY NBC 41 Oklahoma City 911 3 3. 33' ;, 50WNYS ABC 43Syracuse 48 4 S. 93% 98WS Y R NBC 43Syracuse 75 4 5.33% 109WHEN CBS 43Syracuse 49 ', 4.44% 32WTAR CBS 44Norf-Newp News -Hemp 82 9 10.98% 40WAVY NBC 44Norf-Newp News -Hump 58 6 10.34% 135WVEC ABC 44Norf-Newp News-Hump 47 1 2.13% 35KO OL CBS 45Phoenix 83 9 10.84% 73KINK ABC 45Phoenix 56 4 7.14% 99KTA R NBC 45Phoenix 75 4 5.33%, 2KENS CBS 45San Antonio 57 12 21.05% 4KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 64 12 18. 75% 16WOAI NBC 45San Antonio 60 S 13. 33% 108WS PD NBC 45Toledo 67 3 4.48% 125WTOL CBS 45Toledo 50 2 3.39% 129WDHO ABC 45Toledo 33 1 3.03% 38W OHP ABC 48Gnsb-igh Pt-Win Sal 57 6 10. 33% 71WFMY CBS 48Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal 70 5 7. 14% 112W.XII NBC 48Cmsb-High Pt-Win Sal 73 3 4.11% 41KGTV NBC 49San Diego 98 10 10.20% 59KFMB CBS 49San Diego 87 7 8.05% 124KC PX ABC 50Salt Lake City 58 2 3. 45% 141KSL CBS 50Salt Lake City 101 1 0.99% 144KUTV NBC 50Salt Lake City 62 0 0.0%

42 F.C.C. 2d 164 Federal CionimanicaliaaN CoinmisiortRepoi*..

..vetwock. Ranked by Percent II omen Buil) Iniird in High Pu11 Position::

Iligh II igh pay women Ban 14 C411 :afro:. Net. 51kt. 1.o541 thin pay employed ta. No. positions Number Percent

13 W CBS CBS I Now York City... 1S1 20 11.05% 17 WNBC NBC' 1 New York City 179 19 10.61% 65 W A 13( A BC I N.ov York City._ 13s 6 KABC ACC 2Los Angeles 102 21 12.56' 3S KNBC NBC 2Los Angeles 171 15 s.62' 72 KNXT CBS 214)51 Angeles 253 15 5.43% ICES ABC 3Chicago 224 22 ¶4.81"? 33 WB1131 CBS 3Chicago 211 -,9 9.00% 41W1sIA4 NBC 3Chieago _ 230 2o s. 17%, 1 WCA 1. C BS 4 Philadelphia. 50 11 25.0(4'? 01 WIWI ABC 4_ philadelphin 121 9 7.41% 70 KYW NBC 4 Philadelphia 159 10 0. 29% 1S OX YZ A BC .5 1)etmit _ 181 19 In, 007, 102 WWI NBC 5Detroit 129 5 3, 8h5i 132W.113 K CBS 5Bet roil 138 3 2. 17% 24W137, NBC 0lio:d011 131 13 11. .41% 112 WNAC CBS 0Boston 132 5 370'7t 5 07 WKYC NBC 7 Cleveland 155 10 o,0 4a') I28 Why C If S 7Cleveland 110 3 138 W E WS ABC 7Cleveland 116 2 1. 72% 31 K t I 0 ABC; s San Franclseo ______... _.... ._ 1,49 17 03 K PI X CBS S San Francisco__ 1141 8 7. 27%, .03li II ON N 13C SSail Francisco 163 II 6. 67% 22 WI IC NBC 9Pittsburgh 120 12 10. 00% 13 Wl'AE ABC 0, Pittsburgh 103 125 R 11 KA C BS 0 . Pittsburgh 107 3 2. SO% :2 WM A L ABC 10Washington D.C.______. __.. _ I28 21 10. 11% 3 WTO It CBS 10. Washington 1).0 (II 15 13.51% 60 WRC NBC 10 Washington I) C 170 I I 6.4r; 37 W FAA A liC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth _ I444 13 ii: 711% 19 K OFW CBS IL Ballas-Fort Worth 105 s 7.62%. 100 WBA p N BC 11 Dallas-Fort Worth . 112 5 4. 46% 32 KM OX (I BS 12St. Louis 110 I0 $2h;h11) NBC 12 SI. Louis 94 :. 3.21? us Kivi ABC- 12St. Louis S3 1 1. 20% 29 W CC 0 CBS 13. lioncapolis-St Paul IQ 1:. 0. 20% 13 KtISP ABC 13Minneapolis-St Paul -IS 4 S.33% 73 KSTP NBC 13 ..Miuneapolis-St P a u l .. _ .. _.___ 119 7 h WLIVI ABC 14.. Indianapolis_ _. _ __ .. ______66 h 12:12; 26 W Dill C118 14 .Indianapoli 64. 0 . 0. 36^,i. 44 W RTV N BC 14 . Indianapolis 97 8 s. 2117; st!Knott cm 15 Houston 75 4 610 KT It K ABC ISHouston 76 3 4.00%, 107 RI' RC N BC 15lionston 102 4 3.112; 10 KO M 0 ABC 16Scott le-Tacoma 132 13 11. 36',, 35 RISC NB C 10Se:dile-Tacoma _ 112 10 8.1137, 122 Klit0 .CBS 16Sealtle-Taeoma 91 II 3.10% 23 WOX 1 A BC 17 Atlanta SO s 10.00% 74 WS li 'NBC 17 Atlanta_ 104 6 5. 777, 120 WA CA CBS 17 Atlanta 1044 3 2.70% 14 wrv.i C BS 18 Miand 127. 14 I I. 027; 114 W It I. G ABC IS. Miami 105 11 1)1,444"? 47 WCK'I' N BC IShiltuni 102 S : 7.84% 30 WBAL NBC 19 Baltimore 114 7.02%, 57 WIZ Alit; 19 Baltimore 85 6 Ii. 4$"; 105 WtIA It C I IS .illISO illlOre______,. ______,,_ 100 4 4. 007, NO WKIIC ABC . 20. Cincinnati --- 57 3 3.16%.. $7 WI.AVT NBC 20 Ciminnat1 134 7; 5. 22'4 10S WC 1,0 CBS 20Cincinnati 103 4 . 3. SS% 69 W rr I ABC '21 Milwaukee 05 6 . 41.32'? 76 WI NIT N BC 21 MilWankee ,. 105 0 5, 71%, 90 WISN C ItS 21Milwaukee 78' 4 5. 13%; 42 W1'1 C CBS 22 . Ilartford-New Ilav-it 1lb 10, 8.40% 78 W 11 NB NBC 22 .11artford-New 1 l'aven 34 3 IIIWFNII A BC 22 Milford-New 'Unveil_ 65 P , 1: 51'F' 5 K M BC ABC 23 Kansas City. 82-, II'. 13:41% 13511' DA r NBC 23 'WISIS City 01 I 1.96%. 1.6451' 110 KC MO CBS - 23 Mat isas City. 59 I . 11311 FLA N1311 . II. T ampa-St. Peterslang 442 It: . 3. 60% 3.244.? 121 11"I'VT C iiS . 25 Tampa-St. Petersburg__ 92 3 137II'LC Y ABC: . 21 Tampa-St. Petersburg 52 1 1.02% 7911' t i It NBC . 25Buffalo 33 3 5.45% 123 W Kii1V ABC, 25Butralo. 07 o 2.09%, 136 WBF,N CBS 25Buffalo 103 2 1.04% 0S KATI; A 13C 20Porthunl 79 0 6.33:-. 88KillY N BC 26Portland 90 5 5.21%. $44 RUIN Ciiii 20Port land 7S 4 5. 13% 42 F.C.C. 2d Aikatax.Luot;6;ana Olin .1/,',:mi.y8ipp; 1974 Row.wols 165

I ligh High pay cronten Rank(:ill IeIters Net. 'Mkt. Lots.tion pay , employed No. posilions N umber Pewter(

.50ILN. T V CBS.- 27Saenunento-Stockbail 06 .5 7. 5:C', 124 KC RA NBC 27Sim:amen to-Stoekton 101 3 .2.97% 131 RON,' R ABC 27Sarromente.Steekton 03 2. 2, 41%. 17 WLWC Nil C 25' Columbus 73 7 9. 5)I 45 WRNS CBS 271 Columbus 98 S S. 16% -16 S'TVN A ISC 25 Columbus 112 5 5.06% m96 -,,, WMC RE c NBC '29 Memphi GI 3 4. 69%. CBS 21Mcmplu 5.' a815%. 119WTI 11 0 A BC 20Memphis 61 11 3. 20% 9 WS IX A BC 30Nashville 50 7 12. 07% 54 1VS M N BC 30 Nashville 97 7 7. 22%, 55 W LA C CBS 30Nashville 70 4 . 5.26% 16B'll UE AB(: 31 New 0:leans 74 0 10.81% 77 WDSU NBC 31 New Orleans 119 5 5.11"',4, 'it)WWI, CBS 31 New Orleans KS 4 1.55% 71 KOA N13(7 32Deliver 611 4 6.06% 951,-,11,py A BC . 32Denver 03 4 4. ST:4. .1-5 K51(411 CBS 32Denver 08 4 4.55% 12 W 1 1,TN ABC 33 .Charleston-lluntingt.o. 36 .1 11.11';. 80 WC-/ IS CBS 33Charleston-limitingto. 14 3 6. 82% 139 WSAY. 1.,115'7,, wTE v NBC 33Charleston-lluntingto...... 59 1 ABC 34Provhlenee 56 3 5. 36% 91 WP RI CBS 34Pro videi lee Is 3 5.00% 144 WJ A It N Bs.? 34Providence 70 1, I 20% 21 WCC 13 A111: 35Charlotte 20 2 10.00% 52 W IITV CBI,. 35Charlotte ...... _ - 10.) S 7. 34%, 110 WSOC NBC' 35Charlotte 7,13 3 :i. 85%, 4 W LICA' ABC 36Louisville 37 .5 13.51"; 127 WAVE NBC 36Louisville 2 2. 63% 130 WIlAS 76 11 w AsT CBS 36 Louisville 83 3 2.4217,, B(' 37 A I hany-Scheneetnily-T.... _ _- 53 13 11.32 % 97 W It CIS NBC 37Alhany-Schtm4.etady-7'..- .- 64 3 -I. WI% 121) WT EN C BS 37Albany-Schenectady-T.._ _ .. 01 2 3. 20% 55 Wil Ite AIB 30 Birmingham 56 4 7.1.1'7. 11)3 W BM 11 CBS 38 Birmingham 21 1 1.174. 129 WAP I NBC 38 Birmingham 40 1 2. 514'.;. 81 W 1.11' D NIB' 30 Dayloi i 75 1 5. 33 '3. 114Wil 10 CBS 30 Dayton 02 3 'L.66 3. 30 W I.' li C NBC 40Greenville-Spartnlisburg- 45 4 0, 89% Asheville. .55 11.140S A BC 40 G rem v11e-Spaitarisburg- 50 4 6. sit;; . Asheville 101 WSP A CBS 40-11 reel t ville.5 port:nisi null- 45 2 V. I-I% A sl NNW,.

133 WZZA1 A BC 41 1 4.1151' ;. 131 w 1,zzo Kalamagao-I ir Italn,IS- - 15 0134; IIlislainazoo-pr 114116,16 .... 51 I I, 96% 145 WOTV NBC 41 Kalamazoo-I I r Rapids. 83 1 I:20%, in Kwry c Bs 41 Oklahoma city. lit, I ti. 67%, ., 118117 wKOC I,: y 0 A II( 41 Oklahoma City II) 3, 39%, NIB! ItOklahoma City 90 5 3.33% 64 WHEN (111A -13 Syereuse 45 3 11.07% 102 WN Y5 Al))' 13 Synieuse 45 2 I, 17 " ;. 143 WS `17 It I 39wp,,,,.. R NB(' 43Synieuse. 75 I. 33%, (7115 44 NorfolkNewport. News- 82 7 .8.51% Ilani phut 40 WV EC A 11C 44 Norfolk-New pert News- IT I s.51`:) 1 lamplon 50 WA V V NBC 41 Norfolk-Newport News- :IS 4 15, :Hi% I iampton 16 Is-TV E.- ABC .15 Film lis ...... _ . .. 56 13 10.71% 02 KTA It NBC 15 Phoenix 75 5 13. 67 ",4, 1151.1:0014 CBS 45Phoenix. ss 3 3.61% 18 KSAT ABC 45San Antonio 64 5 7.51% S-I KENS CBS 15Salt Antonio 57 3 5. 26',:4 9211 0 A I NB)' 5 San Antonio b 3 5.00% 20I)" PO 1.4 CBS 45 Toledo 59 6 111. 17%, 31 WIJ110 A 11C 45Toledo 33 31 ¶1)21% 142 WSP 0 NBC 45To1,10 (17 1 I. 19% 711.11111' A BC 40Greenslioro-high Point- 57 7 12,2.13% .,.-... Winsto Salein 26P: \11 N1P' 413 6 reenshoto-1 Egli Point- 73 7 9. 59",4, WWinston Salem 75 W FM's( CBS 401 Irvenshoro-1 ligh Point- 711 4 5,71`. Who:bat Salem 30 RIPMB CBS It)San Diego. 07 S 9.10% 104 Kt:TV NBC 49San Diego . ,_ .. te; 4 4. 00%; 0IK t.yry NBC 50Salt Lake. Co-1y 112 3 I. 54% 116 KCP.X .113(; 50Salt Lake City 5S 2 3.45!!4. 147 KSL C liS 50Salt Lake City. 1110 0 0.0% ... 42. F.C.O. 2d- 166 Federal Communicatiops Coinnzission Reports APPENDIX D THE TEN BEST AND TE:s- WORST STATIONS In this Appendix are listed the ten best and ten worst stations in each area of programming and employment. The nine tables in Section 1 list stations entitled to special recognition for their outstanding performances. The stations in the nine tables in Section 2 should lie singled out for their abysmally low perforManCeS. 1. THE TEN BEST a. The ten best stations in overall programming ranking are:

Rank Call sign Cliannel Affiliation City

1 KPIX-TV 5 CBS San Francisco 1,177 TV 13 ABC Baltimore 3 KING-TV 5 NBC Seattle-Tacoma 4 KDKA-TV 2 CBS Pit tsburgh 5 KYW-TV 3 NBC Philadelphia 6 WPLG-TV 10 ABC Miami 7 WMAL-TV 7 ABC Washington, D.C. S WTAE-TV 4 ABC Pittsburgh 9 WPM Y-TV 2 CBS Greensboro-High Point-Winston Salem 10 KGW-TV S NBC Portland

b. The ten best stations in News-Public Affairs-"Other" programming ate:

Rank Coll sign Channel Affiliation City

1 WP L (.; TV 10ABC Nliami 11'N1A Q-TV 5NBC Chicago 3 KN BC-TV 4 NP.0 Los Angeles 4 WCI3s-TV 'CBS N..s. York Ci I y 5__ WA t ; A- TV 5 CBS At lentil 6 KDKA-TV 2CBS Pittsburgh , ____. ______KYW-TV 3 NBC Philadelphia S KNXT-TV 2 CBS Los Angeles 9 WC A 1.7-Ty 10 CBS Philadelphia lo w'rnP-TV 9CBS Washington, D.C.

c. The ten best stations in (lack of) Commercial Matter Concentra tio, are:

Rank Call sign Channelsannel Affiliation City

1 KPIX-TV 5 CBS San Francisco WF:11Y-TV ' CBS Greensboro -High Point-W 'listen Salem 3 WI' ii I-TV 12 CBS Provide»ce I 'NJ Z-TV 33 ABC Baltimore 5.____ WTIC-TV 3 ACB I I artford-New I TaVell 6 KING-TV 5 NEC Seattle-Tacoma ii wprw-Tv ::.1 ABC' Toledo 8 WNYS-TV 9 ABC Syracuse '1 WA ST-TV 13 ABC Albany-Schenectady-Troy 30 \VTAF -TV 4 ABC, Pittsburgh

d. The ten best stations in Local Programming are:

Bank Call sign Channel Affiliation City

1 W LWT-TV 5 NBC Cincinnati 2 Kyw-Tv 3NBC Philadelphia 3 KNItc-TV 4 NBC Los Angeles K OKA-TV 2 CBS Pittsburgh 5 W SB-T V 2NBC Atlanta c W.I Z-TV 13A11(.' Baltimore WWL-Ty 4 ..`BS 74w Orleans S KTA R-Ty 12NBC Phoenix o 11117-T V 1 N 1S(' I )etroit 10_ WP 1. (1-T1' 16ABC 2,1 iami 42 r.c.c. 2d Arkansas, Lo,,iana and ..1f 1ssssppi 1073 167 e. The ten best stations in the percentage of Revenues used for Program Ex- penses are:

Rank Call sign Channel Affiliat ion City

I WA BC-TV 7 ABC New York RI W-TV 3 NBC Portland 3 KIN G-TV 5 NBC Seattle-Taconta 4 \VAST-TV 13 ABC Alliany-Schenectady-Troy 5 KOVR-Tv 13 ABC Sacramento-Stockton 8_...._ ...... KSL-TV 5 CBS Salt Lake City 7 W RC-TV 4 NBC Washington, D.C. S WI IC-'I'V 11 NBC Pittsburgh a WSIAL-TV 7 ABC Washington, D.C. M WS Y it-Tv 3 NBC Syracuse

f. The ten best stations in the Number of .Publie Service Announcements presented are:

haul: ( 'all sign Channel A Ililiati-ii City

I \VI: Y-TV 4 N BC oklahoma City 1V.17,-TV 13 A It t' Baltimore 3 K If \ V -9' V 3 N BC Philadelphia WI,C Y-T V to ABC Tan:pa-St. Petersburg ,5 Ko 1 N-TV ii C BS Portland (1 WI'VT-TV 13 (' Bs Tampa-St. Petersburg 7 W.I A It-TV In 'N BC Provulence S EWTV -1'V .1 CBS Okhilionia City 4, K I ) ICA-T V -, CBS Pittsburgh 10 W PV I-TV 14 ABC Philadelphia

g. The ten best stations in Minority Employment are:

Rank Call sign Channel .1111lialion (

I WT EV-TV it A BC Providence .: \V N Y S-TV 0 A BC Syracuse 3 W P III-TV 12 CBS ill'roos\t,(i)tillenee 4 WI47,-T V -I N IW 5 WSAZ-TV 3 N BC, Charleston-I Hun ington 6 KIN (1-TV 5 N IW Seat Ile-Tacoma 7 K t ;W-T V 8 NBC I'ort land 8 W II TN-TV 13 ABC Chariest on-Huntington \\ 11: c11 11.1., SN--irk' y Syracuse 10 85 CUBBS8 Charleston-Huntington

h. The ten best stations in Minority High Pay Employment are:

Rank Call sign Channel Affiliation City

I KA IIC-T V 7 ABC Los Angeles K ENS-TV 5C Its San Antonio 3 K GO-T V 7 ABC San Francisco 4 KSAT-TV 12 ABC Sun Antonio 5 KNIIC-TV 4 NBC Los Angeles 6 W RC-T V 4 NBC Washington, D.C. 7 WREC-TV 3 CBS Memphis 8 WLWC-TV 4 NBC Columbus o WV U E-TV 8 A I3C I few Orleans 10 WIII1O-TV 13 A lie Memphis

42 F.C.C. 2d 168 Federal 0011,111Wil1;00N Jcpw-is I. The ten best stations in the High Pay Employment of Witinen are:

Rank Call sign I Channel C11 y

...... W 1A L'-'1'% 10(11.4 l'Itihnlelphia 7 A13(2 1. ashhigton, I1,G. 5 TO P-TV ..rliti SVIISiling1011. D.C. 4 32 AB( Louisville 5 KM11C-TV 11 AB( Kansas Cit y KABC-TV 7 A II( 1,os Angeles . 1V1.11111-TV S A II( t 1n.enslawo-11101Point -Wil 1.1o!. Sa'aan...... WI.,Wi-Tv 13 A II( Indianapolis Nvsix-Ty A11( Nashville Komo-TV 4 A 11( Seal I le-Tarialta

2. TIIE TEN 1.1'011...51' a. The ten worst, station:3 in the oiserall programming raillting are:

:tank Call sign Channel Affiliation Cit'y

13: K.MBC-TV 11 ABC Kansas City 1311 tl ABC Cohnular, 137 Vt 1,' EC-TN- 13 AUG Norfolk-Newport News-II:Lawton Vis WRZO-T1* 3 CBS Kalamazoo-It rand Rapids 1311 11,11.11(3.-TV 12 CBS atriniiigirna 1411 KOOL-Ty Ii) CRS Phoenix 141 Will1(4,-.TV 13 ABC Memphis 142 KIITV-117 9 ABC [Mover 143 NVQX I-TV 11 ABC Atlanta 144 NVCCI3-TV IS ABC Charlotte

P. TheIntl st 11410115 iiiNew3-1'tildie .11Titirs-"I/lher" progranimity.: arc:

lank Call sign Channel Affiliation lily _ ....

137, ...... WVEC-TV 13 A ;IC 136 Norfolk-Newtn I News-Itaiapna, Kcpx-T v 4 ABC Salt Lake Cut y 137 WI 1P11-TV 13 A11( 1 usnville-SparlanIturg-.Asla:111- V, KR(.7- 9 \ 12 A III. Cineinnati 139 WIII1Q-''' 13 Al(( :Memphis HO__ .. __ I:TVI-T% 2 AB( St. Louts 141 .. . . . KNISP-TV 9 AU( 7iIinneopolis-S1. Paul 142 . WI,KY-'1'%' 32 ABC Louisville 143 WN VS-TV 9 ABC Syracuse 144 W Dl! 0-TV 24 A 13( Toledo

e. The ten worst. stations in overeommereialization are:

Rank Call sign Channel Affiliation City

135._ _...... _ W1110-41: , (US Dayion 130 K I'M II Tv scits San 1.1iego (37...... _..... wmi)-Ty 2NBC' 1.3ayl ;at I3S KNI1C-TV 1 N13( Los Angeles

139 'WCCO-T \* 1 CISS Alin neapoliq-:41. pant 140 ...... K001.,-Tr 10 CBS Phoenix '14) W131151-TV 2 CBS Chicago 142_ ...... KIITV-Ty 9 A BC I./enver 143 W.I.S-TV 7 A BC Chicago . 144...... NS' DA F-TV 4 N 13C Kans;v1 City

42 2d An.w.v, 1,01.ilmi(noit au,/.117..cvismippi 197-3Bob 'owl., 169

d. tenworst stationsin A.ocal l'r(igraitililingare ;

Attiliatimi City : 'Jr. 11"AsT-v 13A BC Albany,Scheneetady-Troy 311 wx.}..,-....i.vW I. K Y-TV 32 A BC Louisville 37 13 A BC Norfolk-Newport News-liamptoo 33 W11149-1'1. 13 ABC Memphis 29 W1)110-TV 21 A II C Toledo 10 111PrN-Ty 33 A BC Charleston-1 I tint ingtou 11 11. 41R -TV 2 NBC' Buffalo 42.... KCPX-TV 4 ABC Salt Lake City 43 K LOS-TV 13 ABC 4 :reenville-Spartauburg-Ashevill. 14 wN YS-- TV 9 ABC Syracuse

e. The ten worst .star ions in the l'ereentage of iteN-enues used for Program Expen--es are:

Itank Call sign Climate' Anibal Intl City

135 -...... 1 VI S I I -TV s CBS I ildhumpolis 13t, ... .. W 11 N li-TV 30 N1147 1 lari for, I-N cw 1171VVII 13; .. .. 1C13 -TV 1+ ABC ( ffiarloth. .13., VVISZ-V 4 Boston 139 .. . WSAi-TV 3 1('114. Charleston-1imaingion 1 M. wytis-Ty h(' fi.:4 Chaelesion.11tinffitglon 1 11 .... . I.: 1)1:11% TX' 4 c. BS 1 /atlas-I:orb Wort h 112 11' 1;:/Ji -TV 3(7115 Kalamaroa-4 Ina 01 Rapids :M...... 11'10111-T1' -i2 CBS Ilirminglunn 149.-. . W II Ite-TV 0A114' Birmingham

f. The tell worst stations in the Niinkber of Public;.:ervice All11011-neNtwnts presented are:

1{1131-oi calf sign Channel Affiliation City

135 11'1.51.1 -TV -I NBC Milwaukee 130 0 NB(: New Orleans 137 KTVI-TV 2 A BC SI. Louis . .- -- wsi ..K..../,- 3 A 13 (1 Nashville 13:I...... WLA.c-Tv 5 CBS Nashville I10 KIRD-T V 7 4.1111 Seatt le.Tticoina 141 11' X YZ-TV 7 ABC Del roit 142 WSNI-TV 4 NBC No-twill, M...... W i f 10-TV 7 CBS Dax tou 1 It WI 1 NB-TV 30 NBC Dartford-New II :iron

The ten worst stations in :Minority Employment are:

Rank Can sign Channel A11illatioti City

133 K. ()A-TV 4 NBC Denver 139 W W L-TV 4 CBS Now Orleans 140 W LC Y-TV 10 ABC Tampa-St. Pet ersburg 141 WV EC-TV 13 ABC Norfolk-Newport News-liamp1 on 14'1 WD110-TV 9 ABC Toledo 193 1VA PI-TV 13 NBC Birmingham 144 KM-W-7V 1 NBC Salt. Lake City 145 KSL-TV A CBS Salt Lake. City 141) KMSP-TV 13 ABC Mitmeapolis-St. Paul 14G. 11' Kii0-TV 3 CBS Kffiamar.00-Grand Rapids

42 F.O.C. 2ti 170 Federal Communimtions C 0711111;887'0U Reports h. The ten worst stations in Minority High Pay Employment are:

Rank Call sign Channel Affiliation City

131...... KSTP-TV Si NRC Niiimeapolis-St . Paul 139 WLWI-TV 13 ABC Indianapolis 140 WI SN-TV 12 CBS Milwaukee 141 KSL-TV 5CIIS Salt. Lake City 142. . ., ...... WSPA-TV 7 CBS Lire enville-S part anhurg-Asheville 142 WRGII-TV 6 NBC Albany-Schenectady-Troy 14' KCTV- TV 2 NBC Salt Lake City 142 . WIITN -TV 13 ABC Charleston-lluntington 14, KIISP-TV !I ABC Minneapolis-St. Paul 149 WICE 0-'1' V 3 CBS Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids

i. The ten worst stations in High Pay Employment of Women are:

Rank Call sign chatmei Aviation City

13s WENS -TV 5 ABC Cleveland 139 WSAZ-TV 3 NRC Charleston-Huntington 139 KCMG-TV 5 CBS Kansas CD y NI WTNLI-T V 8 ABC lino ford-New !Liven 142_ ...... WSPD-TV 13 NBC Toledo 143 WS Y R-TV 3 NBC Syracuse 144 W.TA R-TV 111 NBC Providelice 145 WOTV-T V 3NBC ' Kalamazoo-Grand Rnpids 145 KTV1-T V 2ABC St. Louis 147 KSL-TV 5 CBS Salt Lake City

APPENDIX E SETTING RECOMMENDED AND :MINIMUM LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE There are certain recommended levels of performance which we have concluded every network-ailillated televishoi station in the top 50 markets should strive to meet. Recommended levels do not necessarily reflect the most desirable performance, but merely the level of performance above which a station can Le said to he giving an a ceept nide level of attention to the "public interest, con venienee and necessity." On the other hand. there are certain minimal levels below which no station should be allowed to fall. These minimums do not reflect desirable levels of performance, but rather levels which have arbitrarily been depressed to such a point Its to permit the majority of the stations to meet them. Any station not meeting these levels is taking a risk, in our judgment, of license renewal challenge or adverse FCC action at some point in the future. You will note that certain of these standards are expressed as percentages. Since the Chapter 1 programming analysis was based on hours and minutes, we have determined the number of stations meeting the percentage standards by applying the percentage to an average composite week of 135 hours.

Minimum levels Number Of Recommended Nninber of of performanetstrit ions meeting levels of sun ions melding minimum performance recommended

Total of News. PublicAle. Affairs and "tither- Programming 1'1) l5' 127 20c,"; 91 Public Service Announcements (number). 150 111 200 71 Ott addition, at least 5tl9 of a station's psas should be of a local nature) Commercialization (number of 60 minute segments wit It 11101'4! than 12 ininut es of comniercia li)_ 4(1 97 20 10 Loiil Programmiog (9) 10% 67 IS!";. 6 Total Mitiorli y Employment while we recognize t he undesirable aspects of a "quota- system for employment of minorities. we feel a good balance should be maintained between the percent of minorities employed and t he yiereent of minorities in 1 he SMSA for tot al employment and high pay employment alike. J ust 26 slat ions employed a tot al premage of taint/titles equal to or great et than 1 he percentage of minorities In t he SN1SA. and only three stations met that standard for high pay employment. Employincin of WomenThe employment of wanton in high pay posit ions should ni least correspond to the percentutre of women in I lie workforce In the S.MS A. CI] fortunni ely. I his dm a teas not available to us. llowever, 110 st al Mil employed women to numbers equivalent to I he 3.1q presence or W011191 ill I he national workforce.

42F.C.C.2d Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi19;.:3 lleneu.,11 171 APPENDIX F TIIE To FIFTY MARKETS

1. TOP 50 AtARKETK LISTED IVYMARKET SIZE Market Number: ttnrket name 1 New York City LOS Angeles 3 Chicago 4 Philadelphia 5 Del rid t Boston 7 Cleveland S sail Francisco 9 Pittsburgh 10 Washington. D.C. 11 Dallas-Fort Wortb 19 St Louis 13 Minneapolis-St. Paul 14 Indianapolis 15 Houston 16 Seattle-Tacoma 17 Atlanta 18 Miami 19 Baltimore 20 Cincinnati 21 3111watikee 22 Ilart ford-New Haven 23 Kansas City 24 Tancpa;St. Petersburg 25 Buffalo 26 Pa,..)and 27 Sacramento-Stockton 28 Columbus 29 Memphis 30 Nashville 31 New Orleans 39 Denver 33 Charleston- Huntington 34 Providence 35 Charlotte 36 Louisville 37 Albany-Scht,lectady-Troy 38 Birmingham 39 Dayton 40 Gv.,nville-Spartanburg-Asheville 41 li.a..uni17,01)-Grand Rapids 41 (klahoijia City 43 Syracuse 44_ Norfolk-Newport News-Hampton 4E Plhienix 45 an Antonio 45 Toledo 48 Oreensboro-IPgli Point-Winston Salem San Idego 50 Salt Lake City

42 F.C.O. 2d 172 Feder1,1 Comilorio,:eyd;ui,Nromni.;8.;01, Repoo$

'MI' :AI 'MANN ETS LISTE6 IBETICA LIN MnrktI : .1Iarket vnnnt Aihany-Scheneetady-Troy 17 Jtlanta 111 11;111111441re 11s BOStl)11 :13 Charlestorefluntingion 35 Cha rho Ie. N.C. 111e:11;1) 11 i 7 tleveland Cilltunhus. ohio 11 Dallas-Ft. 11'or111 $9 Dayton 30 Denver

41 (;rand Rapids-1:111:1mai,o4/ .4s (Ireenslioro-IVinston Salen-lIigh Point 0 flreelivil le-Spa rtaithopg-Ashiille 11art ford-New haven 15 llouNton 14 1 iallanapolis Kansas City lASAilgeles Louisville Memphis 1G .tli:nut 21 Jliltvuukee 1:1 Minneoolis.S1. fail Nashville 31_ ,. NVW Orleans 1 New York Norfolk-PortsunontleNevviaort News- Ihunpt-ou -11 nklalanna City I__ 1'i;iladelphia 5 Phoenix Pittsburgh 21; Portland. Oregon 34 1r4w idenee 27 Sacra tnento-Stiwkton 81. Louis bo Salt La'ke City 15 San Antonio 49_ San Diego San k'ranciseo 111 Seatt1e-Taeoina 3 Sracnse 24 `Pampa-St. Peterslutg. . Fay Toledo 10 'Washington, IV'. 42 F.C.C. 241