Congressional Hearings Into Cultural Regulation
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Congress, Culture and Capitalism: Congressional Hearings into Cultural Regulation, 1953-1967 A dissertation presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy Shawn M. Selby August 2008 © 2008 Shawn M. Selby. All Rights Reserved. This dissertation titled Congress, Culture and Capitalism: Congressional Hearings into Cultural Regulatoin, 1953-1967 by SHAWN M. SELBY has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Kevin M. Mattson Professor of History Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 2 ABSTRACT SELBY, SHAWN M., Ph.D., August 2008, History Congress, Culture and Capitalism: Congressional Hearings into Cultural Regulation, 1953-1967 (439 pp.) Director of Dissertation: Kevin M. Mattson This dissertation describes the series investigations and hearings into cultural regulation that took place before the U.S. congress between 1953 and 1967. Beginning with Senate inquiries into juvenile delinquency and ending with the creation of the public broadcasting system in 1967, the dissertation argues that lawmakers and witnesses repeatedly emphasized internal industry oversight and the power of competition within the culture industry to regulate cultural products like comic books, movies and television. Public television was seen as a solution to the problem that met the demands lawmakers had placed upon their investigations. Existing works tending to focus on matters of quality or social science overlook the economic and regulatory aspects of congress’s activities. Approved: _____________________________________________________________ Kevin M. Mattson Professor of History 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As with any undertaking of such a size and requiring such an expenditure of effort, there are a substantial number of individuals whom I must thank. If I forget anyone or fail properly to express the depth of my gratitude, please remember that my life has been consumed for nearly four years with a decidedly impersonal activity. I am only now regaining socialization skills. Writing is inherently isolating but my friends, parents and colleagues have kept me connected to the world that lay outside and given me something to look forward to. Without them I could never have maintained the drive and motivation to finish. There are four people who were most crucial to my reaching this level. My parents, Don and Joyce, have stood by me through months and years of false starts and too-optimistic personal deadlines. With support of all kinds they have never let me question my choice to postpone adulthood by entering grad school. I owe them more than I can say. As much as to my parents, my thanks, love and respect goes out to Rachel Whitaker. The dissertation may have often been first of my worries but you were always first in my heart and in my thoughts. Without you my eight years of graduate work would have been barren. You kept me sane and grounded and I hope you will forgive the times I seemed to put you second – those are failures I can never excuse. I would never have been able to survive these years, let alone the dissertation, without you. My gratitude to and love for you, your family and my parents could fill another dissertation. 4 Prof. Kevin Mattson, my advisor, was always free with advice and guidance. His ideas focused a rambling concept into a (slightly more) coherent text. Any faults with the finished product are entirely mine as his suggestions were always on target. He has set an example as an intellectual and as a mentor that I can only hope to reflect in my future endeavors. To Anne, Alex, Roxy, Lisa, Nikki, Ryan, Leslie and all my friends, I can only offer my heartfelt and sincere thanks for never doubting me even when it was so easy for me to doubt myself. My life is richer for having all of you in it and I will always think fondly on our conversations, travels and fellowship. Each of you will forever be in my heart. With love and thanks to all who contributed to this work in fact or in spirit I offer this dissertation as hopeful evidence that your faith was not misplaced. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements............................................................................................................. 1 Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………...2 List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………..3 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 4 Part One – The J.D. Hearings: Youth Culture Before Congress ...................................... 34 Chapter One – The Headless Menace: Comic Books, Juvenile Delinquency & Cultural Regulation..................................................................................................................... 38 Chapter Two – Tinseltown Takes It on the Chin: Motion Picture Advertising & the Threat of Television...................................................................................................... 84 Chapter Three – The Emerging Dynamo: The Senate Worries About Television..... 126 Part Two – Scandal!: Corporate & Capitalist Influence in Cultural Production ............ 161 Chapter Four – Does Size Matter?: The Monopoly Hearings, Ratings & Advertising ..................................................................................................................................... 166 Chapter Five – Fast Bucks & Loose Morals: The Quiz Show Hearings & Television Run Amok................................................................................................................... 210 Chapter Six – Pay for Profit: The Payola Hearings & Regulating Manufactured Demand....................................................................................................................... 260 Part Three – Looking For Answers: Federal Oversight, Self-Regulation or Public Broadcasting ................................................................................................................... 303 Chapter Seven – Things Get Mean: Television and the Juvenile Delinquency Hearings Under Sen. Dodd......................................................................................................... 307 Chapter Eight – Public Broadcasting: The Magic Solution…?.................................. 351 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 392 Works Cited ..…………………………………………………………………………..398 6 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1: Kiss Me Deadly ............................................................................................107 Figure 2. The Prodigal..................................................................................................109 7 INTRODUCTION THE WORRISOME FIFTIES AND THE CONTEXT OF REGULATION In 1950 Sociologist David Riesman, published one of the most widely cited critiques of American society. The Lonely Crowd became the largest selling sociological work in American history selling nearly 1.4 million copies, many in paperback editions. Todd Gitlin believes its arguments became topics of cocktail party conversation and elevated discussions throughout the country.1 The Lonely Crowd was published at the beginning of a decade that saw widespread congressional hearings into the role of mass media in juvenile delinquency as well as investigations into potentially corrupt business practices in television and radio broadcasting. Without necessarily knowing it, Riesman helped frame a set of debates that America’s lawmakers engaged from 1953 to 1967. These men of politics questioned what solutions could be found for the problematic mass culture America was fast becoming known for. In his book, Riesman described perhaps the most famous and oft-quoted sociological transformation in American history, the shift from the inner-directed individual to the other-directed individual. Although Riesman defines one other personality type, the tradition-directed individual, he argues that this personality is most often found in highly organized and stable societies with largely unchanging traditional values. Members of these societies learn their behavior cues from strongly held customs and beliefs inherent to those societies. Modern, industrial societies rarely exhibit these 1 Todd Gitlin. “How Our Crowd Got Lonely.” New York Times. Jan. 9, 2000 http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/01/09/bookend/bookend.html 8 traits and so are most commonly distinguished by inner-directed people who had well- developed internal ethical cues. At least, they once were. According to Riesman, modern capitalism and industrialization created a new type of personality: the other-directed individual. Whereas an inner-directed person learned social norms and acceptable social behavior from elders as well as from church groups, schools and other traditional sources of social influence, the other-directed individual took cues from peers and the mass media. For societies that are predominantly inner-directed cohesion is a by-product of generalized norms and goals that are passed down through generations by elders and civic agencies. In the post-war years, though, mass communication and mass culture increasingly took the place of these institutions. “Increasingly, relations with the outer world and with one-self are mediated by the flow of mass communication,” Riesman argued. This led to the development of a new type of personality: the other-directed individual.2