DOCUEEIT RESUME ED 14111 300 .)" IN 004 735 .AUTHOR. Katzman, Ratan TITLE Program Decisions tn Public lelevisibn. 4 Report for the CPB/NCES Programming .Project. INSTITUTION National'AiSociation of Educational Broadcasters, Washington, D.C. ; SPON6.AGENCY National .Center for.Education Statistics (DHEV), Washington, D.C. PUB,DITE Itig 76, NOTE 81p. EDRS PRICE' HF-$0.83 BC-44.67 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Decision Making; *Educational Television;.*Financial Needi; *Einancial'-Support; *Programing Oroadcasty; Public Relations; -Public Support; Television Research , IDENTIFIERS,7 dhildrens Television Workshop; Corporation for Pubiic Broadtasting; Public Broadcasting System .ABSTRACT This report examines public television from the perspectives of the National System, Local Public'Television, and AFhool Programing. It provides a history of the development of Public Broaasking nationally, and includes thegpoints of controversy; between- the- kublic Broadcasting System (PBS) and the Corporation for Piblic Broadca54ngACPB1. A dominant theme is the role which finances play in the_decision making process, and major'sources of funding for national pUblic television,are describea. The general Situation of local public television is examined in terms of the limitations imposed by budget,' the, programing' available from pRs, and the preferences and attitudes of station managers. The role of .the board'of directors and the pelationship'between local stations and the community are considered. In terms of school programing, the report indicates.the impact of programs produced,by the Childrengs Television Workshop, lists other frequently aired childrengs programs, and describes the educational programing qf different types of local stations. It notes the limitations of 'open circuit television for Instructional Television (ITV), and ihe possible effect of technological development on the type of ITV service which , can be offered.(VBC)' ******************************************************************* *** * Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpabliihed * * materials not available from other sburces. ERIC makes every eff rt * * to obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal * * reproducibility are oft n encountered and this affects the quality * * of the microfiche and h rdcopy reproductions ERIC'makes. available * * via the ERIC Document R production Service (EDRS). EDRS is not * .* responsible for the qua ity of,the "original document. Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are th best that can be made from the original. * ************************* ********************************************* IcAM CISIONS:IN A -Report for theCPB/NCEs ProgramminProject ByN4tan Katzman, U.S OIPaTUINTO9HEALTH.' .IDUCTION IL WELFARE MATIONAleINSTIUTE OP DUCATION NAS SEENREPRO. THIS DOCUMENT RECEivED' ARCNA. !SLICED EXACTLY. As ORIGIN- OR ORGANIZATI0N - TNE,ERSON yIEW,DR OpiNIONS ATINGJ:t POINiS.OPNECESSARILY 'REPRE- sTATED 00 NOT INSTITLITEOF SENt OFF ICJAL NATIONALOR POLK,/ EDUCATION POSITION FOREWORD , r Onoe"S awhile there comes an' opportunity._ to .publisha highly dable work, that has a variety 'of proniising . , uses. This i; the case with Natan Ka man's book,. &gram Decisions, in fublic Te(evision. - A What makes it so useful is that it gives ehough baCkgroundto explain why thipgsappen as they do'. This (i not simply a handbook that laysout 'how clecisions shouldbe rttade; it is an orientation to the complex institutionalset-ups in public television and a description 64 how they affect Orogram decisions. ) The book is not without its'controversialaspects. It:was written nearly, a year agO, having been prepared by Mr. Katzman througha United States Office of Education contraet.with the Corporation for Public Brdadcaring.' It was wee printed by the C.P.B. and Wasbeing disttibutedin. February when . QP.B: fnund that it contained errors and should be repiinted. Several thousand copittWere then. destroyed. It is still under consideration by .C.P.B. ancla revised . versiAl may*be prilted by them'. NAEB examined, the book, concluded that the fewerrors could be cor- rected in ifl errata, and that its overall" merit justified circulation withoutany 'further delay. %' / HEW 'education Division dounsel have confirmed that Mr. Katzman's work,,is in the public domain and is ivailable for publication. NAEB has chosen to reproduce the book as it was initay printed by the C.P.B. r adding onfy its own coser, Foreword, and Errata) NAEB Washington, D.C. August, 1976. This report was supiiorted in part as an activity of the National center fOr EduCation Statistics of te Education Division' of The U.S. Department of Health, Educ`ation Zt. Welfare in a jiiint effort with the Ciirpoiationfor Public Broadeasting. Opinions expressed herein* not necessarily reflectthe position; opinion, or officiatpolicy of either C,P.B. or the N.c.E.S., a'nenq official endorse- ment'bx N.C.E.S. or C.P.B. should be hiferred. 3 RATA ASE hould read E 4 Line 14:dissentionss quid read dissensions *Hartford N. Gunn as pBs Pre-Oder& e. 11 The photograph identi which was the case at t tie the study waswritten. Mr. Gunn .is nikw vice-chairman of heBnoard. '12 ,Line 15:25% should rd 6% 21% should re 0 0% 23 Line 21:1974 should re d 1975 24 Line 19:1974 should re d1975 w 29 Pie graph Fedeial proj cts '21% to 20% Corporate 2590 to 26% a. A white lineollld appear from the center of the 4' pie to the cirmference point above the black line designating C 1.3's 10%. It should alsobeAloted that the CFR and ord Foundationcontribution; to the Stie percentage. 'SPC are inclu ed as part of the, 36-37 The Map appearing ontiles pages is incomplete and is incorrectly labejed in several instAnces, acorrected map has been prepared by the C.P.13.. PREFACE , 1 i.THE.4TIONALSYSTEM An Outline of_the *tory The Key'Agencies - National Money - I 'LOCAL PUBLIC TELEVISION ! 30 The Ge4ral Situation .1. 30 Decisions and Station Types. 39 Large member-supported stations 40 'Smaller member-supporied,stations 44 State networks 49 College and University Stations in Smaller,Communities 52 School Board Stab tons 54 A Variety.of $pecial Cases 58 m. SCHOOL PROGRAMMING 60 ITV Programming - 63 Types of ITV Service 66 EEN Network 66 Member-SuPported Stations 66 State-Network 68 College ITV Station 69 School Stations ...70 4 . "TheCorkIration Willprovide a study Of the decision-making process in the programming of public television: This report shall be based on a series of interviews and discussions. It will include adiscussion of local programming practices, national, prograthming policies, and the factors that influence themate-. rial Mat is broadiast by local public television station&." / .--Agreement between the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and ASE National Center for Education Statistics. or several years the Corporation for Public Broadcasting had beensatheiing data on the state of public broadcasting under the terms of a contract with the National Center for Educational Statistics, a branch,o(the Department of Health, Educa- tion, and Welfares-Edtication Division. Independent of these activities, there had been a series of six "One Week of EduCation Television" reports produced , by various organizatiqns over the previous decade. The .1970 ".0ne Week" eepod had been partially finanCed by CPB, although it had been undertaken by Saul Rockman of National Instructional Television in Bloomington, Indiana. Data had been collected for a 1972 "One Weekl: report; butnow CPB was feeling the pinch of full financial responsibility. Inacldition, 'there w1).sa feeling that the "one week" method Was no longer sufficiefit for,a growing PTV_ system. Thus, it cameto pass that'CPB, through its Informatioty Systems Office under Robert E. L.- Tolbert, and NCES agreed to a joint effort to developa program coptertt survey. : The contract that C PP and NCES had signed in the late Spring of 1972 included an interesting prOvision. The Corporation, in addition to conductinga difficult but straightforward survey, was to provide a' "report"on the "decision-making process" in PT Vprogramming. This unusual component had been inserted at the behest of Ron Pedone of.NCES who felt that morewas needed in addition to the quantitative data that the program content survey would provide. To understand public television progfamming, he felt it was necessary to have an. examination,f the ways in .which local broadcasters operated. After brief negoliation, the Corporation hired me to undertake the 6 . prbject. We tigreed to a plan of operation:I spentOstober of 1972 in Washington ' getting to knoWrthe public broadcasting-systemand tsome of,the key people in programming, reSearch, and station relatibns,plans were made and approved:I , would .operate.from my home base in SanFrancisco.. A survey design .would have-Ito ,be prepared in detail, subinitted throughgovernment channels fol iipproval, and pretested. Then the .surVeywould 'take place,An additiOn,1 wa ;responsible 'for the, "decision-makingreport': arid was expected to tour the the country visiting non-commercialbroadcasters, finding their responses: to ..suriey; and asking aboutibeir progratnmingdecisions. This Was a vaguely defined task. The idea was to try to understandthe programming decisionsthat were .being Made at thelOcal level, and 'to come to grips with thereasonstehat those decisions were being. made. A project of this sort hadll'atural peaks and valleys ofrequired activity.. many:people to learnvfhat had alr6dy been , ' At first there was a need to interview done