DOCUMENT RESUME . ED 217 431 $ CS 206 951 AUTHOR - Benjamin, Louise M., TITLE Deregulation? Early Radio Policy Reconsidered. PUt DATE Jul 82 . , . NOTE 21p.;'. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of`the : Association for Education in.Journalism (651th, Athens, OH, July 25 -28, 1982). \ . ,,, EDRS PRICE i MF01/PC01.Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Content Analysis;.Federal Legislation; *Federal Regulation; *Government Role; *Policy Formation; , Public Policy; *Radio; United States History IDENTIFIERS, *Radio Act 1527 ABSTRACT Indebating the merits of the deregulation of broadcasting, policy makers should be cognizantof the conditions that,leid originally to that regulation. An examination of(1) the - lettere and speeches of Secretary of Commerce, HerbertHoover, the 'first regulator of broadcasting; (2) the congressionaldebate over the regulatory issues of monopoly, censorship, scarcity,and listeners' rights; and (3) other contemporary documentsreveals why, in thRlstrong laissez-faire, marketplace- orientedatmosphere of the .1920s, radio policy makers strongly advocated federalregulation of the medium. The examination reveals'that while scarcity .ofspectrum space first led' to the Radio Act of 1927, early regulators recognized that the possible detrimental effect of monopoly and censorshipalso provided a strong rationale for radio regulation. Thenew law wu seen at protecting the public's intvest in radio tecause, uncle? its ..provisionsLno individual or cavoration could monopolize- broadcasting. Censorship,by governmentwas declared illegal and: through the creation ofetat independent agency, to regulate . broadcasting, censorship by broadcasters was'curtailed.Under the act, listener rights were firmly established, and stationswe -rte legally bound to operate in the public interest, conveniwiceand necessity. (FL)- f ***-************t******************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EMS are the best that`.cante-made * from the original document. * ***********************,************************************************* , f. U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION ' History Division CENTER ERIC This do, 1,11,1this borntoortatio,c1ee tec eLerd from too rood orortoniziation oritur allot] it Minot t haityt beefin jiltto ,,,grovt rtgyrAlt, 11011111,100 OP merit tt rte,essd NIE 4 JIosit Lein Jr [)0111 y A DEREGULATION? EARLY RADIO POLICY RECONSIDERED a. by Louise M. Benjamin School of Journalism and Mass Communicatibn. University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa, "PERMISSION TOREPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Louise M. Benjamin 41, TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)" Presented to the History Division at the Associationfor Education in Journalism Annual Convention in Athens, Ohio,,July,1982. ti 4 c INTRODUCTION The Reagan administration's "hands-off," anti-regulatory policiesare reflected in many deregulatory proposals, including thosefor cable and broadcasting. A striking parallel may be drawn to these poliCies ifone turns back the clock sixty years. Inrthe 1920's laissez-faire government developed, underthe Harding and Coolidge administrations. But, historians note, and documents verify, that while laissez-faire may have been these administrations' orientations,this philo- 1 sophical framework does not explain the-actions of regulators concerningbroadcasting. Instead of promoting total industry self-regulation, Secretary ofCommerce Herbert Hoover, the'first regulator of broadcasting,. strongly advocatedfederal regulation of radio. Because of the limited number of channels, Hoover, congressionalrepre- sentatives, broadcasters, and the public realized interferencehad to be stopped. 4 Some also begeved that broadcast monopolies and censorship by eithergovernMent or broadcasters were potential evils and, therefore, had to becontrolled. In short, during the 1920's the whole industry and the countrydemanded more regulation. Today; in varying degrees, the White House,' Congress, broalcasters,and the networks are crying for less regulation. The Federal Communications Commission is attempting to comply with present and past administrations'calls for regulatory reform.b During the 1960's and the 1970's radio evilved intoa medium aimed at specialized audiences as the number of stations andformats increased. Seeing this expansion as a reduction in radio spectrult scarcity,the FCC began deregulatory ti moves in the'early 1970's3 which culminated in its 1981 Report and Order: Deregulation 4 of Radio. Central to the revisions initheOrder is the concept thatmarketplace forc s will dominate and control previously regulatedfunctions such as non-enter- t i ent proqiaMming and commercial time practices.s If future government-directed deregUlatory effbrts continueasplIllned,the FCC will require fewer regulations. 04004% But, as these efforts proceed, the deregulators would be wise to consider why, under such strong laissez-faire, marketplace-orientedgovernment in the 1920's, did 9- the first broadcast regulators includeanti-monopoly,, anti-censorship clauses in legislatio? Was "scarcity-of the ether" the only rationale for regulation?Why did the rights of the listeners becomean established requirement in regulation? A close examination of the letters and the speechesof Secretary Hoover concerning broadcasting stored at the Herbert Hoover PresidentialLibrary in West Branch, 4 Iowa; the congressional debate 'over the regulatory'issuesof monopoly, censorship, scarcity, and listeners' rights; anda look at other contemporary documentSwill, give insights into these questions. A chronology of the administrative and the legislative history of the Radio Act of 1927 will providean ordered lgok into these 4 interwoven issues. THE NEED FOR REGULATION - AN OVERVIEW The Wireless Ship Act of 191 -0, the first Americanradio law, was limited to the*use of radio atsea; the Radio Act of 1912 made it illegal to operate a radio, 6 station without a license from the Secretary ofCommerce. But, both acts failed 4- to providediscretionary standards for effective regulationof broadcasting. ,After .10 World War I broadcasting began evolving and bythe early 1920's new laws were needed. Bills were introduced in Congress and,as most broadcast historians hote, signal 7 interference of stations- prompted these calls'for Apgulation. Radio regulations 41. Oder the laws Q,f 1910 and 1912 had simplyproven inadquate for broadcasting.8 Court decisions held that under theseacts the Secretary of Commerce did not have the authority to withold licenses from stations9 andto regulate,a station's frequency, 10 power-, or hours of operation. As a result of these decisions and theattorney. general's,opinion issued in July 1926 statingthat the 1912 act did not grant the 11 commerce secretary power to make regulations, many broadcasters changed frequencies and increased power and operating time regardlessof the effect on other statiAns. In addition to these problems, the specters ocmonopolyand cens9rship-in the growing medium had reared their ugly heads., Certain tompanies including American 3 Telegraph and Telephone, the Radio Corporation of America,Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company, United Fruit Company andWestern Electric Company were alleged to have entered into contracts to control boththe manufacture and the sale 12 of radios and the transmissibn ofmessages. Congressional leaders, smaller broadcasters, and the public believed such control hadto be curbed through application is !f anti-trust laws, if necessary, and throughenactment of new broadcasting legisla- tion. New laws, they believed,were arsoNnecessary to control problems of station interference. After much debate and many hearings on the issue of radioregulation, that covered several years, Congress finally passed radio provisionsand President Calvin Coolidge signed them into law February '23, 1927. SECRETARY HOOVER AND THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT- THE FIRST REGULATORS Until this new legislation was passed, thecommerce department regulated broadcaStO_ng. In letters to it, the public expressedanger at interference problems and voiced regulatory Isbncerns. While all complained that interference was definitely not in the public interest, each individual had ideasof what should or should not, 0 be aired. One urgei that politicians should not be permitted touse the airwaves : 13 while another argued that religious programmingshould be banned. Others warned - of ralAcal elements "insidiously maligning" Americaor offered to assist radio 14 corpotations with their civicprogramming. To these, Secretary Hoover usually replied with a polite "Thank you" anda statement to the effect that the radio 15 situation was under intense review. I That review had begun in February, 1922, when Hoover clled whatwas to be the , . first of four radio conferences to inquire,into proposed changes in regulations for - broadcasting.., As earlyas 1921 Hoover had recognized thatthe regulatory situation was rabidly changing and new laws were needed to protect the etheras a scarce ,. 16 "natural resource.'". In his opening remarks to the First Radio Conference, Hoover J 4. introduced the concept of the public's priVilege as foremost in broadcasting. "...It becomes of primary public interest to say who is to do the broadcasting,under what 17 circumstances, and with what typeof material." The public's rights and interests in broadcastrregulation were to be involved in all regulatorymoves because, to Hoover, it was necessary "to so establish public right over