• U.S.

Show Business: A Need for Reform

5 minute read
TIME

Somewhere in the 15,000-word catalogue of deception, corruption and negligence, hopeful TV viewers might find a promise of better programs for the future.

But for the broadcasting industry and for the federal agencies that control it—technically at least—Attorney General William P. Rogers’ report to President Eisenhower made sobering New Year’s reading.

From the start Rogers made it plain that he does not consider radio-TV just another communications medium.

Broadcasting, said he. needs not merely “a traffic policeman of the ether” to regulate frequencies—about all there is now—but supervision to ensure that broadcasters are motivated by what ex-President Hoover called “something more than naked commercial selfishness.” Holders of station licenses, said Rogers, are “trustees for the public,” and what he thought of some trustees was made abundantly clear by his review of the quiz scandals.

Crassly Commercial. In broadcasting, wrote Rogers, “there is evidence of widespread corruption and lack of the personal integrity that is so essential to the fabric of American life.” He also disposed of the excuse offered by network presidents for their crooked quiz shows, i.e., that they were merely duped by deceitful packagers; this, said Rogers, is neither a “practical excuse nor a legal one.” But if he found broadcasters and advertisers crassly commercial, Rogers also found the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission incredibly casual. Beyond its licensing and rulemaking authority, the FCC has “investigatory power fully as great as the Special Committee on Legislative Oversight [which dug into the quiz scandals and the payola problem&].” But when a contestant on the now defunct quiz show, Dotto, charged in a letter to the FCC that the show was fixed, the commission merely wrote to CBS, was satisfied with the statement that the matter was being investigated and the show was off the air.

“The commission conducted no independent investigation, such as questioning the complainant [or] program producers.” Also reprehensible, said Rogers, was a fact reported by FCCommissioner Frederick Ford: when station licenses come up for renewal, and licensees are asked to justify their past operation, “only six employees review this information, and about five-and-one-half hours is spent on each renewal.” Added Rogers: ”We are advised that no television station has ever been required to go to hearing on its renewal application because of programing practices.” Although in 1951 the FCC had announced a “public conference” to discuss the role of television, “no such conference has ever been held.”

The FTC. too, has hesitated to exercise its full powers, said Rogers. Although it has taken action against deceptive advertisers, it also has power in many cases to take action against the stations or networks carrying the ads. could also set up trade practices for broadcasting in general.

Substantial Arsenal. Despite commendable cleanup efforts on the part of broadcasters themselves, Rogers called for positive federal action. Some suggestions:

¶ Require guarantees of the honesty of material that is broadcast.

¶ Insist that station licensees or their employees make public all their outside business interests that may be benefited by the station’s programs.

¶ Make past performance count heavily in consideration of license renewals.

¶ Give the FCC a wider range of punishments, e.g., temporary license suspension. The current power only to refuse the renewal of a station license is a commercial death sentence that is sparingly used.

¶ Make the receiving of unadmitted “payola” a criminal offense.

In general, concluded Rogers, there is little need for new legislation. “Without approaching problems of censorship, constitutional questions of freedom of speech or of the press . . . the Federal Communications Commission has a substantial arsenal of weapons to combat deception and corruption in the broadcasting industry.”

Before the Attorney General’s recommendations have any practical effect, FCChairman John C. Doerfer, 55. an Eisenhower appointee, as well as most of his colleagues, will have to revise some longstanding attitudes. Doerfer, a Wisconsin lawyer and public utilities specialist who began his Republican career as a supporter of Wendell Willkie. has gone on record that his commission is powerless to move against crooked TV shows. His seven-year appointment (salary $20,500) still has another year to run.

To back him up, Doerfer has T.A.M. (for Tunis Augustus Macdonough) Craven, 66, a Democrat, Naval Academy graduate and radio engineer, who believes that the Federal Government has no business snooping into TV shows.

Rosel H. Hyde, 59. a Republican appointed by Truman in 1946, is a dedicated Civil Service veteran whose wide experience in federal regulation of broadcasting is approached only by Craven’s.

Frederick Ford, 50, Republican, is an ex-Justice Department lawyer, a veteran of the Federal Security Agency.

John Cross, 55, Democrat, is an electrical engineer, veteran of the National Park

Service, fancier of aging automobiles.

Robert T. Bartley, 50. Democrat, protege of his uncle, Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn. has worked for the FCC in various capacities for eleven years.

Robert E. (for Emmett) Lee, 47, Republican, went to the commission in 1953 with a background of hotel management, accounting, real estate investments, and several years as an FBI agent.

More Must-Reads from TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com