- Series
- National Association of Educational Broadcasters 40th Annual Convention, 1964
- Air Date
- 1964-10-26
- Duration
- 00:35:00
- Episode Description
- In this session, panelists discuss the role of the FCC in channel assignments and other issues concerning the growth of educational television stations.
- Series Description
- These recordings featured highlights from the National Association of Educational Broadcasters 40th Annual Convention in 1964.
- Subject(s)
- Creator(s)
- Contributors
- Genre(s)
- Geographic Region(s)
- regions
- Time Period
- 1961-1970
[00:04 - 00:09]
You know it's important when you have to make that modification to satisfy AGW
[00:09 - 00:16]
that you also modify Menger application before the commission.
[00:16 - 00:21]
Because in our contact with these people we suddenly find out that the basis the court for
[00:21 - 00:26]
matching funds US has expanded considerably and we don't know why.
[00:26 - 00:31]
We're aware that this may be an additional piece of gear which has not been approved by this commission.
[00:31 - 00:36]
We are attempting to cure this in a because the people at AGW Ray Stanley and his office are
[00:36 - 00:40]
attempting to explain to most Americans before that agency that
[00:40 - 00:45]
where they are advised to change gear they are to advise this commission to follow and then to
[00:45 - 00:50]
their applications so that where we're getting to the point now where we're working pretty well
[00:50 - 00:51]
coordinating.
[00:51 - 01:00]
When an application has been fully processed by our by the commission
[01:00 - 01:06]
we find that you're fully qualified except with respect to your financial situation
[01:06 - 01:08]
at that point.
[01:08 - 01:12]
We write a memorandum from the chief of the bureau to the
[01:12 - 01:17]
AGW people telling them that we have processed the application. We find the
[01:17 - 01:22]
parties fully qualified in all respects except in
[01:22 - 01:27]
respect of financial qualifications but that if AGW make funds
[01:27 - 01:31]
available to them in the amount specified we can then
[01:31 - 01:35]
issue the construction permit.
[01:35 - 01:41]
When this happens AGW then makes a no nonsense of the war.
[01:41 - 01:45]
We do not act and then also this award comes out we take action
[01:45 - 01:50]
only when the AGW people issue and obligating document and can bring
[01:50 - 01:54]
specific monies for the particular application
[01:54 - 01:59]
at that point I can then sign the application and issue the construction permit.
[01:59 - 02:06]
We are currently have before some 40 applications for new
[02:06 - 02:12]
education television facilities. Some 95 stations are now on the air
[02:12 - 02:18]
or some 22 standing authorizations has not been built yet.
[02:18 - 02:22]
I think we're moving pretty well and we have some backlog situation in this area but
[02:22 - 02:28]
only because in those instances the various states.
[02:28 - 02:38]
When I get ready to go because of money problems in most cases.
[02:38 - 02:44]
In terms of legal qualifications we have very little in the way of problems.
[02:44 - 02:49]
The only problem even in two recent recent times of the situation where a
[02:49 - 02:54]
county which has a separate independent educational or authority decides that it
[02:54 - 02:58]
wants to file under our rules. They are not eligible where there is an independent
[02:58 - 03:03]
education authority. What we've done in those cases is work out a situation
[03:03 - 03:07]
where the county will file but on behalf of the
[03:07 - 03:12]
educational authority we've had a situation where we
[03:12 - 03:17]
had to dismiss an application filed by a purely one of the municipal
[03:17 - 03:22]
portions of the government such as the fire department Los Angeles we've had to reject their applications
[03:22 - 03:26]
because of the rather limited application of broad general educational usage.
[03:26 - 03:33]
We were expecting some potential problem areas in terms of site selection and air space
[03:33 - 03:37]
considerations now where we run into a problem with the Federal
[03:37 - 03:41]
Aviation Agency in terms of hazard to air and avocation.
[03:41 - 03:46]
You must understand that there's very little of this commission can do but except to give you a
[03:46 - 03:47]
hearing.
[03:47 - 03:51]
Quite often the FAA has its own problems and secularizing
[03:51 - 03:57]
a proposal by the various member agencies and when they
[03:57 - 04:01]
finally get around to really report to this commission they may find that a particular site
[04:01 - 04:07]
proposal constitutes a hazard to air and have a Geisha when this happens.
[04:07 - 04:11]
We will generally wait to see whether or not the problem can be resolved whether the
[04:11 - 04:16]
educator can find an alternate site and should that that be
[04:16 - 04:21]
possible in the educators assist Of course they will be accorded a hearing which they can try the
[04:21 - 04:26]
question of whether or not a particular site constitutes a hazard to navigation.
[04:26 - 04:28]
Up to now we've had no particular problem in this area.
[04:28 - 04:38]
The next area where we expect an awful lot of applications if the room was
[04:38 - 04:43]
right the first instructional service. At the present time we've
[04:43 - 04:47]
granted 11 such applications. Our data are still
[04:47 - 04:53]
scarce and it's too early to tell just exactly what impact this will have we have high hopes
[04:53 - 04:57]
for the situation but there are many problems which which will undoubtedly arise and
[04:57 - 05:01]
which will have to be solved.
[05:01 - 05:06]
I understand that in New York are seeing connections with the manufacturers of units
[05:06 - 05:11]
MC is conducting in Brooklyn a series of quantitative qualitative tests to
[05:11 - 05:16]
determine optimum distances for these structural fixed stations and what problems
[05:16 - 05:17]
they may run into.
[05:17 - 05:21]
The results are not in yet so tentatively I've understood that
[05:21 - 05:26]
up to this release to fix the structural stations will be something like 15 to 20
[05:26 - 05:31]
miles in the big cities like New York and Los Angeles and Chicago because
[05:31 - 05:36]
of line of sight problem so some of the systems we have to be worked out your
[05:36 - 05:41]
effective range may be limited. I'm sorry. Your effective range may be somewhat
[05:41 - 05:42]
limited.
[05:42 - 05:46]
As I say information is not in yet and it will be some.
[05:46 - 06:02]
As I say today we've got a similar one applications.
[06:02 - 06:07]
Evidently the Catholic groups are the first to really go into this
[06:07 - 06:11]
thing in a very on a large scale. The average installation
[06:11 - 06:16]
in New York Baltimore proposed from Miami has been in the
[06:16 - 06:21]
neighborhood of half a million dollars. The Archdiocese of New
[06:21 - 06:25]
York is going to propose situation for three hundred ninety two schools
[06:25 - 06:31]
six transmitter sites for a total cost of four hundred eighty eight thousand dollars.
[06:31 - 06:35]
Baltimore with a single site
[06:35 - 06:43]
transmitter seven hundred twenty receiving sites an approximate amount
[06:43 - 06:48]
of three hundred ninety three thousand dollars. And
[06:48 - 06:53]
I have a million dollar installation for the proposed Miami Archdiocese.
[06:53 - 06:59]
We're running into the problem that as many of these areas
[06:59 - 07:05]
get further rather quickly it's going to be a problem of additional channels being made available.
[07:05 - 07:07]
And in this connection.
[07:07 - 07:12]
Mr. Park and the other engineers of the commission of indicated that we've got to pay a lot more attention
[07:12 - 07:18]
to a much more sophisticated engineering techniques and much more careful selection of the site.
[07:18 - 07:22]
Keeping in mind the fact that other people may want to come in and
[07:22 - 07:26]
utilize this particular service.
[07:26 - 07:31]
And it's in this connection that we've kicked around the idea here that perhaps what is
[07:31 - 07:36]
needed is something somewhat simple comparable to the situation we have and safety special services
[07:36 - 07:41]
or some sort of an industry clearing committee so that when an application is proposed to
[07:41 - 07:46]
be filed it gets clear to industry they look it over and give interested
[07:46 - 07:51]
parties a chance to combine say well this will impact and I hope to take it a proposal so
[07:51 - 07:56]
that perhaps you can avoid an awful lot of litigation and problems in the future.
[07:56 - 08:01]
As I say I want to they are Commission the Commission's rules in this area you're supposed to so locate
[08:01 - 08:05]
your sites that you will not use up too much space and too many charities.
[08:05 - 08:12]
The classical example the situation where you have a transmitter site and all your receiving sites are
[08:12 - 08:14]
directly in front of you.
[08:14 - 08:18]
The use of an omni directional antenna is not particularly useful in this case it's
[08:18 - 08:20]
rather wasteful.
[08:20 - 08:24]
It's conceivable that you could have a backup situation here from two sites.
[08:24 - 08:29]
People could be broadcasting to two different areas to two separate school districts and gets get a
[08:29 - 08:33]
much more efficient utilization of space. But these are the areas where
[08:33 - 08:39]
the industry itself can do an awful lot to prevent a lot of falling out of the
[08:39 - 08:43]
situation running into notable litigation delay and the scarcity of the
[08:43 - 08:46]
valuable channels.
[08:46 - 08:53]
I think this is about all I really have to have said for the good of the questions will be glad to answer.
[08:53 - 09:03]
Riv Thank you Sam. Larry and I found out and
[09:03 - 09:08]
was able to find out the elite of the commission staff usually is
[09:08 - 09:12]
composed of either engineers or lawyers.
[09:12 - 09:17]
But once in a while a Harvard economist with a Ph.D. comes along who
[09:17 - 09:21]
by sheer the like of personality and brilliance of intellect
[09:21 - 09:25]
manages to become assistant chief of the broadcast bureau.
[09:25 - 09:28]
I now present such a man Dr. Hyman H that he of us all
[09:28 - 09:35]
would.
[09:35 - 09:37]
Thank you Keith.
[09:37 - 09:43]
I must say that our Nielsen rating for today is much better than I had
[09:43 - 09:47]
expected when I had learned that we were going to face the
[09:47 - 09:51]
competition of our friends from 80 W..
[09:51 - 09:56]
I was terrified because they administer the National Defense
[09:56 - 10:00]
Education Act and the television facilities act and I couldn't think of any more effective
[10:00 - 10:05]
audience builders and that I'm very happy that so many of
[10:05 - 10:10]
you have chosen to come here and have chosen to stay here despite the
[10:10 - 10:13]
communications problem that we're having here today.
[10:13 - 10:20]
I'm only going to take a few minutes because I think as Max said the most important thing is for us
[10:20 - 10:22]
to answer questions.
[10:22 - 10:26]
And when I say a few minutes I mean that literally this spring I
[10:26 - 10:32]
retain Asia and I'm going across the country to Salt Lake City to speak before one of his
[10:32 - 10:33]
groups.
[10:33 - 10:38]
And after that I think I was through before the introductions are completed
[10:38 - 10:43]
I think this was the shortest speech on record.
[10:43 - 10:48]
I do want to touch briefly on something that Max has been talking about namely the
[10:48 - 10:52]
UHF allocation plan which I still think is one of the most important
[10:52 - 10:58]
for a long term future of educational broadcasting. There are
[10:58 - 11:03]
some differences between our approach and the national and
[11:03 - 11:09]
big. I think we've learned a great deal as a result of their computer tests
[11:09 - 11:13]
and I think this has pointed the way to our own use of the computer. The
[11:13 - 11:18]
differences however are perhaps less substantial than the similarities we differ in terms
[11:18 - 11:24]
of whether they should be more than two assignments in the largest cities.
[11:24 - 11:29]
We differ as to whether all the educational assignments should be the lower part of the UHF band.
[11:29 - 11:34]
We may differ also with respect to how many of the smaller cities shall
[11:34 - 11:38]
receive grants. But I think the important thing and I think the point that I want to
[11:38 - 11:43]
emphasize today is that under our plan or under the plan which
[11:43 - 11:48]
eventually comes out the important thing is that there will be enough facilities for a
[11:48 - 11:53]
large scale nationwide expansion of educational television and I think
[11:53 - 11:58]
this is the critical point. But before
[11:58 - 12:02]
either of our work goes much farther.
[12:02 - 12:06]
We must resolve the question of what to do about the airborne
[12:06 - 12:11]
television proposal as many of you know on October
[12:11 - 12:16]
9th the Commission sat and listened to the proponents and opponents of the Midwest
[12:16 - 12:19]
airborne program for instructional TV big.
[12:19 - 12:26]
There was considerable discussion in that proceeding as to what impact the
[12:26 - 12:30]
Midwest program would have whether it should be limited to only two of the six
[12:30 - 12:35]
states centering in Indiana whether it should be nationwide whether the channels
[12:35 - 12:40]
that should be used should be in the lower portion of the broadcast portion of the UHF
[12:40 - 12:45]
or as we have proposed into the twenty five hundred mega
[12:45 - 12:49]
cycles and was interesting in that
[12:49 - 12:54]
proceeding that there was so much support for impact from
[12:54 - 12:59]
the local educational groups the people who have enjoyed the
[12:59 - 13:04]
experience of subscribing to the Impact Experiment.
[13:04 - 13:09]
And I think that this year at quite an impression on the Commission despite the fact that almost
[13:09 - 13:13]
all of the national groups the NEA the and the
[13:13 - 13:18]
various educational organizations came out in opposition to him parity fact
[13:18 - 13:23]
remains that the local people came and told the commission that
[13:23 - 13:28]
this was a worthwhile service provided multiple channels that it was high grade
[13:28 - 13:33]
programming and they knew of no other way to get the service as inexpensively.
[13:33 - 13:39]
And I don't know where the commission will finally go on this one it is a tough problem.
[13:39 - 13:44]
But I do think it points up several very important aspects for the future of
[13:44 - 13:46]
educational broadcasting.
[13:46 - 13:51]
I think it points out perhaps most important the need for
🔍