.X»0/3 

Mfcfc/41

■ c

 e f \ r < V - r < 5 ^ 0 f r

GOVERNMENT

NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

TO BE A MEMBER OF THE

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIO

Storage

H E A R I N G

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

INT ERSTATE AND FOR EIG N COMMERCE 

UNITE D STATES SENATE

EIGH TY -SE VE NT H CONG RESS

FIR ST SESSION

ON

THE NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW TO BE A MEMBER OF TH E FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 

FOR THE UNEXPIR ED TERM FROM JULY 1, 1054, AND FOR 

A 7-YEAR TERM COMMENCING JULY 1, 1901

FEBRUARY 8, 1901

Printe d for the use of the Committee on In terstate and Foreign Commerce

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRIN TING OFFICE

66498 WASHINGTON : 1961
! 1 1

i I

sta t

t u L

I

MIO’S

- • ■ * / .

COMMITTEE ON INT ERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE

WAR REN G. MAGNUSON , Washington, Chairman

JOH N O. PASTOR E, Rhode Island 

A. S. MIK E MONRO NEY , Oklahoma 

GEORGE A. SM ATHERS, Florida 

STROM THURMOND, South Carolina 

FRA NK J. LAUSCHE, Ohio 

RALPH YARBOROUGH, Texas 

CLAIR ENG LE, California 

E. L. BA RTLETT, Alaska 

VANCE HA RTKE, Indiana 

GALE W. McGEE, Wyoming

E dw ard J arp.et t, Chief Clerk

J ohn M. M cE lroy, As sistan t Chief Clerk

H arold I. B ay nt on , Chief Counsel

Nicholas Zapp le , St af f Counsel

AND REW F. SCH OEPPEL, Kansas 

JOH N MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland 

NOR RIS COTTON, New Hampshire 

CLIFFOR D P. CASE, New Jersey 

THR UST ON B. MORTON, Kentucky 

HUGH SCOTT, Pennsylvania

II

A
■ t

C O N T E N T S

Sta tem ent of— Page

Dirksen, Hon. Eve rett McKinley, a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C__________ 3 Douglas, Hon. Paul H., a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C____________________ 3 Minow, Hon. Newton N., Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C______________________________ 1

Proxmire, Hon. William, a U.S. Senator from the State of Wisconsin, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C____________________ 5

ni

NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW TO BE A MEMBER 

OF THE FE DE RA L COM MUN ICAT IONS COMMISSION

W E D N E SD A Y , F E B R U A R Y 8, 19 61

U.S. Senate,

Committee on I nterstate and Foreign Commerce,

Washington, D.G.

The committee was called to order, purs uant to notice, at 10 a.m., 

in room 5110, New Senate Office Building, Hon. Warren G. Magnuson (chairman of the committee) presiding.

The Chairman. The committee will come to order.

The Chair regrets we are a little late, but we had travel trouble this 

morning, as I believe everybody did. We have before us today the nomination of Newton N. Minow to 

be a member of the Fede ral Communications Commission fo r a term 

of 7 years from July 1, 1961, and the second nomination of Minow to 

be a member of the Fede ral Communications Commission for th e unexpired term from Ju ly 1, 1954. This is caused bv a vacancy in the 

Commission. So actually there is a short term before us and the fu ll 

7-year-long term. The short term will amount to only a few months. I understand 

in the conversation with Mr. Minow yesterday tha t he will not be 

taking office until some time around the 1st of March.

Is that correct ?

STATEMENT OF NEWTON N. MINOW, NOMINEE AS MEMBER OF 

THE FEDERA L COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Mr. Minow. That is correct, sir.

The Chairman. Therefore tha t will shorten the time. So we will 

consider both nominations at this time unless there is some objection 

from members of the committee.

We will consider both the short term and the long term. The short 

term will amount to about 3 months.

Mr. Minow, we have your biographical data here which we will 

place in the record in full. It is before every member of the committee.

(Biographical data follow:)

Biography of Newton N. Mino w

(Designated by President Kennedy to be Cha irman of che Federal 

Communications Commission)

Newton N. Minow was born Janu ary 17, 1926, in Milwaukee, Wis. He at­ tended the local public schools of Milwaukee, and enlisted in the U.S. Army shortly prior to his gra duation from Washington High School in Janu ary 1944. He took an engineering course at the University of Michigan under the Army

I
2 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

sp ec ializ ed tr a in in g pr og ram, an d th en se rv ed a t var io us Arm y st ati o n s in th e 

U ni te d S ta te s an d th e C hi na- B ur m a- Iu di a th eate r, his la st st ati on be ing as a 

se rg eant in Com pa ny A, 835 th Si gn al Se rv ic e B att ali on, New Delhi, In dia . On e 

of th e m ission s of his u n it w as th e in st all ati o n of a teleph on e lin e li nkin g In dia 

and Chi na f o r m il it ary co mmun ication.

Up on re le as e fr om ac tive du ty, Mr. Minow re su m ed hi s ed uc at io n by att endin g 

N or th w es te rn U niv er si ty in Eva ns to n, Il l. H e rece ived a B.S . de gr ee in 1949, 

an d an LL .B. fr om N or th w es te rn U niv ers ity School of Law in 1950. In law 

school , he w as ed it o r in ch ief of th e L aw Re view and w as na m ed outs ta ndin g 

gra duat e, re ce iv in g th e W igmore A war d.

Up on gra duati on, he join ed th e la w firm of May er, Fri ed lich , Sp ies s, Tie rn ey . 

Bro wn & P la tt in Ch ica go. In earl y 1951 , he w as ho no re d by th e ap poin tm en t 

as law cl er k to th e Chief Ju st ic e of th e U.S . Su pr em e Cou rt, Fre d M. Vinso n, 

and se rv ed in th a t ca pa ci ty unti l th e en d of th e 195 1-52 te rm of th e Cou rt. 

H e w as th en ap po in te d, in 1952, as ad m in is tr ati v e ass is ta n t to th e th en Go verno r, A dlai E. Stev en so n, in Sp rin gfiel d, Il l. A ft er th e en d of Gov er no r Steve nso n’s te rm , he re tu rn ed to his law firm fo r 2 year s unti l Gov erno r St ev en so n 

as ke d Mr. Mi no w to jo in him in est abli sh in g a ne w law fir m in Chica go in 1955. 

In 1957, G ov er no r St ev en so n’s law fir m jo in ed th e fir m of Pau l, W eiss, R ifki nd , 

W har to n & G ar ri so n of New Yo rk an d W ash in gt on in law pra ct ic e. Mr . Minow 

has be en a p a rt n e r in th is firm sin ce th a t tim e.

Mr. Minow ’s ac tivitie s includ e th e ju n io r bo ar d of th e N at io nal Con ferenc e 

of C hri st ia ns and Je ws, an d th e bo ar d of th e N orthw es te rn U niv er si ty Al um ni 

Assoc iatio n. H e has been an ac tive m em be r of Ch ica go B a r A ss oc ia tio n com ­

m itte es and w ro te se ve ra l of th e publi ca ti ons put ou t by th e ass oci at io n re gard ­

in g th e lo ca l co u rt syste m. H e has be en on th e bo ar d of dir ecto rs of th e 

Amer ican J ew is h Com mittee a nd th e J ew is h Com mun ity C en te rs of Ch ica go . He 

has le ct ur ed a t colleges , Le ag ue of W om en V ot er s’ grou ps , an d scho ols from 

tim e to tim e on va ri ous pu blic issu es, an d he has led di sc us sion gro ups sp on so red 

by th e Fun d fo r A du lt Edu ca tio n. H e is al so affil iated w ith th e Ec on om ic Clu b, 

th e City Club, th e Le ga l Clu b, an d th e Co un cil on For ei gn R el at io ns an d man y 

le ga l an d ci ty c lubs . H e is a D em oc ra t.

In Octo be r of I960. Mr. Minow w as se le ct ed as 1 of th e 10 “O uts ta ndin g You ng 

Me n of Chica go fo r 1900” by th e Chi ca go Ju n io r Cha m be r of Co mmerce an d 

In dust ry . T he 10 were ch osen by a co m m itte e of six pro m in en t Chica go civ ic 

an d bu sine ss le ad ers fo r co ntr ib ution s to th eir wor k or pr of es sion and to th e 

ge ne ra l w elf are o f th e public.

Mr. Minow m arr ie d th e fo rm er Jo se phin e B as ki n of Chica go in 1949. an d they 

liv e w ith th e ir th re e da ught er s, Susa n Nell (8 ), M art ha Lo uise (6 ), and Mary 

Ros e (2 ), in Gle nco e, Ill. Mr. Minow ’s par en ts , Mr. and Mrs. Ja y A. Min ow, 

live in M ilw au ke e, Wis.

F ed er al Com munic ation s Comm issio n

Name Term expires Politics Residence

(1) ________________ _______ Jun e 30.1961

Joh n Cross ___________ -- - -- June 30,1962 Dem ocrat_______ Arkansas.

T A M C ra v en _ _ ___________ June 30,1963 ___ do__________ Virginia.

Frederick W. Ford _______________ June 30,1964 Re pu blican ... .. West Virginia.

Robert T Hartle y __ _____________ June 30,1965 De moc rat......... . Texas.

Ro spl IT 11 vde ______________ June 30,1966 Repub lica n____ Idah o.

Robert F T^ee _ ________ June 30,1967 ___ do............ ........ Dis tric t of Columbia.

1

 Charles H. King. Republican, Michigan, now serving under recess appointme nt succeeding Mr. Doerfer, resigned.

N ot e.—The Communications Act of 1934 provid es th at the Federal Communications Commission shall 

be composed of 7 members, appointed for terms of 7 years, of whom th e President shall designate as chairman, an d t hat no more t ha n 4 commissioners sh all be members of the same political pa rty .

The Chairman. We find that Mr. Minow for his age has a very impressive and distinguished career in many fields—in the field of law 

and in community activities in the Chicago area. We have both 

Senators from Illinois here. We will be glad to hear from them.

Senator Douglas ?
NOMINATION OF NEW TON N. MINOW 3

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL H. DOUGLAS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

TH E STATE OF ILLINO IS

Senator Douglas. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce Mr. Minow to this committee and most heartily to endorse his nomination. As the chairman has said, you have a very full and accurate bi­ ographical statement of his record. Amongst the many features of his experience, which I think are perhaps the most noticeable, is the fact that he served for a year as law clerk to the former Chief Justice of the United States, Air. Vinson, and served as an administrative 

assistant to Governor Stevenson. He has since practiced law in the city of Chicago with grea t distinc­ tion. He is recognized as one of the ablest lawyers in the city, even though still in his 30’s. He has a very good reputation as a citizen, and he is highly esteemed by everyone. I think the President is to be congratulated upon his nomination, and the country will be the better for his service. So it gives me a g reat deal of pleasure to present him 

and to endorse him.

The Chairman. Are there any questions of Senator Douglas from 

members of the committee ? If not, we will be glad to hear from the distinguished minority 

leader, Senator Dirksen.

STATEMENT OF HON. EVER ETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, it has been my pleasure to know Mr. Minow for a number of years. He showed rare good judgment when he got th at coveted law school sheepskin by associating himself with one of the outstanding law firms in Cliicago. One of my admin­ istrative assistants was associated with the same firm. So I learned a good deal about Air. Minow in a firsthand way, in addition to my own 

observations over a period of years. I know many of his friends, and everyone speaks very highly of 

him. He brings to this job, I think, two attribute s tha t will stand him in the best of stead as he goes along. The first one is a delightful candor. He has disclaimed knowing everything there is to know about the communications indu stry, which in itself is refreshing. But more than that, he has a delightful sense of humor, and how he will need 

it in his job. [Laughter.]

The Chairman. He really will need it now.

Senator Dirksen. Air. Chairman, I reservedly concur in my col­ league's endorsement, and I unequivocally endorse him myself.

The Chairman. 1 see by his biography, Senator Dirksen, that he joined the law firm of Mayer, Friedlich, Spiess, Tierney, Brown & 

Platt.

Senator Dirksen. It used to be Mayer, Aleyer, Austrian & Pla tt. 

The Chairman. Is tha t Adlai Stevenson’s law 

Senator Dirksen. No.

The Chairman. Th at is another law firm ?

Senator Dirksen. Th at is correct.
4 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

Mr. Minow. That is another law firm.

The Chairman. You went to that firm later ?

Mr. Minow. No; I started out there, at Mayer-Meyer.

The Chairman. That is a very impressive list of names.

But as a lawyer I know tha t on the stationery you were probably 

at the bottom.

Mr. Minow. At the very bottom.

The Chairman. I see you won the Wigmore Award. As our 

lawyers know, is that our friend AVigmore on Evidence ?

Mr. Minow. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. The one we labored over so many years in law 

school ?

Mr. Minow. That is right, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Both Senators have verified your activities in the 

Midwest area in law and in civic activities. I did note tha t you had 

also been active in a group in the area that was promoting educational 

TV; is tha t correct?

Mr. Minow. That is right, Mr. Chairman. I have been involved 

in this professionally, representing clients who have been involved in 

the field.

The Chairman. I s that in the whole Midwest area ?

Mr. Minow. Our firm has been the legal counsel for a group which 

is headquartered at Purdue University, called the Midwest Council 

for Television Instruction. This involves an experiment to bring 

classroom instruction through television to six Midwestern States, 

which will commence later this year.

The Chairman. From an airplane?

Mr. Minow. From two airplanes.

The Chairman. Did they not get a grant from the Ford Foundation?

Mr. Minow. Yes. It really is an offshoot of the fund for the advancement of education, which is pa rt of the Ford Foundation.

The Chairman. There have been some experiments in that field. 

They haven’t been put to complete practical use yet.

Mr. Minow. Tha t is right. It is too early to tell but we think it 

offers great promise.

The Chairman. And if it is successful, according to the plans, it 

would reach some, as I understand, 5 million schoolchildren from the 

projected height of the two airplanes in that particular area.

Air. Minow. Tha t is right, Air. Chairman.

The Chairman. To supplement the education even in the rural 

areas.

Air. Minow. Yes. Wha t we are trying to do is to get the best 

teachers we can to make tapes or films, so that we can brin g a high 

quality instruction to even the most remote classroom.

The Chairman. The committee will be looking forward with great 

interest to this project—and the Senator from Rhode Island, who is 

the chairman of communications—to see how it comes out. We had 

the Senate pass an educational TV bill on two occasions. It was 

unanimous, both Senators from Illinois, and all the members of the 

committee have agreed with the objectives. There was some discussion as to the amount of money or how you got at it, but that will be 

one of the matters tha t will confront you in the FCC, w hat to do with
NOMINATION OF NEW TON N. MINOW 5

some 257 channels t ha t were allocated, with only about 52 being used. 

So there are about 200 fine allocations of channels set aside for educational television in the country, valuable channels, th at have not been 

used. The problem is for the FCC, the Congress, and those of us 

who believe in this, to get the project off the ground.

Mr. Minow. I will dedicate myself to that task, Mr. Chairman, 

because this is one of the sub jects close to my heart.

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, if the committee will permit, I 

have some other business to pursue.

The Chairman. Thank you very much.

Senator Douglas. Might I be permitted also to leave ?

The Chairman. Surely.

I see our colleague, Senator Proxmire. We will be glad to hear 

from you.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM PROX MIRE, A ILS. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

Senator Proxmire. I am very proud and happy to have a chance to 

come before your committee to appear for this nominee. As you will 

note in the first line o f his biography, he was born in Milwaukee, Wis. 

We are very proud of that. Milwaukee and the Wisconsin papers 

generally have noted this nomination with very enthusiastic approval. 

I might say we have extremely critical newspapers in our State, which 

are very careful about people whom they support.

I have known the nominee personally for several years. Of course 

I know of his fine re putation in Wisconsin, as well as Illinois. As is 

indicated he was one of the outstanding scholars to attend the N orth ­

western Law School in a number of years. As the chairman may 

know, and members of the committee, 1 have been critical of the 

Federal Communications Commission. I felt tha t they have not, by 

and large, been as concerned with the public interest as, in my judgment, they should have been.

This is the reason, the principal reason, why I am delighted with 

this nomination. I thin k that the nominee has exactly the kind of 

qualities necessary.

In the first place, he is extremely intelligent. I think this is a mandatory qualification for this particu lar job. He grasps new fields 

and new problems very readily. He expresses himself clearly and 

simply. And I have seen him demonstrate a number of times substantial imagination.

In the second place, he has a very fine, easy personality, which I 

thin k is very important in this position, too. li e gets along extremely 

well with people, very ingratiating and pleasant. And as the distinguished junior Senator from Illinois said, he has a sense of humor, 

which will be very useful to him in this position.

But I think the fundamental reason why I am appearing here this 

morning is because the nominee is a man who is dedicated to prin ciple; 

and has shown that both in his association with Adlai Stevenson, 

very, very close association over a number of years, and also in his 

own splendid record as a lawyer and as a person who has made, in my 

own experience, a number of very useful and thoughtful suggestions 

65498—61------ V
6 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

for improving our Government with regard to a number of governmental policies.

Senator P astore. Will the chairman yield to me at this moment for 

an observation or two?

The Chairman. Yes.

Senator P astore. I should like to make a suggestion at this moment, 

if I may. At the time tha t we considered the legislation that had to 

do with equal time and payola I know th at the distinguished Senator 

from Wisconsin was very much disturbed at that time as to the caliber 

and the quality of programs tha t were going out over the air, and 

the influence such programs were having on our very young minds, 

our teenagers, the adolescent population of our United States, and the 

older folk as well. Also, whether or not something couldn’t be done 

to boost the quality of the programs. Of course it gets into this very 

sensitive area of censorship, and we are all very conscious of that 

and we have to be very careful of it. But rather than do this by legislation, inasmuch as the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin is 

here now and is very much interested in this, and so am I, and I 

promised him tha t we would look into it as a committee, it seems to 

me tha t much of this falls within the purview and the province of 

the administrative body itself. I don’t think we can legislate in this 

field. I think myself, with aggressive leadership—and certainly you 

have engaged yourself in many of these community affairs and devoted much of your life to much of this community activity which 

leads to a more top quality prog raming in this media of communication—Mr. Minow, th at you would make it your business to sit down 

with our distinguished friend from Wisconsin for an hour or two 

someday and see if we can’t allay much of his fears and apprehensions 

from an administrative point of view, because I know from a legislative point of view it would be a terrible, terrible headache.

Senator Proxmire. If the chairm an would yield for just a minute 

at this point ?

The Chairman. Yes.

Senator Proxmire. I would like to say that much of my fears and 

apprehensions have been allayed by this appointment. I think this 

appointment as Chairman of this Commission will make a very g reat 

difference, not only in the conduct of the FCC but in the operations 

of the television and radio industry.

The distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Communications may be aware of the fact tha t in recent weeks I have put into 

the Congressional Record a series of very splendid programs which 

the television industry is engaged in. I have done this to indicate how 

extremely good television can be, and what a magnificent influence it 

has had.

Senator Pastore. Last night was a very bad nigh t and most of us 

stayed home. I looked at television for 3 or 4 hours. I don’t know 

how many people were horsewhipped, I don’t know how many were 

shot, I don’t know how many were killed. Just sitting there, I 

wondered just what kind of an influence this lias on people. With 

the exception of one very excellent program, I think it was sponsored 

by Hallma rk Cards, which was an exceptionally fine performance, 

most of them of course were gunshootings, killings, horsewhippings. 

I think the American public deserves something better than that.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 7

Mr. Minow. Senator, I will do my best. As you say, it is one of the 

most sensitive areas for the Government to become involved in. Bu t I certainly hope that we can have, if I may say, more wide open spaces between the westerns and more public affairs instead of private eyes. It is hard for a government to undertake to tell people what to put on the air. Bu t I do think that the Commission has a role in elevating and encouraging better programs, and I am determined to 

do something about it.

Senator Pastore. Tha nk you.

The Chairman. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

The Chairman. On the record.

Senator Yarborough. May I make a comment along this line while 

Senator Proxmire is here ?

The Chairman. Certainly.

Senator Yarborough. In connection with the question raised by 

Senator Proxmire and by the chairman of the Subcommittee on Com­ munications, I will add to Mr. Minow’s headaches by telling him th at groups that I have met with in the past months, those from foreign countries, say tha t the worst export America has, doing us more harm in our foreign relations than anything else, are American films and 

television programs. I was with a group of foreign students this past week. Many of us met with some of them. One of them was from Australia. Pie trav­ eled around the world with these student groups and worked here with Greyhound buses for a few months in the summer carrying tourists. He states that the worst picture the Australian people get of America is through the motion pictures and through the television films. The television films are mostly shoot-them-up and gangster- type pictures. He said he was amazed to come here and find the fine news commentaries; th at no place in the world that he had been had the news films on television been as they are here in America. He said they were fine and objective. He said he never saw the television films which were exported but the shoot-them-up and gangster-type 

films.

Senator McGee. May I add a note on that ?

The Chairman. May I leave this problem ?

In this whole discussion yesterday we got down to one thing tha t 

the Commission must look at: That when a thin g is fiction, it should be so labeled. And when it attempts to present a historical fact, it should be as accurate as possible. That hasn’t been done in television 

shows.

Mr. Minow. Exactly.

The Chairman. Th at is something tha t the Commission does have 

the authority to handle, and it is a sensitive thing. Tha t was the question tha t was posed. When it is fiction, it should be labeled as 

fiction; when it is historical fact, it should be so labeled. All these W yatt Earps, and Bat Mastersons, if you read their history you wouldn't believe the two are the same people.

Mr. Minow. I am going to trv my best to do something about tha t, 

Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. The Sena tor from Oklahoma ?
8 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

Senator Monroney. This is beyond the regulation of the Federal 

Communications Commission, I am sure, but since it has assumed 

a dominating position in the great television industry, to where the 

networks, Madison Avenue, local stations, all have become equal victims of the television rating services, would you consider it proper 

tha t the Federal Communications Commission devote some time to 

ascertaining and to, if possible, force at least the identification of the 

base on which these television ratings are produced ?

I am informed, unless it has been recently changed, that Nielsen, 

a leading rating service in the television industry, takes less tha n 1,050 

samples of the listening audience, for which the television diet of some 

70 million Americans is dictated.

I don’t think it is the fault of the networks. I think they are the 

victims of it. I don’t think it is the fault of Madison Avenue; I 

thin k they are the victims of it. And certainly the individual stations 

have to take whatever is piped out as the result of this vicious cycle 

of very scattered samples tha t are almost meaningless as to the desires 

of the people to get what they wish to see on television.

If we have our 2 percent population sample, we probably have two 

sets wired for the whole State of Oklahoma. It is too meager a sample 

on which to forecast television programing. Yet if the rating goes 

down 10 points in this very small sample—and there are others likewise 

tha t are small, indefinite, or vague, or almost meaningless samples of 

other television rating services—then the whole industry panics and 

rushes to the new glamour program, and consequently we get a steady 

diet of more of the same, which becomes, in the course of an evening, 

not a broadcasting but a boring system of how to debase one of the 

greatest media tha t the country has ever had for the elevation of its 

taste and for its programs that would truly be beneficial to children 

and to the adults as well.

Certainly it seems to me that since we require in the Pure Food and 

Dru g Act some indication of the quality and quantity of things that 

are added, these rating services, because of their tremendous influence, 

should not be completely w ithout the scope of some degree of supervision, or some identification.

Senator T hurmond. Would the Senator yield ?

Senator Monroney. Yes, sir.

Senator Thurmond. Mr. Chairman, there is only one question that 

I intended to ask this witness, and it is right on that point.

I would like to associate myself with the remarks made by the able 

Senator from Oklahoma. I was going to ask Mr. Minow what his 

conception is of the FCC ’s role with regard to the rating services 

utilized by the networks and sponsors.

Mr. Minow. I am familiar with the hearings that Senator Monroney—I thin k it was a subcommittee—held several years ago on this 

problem, Senator Thurmond.

I understand the House also is going to investigate this, th is session. 

I think it is a proper area of concern for the FCC. My own feeling 

is t hat the fact tha t the competitive ratings differ so widely among 

themselves indicates that they cannot all be right.

My own feeling is tha t they underestimate the taste level of the 

American public, which wants something better and something from 

which they can learn as well as enjoy just an entertainment program.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 9

It is a subject which I thin k the FCC has a legitim ate and prop er 

concern about and I intend to look into that, sir.

Senator Monroney. I appreciate that. I don't think networks 

like it.

Mr. Minow. I don’t think they do.

Senator Monroney. I don’t think the stations like it, and I don't 

thin k the advertisers like it, but there is nothing else in its place, so they are all victims of producing the lowest common denominator to get the brass ring every Monday morning on whoever happened to 

have a few points higher. And so good artists or good programs like “Voice of Firestone”— you can go through the list of the dead that tried to produce some­ thin g new and something novel in the entertainment or cultural field—and the bones representing such efforts lie from here to Los Angeles, and at grea t expense many times to the networks who tried 

to produce something new. But they were stran gled in infancy by this vicious system. I think it is a vicious system where the control of television passes from those in it to a separate set of statistics which I think are highly 

questionable.

Mr. Minow. This is certainly an area of prop er concern for the 

FCC in my opinion.

Senator Monroney. Thank you very much.

The Chairman. This committee, Mr. Minow, had brief hearings 

on this matter. The Senator from Oklahoma handled some I believe in New York, and the Senator from Rhode Islan d. We turned our files on the letters and the transcripts of the hearings and testimony over to the Federal Trade Commission, which was going to investi­ gate and make a report and I hope to have the results turned over 

to the FCC. I will suggest here now, if there is no objection by the committee, that we contact the F ederal Trade Commission to get that report here, 

so that you would have the benefit of it.

Mr. Minow. I would be very grateful for it.

The Chairman. Fo r the purpose of the rec ord : Wh at are your politics, Democrat or Republican ?

Mr. Minow. I am a Democrat.

The Chairman. Th at would leave the Commission then, following 

the spirit of the act, if you are confirmed, with four Democrats and 

three Republicans ?

Air. Minow. That is right, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Do you have any stocks, bonds, or investments 

that you would consider would be in conflict with your duties as 

Chairman of the FCC if confirmed ?

Mr. Minow. Unfortunately, no. I had 30 shares of one stock, which I sold last week, which I thought was related. Other than tha t, I have none. I will be glad to supply the committee with a list 

of my holdings.

The Chairman. We ask all nominees to supply the committee, for 

the files, with a list of the ir investments.

Mr. Minow. I will do that. I also want to go on record: I will 

withdraw from my law firm prior to assuming this office, if I am 

confirmed.
10 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

The Chairman. Now we will proceed with the questions.

Does the Senator from South Carolina have any furt her questions ?

Senator Thurmond. Tha t is all, thank you.

The Chairman. The Senator from New Hampshire?

Senator Cotton. You have mentioned representing as attorney 

the educational television people. Have you practiced before the FCC 

as an attorney ?

Mr. Minow. I personally have never been there, Senator. I believe 

our firm, which is a large firm, has been there from time to time. I 

have not.

Senator Cotton. The purpose of my question was not as to prejudice 

you because of any interest you had. I wondered if in your practice 

you had become somewhat familiar with the Commission and the 

way it operates.

Mr. Minow. I have not, Senator Cotton. I have practiced a good 

deal before other administrative agencies and am familiar with the 

administrative process, but I have not appeared before the FCC.

Senator Cotton. Are you aware that in the opinion of many 

people—I think including some members of this committee; I know 

a few myself—that the Commission at the present time seems to be 

very much divided on many questions, not divided two ways or three 

ways, but in New Hampshire we used to say seven ways to Sunday, 

and I never knew the meaning of tha t until I observed the FCC.

Are you aware of that situation ?

Mr. Minow. I am. I know that there are a number of controversial 

questions tha t are evenly divided three to three at the present time.

I think this is regrettable, but understandable because the problems 

are so often so complex and complicated.

When I was a law clerk at the Supreme Court I used to see several 

decisions come down five-four, six-three, with one concurring, and 

everything else.

Sometimes these things get so complex you cannot achieve unanimity. But I will do my best, particu larly since the President has 

designated me as Chairman, to tr y to achieve a consensus if I can, on 

most of the complicated ones.

Senator Cotton. Are you familiar with the apparent long-standing 

controversy, or at least long-standing perplexity of the Commission in 

regard to U HF , and VHF, the allocation of the spectrum ?

Mr. Minow. I am, Senator, and this is one of the very high p riority 

items th at has got to be moved ahead to a decision, because if we are 

going to have a truly nationwide competitive system we are going to 

have to somehow find a way to use all the channels th at are available.

Senator Cotton. I am not asking you—and I would not expect you 

to commit yourself—but do you have—you don’t even need to indicate 

what they are—do you have some notion in your own mind of how you 

feel that partic ular problem should be attacked ?

Mr. Minow. I have some notion about what objective I want to 

achieve. However, I am afraid I would have to await some study so 

tha t I could give it an intelligent opinion.

Senator Cotton. By “objective” can you say what you mean ?

Mr. Minow. By “objectives” I should like to try to achieve making 

as many channels available, economically, so tha t we can have a truly 

competitive nationwide system. In many places of the country we
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 11

just do not have enough channels to provide a competitive atmosphere.

Senator Cotton. Are you somewhat familiar, from your own ob­ servation and experience, with the general problem we have been struggling with here this summer, about CATV, and boosters, and 

various means of getting wider transmission ?

Mr. Minow. Yes. I am by no means an expert. In the last month or so I have been doing a great, great deal of reading and I am familiar with the proposals to license CATV systems and so on. I thi nk the problem there is to protect local prog raming if you can, and at the same time give the people a chance to have a variety of service.

It is a delicate one of balancing interests.

Senator Cotton. You have indicated a very real realization—in answer to the questions of the members of this committee—about the quality of radio program ing and its effect on public morals and morale 

and all the othe r results. As a lawyer, and an able lawyer, in your judgment does the FCC have power to require its radio and television licensees to improve the 

quality of programing ?

Mr. Minow. I think it is one of the most delicate and sensitive areas of government. You cannot and must never engage in censorship 

cr any interference with free speech. This of course is more important th an anything else in the country. At the same time I think if a licensee, who after all is using public property, is not operating responsibly in the public interest, tha n I thin k it is the FCC/s job to find somebody who will. I say, this is about as sensitive an area as you can get into.

Senator Cotton. I wouldn’t even give the impression th at I was trying to cross-examine you on that statement, but if the FCC be­ comes convinced as to a certain program, where the quality of tha t program is at least not elevating, what can you do about it, actually ?

Mr. Minow. I don’t know tha t you can do anyth ing about a specific program as much as you can when th e license comes up for renewal. I think the real job of the Commission is to examine the licensee’s performance and to see whether the promises that it has made in obtaining th at license have been lived up to. If they have promised to devote some time to public service p rograming and it turn s out that they haven’t, then I think it is the FCC’s function to see to it tha t 

they do.

Senator Cotton. I wouldn’t pursue that further if I didn’t think it was awfully important, and it is not in any attem pt to embarrass you. If a licensee comes up for renewal of a license, and the Com­ mission should say to tha t licensee, “We refuse to renew your license because of the quality of your programing,” then immediately you get yourself into the position of the licensee seeking some k ind o f an appeal because of an improper exercise of censorship by the FCC. If, on the other hand, you simply decline to renew the license or allege some other reason, you are puttin g yourself in a position, which I know you as an honorable man would not, of using subterfuge to 

refuse a license and not give a reason for that.

Would you comment on that dilemma ?

Mr. Minow. I would draw a distinction between th e quality of a program and the full range of prog raming activity. Fo r example, if they would put on what I would thin k is a poor western, that is
12 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

none of my business, or none of the Government’s business, it seems 

to me.

Senator Cotton. By a poor western you mean one th at is not interesting or one that is not true to life ?

Mr. Minow. Well, let’s say either. But tha t would be none of the 

Government’s business. But if all they put on all day long, let’s say, 

were westerns, for 3 years, then I think tha t the Commission should 

be properly concerned about the failure to use tha t license in the public 

interest.

Senator Cotton. I think t ha t is an excellent answer and it interests 

me. In other words, to be sure 1 understand this, do you, as a lawyer, 

and from your study of the functioning of the FCC, feel tha t while 

the FCC couldn’t legally and legitimately, say to a licensee, “We are 

going to deny you a renewal of your license because you put on shootings and crime plays,” you could analyze the proportion of time they 

put into tha t and say, “You are putting in a disproportionate amount 

of time to that sort of thing, and it should offer better balanced 

programs?”

Mr. Minow. That is my view, Senator.

Senator Cotton. Do you feel tha t you would have legal ground to 

stand on there to really deny a licensee and have some force and some 

power in enforcing that sort of ruling?

Mr. Minow. I do, Senator. I feel that after all the airways belong 

to the people. When the Government assigns the rig ht to use the 

people's property, I think tha t it has a legitimate concern and a legal 

right to see to it that it is used in the public interest.

Senator Cotton. I appreciate those answers. To me tha t is an 

excellent approach. It makes me all the more happy and I will vote 

for your confirmation.

Senator P astore. Would the Senator yield ?

Senator Cotton. Yes.

Senator Pastore. I agree it is a very sensitive area, and the one 

thing we must not do in America, of course, is get into any frame of 

mind tha t we can censor television any more than we can censor newspapers. We don’t want to do th at at all, because above all the freedom 

of speech should be preserved and protected. But let me give you an 

example. I think there is such a thing as a function on the part of 

the FCC to watch this very closely and to admonish the networks 

and the broadcasters against a drift toward carelessness. That happened with relation to the quiz programs. It is true th at the networks 

were completely absolved because they pleaded ignorance as to what 

the producers were doing. Bu t it is still my firm conviction tha t had 

they been doing their job and watching this very closely those producers would have never g otten off with the things that they did on 

the quiz shows.

This idea that we know noth ing about it and we will turn a deaf 

ear to it because it is brin ging in a lot of dollars must not prevail, 

I th ink there the FCC has a function to perform. If the FCC watched 

the networks and had the networks watched the producers, we wouldn’t 

have had the scandals th at we had in payola and the quiz shows.

Senator Cotton. May I ask one more question, Mr. Chairman?

The Chairman. Go rig ht ahead.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 13

Senator Cotton. I would like to pursue tha t line of questions 

with just one more question. Again, I don't want to appear to be 

pushing you too far. Following out of what you have just stated as a possible or a 

probable approach, suppose a licensee put on just one show that 

is so offensive to good taste tha t it is offensive to everyone’s sense of 

prior ity and good taste, and is even vulgar in its connotations. If 

one show is p ut on of tha t nature, would, in your opinion, the FCC 

have the power under the law to revoke the license of tha t licensee, 

regardless of whether it was a small fraction of the time involved ?

Mr. Minow. I think as a legal question, 1 think it probably would 

have the power to revoke. I don’t think as a commonsense approach, 

though, tha t a revocation would fit the crime. In other words, I think 

tha t there are lesser devices which the Commission could properly 

employ.

Senator Cotton. I can understand that. Suppose, however, that 

a licensee put on three shows a week, and the shows were only 20 

minutes in duration, which would be a small portion of the ir time, 

and you couldn’t approach it on the balance of time theory. And 

yet tha t one show tha t was programed, one program put on three 

times a week, was an extremely revolting and degrading sort of 

thing, what would* you feel would be the proper action and legal 

basis for action by the FCC in that case ?

Air. Minow. There have been some precedents in this field. There 

have been several revocations in analogous situations back about 

15 or 20 years. The power of the Commission to step in has been 

confirmed by the courts. It gets down then really to a question of 

judgment as to whether you think tha t those particular flagrant 

violations were serious enough to warrant a full revocation. On 

tha t it is hard to answer without really getting into a specific case. 

But I think the power of the Commission is there.

Senator Cotton. Ju st one more question, if you care to answer it, 

and I will unde rstan d if you wouldn’t, not having assumed the 

duties.

Is it your feeling that the FCC has an obligation to observe and 

to—I don’t like the word “censor”—to observe and to monitor the 

programs, the type of programs, more than they have been doing 

up to now ?

Air. Minow'. I do ; I do, Senator.

Senator Cotton. Thank you.

The Chairman. I might say tha t the chairman of the committee 

handles the appropriatio ns fo r the FCC.

Air. Minow. Fo r which I am very grateful.

The Chairman. They have in the past two budgets asked for more 

for monitoring purposes, for a Complaints and Compliance Division. 

I think the record ought to show, too, that in this case any Chairman of the FCC—and what you are speaking about, Senator Cotton—must also place great reliance upon the industry itself which 

does have a very good code of ethics, and which does attempt, insofar as they can, to influence their members to live up to that code.

65498— 61 3
14 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

In the television field maybe 95 or more percent of those who have 

television licenses now belong to the association and subscribe to the 

code. It is not true in radio. There are several radio stations that 

do not belong, I understand. But even that list is growing.

Mr. Minow. The approach t ha t I bring to this, Mr. Chairman, is to 

try to have the industry do this job. I think the industry is blessed 

with a man like Governor Collins, who has assumed its leadership. 

I would hope that the industry would carry most of that.

The Chairman. I just can’t see tha t the type of men who are in the 

industry would deliberately want to hurt themselves or the industry 

by not doing the things that we are discussing here today. I think 

they have made good progress in the past 2 years in getting the members of the Broadcasting Association into the code. They have had 

many meetings and they have worked out, I think, a fa irly good code 

of ethics. The FCC must rely upon them to be helpful in th is matter.

Air. Minow. Right.

The Chairman. I have to ask one more question for the record.

The Senate passed a resolution last year relating to members of the 

so-called independent agencies, those who are arms of Congress, 

hoping that it would be the sense of the Senate that when men are 

appointed to these positions of responsibility th at they fully intended 

to serve their term.

May I ask you, is that your intention ?

Mr. Minow. It is, Mr. Chairm an. I think I would be happy to 

serve as long as President Kennedy wants me.

The Chairman. We understand tha t there are some rare, special 

circumstances, maybe of health or something like th at; but not to go 

down to the agency and serve awhile, get the experience and then go 

out into the industry. That has been abused in the past.

Mr. Minow. Tha t is not my intention.

The Chairman. The Senator from Indiana?

Mr. H artke. Mr. Minow, I suppose you are aware tha t this educational television experiment is being conducted by one of the most 

outstanding universities in the United States?

Mr. Minow. Purdu e; tha t is right.

Senator P astore. What happened to Notre Dame?

Senator H artke. There are three of them in Indiana. [Laughter.]

The Chairman. If they are not in it now they will get in it.

Senator Hartke. I wanted to show that there is some place besides 

Harvard.

In the field of telecommunications on a national level, have you had 

an o pportunity to examine the record and to make a determination as 

to whether or not you feel there is an adequate national unified policy 

in this field ?

Mr. Minow. I have, Senator. As a matter of fact, I read your 

speech the other day, Senator H artke, which I think is a most needed 

effort to take the lead in this, because I think it has just suffered. 

Back in 1951 the President of the United States appointed a commission to study this, but no thing has happened since.

There is a problem of most urgent concern in connection with the 

new space exploration and satellite possibilities. There are problems 

involved in interagency disputes within our own Government. This 

is one of the chief areas in terms of national defense and national
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 15

concern, and I would hope very much tha t the U.S. Goverment move 

along and start making some decisions.

Senator Hartke. You are aware of the fact t hat there is an international conference coming up in 1963; that if we are to be prepared 

to meet this conference and have a unified program, we have to be 

underway very soon.

Mr. Minow. It is my hope that the FCC, the Congress, and the other 

interested agencies can advance the plans so tha t by 1963 we will have 

a formulation of policy. It is essential.

Senator Hartke. I gather from what you say that you are w illing 

to more or less take th e lead in trying to bring such a policy and such 

a study to a quick and early conclusion ?

Mr. Minow. I will do whatever I can to that end, sir.

Senator Hartke. I wonder, also, in the field of educational television, whether you feel tha t there is opportunity for the present commercial stations to expand their operations in this field?

Mr. Minow. I do. Actually, my own impression is in the last year 

or two there has been an effort toward tha t trend. I know that there are some commercial stations th at do devote pa rt of their time to edu­ cational purposes, which should be encouraged. I am very familiar, and I have been identified professionally, with these courses in physics and chemistry tha t are shown over television very early in the morn­ ing. I think tha t there can be much more, a much wider use of the 

medium for educational purposes.

Senator Hartke. In other words, you have a feeling th at this wonderful natural resource of the air and use of the airwaves can be 

utilized for entertainm ent and for education as well ?

Mr. Minow. Absolutely.

Senator Hartke. As well as in the national interest ?

Mr. Minow. That is right.

Senator Hartke. Those are all the questions that I have.

I am glad to see you here. I was delighted to visit with you yesterday. I am certain that you will be a proud addition to the industry.

Mr. Minow. Tha nk you, sir. And I am particularly grateful for 

your interest in the telecommunications problems.

Senator Pastore (presiding ). Mr. McGee ?

Senator McGee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It seems to me tha t one of the most significant things th at you have 

contributed here in testimony today has been your response to the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island, th at our real concern is less in trying to legislate more behavior patterns for our people, or the industry, or anyone else, than it is to have an aggressive type of leadership down there.

We found it necessary a year or so ago to go into intensive hearings 

concerning legislation when we had a difficulty arise peculiar and particu lar to the West involving television booster stations, necessi­ tated by the mountains, and tha t sort of thing. In our judgm ent it required no new legislation, but the FCC, or those in command, sat 

on their hands, and we had to legislate backbone for this. Under your immediate predecessor, Mr. Ford, there was a marked 

improvement in this approach. I think it is significant tha t you are willing to reflect what I think is perhaps your most important quality, even more important than your brilliance which has been al­ luded to, and your personality, and your good humor, and that is the
16 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

existence of a strong backbone. I think this is a real contribution.

If you can now acquire the hide of a rhinoceros, you will be well 

fortified in this role.

I would like to likewise suggest tha t I sometimes felt tha t we 

had gone at the question of television ratings a little in reverse: that 

is, whether there are enough samples or whether they are f air ratings. 

Tha t still ducks the main point, in my judgment, and tha t is quality. 

That is why I want to associate 'myself with the Senator from 

Oklahoma in his general remarks on that.

Conceivably all of us came from the jungle in the beginning—that 

is a controversial theory—and if we had our way we would probably 

go back there, if we really let animal instincts prevail. So there is 

some way along the line to use our great resource to improve the 

human race, rat her than let the human race, by whatever way it will, 

run its way back into the trees. I would hope tha t we can bring 

this around in proper focus and concern ourselves with the power 

tha t is available to us in this media, rather than the other.

I think it would be in order th at I put in one petition for westerns. 

I would hope that the disgruntled statements expressed here really 

were focused on crime, the sort tha t you associate with the 1920’s, and 

less with the folklore of cowboys.

Tourism is our second largest industry in Wyoming. We have 

reason to think that this does contribute to the curiosity of the people 

who come across the Hudson Rive r and from the Potomac to get 

out there and see what all this cowboy stuff is about. If we can perpetuate that folklore, it is to our interest to do so.

The Chairman. Don’t you think you ought to perpetuate it historically correctly?

Senator McGee. Then tha t would spoil it. [Laughter.]

It is the folklore tha t keeps it going. I mean the fact that there 

are no b oard sidewalks or sixshooters in Laramie, Wyo., would discourage them. We have to keep this going.

The Chairman. We will refer your case to the Federal Trade 

Commission as false advertising.

Senator McGee. Tha t is why we called it folklore. We want to 

label it as folklore. It creates a real atmosphere. We all own cowboy 

outfits out there and put them on every July and August in order to 

satisfy the easterners who think they have to see that.

But in a serious vein, I would like to mention one more point, Mr. 

Chairman. In doing some checking I noticed th at the A.T. & T. and 

the telephone rate structure ap pare ntly has not had a serious restudy 

in a good many years. I notice also in a recent issue of the Washington paper—maybe it would be in order to put the notation in the 

record, Mr. Chairman—A.T. & T. profits set records in 3 months.

Tha t is from the Evening Star of January 10 of this year. It 

might be appro priate in the record at this point:

[F ro m th e W as hi ng to n E ven in g Sta r, Ja n. 10, 1901 ]

A.T. & T. Profit Sets Record in T hree Months

New York. Janu ary 10 (A P).—The American Telephone & Tele graph Co. 

reported today th at Bell System earnings for the fou rth qu arter were the best 

of fiscal year I960.
NO MIN AT IO N OF NE W TO N N . MIN OW 17

Pro fi t fo r th e 3 m onth s en de d Nov em ber 30 ro se to a re co rd $321,841,000, equal to $1.40 a sh are on th e p are n t co mpa ny stoc k. In th e th ir d q u a rt e r pro fi t am ou nt ed to $318 mill io n. F or th e seco nd q u a rt e r it w as $312 mill io n and in 

th e fir st q u art er it w as $2 92 mi llio n. The quart erl y re p o rt w as m ailed to mor e th an 1.9 mill ion stoc kho ld er s— la rg est of al l sh are hold er fa m ilie s— w ith a di vi de nd ch ec k a t th e cu rr en t q u a r­ te rl y ra te of 82% ce nts a sh ar e. L ast m on th dir ecto rs sa id they wou ld ra is e 

th e r a te to 90 ce nt s a q u a rt e r sta rt in g w ith th e Ju ly d ivid en d. P re si dent Fre deri ck R. K ap pe l to ld st oc kh ol de rs th a t th e 1961 annual m ee ting on A pr il 19 w ill be held in Ch ica go. T he 75 pr ev io us m ee tin gs ha ve be en in 

New Yo rk. E arn in gs fo r th e la te st pe riod w er e 10 per ce nt ab ov e th e $293,837,000 or $1.33 

a sh are cl ea re d in t he s am e per io d of 1959. F o r th e year en de d Nov em be r 30 A.T . & T. and pri ncip al su bsi dia ri es earn ed $1.243,945,000, eq ua l to $5.52 a sh ar e, co m pa re d w it h $1,135,841,000 or $5.16 a 

sh are the pr ev io us y ea r.

Senator McGee. So far as I can tell, the only study of rate struc­ tures has been on a piecemeal basis, also sometimes within individual States; sometimes a fte r there have been petitions of a local sort, and 

it has kind of hung together by fragments. Inasmuch as we have here a private monopoly in the public in­ terest—and understandably so, and its demonstrated public interest quality is beyond question—I wonder if it might not be in order to have, instead of a headline hunt, a serious study of the rate structure and earnings of the A.T. & T. and related groups concerned with that. 

What would be your opinion? Mr. Mixow. Aly understanding, Senator McGee, is tha t there has been a reduction in interstate telephone rates which was arrived at by the FCC last year, of about $50 million a year, and tha t there are continuing studies underway to do this. There is a feeling T know among many State people that interstate telephone rates by and large are cheaper for equivalent distances than in trastate rates. The m atter is of great concern to me and to the Commission and is one which I will devote a good deal of attention to. But I do think that there is something underway right now which is already started, 

to review the whole problem.

Senator McGee. It is my understanding tha t the absence, the con­ spicuous absence, was anything in the way of a public record of this 

sort. I do know tha t your observation ju st made is very true. Anywhere you want to apply it, it costs much more to talk between two Wyoming towns than to call an equivalent or much greater distance across the 

State line. I have no quarrel with the A.T. & T. prospering. I think it epitomizes pretty much the spreading out of our corporate basis in this country, perhaps the largest corporate holding in the land, with more individual small stockholders than any other. I think it is a good symbol of what we stand for. But I do th ink because it is of a public interest nature that it might be useful to have a constructive look at the whole earning operation so a full 

public record is available. Mr. Mixow. With the trend toward more and more automation in the telephone industry, it may be possible to review and bring some 

of those rates furthe r down.
18 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

Senator McGee. I would hope also tha t there might be some encouragement, perhaps, of the men in the Commission, to somehow and 

some way get underway a real basic look at the whole communications 

industry.

I am thinking now particularly of radio and television. Again 

with the idea of trying to make it the best possible, rat her than trying 

to find something wrong. I don’t suppose any single question has 

come up more to me in trave ling around the country tha n those 

I get from members in the radio or television in dustry who will discuss with me privately—don’t let my boss know—privately the importance of having a fresh look at this.

Not another report that we would nail on to a report previously 

made. You know perhaps better tha n most tha t this has all just 

“growed like Topsy.” We started out with a problem which involved 

something decidedly new—radio. Out of sheer experience we piled 

what we learned on top of earlier mistakes, perhaps, and not any great 

change in the past, but merely patchwork all the way up.

On top of this we have built a television industry, some of it dependent upon some of the things tha t have gone before. I would think 

it would be in the best interest of all the industry if they would be willing to have intelligent and expert minds perhaps take it all apart 

and try to put it back together again with the benefit of the many, 

many valuable lessons that we have learned in the meantime.

It is not quite as easy to do as a simple statement like th at suggests. 

There has been a strong reluctance in many places to tackle it. It 

means a great deal of work and it should mean no headlines, or very 

few’, and thus no rewards in terms o f public acclaim. But I do think 

it would be a sound way now7

, in the light of what has gone on in the 

last quarter or half a century, to try to make the most t ha t we can 

out of constructive force here in the interests of the industry and the 

public interest.

Mr. Minow. I think that is very w ell put, Senator.

Mr. McGee. That is all that I have to say, Senator.

The Chairman. The Senator from Oklahoma ?

Senator Monroney. I have three questions b ut I will yield to the 

other members w ho have not had a chance yet.

The Chairman. The Senator from Texas ?

Senator Yarborough. Mr. Chairman, having been acquainted with 

the nominee for more than 5 years, I think the Government people 

of the United States are extremely fortu nate to have an opportunity to 

obtain his services.

I have a question or two th at I wTant to ask, bu t I assure you, Mr. 

Minow, they will not be so difficult as some requests tha t have been 

voiced tha t you distinguish between history and folklore, and fact 

and fiction.

If somebody threw you the “Life of Billy the K id” and asked you 

what is history and what is folklore, what is fact and what is fiction, 

where it is all merged into one mass, I would not envy you tha t task.

On educational television some years ago the Commission reserved 

a number of channels in television for educational television stations.

Most of them have not been constructed. Efforts have been made to 

change those to commercial licenses on the basis tha t they had not been 

constructed.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 19

People wanting those channels have gone before the Legislature 

of Texas and lobbied provisions into our State laws prohibiting the State educational institutions from spending money on educational 

television. I think it is to the credit of the Commission tha t they have steadfastly maintained those channels open for the time when people in Texas can get control of their government to the extent tha t they can utilize those television educational channels that are in reserve. I want to express the hope tha t you on the Commission will con­ tinue that policy to keep those reserved educational television channels in Texas free and open until they can be utilized by the people of 

Texas.

Mr. Minow. I will certainly do that. I also am concerned about somehow liberalizing the rules under which educational channels operate, so that they can somehow achieve some income. The biggest problem is tha t they jus t do not have the funds to program properly. If there is anything 1 can do along th at end, I would certainly try.

Senator Yarborough. In another field, I want to direct your attention at a recent decision of the Commission which I feel raises grave questions in the mind of the public. In fact, I know i t has—some of 

the public—by statements made to me.

I refer to docket 12493. These were applications of Veterans 

Broadcasting Co., Inc., of Vail Mills, N.Y., and Capital City Television Corp., of Vail Mills, N.Y. They were two rival applications for the g rant of a license of broadcastin g from Vail Mills. In the opinion of the examiner, since the five-man stockholder com­ mittee of one of these rivals numbered among its five members two Congressmen, the examiner found th at being a Congressman gave one of the stockholders such peculiar knowledge of the people in the area as to entitle that application to more weight than the other. The decision of the Commission, handed down on Jul y 18, 1960,

the decision said th at:

Each of the applicants has previously been determined to be legally, financially, technically, and otherwise qualified to construct and operate the facilities proposed. The only issue designated for hearing is the standard comparative 

issue.

Th at is, of the comparative knowledge and capabilities of the people 

who were seeking the respective franchises. These two Congressmen were not shown there to have any previous broadcasting or television experience. The Commission in its opinion 

said:

The examiner stated tha t it cannot be ignored tha t some of these individuals have achieved civic and political prominence which denotes in them an ability to discern and be responsive to the interests of the people of their community. To be elected and reelected a s a Member of the House of Representatives is such 

a manifestation.

Th at is the examiner’s opinion. The effect of this opinion of the m ajority of the Commission is to confirm the examiner’s opinion and hold that the mere fact of^i+ember-...

ship in Congress gives people a peculiar qualification tdcdbtain license, because of a knowledge of the people and being oc&ndidates, and that their application for broadcast license should p^giv en pre ference over the others. I | p .) A | *-«D n / i h
20 NOMINATION OF NEW TON N. MINOW

The Commission’s opinion states this:

Of interest to the Commission is the fact tha t the officers and directors who 

will be active in the affairs of the competing applicant have engaged in such 

activities—

tha t is politically—

since they provide a basis for insight into an understanding of the community’s 

needs. Political activities are in this regard of no less significance than other 

actvities which project the principals into contact with various elements of the 

community proposed to be served.

I poin t out, Mr. Minow, without asking you for any opinion now, 

tha t a continuation of this policy of giving a preference to applications 

from Members of Congress, who have no previous radio or television 

experience, would in my opinion destroy the confidence of the people, 

the industry, and the Commission, and shake their confidence in the 

Congress itself.

I want to state tha t for your serious concern when you go on the 

Commission, this opinion of last July.

Mr. Minow. I am glad you called t hat to my attention, Senator. I 

had been unaware of tha t decision. My own feeling—I am perfectly h appy to say it—I don’t thin k tha t that should have a thing to 

do with who gets a license, myself.

Senator Yarborough. I agree with you thoroughly.

The Chairman. Are there any further questions?

The Senator from Alaska ?

Senator Bartlett. Mr. Minow, I should not have had a single, solitary question to put to you had it not been fo r the fact that there has 

been so much discussion of westerns here.

My questions stem from a personal experience. I am not a faith ful 

television viewer. But during the so-called bobtail session of Congress 

last fall—and those were trul y dog days—I found myself watching a 

western. It opened in typical fashion. The hero naturally was tall, 

lean, and very handsome. The villain was otherwise. The girl was 

a beautiful girl.

The film projected itself in the usual manner of westerns and it became abundantly clear to the viewer tha t the villain and the hero 

weren’t getting along well. This reached a climax rig ht at the end 

of the show and the hero got at one end of the saloon—the final scene 

had to be in a saloon, of course—and the villain at the other. The hero 

knew th at the villain was one of the fastest guns in the West. They 

both drew, the guns roared, and Lord save the mark, the hero fell dead 

on the floor, shot by the villain and the girl walked into the sunset all 

alone.

Now my questions are these [laughter] : Was this good or bad? 

Was this hurtful to the American way of life? Was th is destructive 

of the American creed ?

I am not going to ask you to answer now. I have been asking myself these questions since August, or whenever i t was, and found no 

answers.

On F ebruary 8, 1962, I hope to project those questions to you again 

for an answer.

Mr. Minow. Thank you. I will have to have a rerun of this most 

unusual western.

Senator Monroney. It must have been burlesque.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 21

The Chairman. Are there further questions ?

Senator Pastore. I have a m atter here tha t I should like to bring 

up. I think, apart from the policing responsibility of the FCC, it does have a responsibility to assist in the growth of America. Among the things we are talking about now, of course, is communications in 

space. Unfortunately every time we talk about communications in space we tie it up with our military posture and our military ambitions. It is more than that, because we, as a m atter of policy, want to dedi­ cate space to peaceful uses. When we applied for the money which is necessary to run the activities of this committee, the report of the 

Rules Committee has this to say, in effect:

The whole field of communications will be tremendously changed by the use of satellites so d ram atically dem onstrated in the past few months. The policy for space communications prob ably via the use of satellites must be established, and this, of course, will lead to a review of the use of the entire spectrum by both 

the milita ry and civilian users.

Tha t responsibility, of course, falls upon this particular commit­ tee, and partially, of course, by delegation on the Communications 

Subcommittee. I merely call it to your attention, Mr. Minow, because I am th ink ­ ing to myself tha t much thought has to be given by the FCC as to what the A.T. & T. is doing, what can be done, and how they can be assisted, of course, in these experiments to shoot up into space some of the satellites tha t will have some of the apparatus t hat they are inte r­ ested in in promoting for the peaceful uses of better communications. I think t hat is a new field that we are gettin g into and I think th at is a new responsibility tha t falls upon the FCC. I would hope tha t 

you would give that some very, very serious attention.

Mr. Minow. I will. I think it is one of the most urgent. It will 

require one of the highest priorities for the Commission's attention. There was just something last week which the Commission per­ mitted one company to run, one experiment. I think this has go t to 

be encouraged, and I intend to do that.

Senator Pastore. Another thing, I understand there is an inte rnational conference to be held in Geneva in 1963, where all the experts of the world will assemble. Of course, the allocation of frequencies is quite an important one, and I think tha t we in America ought to begin giving it some thought, primarily throu gh the impetus th at can be given to it by the FCC, because when we get there we want to be prepared as to what our objectives are and be able to analyze counter­ proposals tha t are made, because, as you well know, much of the criti­ cism that have been made by this administration, especially in the field of disarmament, is the fact that sometimes we haven’t been too well prepared to properly analyze counterproposals tha t have been made. I would hope that by 1963 we are so well prepared that we will know our objectives and know where we intend to go so as to better analyze counterproposals made by other governments.

Mr. Minow. I will certainly devote myself to that task.

Senator Monroney. Air. Chairman.

The Chairman. The Senator from Oklahoma.

Senator Monroney. I will try to be as brief as I can.
22 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

I have four points I would like to get in. As Chairm an of the 

FCC, you will be before the Magnuson subcommittee asking for funds. 

I would like to get your opinion if it would not be better to ask for 

funds so tha t the Commissioners who are invited to, and quite properly, address the conventions and assemblies of people who take an 

active part in the broadcasting industry, if it would not be be tter to 

ask for Government funds so that these men can go representing our 

Government, ra ther than going a t th e expense of the convention or of 

those seeking it.

There have been several times that Commissioners have been criticized because the tab of their travel has been picked up by people who 

had an industry point of view. I thin k i t would be highly beneficial 

if the Government, recognizing our duty to have a voice and advice 

at these various assemblies, pay the Commissioners’ way and not make 

them the guests of the convention.

Would you feel tha t tha t would not be a proper expenditure of 

Government funds ?

Mr. Minow. I certainly think it is. I personally think that it is 

very hard to operate otherwise, with self-respect as an independent 

Commissioner. I think this is the only way to do it.

Senator Monroney. I am glad to hear you say that. You mentioned several times that you believe in competitive radio and television. Fo r about 4 years, I think, the FCC has been sitting on various suggestions, proposals, and petitions to establish in our major 

markets outlets for the three great networks. Nothing has been done 

about this.

They fiddled and they have faddled, and they have asked the military to disgorge some of the ir wavelengths, without success, and 

nothing has been done.

Meanwhile, we have an imbalance in our competitive television 

network where certain major markets are denied the advantage of 

tuning in on the thir d network.

I would hope tha t as Chairman you will be able to determine 

whether there are modern devices, such as directional antennas and 

other things, such as low power, where you can begin to make a 

competitive situation.

We don’t wish to censor. The best way, I think, of avoiding this 

is by the great American competitive system. If people have the 

choice of three stations, three networks, they can perhaps find a program out of the three th at they would like to see.

Certainly it deserves more than the continuing death by delay that 

has been occurring under the present and past operation of the 

Federal Communications Commission.

Mr. Minow. I certainly share that, Senator Monroney, and will do 

everything I can to move along to a decision.

Senator Monroney. Thank you.

One oth er point tha t I think is very imp ort ant : When people sign 

up that they will devote certain time as a station to receive th eir television or radio licenses, this is probably not in good faith, and I think 

many of the local stations would like to carry out their pledge. But 

sometimes they are captives of the network, and there has been somethin g approaching duress at least.
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW 23

The ‘‘11 o’clock Roundup,” the J oe McCaffrey program tha t I am 

talking about on the local station here, th at is very beneficial to those 

of us who like a late nig ht roundup on weather, news, and commentary. We might like to receive this instead of a 10-year-old movie 

tha t may be sold at a better rate out of New York and add more 

revenue to the network. Can the Commission is some way protect the local stations, which 

may wish local television programing at certain points, against the 

demands and implied threats tha t if there happen to be four outlets 

in the area, tha t they must salute and obey and put on the corn or 

whatever it is tha t is coming on at that time of night from the 

network ?

I think it is a proper point of inquiry for the FCC to look into 

this matter where stations are in fear of losing the ir affiliations because of refusing to take programs where they feel the time could be 

better spent on local orig inating programs.

Mr. Minow. This matter, at least part of it, is now before the 

Commission. My own approach to it is to try to assure to every local 

licensee as much freedom of action as possible.

Senator Monroney. I thin k to a degree certainly a local station 

has some righ t to its local program; that is the way they got their 

license. That is included in a long list of things they intend to do, yet 

they are powerless sometimes against the pressures.

You mentioned public service programs. I know you are dedicated 

to a t least a proper amount, or a representative amount. I would call 

your attention to the fact that in the 22 pages of fine type where the 

license agreement is made, tha t on page 2 of this agreement, in section 

4, there is a note—it is all in fine type,

Note.—The purpose of the following tabulation is to enab le the Commission 

to secu re quantita tive data as to the proportion of time to be devoted to vaiious classes of program s. The functio ns of each class of program as a pa rt of the diversified program str uc ture is discussed in the Commission’s report of March 7, 1946. entitled “Public Service Responsibility of Broadc ast Licensees.”

This was true 6 months ago. I haven’t had a chance to check it 

today.

Mr. Minow. It is under review now, Senator.

Senator Monroney. It is ?

Mr. Minow. Yes.

Senator Monroney. May you please expedite it and may you please 

brin g it in 10-point. type, and up-date it for television. This was written for radio, and yet these men now getting $10 million and $20 

million licenses have to go back to 1947.

The report that was made on March 7,1946, is out of print, and even 

the Senate Library doesn’t have it. You can find it if you go to a lot 

of trouble in the Library of Congress.

It certainly should be printed in full as another bluebook so people 

will know their responsibilities, so it will be up-dated and they will 

know what they are.

Mr. Minow. I will do my best.

Senator Yarborough. I would like to have the privilege of associating myself with the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma on this 

last point, and expressing approval of his statement and his request 

to the Commission that this public interest concern be written into 

boldface type and right into the license itself.
24 NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MINOW

The Chairman. Mr. Minow, speaking of expediting eases, this 

committee deals with many of these independent agencies which have 

a perennial and constant, complaint, and it is reflected by the public 

itself coming to us with what I call regulatory lag in commissions, 

regardless of what the decision is going to be.

Sometimes people have a justifiable complaint of the length of time 

it takes these agencies to make a decision. Last year, in Appropria ­

tions, I think we arrived at a mean average of time to disprove of contested case in many of these agencies and it averaged 16 months, and 

some of them 2 years, 21

/

2? or 3 years.

Every nominee we have had up here always said, “We are going 

down there with a firm resolve to bring this regulatory lag into shape 

and to expedite the administration of the agency.” They get down 

there and it seems like nothing really happens, although there has 

been some general improvement in the past 8 or 10 months. Some 

of this is due to the law its elf ; I must agree. A lot of it is due to 

agency regulations which they weave around themselves as a web and 

then they can’t get out of it themselves.

This committee long ago adopted a policy tha t in order to be as 

helpful as w’e could in attem pting to correct this situation tha t we 

would ask all of the members of these independent agencies, under 

the jurisdiction of this committee, if they see some place where the 

law needs to be changed in order to—not as to policy—expedite these 

cases and these problems tha t you have before them—would they 

please submit such recommendations to us, and we will give it sympathetic consideration.

Of course, that job falls mainly on the Chairmen of these Commissions. I would just assume, from talking to you, that you would do 

that. I think tha t in the FCC, the law itself, there are many technical, minor amendments that could be made tha t would lend a climate so that you would be able to expedite a case.

Senator P astore. Would the S enator yield ?

The Chairman. Yes.

Senator P astore. There hasn’t been one recommendation or suggestion made by the FCC, made to your subcommittee, so long as I 

have been connected with this whole committee, th at hasn’t been recognized, expedited, and brought to fruition.

We have assisted in every way we could, where we have been asked 

to, in streamlining the law in such a w’ay tha t administration can lie 

done for the benefit of the public.

Mr. Minow. I am aware of tha t, Senator. I know that in 1960, 

very recently, there have been a number of changes which I think will 

be very helpful. You will certainly hear from me if I have some 

suggestions.

The Chairman. We can be helpful in tha t particular case. The 

regulations of the Commission themselves I need not go into. They 

are bulky. There has been a lot of criticism made of them. This 

committee has a running criticism of that, and of all agencies, not 

only the FCC.

We are hopeful that we can do something about this.

One more thing, you not only will be concerned with programing 

down there, but you will be concerned with advertising, tha t is the 

type of advertising. There is a little duplication in this particular
NOMINATION OF NEWTON N. MIN OW 25

field with the Federal Trade Commission and the FCC. I am hope­ ful t hat you will see, as Chairman, that there is a real liaison between the two agencies on the question of misleading or false advertising. The Federal Trade Commission—I see this morning the President has appointed a new Chairman. I must say in all fairness tha t Mr. Kin tner was doing a good job on this. But there was a change of administration, and I am sure tha t the new Chairman feels the same way as he did. I am hopeful tha t the Federal Communications Com­ mission and the Federal Trade Commission will see to i t tha t in this field of misleading and false advertising, that you have complete cooperation. It is a continuing 24-hour-a-day job. It just goes on 

all the time.

Mr. Minow. I will do that, Senator. Fo r the record, the re is one thin g I would like to say and tha t is tha t the FCC, and particu larly Chairman Ford, have welcomed me with a very fine spirit and w ith open arms. I have found nothing there but the most congenial cooperation. I want this committee to know that. I have been received in tha t spirit and I think we will work 

together very well.

The Chairman. The FCC in particular will be faced not with the 

type of advertising or the type of programing, but the amount of advertising. Tha t is a matter, of course, tha t you will have to look 

at carefully and make a determination on.

Mr. Minow. Right.

The Chairman. The Senator from Oregon asked me to ask you one 

or two questions raised on another subject. Senator Morse asked this committee to inform you tha t he has received complaints concerning possible harmful interference in the operation of the frequencies assigned to the forestry conservation radio service, and he asked this question: Are you aware of the importance of the forestry conservation radio service in the fields of forest fire preven­ tion and control, flood control, and in carrying out the functions of forestry, fish, and game protection and other conservation activities?

Mr. Minow. I am, Senator. It seems to me th at those uses, because 

they are safety uses, should be entitled to some priority. I am not 

fam iliar with the exact natu re of the complaint.

The Chairman. I thin k wha t the Senator from Oregon means is 

tha t this is a field in which we must keep th is service operating, and where there is unreasonable interference it is something which the FCC ought to pay p articu lar attention to, to help work it out, because 

it is needed.

Mr. Minow. I certainly will.

The Chairman. That is all th at he has.

Are there any further questions?

(No response.)

The Chairman. If not, th e committee will go into executive session.

Thank you very much. (Thereupon, at 11:46 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned to the 

consideration of other business.)

o
£ult o i I anil if ( ' .. ' : . •

f1