Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1925-11-10


| connection between stations was only
occasional and was a great curiosity
| Now 1t is commonplace. 1t is Decom-
| ing more systematized and has gone
| far toward the creation of long linked
! systems which will finally give us uni
versal broadcasting of NATIONWIDE
| Advertising
| Another problem for solution by the
industry itself and which now rests
prominently on the public mind, is
/ that of advertising. There lies within
| it the possibility of grave harm ana
even vital danger to the entire broad
| casting structure. The desire Tor
| publicity Is the basic motive and the
financial support for almost all the
broadcasting in the country today.
| Publicity largely provides the cost
of broadcasting which might other
wise fall upon the listener, who now
pays nothing, much as the advertiser
does in the case of the newspaper or
magazine. Whether an individual ac-
| complishes his purpose through the
building and operating Of his own
station or by hiring time on one al
ready built by somebody else makes
] little difference.
| But the radio listener does not have
the same option that the reader OF
publications has to ignore advertising
in which he is not interested. and he
may resent its invasion of his set. 1t
has been pointed out over and over
again in previous conferences, and it
might well be reiterated by this one,
that advertising in the intrusive
sense will dull the interest of the lis
tener and will thus defeat the indus
try. Furthermore, 1t can bring dis
aster to the very purpose of advertis-
ing if it creates resentment to the ad-
vertiser. If we can distinguish on one
hand between unobtrusive publicity
that is accompanied by direct SER
vice and engaging entertainment to
the listener and unobtrusive advertis-
ing on the other, we may find solu-
ton. believe the conference could
well consider definition of this dis
tinction all along the line.
Another problem that the industry
could quite well stimulate is the re-
Air Overcrowded
My major purpose today Is to dis
cuss these problems which must be
solved in cooperation with the gov
eminent.
Up to the present time, we have
untrammelled operation, a field open
to all who wished to broadcast for
whatever purpose desired. I am con-
WINGED that policy was sound. 1t re-
suited in a wonderfully extensive de-
veiopment which could have been OBJ
tanned In no other way. We have to-
day 578 stations, and as no more than
four Of them are under the same
management, no one can say there is
not plenty of competition. Today
. every solitary channel in the ether is
; occupied by at least one broadcasting
station and many of them by several.
!. OF the 578 stations, 1877 are using at
least 500 watts of power. and there
are now pending before the Depart
ment of Commerce over 175 applica-
lions for new licenses.
; Higher power has greatly strength
ened the service to listeners, but it
has aggravated the problem of pro-
viding lanes through the traffic, for
geographical separation must be
; greater. Heretofore, 1t has been pos
fsible to duplicate channels geogra-
phically to large extent among
those using 500 watts, but with the
increase of power, this system be-
comes more and more difficult, for the
borderland of interference is wider
spread. We must face the actualities
frankly. We can no longer deal on
everybody on the radio highways.
There are more vehicles on the roads
than can get by. and If they continue
to jam in, all will be stopped.
1t is simple physical fact that we
have no more channels. 1t is not pos
sible to furnish them under the pres
ent state of technical development. 1t
takes no argument to demonstrate
that SO wave lengths. (and no more
are available), cannot be made to
serve innumerable stations, no mat
ter how ingenious we may be in ar
ranging time divisions and geogra-
phical separations. 1t is not ques-
ton of what we would like to do but
what we must do.
One alternative, which would only
partly solve the problem, would be to
, increase the number of stations by
further dividing the time Of the pres
ent stations down to one or two days
week or one or two hours a day.
From the listeners viewpoint. and
that is the only one to be considered,
he would get a much degenerated SER
vice IL we were to do that. 1t is quail
ity of program, location, and efficiency
of transmission that count None of
these will be improved, and in most
cases they will be ruined by introduce
ing more stations to traverse the
same channels. A half dozen good
stations in any community, operating
: full time, will give as much service
In quantity and far better service in
) quality than eighteen, each on one
third time.
AS the art progresses the capital
investment in a good station has ris-
en- to upwards of $150,00 and to pro-
vide technical staff, good talent and
interconnection the cost Of operation
has risen to as much as 100000 per
annum. and frequently even more.
The costs are in large part the same
whether the station works one day in
a week or seven. If we impose more
division of time than at present we
shall drive the best stations out Of
action and the public will be more
poorly served. The choice is between
public interest and private desire, and
we need not hesitate in making a de-
cision. There are of course some
stations of special character which
can divide time, but they do not
often lie in congested territory.
1t has been suggested that the
remedy lies in widening the broad
casting band, thus permitting more
channels and making 1t possible to
provide for more stations. The vast
majority OF receiving sets In the
country will not cover a wider band
Nor could we extend 1t without in
vading the field assigned to the anna
tours, Of whom there are thousands
and to whose constant experimental