Evening star., 1939-07-18
Witness SaysF.
Program Rule Leads 10
Real Radio Freedom
Commission Also Told
Voluntary Restraint Is
The American Way
By WILLIAM ]. WHEATLEY.


Support for its new international
program rule, temporarily sus-
pended. was found by the Federal
Communications Commission yester-
day in the last of the witnesses at
its hearing
The F. C. C. also found solace in
the statement of another witness,
president of an international radio
station, that the letter of Neville
Miller, president of the National AS
sociation Of BroadcaSters, which in
augurated the long controversy lead
ing up to the hearing, was not the
proper procedure. 1t concluded by
listening to long argument by for
mer Representative SWager Sherley
of Kentucky, counsel for the NJ A.
B., in which he characterized the
suspended rule as a violation of
the Bill of Rights. adding that it
was the difference between servitude
and voluntary restraint. The lat
ter, he held, was the American
way - that is, the broadcasterS
should be given a free hand in the
conduct of programs to foreign
countries over the international sta
tlons.
With the end of the hearings the
commission now has the disputed
rule under adviSement. The rule.
which limited international broad
casts to programs rejecting the cul-
ture OF this country and promoting
good will, remains suspended pend
ing consideration Of the testimony.
Professor Testifies.
The commission WAS told by John
G. Scanlon, professor of English at
Boston University, that culture is
not a state. but a process, a con-
stantly changing process. Answering
a question of Commissioner T. A. NJ
Craven. he replied that an Amos
n Andy program reflects the cul-
ture of the United States. mot the
whole story, but an important part
OF the story"
He said news items reflects good
will of the country, even though
they are not at the time accepted as
such in the countries which are
served by the international stations.
Walter S. Lemon, president of the
World Wide Broadcasting Corp,
which plans to develop a world uni
verslty of the air, said he had con-
ferred with Mr.. Miller on the draft
OF letter to the commission op-
posing the new rule. He said the
first letter shown him was char
acterized by the witness as too
harsh. but second draft shown him
was a little better. However, he
did not say which of the two drafts
was finally sent and which caused
such violent reaction within the
commission. He told Mr.. Miller, he
said, that the letter procedure was
not. in his opinion, the proper one
and suggested that the matter
might be adjusted by conference
Cites Litigation Possibility.
S. Howard Evans, representing
the National Committee on Educa-
ton by Radio, said all that could
be accomplished by the hearing is
either to make the commission re-
cede from its position and thus
avoid the issue. or TO set the stage
for litigation which would Clarity
the meaning of the communica-
tlons act. 1t was his contention
that the adoption of the rule by
the commission is step towards
the establishment of greater free
dom in radio.
He said that in promulgating the
rule, the commission is not extend
ing its power, but rather defining a
power already possessed and ex-
tensively used. At present. he said,
the commission reviews the pro-
gram service of international broad
cast stations in passing on their ap-
plicatlonS for renewal of license.
Presumably. he added, the COM
mission could reject an application
because of the unsatisfactory ma
ture of its program service. Such
q deletion Of station has already
occurred in the regular broadcast
band and has been supported by
the courts.
Sees Freedom Assured.
He contended that there is
practicable procedure through which
the commission can begin TO estab-
lish standards for radio programs
and that the development of rules
for that purpose not only falls
short of being a restriction on the
freedom of radio, but actually con-
stitutes one of the best ways to in
sure the freedom of radio in the
face of controls to which it is and
In the very nature of the instru-
ment must continue to be subject.
On the other hand. Mr.. Sherley
told the commission that it had no
power to regulate programs nor can
1t act by any declaration of view
point as it attempted to do at the
beginning of the hearing when it
issued a lengthy statement dis
claiming any intention of censor
ship in the new rule Mr.. Sherley
asserted that the industry must be
bound by the terms and language
Af he pti1a orI MT ~, la,lo -.