Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1949-01-23
House Probers Failed
10 Touch Problem Of
Free Radio, Coy Says
BY the Associated Press

NEW HAVEN, Conn.,, Jan. H.
Wayne Coy, chairman of the Federal
Communications Commission, said
tonight a House committee which
accused the FEC of a thought
policing" policy never came to grips
with a fundamental question of
radio freedom
Mr.. Coy's remarks were contained
in an address at dinner gathering
of editors of the Yale Law Journal
A special House investigating
committee last year made the &C
cuSation against the FEC in con-
,nection with a decision the COM
mission handed down concerning
the right of an atheist to discuss
his beliefs over the air
Although refusing to revoke any
station licenses, the FEC ruled that
a station lis not free to deny a
point of view access to the radio
solely because it is an unpopular
point of view" or because it does
not coincide with the views of the
station operator.
Cites Need of Fairness.
Whether an atheist should be al
lowed to broadcast depends on
whether a public controversy has
been stirred and whether reason
ableness and overall fairness war
rants it, Mr.. Coy said. The decis-
ion is up to the broadcasters. They
have complained this makes them
thought police"
The House committee, headed by
the then Representative Harness,
Republican, of Indiana, in Mr.. Coy's
opinion, never did come to grips
with the fundamental question of
what is the nature of the freedom to
be preserved in radio and who is to
enjoy that freedom
He commented that the House
committee apparently found fault
with the FEC decision in the atheist!
problem, known as the Scott case,
because of their belief that atheism
Is reprehensible subject"
Mr. Coy noted that the committee
in holding hearings on the FEC de-
clslon, allowed three atheists as well
as Catholic, Protestant and Jewish
clerics to testify.
Applicable to Radio.
In acting in this fashion, Coy
said, the committee was evidently
actuated by a feeling that fairness
required this result, whatever the
private views of the members.
But despite their own conduct
motivated by that sense of fairness
they we're unable to perceive that
the commission has said no more
than that the same principle of
fairness must be equally applicable
to the radio if the preservation of
radio as a means of free expression
is to be achieved
The atheist broadcasting case
arose in 1945 on the complaint of
Robert Harold Scott of Palo Alto,
Calf. Mr.. Scott asked for revoca-
ton of several West Coast radio sta
ton licenses because he said they
had refused him time to discuss
atheism in reply to broadcast church
services.
Sees No Danger in Stand.
TT is difficult to imagine" Mr.
Coy contended, that it is danger
Gus and mischievous business for
the FEC to insist that the Ameri-
can people have opportunity to
hear all sides of public questions.
If we say that radio broad
cast licensees may refuse the use
of their facilities for the express
sion of point of view because they
do not share that point of view, we
are, by that token, denying the
right of the American people to be
informed on all sides of public
questions ." He added:
mo amount of dispassionate
analysis, nc number of court deci-
SONS will, l suppose, be sufficient to
put to rest the charges that the
commission. in its insistence on
fairness and the fullest use of radio
for the benefit Of all the people, is
impairing the licensees freedom.
But I, at least, propose to take
every opportunity and make every
effort to curtail the freedom of radio
station licensees to be unfair or to
use their licenses soley for their own
private benefit rather than for the
public interest.
THE curtailment of that freedom
presents no dangers to the preserva-
ton of the freedom of expression
which the Constitution protects and
to the availability of radio as a
medium for that freedom of ex-
preston. for which the communica-
tons act provides"