Public Television Hearings; Senate Hearings

Fan eighty nine point seven mega cycles Boston from the United States Senate Office Building in Washington D.C. You're listening to the only live coverage of Senate hearings on the proposed public television Act of 1967. This is Bill Greenwood public affairs director for the national educational radio network. I'll be describing the proceedings as the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on communications continues its scheduled eight days of hearings hearings that will be called water again in a few minutes by subcommittee chairman Senator John Opana story Democrat of Rhode Island. This special coverage is being produced by W am UFO American University Radio in Washington D.C. and the Public Affairs Bureau of the national educational radio network. These hearings are also being heard live by members stations of the Eastern educational radio network in addition to w a MUFON them here in Washington.

These outlets include w h y o film Philadelphia WRVO our own film New York City WGBH FM Boston WFC are FM AM Hurst Massachusetts and WAMC in Albany New York. Our technical director is Mr. Mike keris. AM You FM. The Senate hearings are scheduled to run four days this week. This is the second day of the hearings and they will conclude on Friday. There will then be a one week recess after which the hearings will resume Tuesday April 25th. That second series of hearings will also run for a period of four days during which time this live coverage will also be provided this extraordinary coverage of a congressional committee proceeding has been demanded by the very nature of the legislation being considered legislation which could literally change the course of educational broadcasting in the United States especially educational radio broadcasting being considered as Senate bill number 11 60 introduced in the Senate by Senator Warren Magnuson chairman of the full

Senate Commerce Committee. It's called the Public Television Act of 1967. It's a highly complex document but vital at this point in time for a meeting that we outline the basics of it so you can understand the importance of these hearings. The bill is a three part document which would amend the original Communications Act of 1934 in several ways. Title 1 of the bill would first extend and improve provisions of federal grants for the construction of educational television facilities. Second that part of the bill would add a new category for federal funding for the first time federal funds would be made available for the construction of noncommercial radio broadcasting facilities. The bill would authorize a congressional appropriation of ten point five million dollars for this construction during the 1968 fiscal year. It would also pave the way for additional federal funds during a four year period. Basically that is the way the first title of Title One of the bill would affect educational

broadcasters. Title 2 of the proposal would authorize the establishment of a nonprofit corporation to help develop public radio and television broadcasting and to protect public radio and television broadcasting from extraneous interference and control. Today is witnesses will center their testimony generally on that public cooperation which was suggested by the Carnegie Commission on educational television. And it is Dr. James R. Killian Jr. chairman of the Carnegie Commission who will be today's leadoff witness. Appearing with him will be members of the commission misses Oviedo call possibly the first secretary of Health Education and Welfare and former treasurer of the United States. Also appearing Edward H will land president of the Polaroid Corp. Leonard Wood vice president of the United Auto Workers of America. Then today probably this afternoon will appear representatives from the Ford Foundation. These include Foundation president McGeorge Bundy and former

CBS president. Now Ford Foundation advisor Fred Friendly all of these witnesses are now in this crowded hearing room like yesterday overflowing standing room only. Another witness scheduled this afternoon will be the president of the Eastern educational network John cure moire. Members of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on communications whose responsibility it is to investigate and hear this testimony are Democrats. Chairman John O pastoring of Rhode Island. Mike when Ronnie of Oklahoma Vance hardcopy of Indiana Phillippe a heart of Michigan Russell Long of Louisiana Frank Moss of Utah Republicans serving on the subcommittee are senators he was Scott of Pennsylvania James B. Pearson of Kansas and Robert Griffin of Michigan. Attendance was disappointingly small for yesterday's opening hearings of this scheduled eight day session. Only four members of the subcommittee appear they were Pastore a Hartke Moss

and Scott members of the subcommittee are now coming into the room Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts who was a member of the full Commerce Committee is going to sit in on the proceedings apparently Senator Kennedy was first to enter the room. SENATOR PASTORE A is now walking up to his place in the center of the oval table which faces the front of the room. An example of the counsel the attorney for the committee is now discussing various aspects of the hearing with advisors. SENATOR PASTORE A is being joined at the Stand by Senator Cotton another member of the committee. Staff aides are lining the wall and the hearing is in order. We switched to the rostrum. If there is anyone in this room who is at Penn expecting to attend the merchant marine subcommittee hearing that a hearing is being held in Rome

12 0 2 0 of this building I noticed yesterday and I'm directing myself to the staff now that we had a number of people who were compelled to stand to kill only women I was one and if we can make some arrangements. Yes yes. How this hearing will now come to water our first witness today is Dr. James Arcadian of MIT and he will be introduced to this committee by a very distinguished colleague the honorable Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. Chana recognizes. Mr. Kennedy thank you very much Mr. Chairman and the members of the committee I'm

deid on it to have the opportunity to present Dr. Edward Land and Mr. James R. Kilian to you and to the members of this committee Commonwealth of Massachusetts has many illustrious citizens but there is little question that Dr. LAN and Mr. Killian are two of the most distinguished they represent a high tradition in the Commonwealth a tradition of men who hope positions of great responsibility in the Commonwealth and yet find time to further serve the nation in high councils of government and commission such as the Carnegie Commission on educational television and in many other ways is to Kilian chairman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has also been chairman of the Carnegie Commission on educational television. The chairman of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board for one thousand sixty one thousand sixty three. Chairman of the President's Science Advisory Board for one thousand fifty seven thousand nine hundred fifty nine. This doesn't merely exhaust the list of his positions but it does show the very broad range of mystic aliens contributions to the nation.

And in addition to his public service he is a member of the board of directors of a number of the largest corporations in the United States among them General Motors Corp. in the American Telephone Telegraph Company. Dr. Land chairman of the board of the Polaroid corporation served as a member of the Carnegie Commission on educational television like Mr. Killian is also given his time his energy in the service of the nation. He is a member of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and through his research in the field of optics has been vital in the development of range finders and guided missiles and such varied items as the Infinity optical ring size and of course the his genius gave us a Polaroid camera. It was my privilege to host a luncheon in the capital last month of which Mr. Killian discussed both the recommendations of the Carnegie Commission and other related matters not included in the commission's report. All of us at the luncheon were very impressed with what Mr. Killian had to say. I was particularly struck by the Commission's finding that the average American spends three hours a day

watching television. This presents us as Mr. Killian said with an obligation to offer an alternative to present programming. Another subject touched upon at the luncheon was the educational radio you portions of which has been obscured by the intensity of the concern generated for Educational Television. I'm sure that the members of this committee will give educational radio equal concern with television. Chairman thank you for giving me the opportunity to introduce Mr. Killian Dr. Healy and Dr. Land giving and forgiving Americans everywhere the opportunity to hear them. We thank you Senator and after that beautiful sendoff if you're not good today Dr. Robinson fries man. I don't recognize you as a prize where I have a telegram here from one of your colleagues said directed to Senator Everett Jordan and I should like to read it at this time I would be grateful if you would advise said of the past story and Mr. James Killian and I am caught

up in a schedule which leaves me no way to get to Washington. It is therefore impossible for me to attend the hearing today before the subcommittee on communications. I regret that I cannot be there for the purpose of giving support to the suggestions of Vista Kilian and the other members of the commission. I settle Ian Dawson everything in the statement to the committee. In my own efforts to expand the usefulness of educational television in North Carolina I have long been convinced that the development of the media was a proper and necessary function of government. There is no other way that we can provide for diversity and diversity with many minds at work will be our path to quality and excellence. Television has become too much an influential part of the lives of Americans for us to disregard the quality and scope of what we show the printed word has been used in many forms of excellence in books magazines and newspaper cover every conceivable subject.

There is something for every interest. The depths of our problems and opportunities in and out of government are currently probed and the extensive utilization of the printed word has been a tremendous and beneficial advantage to American life. Television is more is even more dramatic and perhaps will be more influential on the people of the communities and the nation. However it cannot extend and achieve wide scope and high excellence as the printed. Word has done unless the public provides the facilities in the first place. Television production is more expensive than publishing and printing printing presses are cheaper and society can have. All anyone can pay for television channels are limited by natural laws and allocated by enact national laws. Only the fullest possible availability of television facilities for both transmission and production will serve the purposes of the nation. And this can be accomplished only by public action through the government. I

hope the public television corporation can be established. While I have some reservations resent relating to the method of appointment feeling that the board appointment should be shielded from any remote suggestion of possible governmental influence Nevertheless I am convinced that we must have the cooperation if we expect to provide the potential television development and this is sent to Senator Jordan by Mr William M. Cochrane. Now we have another. This was sent to us by Kerry sent but All right thank you very very much. All right now Doctor you may proceed in any fashion you like and you may call upon your colleagues in any way you like at any juncture of your testimony. After all we're trying to develop the facts of the trial. Thank you very much in the past already done one of the committee.

I want first to point out that they are all the very distinguished members of our committee who are here today and just waiting and those I would like to present president to bread's president of the California Institute of Technology. Would you put the microphone closer to you also know everyone in the room can heal fine can you hear now. All right he'll. I'm Mr. Leonard Woodcock who was now you want in this room here the doctor. I'll let you put it closer to your mind can you hear now. Can you hear now you know we can do everything on communication but improve our own system. Can you can you hear now. Oh yes we can. All right. I would also like to present all the members of the commission Dr. Lee Ada braids the president of the California Institute of Technology is here and Mr. Leonard Wood cock vice president of the Automobile Workers Union is here. I would also like to introduce Mr. Ernest Wu NASS who was legal counsel to the

commission and this is down here. And Dr. Hyman h Goldman who was the executive secretary. The full membership of the commission and it's listed in the attachment to the station which will be the statement which will be filed. We very much welcome the opportunity to respond to your invitation to discuss the commission's recommendations and their relation to us. 11:16. We are gratified that the president adopted a number of the commission's basic proposals which have been incorporated in s.a love in six days. The public television Act of 1970. It is altogether appropriate that this historic bill should have been introduced by Senator Magnussen who was apparently or a sponsor of the educational television for solid design. It is also highly fitting that these hearings should be conducted by the subcommittee what son of a past or a child because of his on the sub

committee is blown constructive leadership in the complex field of national communications policy questions of immense memory to the future of television in this country have now been pulled and it is fortunate that there are legislative consideration has begun here. Let me say at this point that we appear here to support the bill that has been introduced S11 succeed in doing so however we would like to tell you something of the work of a commission on educational television. Commission was established in November 1965 as a private body sponsored and financed by the committee called Operation of New York. When we began our work we had no preconceived ideas as to what kind of educational television service would best serve the American people. We started from scratch. We undertook our study not as advocates representing any special interest but our citizens invited to study educational television objectively.

We deemed it our charge to look at the future of educational television in the context of what would best serve the public interest. I have hear of the body M that contains our report and if I may I would like Mr. Chairman to make the first night in 9 pages of this report. A part of the record since it is in those pages that our principal recommendations and conclusions appear rather than to do that would be satisfactory to the members of your commission if we made it a part of the record by reference. Yes. Defn sparing the taxpayers the expense of our rewriting everything that's in that book. Thank you. Question of legality came up here yesterday. We heartily agree. I don't want to be when the other is out of the Coens. There are two parts to educational television one part

instructional television is directed at students in the classroom or otherwise in the general context of formal instruction. The second part to which the commission devoted its major attention is directed at the general community to differentiate this part a part of educational television but on the other they can make a commission. Cohen The term public television public television's purpose is to meet the diversified needs and desires of the American people in all walks of life who seek a wider choice of television fire in the setting of the home. In the course of our study we were in direct touch with all one hundred and twenty four educational television stations. Then an operation and 92 stations were actually visited. The single theme in the detail reports we receive that most impressed us was thought of opportunity on real life. From station to station

the amount rises so much that needs doing so let all the resources with which to operate. And yet so receptive the audience that is now reaches the late managers with an educational television. All very great. The men and women who have committed their careers to educational television and whose rewards have never been commensurate with their efforts have lost none of their devotion and how manage to maintain their enthusiasm. We have a role structure the build upon here. The audience for particular programs is useless small yet significantly the composition of the total educational television audience is broad. It is not limited to an intellectual or a cultural elite. The members of the audience have anything in common. It is that they are a hungry audience looking to educational television for something they do not find in their everyday

lives. For many it is also something that they cannot afford unless it comes to them free on educational television. As we pursued our study all that came before us all the people who appeared to testified led us to the conviction that the American people have a great instrument within their grasp which they can turn to great purposes through the diversified uses of educational television. Americans as we view it can come to know themselves their communities and their world in richer ways. They can gain a fuller awareness of the wonder and the variety of the arts the sciences scholarship craftsmanship and of the many roles along which the product a man's mind a man's hands can be and count properly financed and organized. The TV could enlist creative talent that has never found its way to television. There are performers of high professional skill who do not seek I would not necessarily meet the

taste of a mass audience but who could bring enjoyment and entertainment to thousands of people. There is a whole living meaningful world of civic affairs at the local level. The city is have long since become a hundred fold too large for town meetings. But part of what the town meeting accomplished is certainly within the reach of educational television. This is all the more important and an air of when cities are confronted with an unending series of new problems. As I hardly need to emphasize that demand the involvement of an informed public. There is also the urgent need to provide television service that would be responsive to the authentic needs and desires of our young people. One of the distinguished citizens we consulted made the observation that American parents today are in trouble and he inferred that one of the great opportunities for public television will be to provide

programs that would be authentically important and exciting and meaningful to the children and to the youth of our nation. In the opinion of the commission what confronts our society is the obligation to bring television into full service so all of its power to move image and sound is consistently coupled with the power to move mind and spirit. Television we feel CNN able us not only to see and hear more vividly but to understand more deeply. As we concluded our study we formulated a dozen recommendations which are listed in abbreviated form on the chart which we have put up here and I will use up as a background for the discussion as I perceive these recommendations provide the building blocks for the public television system proposed by the commission. The system we want emphasizes not the educational television system we now have.

It is not patterned after our commercial system or the British system. It is not a BBC. It is not patterned after the Japanese system or any other existing system. We have attempted to design something that corresponds to our American traditions an American goal that can co-exist amicably with commercial television. We feel a lot to be of vital importance and not together with commercial television can meet the highest needs of our society. As you can see by the commission the new system has these characteristics. It has to be constructed on the farm foundation of a strong and energetic system of local stations. The heart of this system is to be in the community initiative Well either the overwhelming proportion of programmes will be produced and the station scheduling will be determined by the local station and stuff local skills and crafts will be utilized on local talent. Town

public television is to be divided with such abundant programming as to offer for each local station both diversity and choice. Enough of this programming will come from major national productions on Earth from stations in the great metropolitan areas to assure that localism within the system will not become parochialism. Like a good metropolitan newspaper a local station in the system will reflect the entire nation and the world while maintaining a firm grasp upon the nature and the needs of the local people itself. Local stations must be the bedrock upon which public television is directed. But the commission saw an overwhelming need for a national institution which could provide high quality programming and leadership and strength of public television as a whole while leaving to the local station autonomy with respect to its own operations with ample recommended that the Congress establish a nonprofit non-governmental corporation to be known as a

corporation for public television. It should be authorized to receive federal funds but it should be insulated to the maximum degree from the budgetary and annual appropriation procedures it should provide grants and enter into contracts for programs. But should not itself engage in program production. It should serve the stations but not control the stations and above all the corporation should be led by men and women of varied background and of acumen and achievement and a sense of public responsibility. The commission considered the creation of the corporation fundamental to its proposals. And what I've been most reluctant to recommend the other parts of its plan unless the corporate entity got brought into being. And I know that I will explain later. The corporation should receive federal funds as we recommended also how or at this that at the start the coporation should have an endowment from

private sources of 20 at least 25 million dollars and we contemplated that it should solicit and receive year in and year out additional funds from foundations individuals and corporations. We attach great importance to the flow of private funds into this corporation. What other prospects of that from your experience. I believe that the prospects are excellent that this would command support from a wide variety of sources of private funds and I think we have already seen some indications of this and there have been hints of other moves to provide contributions toward the endowment of this corporate entity. So I'm very optimistic about the possibility of a private function. They have an ability of such funds would help the corporation maintain its private status although it would require that we must part out large federal funds to support an effective system of public television.

In the end I'm not talking about the first year. Now the cost of the system such as the capital and basic operating cost of the local stations would support the substructures for both public and instructional television may ultimately bring the total annual cost to approximately two hundred and seventy million dollars a year. These for all the cost and the amount of one hundred seven million dollars to be met by state and local governments by the federal government acting through the Department of Health Education and Welfare and by foundations and other private sources. The public television system we envisage would bring in to being a stimulus to art and technology from which the rewards are incalculable. Throughout the United States television stations would operate with funds commensurate with their needs and would be receptive to the writer the producer the director the performer the artist who believes he has something to contribute to the culture all the entertainment and we would stress the quality of excitement that could be brought into this medium.

There would be room for the young man and woman in a developing stage for the experiment of the descent or the visionary the innovator would be able to try his art with being without being subject to the tyranny of the right support services for which until now there has been no place would be organized and provided and the connection would be for the first time available to enable public television to bring to all the people of the United States those events of great national importance or interest which now go on reporting it until they have passed. I would also be the less obvious services the training programs the provision of archives the development of new technology which until now have not existed at all or have been supported only by they promise immediate commercial advantage. It would be in some from our view an enterprise from which all Americans could take part.

The proposal of the Carnegie Commission it should be stressed agree is in important respects with other proposals which have been made recently. For example the proposal of the Ford Foundation they can make a commission under Ford Foundation to quote a statement that the foundation itself made recently are united in their view that Educational Television has unlimited potential to deepen the awareness and understanding of the American people and to raise the quality of American life that their prime source of the required funds must be the federal government that new institutions must be created to direct and manage this developing reforms including a nonprofit corporation to receive and disburse Fox and that such institutions must be independent of the normal processes of repeated review authorization appropriation and other aspects of control by the executive of the Congress. The Ford Foundation proposal however as we understand it goes beyond a domain started but they

can make a commission and raises broader issues of national policy concerning national satellite communication organization and operation. We did not study this particular restaurant. Now have we any recommendations to make with respect to the organization of our domestic satellite system. We did feel that we would hope that this issue and not necessarily get in the way of making decisions with respect to public television that the issue does not have to be resolved before a program to strengthen on commercial television is undertaken. Moreover it is uncertain whether the Ford proposal could ever provide enough funds for the corporation. We concluded that the most urgent problem before us was to begin to build without delay. A strong system of public television. Whatever decisions might ultimately be made about domestic satellite communication public television can Flora's with any one of the proposed

satellite systems in addition to the above variations in the two proposals. They cannot get commission advocated the use of any connection facilities primarily to distribute programmes to the stations whereas the Ford proposal places stress on live networking. We of course anticipated that. However communication satellite technology is managed in the end that it will provide cheaper and more copious on a connection for public television. In fact we recommended free satellite and a connection for public television. While the commission devoted its major attention to public television it believes strongly on the importance of seeking to achieve the full potential of instructional television. We felt certain that by strengthening local stations and by building a strong system of public television we would be laying the foundation for improved instructional television. The educators what possessed for the first time

powerful instruments and strong well supported well equipped stations from which to launch new and greater efforts in formal and informal education stations styles familiar at new levels with the introduces a program conduction can turn their new skills to the service of instruction. Universities in concert with the large stations are with the National productions on earth would be able to embark upon the profound study which in our judgment is required before television can be fully comprehended as a tool of education and would be able to proceed to the creation of pilot programs which absorb the best uses of television into the full variety of educational too. If anyone has doubts about the potential of instructional television or public television for that matter let him look at what Japan has accomplished. By all measure much Japan has the outstanding educational television system in the world today and there are competent observers who believe that the system has had an

important role in the impressive progress and particularly in the educational achievements of Japan in recent years. Let me now turn to certain of the specific provisions of S11 60 and comment on several of the major policy aspects of the proposed legislation. They can i get commission made three basic determinations as to the financing of the cooperation that it would require a substantial annual songs sums if it were to support public programming and to discharge its other responsibilities that sums up the required magnitude could be supplied only in part from private and state and local governmental sources and therefore federal funds must be provided. And finally that the federal funds must flow to the corporation in such a manner as to insulate the programming activities of the corporation from the government S11 60 provides for that kind of insulation and

protection. Simply stated the critical question is how can we develop a free innovative creative public television service which at the same time will be dependent in substantial measure on federal funds ultimately depend on two basic principles of a democratic society involved in the solution of this problem. The tradition of control by Congress of federal expenditures and the tradition of fostering the expression of ideas and communication of information free from government control or oversight commission was sensitive to both these principles and sought a means of reconciling them. We believe that our proposal is a practical and reasonable approach. Fundamental to it as a premise that the corporation shall be established to carry out the policy as defined by Congress as being in the broad public interest. But the corporation sort itself not be an agency or establishment of the government. The second underlying principle is that the federal money should come through a trust fund which

would be established by an act of Congress and would not require annual appropriations. I must point out however that the Congress would still retain its ultimate power since it could repeal the source of the funds of the corporation more to embark upon a course that Congress regarded as fundamentally inconsistent with the public interest. These two principles taken together would go as far as practical in protecting public television program from the dangers of governmental interference while maintaining congressional control over federal funds. We accordingly recommended that federal funds be provided the corporation through revenue is from a manufacturer's excise tax on television sets the proceeds would begin at 40 million dollars a year and rise at times in time to one hundred million dollars a year and were received by the Treasury. As we have said and held in a trust fund the tax at the outset would be at the rate of 2 percent and would rise in time to a ceiling of

5 percent just half the tax that was imposed on television a few years ago. This mechanism would permit federal funds to flow to public television outside of the ordinary budgeting and appropriations procedure. And this was of a particular reason that we were attracted to the excise Tapia line if I interrupt you at this point what have you to say to the assertion that this would be a discriminatory tax. We feel that the taxes so low that amounting only to a few cents a week on a off color television so that it could hardly be described as regressive. But we also feel that television public television develops as it serves the whole American family the parents the children as it serves the community. The uses of public television would be so wide throughout the whole American

community that it could in no sense be considered discriminatory. In other words what you're actually saying is that it's effect will touch someone in any family at some time we feel certain that it was. Yes they are all members of the family from one time or another. What does benefit from this medium. So on balance it seemed to us that and now I'm talking about the future not about the immediate is right in the U.S. Open I realize that that it was the best method of financing the corporation in terms of its Clark to stability ease of administration public acceptability and its equitable empire. We recommended the excise tax and trust fund financing as a most suitable fiscal arrangement but it is the principal one we would like to emphasize as of this critical insulation from the annual budgeting and appropriation procedures. If Congress should approve the excise tax but require the annual procedures of review and so on then our plan about a failed excise tax

are no excise die. The funding our prize in s 11:06 state departs from the commission's proposal. But I think wisely and we understand why the Forestier provides for 9 million dollars to be appropriated from general funds for fiscal 68 and such funds as been may be necessary for 69 if the future means of financing the corporation will remain tied however to annual appropriations. It would in our view seriously compromise the independence of the corporation and should be rejected. But now we're talking about what might be happen in the future. We understand how real that annual appropriations are to serve only as the initial method of financing the corporation as stated in the president's message to the Congress next year he will make further proposals for the corporation's long term financing. In the interim we urge that safeguards be added to minimize the effects of appropriations from general funds.

The Corporation for Public Television is designed as we repeat as a non-governmental organization and it should have all of the latitude and freedom that its private status confer and its special functions require this fundamental view of the corporations character should not be compromised at its inception. We strongly urge therefore that it should be exempted from civil service public bidding and geo auditing requirements and that by next year a means of providing the corporation with a trust fund next year be adopted by the Congress. Since the bill provides for the establishment of a non-governmental Corporation which is not an agency or establishment of the United States financing through a trust fund should not present these problems. One more comment on the financing of the cooperation on our commission felt strongly that it should have adequate funds and in our view we estimated what these funds should

be and they are given in our report. I think we must say in all candor that we cannot support this 11:16 with its lesser amounts. If we felt that for the second year and later sums in the ballpark of those we recommended would not be made available from a variety of sources. But don't we understand why it isn't appropriate. I'm important to start with the level of appropriate out of the batter's bank of the nine million dollars was never intended to do much more than to get the show on the rest of us. This is right and this is very important. Let me turn now to the board of directors of this corporation. The bill proposes our 15 proposes a 15 member board all to be appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the summit. They can a commission have proposed a 12 mimes board with six being appointed by the president with a concurrence of the Senate and six by all the members of the board. While the two proposals are

fundamentally not dissimilar the commission and I'm reporting believe that its method of selection is to be preferred as a means of giving the co-operation on a demo day of its own and as widening the process of selection the goal is for the corporation to be led by men and women of achievement and strength. They should be the kind of people who will zealously protect the independence of the corporation and who will ensure all the qualities of leadership and standards of excellence which will be of such importance to public television. If there are better ways of achieving these goals by alternate means of appointing the directors of the corporation different from those contained either on the bill or in the commission's report then by all means let them become sort of it as a principle rather than the technique that is critical. Well do you see any fundamental danger in the deviation that has been made with reference to the equipment of the thought of direct is the recommendation made by the

president as against the regulation made that a kind of commission. I have stated they are particular view of the Carnegie Commission. What I would add to this my own personal view as I said at a recent meeting here in Washington that I find no intellectual difficulty in accepting the president's role because we are in this film that the president of the United States and of the Carnegie suggestion. What a point. Six men and men of quality who would in turn appoint six other members of quality. Then why can't we assume that the president could appoint all 12 men of quality. We are all out on a presidential appointment process as one of the most important ways of achieving quality on this board. I mean in other words was your suggestion more to reach the psychological power suggest and wanted to spread the opportunity or to increase the selection and meet the kinds of criticism I might be concerned without and undo some troll ization on the political

appointment. Fundamentally my own view is and I speak only for myself that I don't see any harm in either Matthew. Does any one of my colleagues doctored the bridge would you want to offer to comment on this. It was Dr. Killen said we considered a lot of different members of selecting methods of selecting members of this board. We felt that one we suggested was preferable because it does spread the base and gives an opportunity for private citizens to be elected by those appointed by the president. There are those who fear that a presidential aide appointed board would be too subject to the will of the executive branch of the government. I don't feel that there is a serious danger and I at but I have I do feel that an order to assure the public that this is to be an independent corporation because half of the members were self-selected this would be better. There's always a sense of prestige I would think in getting this it to pick it's signed by the president of the United States

boastful of the fact that only positions of great prestige come before the Senate for confirmation and that you may be giving away more in your suggestion that you're actually Rick acquiring. I know a lot of people who just love to go to the White House and stand before the president and raise their hand and be sworn into a responsible position. I know that we have some dissidence to society but I think most people love that. It's a very very wonderful thing to have that point out one other thing in this regard to that we attach great importance to a Senate confirmation of the people appointed to this board and we would we would anticipate that given the particular danger of this cooperation it's sensitive a day of tunnelling of our freedom of the press freedom of communications that the Senate would attach great importance and be very discriminating in its judgment of the people who would be selected for the board. And as one

person remarked in one of the discussions on how can you have perhaps a better selection in our society than the president making careful selections in the Senate reviewing them with care. Dr. I was only pulling your leg a little. But anyway you have buy you have both proposals before you and we wanted to state the Commission's position today. The commission recommended that the corporation provide educational television as expeditiously as possible with facilities for live in a connection as a most economical and desirable means of programme distribution. Initially these facilities would consist of the conventional radio relay and actual cable facilities now available. Subsequently the commission anticipated the use of domestic satellite satellite in a connection and it recommended that the corporation should not itself seek to construct such facilities but to rent them and urged either free or

reduced rates while the runnel all the necessary facilities. S11 60 differs from the commission's recommendations on a connection in one respect. It limits a corporation to assisting others and providing a connection. Specifically Section 3 96 sub paragraph he authorizes the corporation to arrange for any connection facilities with appropriate public on non-pro private agencies. The corporation is not authorized to deal directly with common carriers who would normally provide the facilities. Instead it would be limited to providing contracts or grants to an intermediary organization that went on to take the on a connection and you would prefer to have a direct yes. We firmly believe that the corporation itself should have direct responsibility here. I would hope that Dr Costard would take note of this statement. There is an important principle involved from our point of view. The commission viewed on a connection

primarily as a means of programme distribution and not as a means of just establishing a fixed schedule network kind of operation. This is a very important innovation in our approach to educational broadcasting in this country. We sought to foster local autonomy rather than the establishment of a powerful central lies network agency. We would do it in a connection to bring to each local station all of virtually all programs designed for more than local us which of finance with the cooperation we would expect that there would be an abundance of programs available to the stations through in a connection it would be the responsibility of each station to decide which programs coming over the lines are suitable and desirable to broadcast to in its community. Normal of the programmes would be transmitted over the interconnection facilities during the morning and afternoon and early evening. And each station would be required to make its own decisions as to which programmes at

which to record on videotape for broadcast on the station's facilities. The station decided not to carry a programme sent over the unit connection. I would be there that would be the responsibility of the station and the corporation clearly would be exceeding its authority if it sought to control the station's program schedule. The coporation were provide each station with descriptive material regarding each program. This would be designed only to assist the local station manager in his decision as to whether it would be worthwhile to record the program for later broadcast. The underlying principle of the corporation's control of on a connection is to send the greatest abundance of programs to each station rather than to select some programmes for on the connection and exclude others. Normally the contracts for programme production made by the corporation with the production centers of the stations would provide that the program's finance but the corporation would go over the interconnection lines. Basically the stations by their individual

decisions as to whether they would broadcast the programmes I would not would determine the success or failure of the programmes that had been produced. This of course is not the whole story. There would be some programmes carried over the on a connection during evening hours either on a regular basis on special occasions which would normally be intended for simultaneous broadcast but even here each station should have the right and obligation to determine for itself whether it would broadcast the programme as it came over the line or delay it or not carry the programme at all. So important do we believe is the desirability of using the n r connection facilities principally as a method of program distribution rather than of central networking that we feel that control of the ANA connection must be with the cooperation. If a national program production center for example were to have the responsibility for in a connection then we would have the programme production tied with distribution. And this

makes the other goal elements of a networking system which we would avoid. This authority would almost inevitably tend to develop a programme schedule to transmit to the affiliated stations and this schedule would be based on the programmes produced by that production center are obtained by the production side or approved by it. You see if I may interrupt you doctor at this point do you see any element of reprisal. By the cooperation against a local station if it refused. I see no argument whatsoever. Is there anything in the bill that would even create such as his speech I do not see any such element in the bill in other words the choice is exclusively of the local stage of the bell over the cost of the India connection if they still decide to accept it would be paid by the corporation. The cost of the connection would be a problem provided by the corporation. So I think that local station alerts to the heart of the system would be independent and free and would be under no substantial pressure of any kind in the

determination of what its problem should be. In other words a local station will not be asked as affiliates not to day that you must commit yourself as to time and as to circumstance and in the beginning of an overall program to last lets say a set number of months or a year or a cell. The choice will be per item per item. As you envision this way you certainly don't. Do you want to comment on this most of what culture and this is all very important. Thank you. This is one of the two or three elements that I saw Mr. Chairman as being central to the whole proposition there are obviously some elements that are not necessarily central this one I think is because the great opportunity as I as one individual sought for public television is to exploit the tremendous diversity to that is America. And if you have it centralized through a networking system that pumps out programs where simply making

something else which deadens that diversity the control has to be in the local station here. At the same time it can't simply be an affiliation of local stations because with the tremendous costs of the television technology there has to be programming done at central places where the those costs can properly be met. But the control and this of course can be negative as well as affirmative we recognize that because that's one of the elements to a diversity. But I see in this particular proposition the one of the heart. Part of the heart and core of the whole proposal. And I might add that this in a connection responsibility vested in the corporation seems to us to support this local responsibility. Let me turn now to another part of the of the Bills section 396 Gees to see which authorizes the corporation to do this to make payments to existing and new noncommercial educational broadcast stations to aid

in financing local educational television or radio programming costs of such stations particularly innovative approaches there to another cost of operation of some states. Here I'm specifically concerned with the last clothes and other cost of operation of such stations. The Canadian commission recommended that the federal government share with the state and local governments and private support sources support of the operating cost of the local stations such operating costs include salary cost as well as light power communications rent insurance FIA's and materials and supplies in general they might be considered to include those kinds of operating costs that relate to the instructional responsibilities of the local stations. The poverty of the present educational television service in this category is extremely damaging. At the present time the lack of adequate operating funds results and shutdown of stations all weekend operation with skeleton crews inability to recruit and

adequate managerial and production and technical personnel absence of experimentation and innovation and above all the inability to serve properly local community need for many managers of educational broadcast stations the daily task is simplicity while their energy is all focused on raising enough funds from contributions and from local government sources to keep their stations alive. Many of the stations are victims of it. This is cycled too often they are merely transmitters liking the resources to provide a service which reflects the life and Ike dividends of the community. And because of this lie the stations make no impression on their public and therefore fail to grow the necessary financial aid. While I cannot always stress the critical need for federal aid to local station operations I would express reservations as to the wisdom of placing this responsibility on the Corporation for Public Television. The commission recommended the set

forward of station operations be provided through the Department of Health Education and Welfare. We did so for several reasons. The sums that are required from federal sources for station operations are substantial. Initially we estimated the use of 30 million dollars annually. Later increasing to 15 million a year and to raise these sums in addition to the other needs of the corporation might require a higher excise tax than we were so this was all a part of our total system. We also believe that the corporation should be limited to public television and should not be involved with instructional television. We wanted no part of some educational instructional activities in this analogy meeting yourself a little bit coming down the hill. I'm sorry IQ meeting yourself a little bit in coming down the hill. I think you start out with very very serious premise that you want freedom. I mean the parents on the part of the government. With reference to

program a very essential part of the life of a station it's operation. Yet you would take this authority away from the corporation which is independent of the government and you would put it in the AGW which is a government agency. Now there couldn't you exercise control or some influence over programming. A We are made the distinction between the programming responsibility where we follow the maximum sensitivity was and clearly that should be handled by the private corporation corporation for BOB Yeah but how are you going to show any kind of a program unless you have the money to operate and if I shut off that's a loss. We we have had of course the educational television facilities II which has been handled by AGW. That's right. But that's has to construction out as how we're talking about operations like yes. Now you are suggesting here that you would prefer to see the operational grants

made through AGW rather than the corporation and I'm just feeling you out on whether or not here we're not bringing back in the government where you have so assiduously try to leave it out in your report. Yes there was another aspect of this that led us to the conclusion that we reached and that is that we wanted to make a distinction between instruction or. Television on public television. And we felt that the corporation should not get involved and instructional television and so much of the operating funds that are involved in the local station will have to do with instructional television. How much emphasis do you put on this position. I simply stated as one of our conclusions I think it is a model that warrants careful consideration as to what is lodged in the recall corporation and what is lodged in AGW in terms of the responsibility for the local station. You're listening to Live coverage of Senate hearings

on the proposed educational television Act of 1967 produced by W am going to have family American University Radio in Washington D.C. New York and the national educational radio. We plan was for station identification. This is the eastern educational radio network. This is WGBH FM eighty nine point seven mega cycles Boston buttons could be provided on a matching basis by AGW then a station could be an operating facility. Then programs that are supported by the corporation are provided by the corporation or the interconnection could then be used and broadcast and the station would have the ability to receive program funds programmes from the corporation and would have the substructure of the infrastructure sort of speak to be able to handle these programs produce them and put them on the air.

So it was our thought that the operating funds provided by AGW would just sort of be the basic cost of utilities and engineers and technicians and that sort of thing and would not support particular programs. All right now let's take it a step further. If for instance eventually if for instance eventually the funding of this whole program is through the excise tax that you have recommended for the call which the Congress lack while the crop forms going to the corporations and the funds going to the corporation. Now what funds will AGW used to sustain their operational costs after the construction under Title 2. I think it was contemplated on our pion that those funds would come by the usual appropriation process. So you bring in the gun the same way going to the same way the pond's made avail another way do you really think they should ban the facility's act by going beyond construction and including therein

as a permanent continuing program. This matter of providing operational money. Well I'm afraid we're mixing the salad up a little too much. What you have. I'm sorry for that one. Oh but I have three answers. One of the things that certainly led us to this separation of funding was the concern that this cooperation not dog growth to beg or not become too central and that we have a distribution of funds the sources of funds distribution of responsibility in this total system of public television. We felt that the corporation should not become too dominant an organization we sought to construct a kind of entity here that would be a leader in educational broadcasting particular in supporting television programming. But that again every local station must

look to the corporation not look to the corporation for its daily requirements. If it had to look to the corporation for its data requirements I fear that this would lead naturally inevitably to unwise unwarranted and unnecessary centralization of educational broadcasting. So this is a part of how we sought to distribute the responsibility to distribute the fun and not create some monolithic entity here that might be too dominant in the system and the guy with Jerry.