The First Amendment; Lawrence Bergreen - Look Now, Pay Later

The First Amendment and a free people a weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world. The program has produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University. The host of the program is the institute's director Dr. Bernard Rubin. The American radio and television networks dominate much of our lives. They influence our thoughts they portray life as we try to live it. Indeed they are most persuasive agents of change for better or for worse. We accept it where like so many lemmings we march into the sea with the networks we accept their nightly fare. They tell us that Walter Cronkite is the most trusted man in America. I don't know whether he is or not but we tend to trust him. If he sits alone in the convention booth at the Republican convention we don't even question why they don't give him someone to talk to like a regular human being. Why is Walter Cronkite in

solitary might be a good question. But the rise of the networks in broadcasting is a fascinating subject and I'm lucky enough to have Lawrence Berg rien with me who has just written a fascinating book called Look now pay later. Published by Doubleday and Company in New York 1980. As a matter of fact it's only been out a matter of weeks Lawrenceburg Greene worked in the Museum of Broadcasting in New York City which is headed by Robert so Dick who was originally known for his programs and other things he writes for Newsweek TV Guide and American film publications and in the fall is going to be teaching a course at the new school based upon this book. Lawrence I'd like to ask you a question that perhaps is somewhat rapacious at the start but I'm quite cynical about the influence of the networks for the

public good. It seems to me that they have missed many a chance many a boat in order to achieve looker through popularity. Is that too much cynicism for you at the start. No not at all the more I learned about the way the commercial networks operated the more cynical I became when I started out to write a book about their history. I really didn't have an distinct impression your point of view was as to their contribution or rapaciousness But the more I learned the bleaker the story became And there were so many missed opportunities that after a while I just have to shake your head in. Feel heavy hearted where the old days when Toscanini was so stupendous that they portrayed him on television they provided him with an orchestra or in the earlier days I think one of the networks was that NBC provided Walter Damrosch with a symphony orchestra. And we used to crowd around looking for culture.

What happened to culture the curious thing is the more popular the networks became the more money they made the more they needed to make to stay alive in the competitive atmosphere the competitive pace that they all sat there for those kind of programs which were noncommercial sustaining programs. The cost being sustained by the entire network. After a while they were simply squeezed out of the schedule and David Sarnoff RCAF chief architect who put together the Toscanini the NBC symphony orchestra and Toscanini then disassembled it all in the 50s with the introduction of television and the feeling that the network climate was going to become far more competitive than it had been during the Second World War and before. And in fact before then there were only two networks as your older listeners know and Reza New York operated to a red blue the red was a very commercial network and depended was known largely for the vaudeville train comedians like Jack Benny and.

Bob Hope and so on. The blue was more like a Public Broadcasting Service in the sense that it was more information and culturally oriented and not as commercial although it did carry some commercials. But eventually they were forced by the FCC and 1043 to sell off one of those two networks they sold off the blue the last profitable naturally which became ABC. Well what happened is once the competition then it was doubled by the addition of a of a well by respect 50 percent suddenly all three networks became very commercial and no one could afford the luxury of symphony orchestras and programmes similar to the one that were on Originally the networks proposed to make their money by selling the radio sets themselves. That's right and then they went into the era where they began to sense that advertising and the agencies were the key to their own success. Is this is the fate of the networks so closely tied up

with the advertising agencies now that the networks would tumble rather than disassociate themselves from this system. Absolutely they're hooked on it. It's a complete It's like a drug addiction and it started in the 30s with the collapse in the sales of radios because people couldn't afford to buy them anymore. Therefore the RCA which had begun is PCs networks which had begun as a kind of a publicity device for the sale of RCA radios that that phenomenon ended with the competition afforded by it. CBS which came along just a year later in 1907 after NBC began both networks started selling advertising time is as fast as they possibly could and when everybody else was going broke in the Depression they were making a lot of money selling this intangible thing called air time. And. So that was a terrific success story. Now I'm not going to condescend on this particular program because I think our audience understands that the networks and commercial broadcasting and public broadcasting have done some marvelous

marvelous programs. I remember as a boy I would listen to tell you Kimo sabi I forgot whether it was Tuesday and Thursday nights and so on I don't know about six to six thirty the Lone Ranger and I would listen to yours truly Johnny Dollar with great attention so I didn't have to listen to the NBC symphony orchestra but not condescending. Let's take a look at where the networks are going. Not only have they tied their fortunes to the advertising agency Yeah but the advertising agencies have almost put or installed within the networks these people called the programmers write the Fred Silverman and the gym or Breeze who took over where the general Sonn office and the Paley's left off they ensured success they sold the program. How much of a grip Do they still have the programmers the program. Well they they they run the net they exert a lot of control and the networks the three of them now become very similar to one another they used to be different have different traditions

but now a friend Silberman has worked at all three networks is an example of how interchangeable they've become programmers I think it's their power will only increase as time goes on. But there with the addition of cable television and Home Box Office and all the other pay TV phenomena that he many more programmers and programming source of cable the FCC future is in doubt itself. Right perhaps the most suspected agency in town in Washington. But at any rate and also the weakest. Yes when it comes to minority affairs and public service yes but nevertheless the FCC ruled in the summer of 1980 that cable television stations can bring in as many outside sources as they want right now. This obviously is the greatest threat to the networks that has ever existed. That you are able to bring into your local community no matter how small a problem anywhere Grahams people want to

subscribe to. And yet the first thing that the networks did through their representatives was denounce the decision. Well because it's cutting into their monopoly and they exercise a monopoly over the airwaves and therefore viewers time and all that advertising money ever since the late twenties cable is only cut into an infinitesimal fraction of that until now. But once the cable is free of regulation which the which the commercial networks are not then cable can grow very very rapidly. Ten years ago when cable first began to become popular the networks went around buying cable TV systems like crazy they were snapping them up here in Canada and then they went into the doldrums and then it went to the doldrums and the FCC forced the commercial networks to sell them off and said they were not allowed to own cable systems themselves. And that was a a very important decision of watershed that was not very noticed very much wasn't noticed at the time but as the years go by it becomes more and more important they could have fought back they could have fought back with better programming.

But I have a. Prisoner of their own system like the Chrysler Corporation making cars we were told of the morning show is like the automotive industry. Yes. In other words if you are tied into commerce or the advertising segment I noticed in Life magazine I bought some Life magazine a hold down collection of 937 Life magazine and I was intrigued by the similarity of the ads of 1937 the printed as you see as of today. From I've got a new adventure to tell you about pepcid and to the price in the approach to selling the new last sell which I think was even superior to the latest automobile ads. Is it that they disdain novelty. Is it the fact that when you get into a corporate executive office even if you're in public broadcasting at a certain point you begin to see other things than the public sees. I think in the old days in the 30s the networks were really run by a handful of people by Paley and CBS Sarnoff NBC people who really did make decisions and had personal

tastes which they brought into play but now since programming that works are run more or less by faceless corporate personalities that keep shifting every few years there is a kind of a low consensus of a very low order arrived at for most of the programming and therefore a dissatisfaction there was a a an NBC executive Paul Klein who have an advance what was known as the l o p theory in the 60s the least objectionable program. And he said that people really as I mentioned in the book now pay later people are watching TV just eat up their life. And he was simply attempting to schedule programs in NBC that people would not turn off that were like mine Candy and I would not would not offend them but they wouldn't stimulate them or have a positive with the latest thing is Silva and his competitors and who are his competitors at the moment on the networks. Who are they. Well that's a good question the faces change so quickly it and ABC it would have to be Fred Pearce and it's CBS. Well they just fired back e.

Jan Koski is involved with the program but there is and Daley out in Cali meaning that the names keep changing there really isn't a dominant person there they sit in front of these huge boards ultimately right. And they have to present something to their subscribers the people that own the individual stations on them and you know it lends and program against one another. That's right one gets the impression it's game strategy that the only outlet for used darg Chargers and similar cars is to is to keep the networks alive that as long as they can keep hurtling cars over cliffs or in hillbilly settings one another with rum runners going back and forth. This is pretty desperate programming though isn't it. Well I think it is and occasionally. Something good slips through almost by accident through a fluke. But I must admit that at the moment things seem to be on a downturn there hasn't been much lively programming in my opinion in the last few seasons. At the moment as you're as you're probably aware there's an increase in

informational programming things based in reality but that tends to be very fluffy. And I think networks favor it because it's so cheap to produce much cheaper than entertainment programming to produce. Do you believe that the use of television as a databank for the household really is realistic or is it another one of those scientific Americans from the 1940s that never panned Well I find it hard to believe it will supplant the written word I'm a person who swears by the printed page and. I don't really think you can carry a TV around with you or put it on your bookshelf or its loop. It has uses but but they're very very limited. But the price of onions at the market are what my bank account statement is this morning. I heard somebody the other day who said that we must be quite dubious about this because the average house maker homemaker male or female can do better with a pencil and a piece of paper. Yeah then he can or she can with a computer because there just is no need for that. And yet that's all the talk that we hear we hear about the cube system we hear about talking back to your TVs right.

When it very well may be that attention for the next decade should be on the best programming for television or radio as a spectator. Yes well this is country technology and technology and business and the networks always takes precedence over the programming they're the they're lone low on the list of priorities. When I think about those two way televisions and home TV computer sets and terminal and data banks I asked myself if that really improves the quality of life and I don't in a you know immediate tangible sense and I don't really see that it does. It has a kind of a gimmick value learns Peregrine. Your book look now pay later is a very good history of the industry. But I want to take you off into futuristic. We have been a bit cynical and a bit tart and I think a bit realistic but what hope is there what might happen that we don't expect that would be on the more hopeful. What we don't expect is is that there are people now who are

young people who have different ideas who might enter the industry the way the entrepreneurs did in the late 20s when things were also open ended in conventional broadcasting where they are now and in cable brought another was a young film makers could sell their films on a competitive basis to replace the outright izing agencies. Well sell their films or people will come up with novel ideas for programs that would have great appeal. I think that the industry is just about to take off again on a new tack the way it did 50 or 60 years ago and there is hope that there will be a broadening of the spectrum and all kinds of programs will be scheduled not ones that have to appeal to everyone but that can appeal to just limited or certain specialized audiences. Is it possible that radio will be resurrected. Oh I think it already has. In what way. Well I have I seem to have so many friends who are devoted radio listeners and they would they wouldn't give up listening to radio.

For the world and they might it was a woman who just slammed the door in a kitchen and left the house as we are talking. Let us listen. And I would hope that you come right back yelling at it through the door. But there isn't that much to listen to on radio there's good music on FM but there isn't anything by way of the Archos radio dramas on a consistent basis. That's true there isn't Tom Mix for the kids and no more Norman Corwin's no more Norman Cohen's. And yet radio is there is the greatest instigator of the imagination that it is possible to have radio so wonderful because it doesn't completely dominate the way television does you can do other things while you're listening to it and it opens up your imagination. I just came in again at the dog out as it turned back in the kitchen again touting radio. But is radio an advertising medium that matches potential I'm thinking of the fact that there are so many stations on the band. It's almost anarchy when you cross that and everybody is in it imitating everybody else all new stations all pop music stations all

classic different formats. Yes. Well it is it is your right it is a kind of an anarchy but I don't think that cable television wind up becoming quite as anarchic as that you think we should bring back some individuality. Talking Edwin Hill I think human side of the news. In other words I wish it would happen that way. When you tuned in it wasn't this steady drone of news being repeated every 15 minute right. Right now there is a great deal of commentary and there was much more of a personal voice involved. I hope it happens but it may be through some new influences now that the industry is suddenly open again. Lawrence Greene what do you mean by the last part of it. Look now pay later I'm glad you asked that question when I was casting about for a title for the book. When I finished it I came across a speech that Edward R. Murrow the famous CBS broadcaster made would you lay out in some depth later on

right. And just to quote one sentence he said during the daily peak viewing periods television in the main insulates us from the realities of the world in which we live. And if the state of affairs continues we may alter an advertising slogan to read quote look now pay later which meant that there would be a price to pay for the escapist programming particularly in prime time a price in terms of national ignorance. Waste of a national resource pollution of people's thinking and didn't know what happened in a way I think at the Republican convention. As we are speaking we are looking to the Democratic convention I'm not talking about the politics nor about the Republicans I know what you mean if I tell you about the format of the. The fact that television turned it into IT WAS turn into a television studio instead of a everybody goes I know you have to have the whole day off television comes on and then they have their role to play. As you know there hasn't been a convention since 1948 where it had to go to a second ballot to find out who the presidential nominee would be.

So a television has in a way spoiled the convention system when primaries of it have taken it over. What could we do about that. Well I I don't know I have a feeling that networks are probably going to limit convention coverage in the future they say because they don't want to disturb the political process but what they really mean is they don't want to spend the money to do it. They really only do it to satisfy the FCC that they're providing public affairs programming. They have they board the American public about the political process is have they taken some of the sting away from it. But you know that actually Leslie Stall is just as important certainly as John Anderson in that that's terrible and people begin to think that way isn't it. But isn't she I mean their messenger is becoming more important in the message in the message. It's like a little anthing Cleopatra with. Cleopatra attacking the messenger when he brings bad news to her. I notice that all of the reporters on the floor for television at that Republican convention were excellent reporters. But the more old fashioned reporters. Who are

also quite good were consigned to radio by the net interesting the older reporters were consigned to radio who such as who well are people like Herb Kaplan. Oh I see. And even Teddy White has over the last several campaigns been allowed that tiny little tidbit they bring in Bill Moyers. Yeah but they don't use him right. They bring in Teddy White but they don't Hughes use him. Yeah and the old the old style radio reporter who knew his politics I would say Roger Mudd used to be very good on the floor of the of any conventions or in any political scene. Well they would sort of depreciate that desperately that these programmers use they've built up personalities who are more important in terms of luring the viewer to the TV set than what they're covering is. And yet for our freedom of communication the networks their programs their programs over the last 50 years have been a mainstay of democracy. If

we if we're not careful and read what you have written and what others like you have written you're putting up the alarm bell in the night. You're saying don't look at what is good. Look at the tendency overall and we're in trouble. What specific troubles are we. Well in most countries as you know broadcasting is a state controlled monopoly either it's done in a sophisticated way as in Great Britain or it's done in an unsophisticated way as in France or the Soviet Union. And of course there are definite drawbacks there in terms of government censorship and and with broadcasting in this country in an intensely capitalistic free enterprise environment there is which is wonderful because there is that freedom of choice and there's also responsibility though to exercise in a way which is pro social and publicly beneficial. It's hard for me to see the how the networks are are doing that now. They're more involved. They're locked

into the rigid orthodoxy of. Earning more money than any other network and it's important to stress that they all make tons of money you always hear about how NBC is in terrible shape but they're also their profit was only 50 million dollars last year as opposed to ABC which was 200 million which is only to point out that there are all those networks are or are in terrific shape and as someone once said owning a TV station is a license to print money so profitability is in a way the least important the least difficult part of the whole. Is Ted Turner history who started this new all news network out of Atlanta on a super station a ranger with other with other station in effect creating his own network. Is that a threat to the traditional networks other religious networks is Lawrence Welk establishing his own affiliates for his radio television program rather. Is that another threat. In other words are people breaking away. They're all rivals for the audience but they're all very specialized religious programming and cable news network they're all very specialized and but in effect they're creating other

networks. That's right. There have been from time to time other networks around that have tried to challenge the the main ones of Mutual Broadcasting System and network. And when the comedian established his own network for a few years in the early 30s and they all were driven out of business eventually. There really haven't been enough stations to support them all until now. But I think there's really room for for everyone there's room to go around for everyone. Some of the most creative things that the networks have tumbled into have been the soap operas in a way haven't you. I think they sort of stumbled into that in a saving grace but they have soap opera the schedule from early morning till late at night is no longer an afternoon feature. They have in effect put the soap opera stamp on all of their body of humanity all over. Yes these mini series like that wallpaper. Yeah but that's very popular wallpaper. Yes yes it is very popular pattern a very popular pattern. Well I miss some of the other

the old characters on radio for example and on television like Arthur Godfrey who was driven off by by a programmer even though he was providing some sort of a service with his friends. That's right. Even though he had awful programming I guess the most awful program I can remember is a radio program I think was called the barber's. It was Father by the barber and they used to argue about whether they should put me in a zone the tuna sandwich or the barber would always say things. Yes. And they were named Patty and they were named Tim and the name Bill was a terrible program but it had an audience. Our Gal Sunday had an audience. Whatever happened to her. Did your researchers come up with whatever happened to our Gal Sunday. No I don't know whatever or just plain Bill Barber of Hartsville. Certainly the 30s were better represented then the 70s and 80s. Well I think it was the legitimate The entertainment was somehow more legitimate less less canned then it is today less cynical ife. I think the entertainers were more adept at pleasing an audience

in many cases they were all the more you do INS weren't. Yes we knew how to play an audience very well. Jack Benny Jack Benny and Burns and Allen Bill Harris right. Many others yes. Well I think that this little discussion that we've had. Again I want to repeat your book. You don't mind if I tell it your book do you not urge everybody to buy it look now pay later buy Lawrenceburg green. It's a I think a balanced. And fair representation of what went on over the last 30 or so years in the industry we cannot look ahead. But I wish that you were writing some sort of a synopsis of what's going on now but you tell me that you are writing a novel instead. Is that a natural progression from broadcasting history into the novelized form. Well I've just stumbled across another story I think. I think that's a ways but it has nothing to do with broadcasting this time.

Does it have a lot of sex sadism and commentary on religion and politics. Oh absolutely not never think about those things myself. Good good. Well Laurence GREENE I think that the the issues that we've been talking about are very pertinent and they boil down to these. We've got the greatest service for the first amendment in our broadcasting networks that we could ever imagine. We ought not frittered away. We ought to communicate with one another we ought to enjoy one another and somehow or other there is more to represent the American public than a car charging over on a moonshiners program no matter how interesting that is that should be one of thousands of programs is that a fair statement to make. Absolutely. Is there any way to bring it about. Through opening up the airwaves to a host of independent producers who look for different formulas and ideas rather than sticking to a rigid formula that commercial networks do today. But in the mean time we'll just take £700 off the standard car and

hope that I 1973 Arab oil embargo was a one time thing. The Japanese will certainly go away with their little automobiles and so we need not worry about quality because we've been making cars since the beginning and nobody can beat us at our own game. All right we'll look now and pay later. Exactly. OK Lawrence Berg GREENE Many many thanks. Thank you Ed.. Bernard Rubin. The First Amendment and a free people a weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world. The engineer for this broadcast was Margo Garrison. The program is produced by Greg Fitzgerald. This broadcast has produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University which are solely responsible for its content. This is the public radio cooperative.