The First Amendment; Richard Block (NAB)

WGBH Boston in cooperation with the Institute for Democratic communications at the School of Communications just Boston University now presents the First Amendment and a free people and examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970s and now here is the director of the Institute for Democratic communications. Dr. Bernard Rubin. You. Were in Washington D.C. at the broadcast Education Association meeting. And my guest today for this program is Richard Bloch the well-known broadcast consultant. Richard Roth works in TV production distribution and station areas. In addition he's chairman of the Council for U.S. broadcasting that's ultra high frequency in Washington. He consults on industry conferences in regard to the National Organization for broadcasting and other such groups and he teaches one or two quarters a year at Stanford University. He's probably Dick I'm going to just throw a compliment your way you're probably one of the best known people who've or a couple of

decades has been telling us from the practical theoretical side how Station should operate about programming and about independence. In the industry perhaps that leads me to my first question just where do you see the industry today and whatever its great problems that regarding freedom of expression and programming. What I see today is that on the eve of another major push of growth growth. Expansion primarily in the area of independent UHF station there will be a whole new generation of those in cities such as Columbus Columbus Georgia Columbus Ohio and Oklahoma City and Tulsa much as there was in Boston 10 years ago with Channel 38 56 and will be more stations coming to Boston as

well. So I do see this growth because the the bigger turning to the commercial side certainly there's an enormous. Demand. By advertisers for television time. There's no question about the impact that that television has on the. Culture of the economy and so many. New advertisers have come forth not only the groups you think of such as the fast food department stores but also the you know the international. Ladies Garment Workers Union who are known to really get. A mass reaction they have to use mass a mass medium and there's just no other one except television. So I see economically and from a standpoint of stations I know there are 200 to 300 new stations over the next 10 years or five even in that UHF which I'm not a particular advocate and it's just an observation sometimes people who.

Have inferred that. I want the whole world to go UHF that to me has no relevance at all to it just where growth is going to be and has to be. And much like FM like and aggressive I think it 10 years ago when Kaizer broadcasting in the Globe put WGI be on the air the FM station there was very little FM in Boston and I was told that Bostonians didn't like FM except for classical music. And that. There was no chance of the station working it working in the in the market and that's why the auditors by the way I mean ONLY lot of $35000 allocating the purchase of the station that was the aim of the FM the TV channel but the 6. Station was sold but seven years later for 3 million 60 General Electric and I think one of the top two or three stations the same thing is happening on the UHF side all over the country despite the fact that so many people

don't realize that or think UHF is inferior to a degree that it makes it almost worthless but it's not that way at all I think the fans who watch the Bruins know that but also people who like civilized programming sometimes because of the nature of purchasing by many UHF stations they provide you with the only good movies to watch and and things of that sort of. My co-host today is Paul Prince from Indiana University. Paul. In terms of diversity through a wider number of stations assuming we have more options perhaps this would give more diversity and Bernard just referred to. Classic Movies that we call in the industry classic movies and the clever diversity that seems seems important as well. If indeed the economic outlook for

independent stations whether the UAV is is better is that going to lead to a little bit richer feel for these stations to comply with and perhaps. An increase in their ability to offer real diversity rather than simply the kind of the reruns which also we've come to to with think of it on and on and event station. We see some new programming coming up definitely Well it's not here yet. The there will be the testimony of two men a six part series will be seen in many it was going to be on Channel 4. But to the West you know station they pulled back because they didn't have the prescreening and. Right that they wanted and I think it may be on channel 30 Here is a full blown new book By Taylor Caldwell in a mini series. That's all that original tolerate you know that has nothing to do with the network. I'm

finding the the the diversity across public television I don't mean to just factor out here. This is a very vital for us. And I think we all know that in Boston. And it was certainly one of the most aggressive and stations in the country in the in the Public Television Group. But in commercial broadcasting there has been as yet no. Push nor desire nor almost consciousness about increasing diversity on the part of those who could do it. That means the station owners group owners it hasn't been there it isn't their business is very good and no one sees the necessity for doing that. And there is not a tradition of pointing in that way nor satisfactions for the broadcasters the satisfactions are more

in the fact that things are selling well and the programs that are on are going all right. There have been some extraneous some outside forces that have pushed for that but. In that. Inept fashion I think you've heard of Metro in that where an advertising agency proposed a very flimsy schedule of programs to be seen on stations starting in New York at 8 o'clock in the fall for a half hour Gothic. Dramas that were coming at about $40000 a run. And if you think that a half hour on any comedy show Norman Lear show is pushing $200000 or run that you have to go pretty far to equate them either in production or quality or anything like that. But it would be strangely the.

Certainly the. The critics of television and the press generally jumped on that as a very exciting happening. Yet I was surprised that nobody looked at the substance of it. And of course any advertisers did look at the substance of it and advertisers are pragmatic. Again I apologize and for generalizing but most are because they are to sell products and they turned it down. And they were. And so someone said there would be no fourth network. In fact I was trying to get somebody for a panel and. Fourth network on the NE B which followed to be a convention here in Washington in my secretary called back and said that one of the panelist couldn't come because whether or not there was going to be a fourth network would be decided next Tuesday this was a couple of weeks ago and there will be a fourth network there's no doubt about that. If I could jump on one other question which I didn't perhaps I you know I didn't answer was What is it what's the greatest threat to the industry. I do see

the problem of violence as a very real one for the industry. And I know you're interested in the holder of the photos. I was surprised at this meeting that when this issue came up as a matter of fact I brought it up and a number of other people did that there was almost. Feeling of regret that that word came up again and many of people in the room felt that this was a bogus charge of false charge. And yet at the very next panel that you chaired we had all of these people or two FCC commissioners we had somebody from the n. A B and so on and so forth. And they kept hitting on this violence and everybody sat there hearing the same thing twice in a row this time they didn't say a word. What do you make of it. It was probably a violent reaction to your critics and the

broadcasters are or want to be defensive when accused of. Of being handmaidens to violence and the people who are on the panel where your question was directed were program directors at Network affiliated stations who have absolutely no control over whether or not there's any violence on the air. The and and perhaps you saw frustration you also saw a kind of party line knee jerk reaction to it and in some also some frustration about it I think and and. Because they feel it's a bad rap and possibly there's too much of it and they do realize that there is. An immense amount of.

Of action being taken as a work to to have less violence. I see it as a problem and they do not have control of it the control is where the programs are made or the movies or main. Five years ago Will anything be done about that. Well I think I see it as a problem because of the I perceive it differently from from from most. The problem is that it has it's very popular too as you did to criticize violence and it puts one on the side of the angels. And everyone agrees with you and all the broadcasters essentially agreed with you. But I think they realize that the again is saying it's a societal problem it isn't just Intel a lot but I brought up the fact that I specifically referred to a study done by Dr. Summers and by George and Timothy Johnson and his associate and who are physicians working for the media. The general conclusion is forget about being on the side of the

angels. We do have a problem from now from a medical viewpoint is getting disturbing when you get such a specialist action. You know what I think there's also though I don't think there's a an acceptance completely maybe it's a matter of communication between the experts and others that there is peer consensus and there's enough there there are enough other surveys funded by ANY be or that refute some of the findings and governors. I'm one of the county's good news incidents of violence and I have been a Road Runner show some people feel as absurd and point up that there's been a Punch and Judy for years and there's going to war is for your buddies just the number of minority people on drummers who are always victims of the victims and I'm not saying by the way I don't mean to me that what he says is all right but it's such a general that perhaps the whole frustration with a medium with a with a force as large as

television. It's a great way to vent spleen about television whether it be the commercials or the breaks and or the amount of time it takes. The whole disruptive impact the anti intellectual effect of television it can all come out and saying you're too darn violent and to the exclusion of knowing there are other violent or realizing that movies are very violent The novels are violent life is violent and all that. But I'm not saying and I'm not recommending a do nothing course or there is no problem obviously there's lots of smoke and so there's some fire there but but it is the only way to I think to go about it is from the people you were talking to would be to say to you so much of it is shocking approaches to rifle approach and go to a station and go to Channel 5 and say please take off Starsky and Hutch or go

to Channel 4 and say please take off the rockery file and I don't mean to. Like I was going for naming names. Channel 6 to station which you were formally head of for years ran the untouchables at what was five. There he was right in there along with Starcraft. No wonder I don't have to leave ever I don't know that I'm quite a runner Star Trek Well OK. I doubt of Iran early program today because I'm sure ran an epic Well OK and the hell that was just a look at that kind of program let's put it this way OK let's let's put it this way. Well I get your personal and your personal views are the times changing so that now the broadcaster is going to be a little bit more receptive these type of complains because we use CDMA we do use some fairly prominent groups coming out and also we see the advertisers release threatening to pull the ads off does that mean that there's really going to be a different awareness of broadcasters I think some are viewing and maybe will start

I think you saw during the skepticism Well I don't see it really running to the core of it yet I think the whole business is going to change as younger and new groups take over this industry the people who are on their way up I believe. My contemporaries are not the ones who are deeply feel these things and I by the way that doesn't go just for the station that goes to the to the writers to the producers to the networks. There is no deep feeling among the entire everyone who contributes to the commercial medium of worrying terribly about violence other than it is an annoyance. The criticism of it and they really don't feel terribly guilty about it. But if you read that's regardless and that includes advertisers who make statements it includes producers and writers who will make statements. I'm not saying everyone is cynical nor am I saying they're being cynical when I

say it but when push comes to shove. When there is a kind of program that someone thinks thinks is work. There isn't terribly sensitivity to it now on their side I think you have to also understand that when I say the problem and this could become it gets feelings of being overzealous that you do have the family hour and I was quite a reaction to that lot of people said well in a marvelous to be no violence 8 to 9 o'clock. But you had a lot of people who were held in great esteem. The Norman Lear's and Grant Tinker MTM Mary Tyler Moore who felt it was an onerous kind of thing to impose. That's why I get back to the point because much of what I say may be irrelevant that on that the way to get rid of violence on television is specific is to sit down and work on a specific program and also to agree with the broadcasters whoever you go to and say we know. That that the society the violence and society or

wherever is not caused only by you but we think it is a controllable force and we think in in specific situations life would be better off without this particular program. And I think that is the modus operandi at this time in the development of who we are and the possible that there is a mutual frustration that there have been so much research on it. From a practical and a theoretical side there's been so much confrontation between the programmers in the station and network heads and so on and so forth and everybody is worried. For example I suspect that people are worried that you made reference to the movies that the changes in the movie might invade their homes. I think other people are worried that the family are for example I was worried about the family as a violation of the First Amendment. I don't think that you could segregate the hours of the day and separate them from life but it was very compelling for example my goodness and tell me to change the

subject. The Court of the Federal Court of Appeals has. Broken some of the restraints most of the restraints of the important cable TV Do you think this is going to affect a UHF and VHF the networks do you think there's going to be a new ballgame now. Resurrection of cable TV perhaps. No I think. That what they did was overturn some fairly foolish rules that the commission had about having films from 2 to 10 years old on here. They will get will offer a few more movies to pay television to take them off that will take the more popular ones off of the free TV. Well it depends on how I doubt that they may be on both at the same time much as you see reruns at a theater in movies or theaters and on television at the same time. Pay television is certainly going to be a factor in their million or so people hooked up to that now. And of course movies are unabashedly violent.

And that's another thing that records the broadcaster I should say and I think the ante to legislate in the creative community that's the really jealous thing it can never be done yet. But I think going back to what I saw it's perhaps that's a major threat because if you're commercial television and perhaps public television has to become. Heidi and when there is somebody sitting there you know George Gervin or with a hand calculator saying how many events of violence in the and they going to rewrite it if he gets kicked by a cow. That's a problem and I think you do find some of the frustration yesterday on that and that there are I mean I recall there was a show called Speed Racer That was one of the most violent of children's programs and bother George Gruber like who's a friend by the way bought it not so much from its violence of the violence of zapping guns and things but because of the

speed in it of these people get killed in cars and then you're teaching kids to drive too fast we took it off the air by the way in which because a Georgia group who was working with the time that was working with them on a committee and the. Remember a letter came in from Los Angeles from a teacher of autistic children and said Can't you find some way of putting that program back on here because it was the only way I was really reaching these children and it was a real service. So you know life isn't simple. We're not a bunch of trained seals and I think the those who are critical of violence have to be thoughtful about it and it's very easy to scream and yell No but it's very it's also very easy just to put the way in a circle. Yes and I have a feeling that the national broadcast Education Association. Is wagon train minded now.

Not not everybody I think less well perhaps of the panel up there but there that wasn't the BSA and I would think the audience was more sympathetic with you your panel was not it wasn't him pathetic with me in the program was one of the right to talk. Here you are now I would know the. Station group management where you were procuring these programs which you said you didn't feel you had a great deal of control because after all they were being produced and then offered you now you're closer to the creative community. You've already spoken about the creative community's feeling that should not be held back by by such laws as are set rules as a family hour. What do you how do you see any changes out there you're close to Hollywood now and the production of the programming. Is there any alternative to that kind of a quick uneasy violence. Oh yeah there's less war and I don't think there's a question in that now that there's less action. Which is the euphemism and comedies are what some women Western designed.

But if you. If if war programs were suddenly there were somehow there is a manifestation that somehow the public indicates it has a hunger for war programs. I would think you'd see quite a few again. And someone would say well we're telling these are anti-war programs. And then there might be more violence and I but I think the the mood of the public as such now is for. Is for certainly for gratuitous violence. I think probably has it in you know it's nothing now I think will be wonderful we get 50 Frederick Wiseman. To do things on real violence I thought one of his most of purp jobs was the inside of a welfare office over a long period of time. The frustrations of the people the the documentary kind of stuff. No one objects to violence. It's just that this is such a limited stereotypical kind of it is that all the creative juices have gone out this leads me to

my question Dick Clark in the few minutes remaining. What would you like to do forget about our discussion of violence. You've got nine tenths of your career ahead of you. You're a very exciting person what would you like to do and what DIG you're mostly Id like to be done a five with programs with which that I feel. Break some barriers and I would hope that the public becomes less skittish about it for certain on television. Which can only be called sexism or again the exploitive use of that is has no more value in good literature be it television literature written literature or movie which are. But I do I would hope that that the feelings about anti violence and the nexus between that and how it how it encourages violence in the culture that it doesn't go hand in glove along with.

Realistic. And an honest look toward life and I do enjoy working with writers and producers and I guess the next phase of my career which I'm trying very hard to do and I've started my own company out in which you can bring that to you. Well I I formed it with a friend of my many years in a more Libra and we came up with a very creative title of blackly Bach productions and but I wanted to know what he wanted what I wanted to know. Well I guess we both want our name on the door. And you're working for a lot of people for many years. So but I would say that would be and there is I must say to the to the credit of how it would use you know just as a name the compass is an awful big area including New York as far as television goes that they're very exciting people with lots of ideas and there are lots of young people coming up and that doesn't mean that people don't have an opportunity there but they look at life somewhat differently and go about it in differently

and you know I look for a very pleasant revolution in television entertainment over the years and that the whole violence. The guy the violence issue will become somewhat less in the forefront. But I only who urged anyone and me that they got it they have to think as you do an exam thoughtfully where when they were how far they want to go in curbing First Amendment how far they want to go in curbing artistic Well there's just no there's no point to the ballgame. If in getting what we want or don't want on television radio or in the newspapers we diminish the First Amendment because without the First Amendment we haven't made a real contribution to the revolutionary process of this world I think we all agree on that and we're skittish about that no matter how we differ on issues. Richard BLOCK I want to thank you for being our guest I want to thank my co-host

Paul Prince of Indiana University. This is Bernard ribbon saying good night. For WGBH radio in cooperation with the Institute for Democratic communications at the School of Communications at Boston University has presented the First Amendment and a free people. An examination of civil liberties in the media in the 1970s. This program was produced in the studios of WGBH Boston.