thumbnail of Intertel; 9; America Abroad
This content has not been digitized. Please contact the contributing organization(s) listed below.
Series
Intertel
Episode Number
9
Episode
America Abroad
Producing Organization
Associated-Rediffusion
Contributing Organization
Thirteen WNET (New York, New York)
Library of Congress (Washington, District of Columbia)
AAPB ID
cpb-aacip/75-70zpcgd6
NOLA Code
ITTL
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/75-70zpcgd6).
Description
Intertel is a dramatic breakthrough in the dissemination of ideas and cultural exchange through television. Intertel was conceived in November, 1960. Five television broadcasters in the four major English-speaking nations joined to form the International Television Federation, to be known as Intertel, the first such international organization. The participants were Associated Rediffusion, Ltd. of Great Britain, the Australian Broadcasting Commission, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and for the United States, the National Educational Television and Radio Center and the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company. Intertel produces on a bi-monthly basis hour-long documentaries on important world topics, inaugurating a global television production agency dedicated to the creation of programs of substance and meaning. John F. White, President of NET, called Intertel more than a fusion of the creative talents of the organizations involved in producing television programs of outstanding merit. It is a step forward to world understanding, he added. I believe that the exchange of documentaries, while of great significance in the vastness of the mutual understanding in it can foster, is but the first step in a regular exchange of all forms of programming.
The British evaluation of American achievements in overseas is Associated Rediffusion's fourth contribution to Intertel. The following synopsis was written by Peter Hunt, producer and writer of America Abroad: There are roughly two million United States citizens living and working abroad. About two-thirds are members of the armed forces, their wives and children. About 100,000 civilians work for United States organizations; about 30,000 are missionaries; 25,000 are businessmen; some 33,000 are /'Government' people. All are scattered over the world, in some 70 nations which profit by American aid. Not all are popular; some have proved to be indispensable. Some are popular and useless. Some are brilliant but misplaced. Some mean well but are misunderstood. All contribute to the so-called /'image' of the American abroad. But what is this /'image'? Is it the image of the badly paid doctor who volunteers to work where he need not work because he thinks he should? Is it the image of the well-paid soldier who drives a car too fast? Is it the image of the administrator, with dollars to circulate, who is taken in by the people who want his dollars because they understand the language but he does not? Is it the image of the Peace Corps workers who is getting to understand a language, is getting to understand a people, but is young in the hazards of administration? It became clear to us, when preparing our programme, that the /'image' is really hardly worth considering because there are so many Americans abroad doing so many different things, thinking so many different ways, working, eating, sleeping, loving, hating, being just people in so many different countries. There are, for instance, nearly one hundred different North American missionary societies represented in Japan alone. What interested us was something on a simpler scale. Until World War II the United States tended to keep out of the Old World's affairs. There was, it is true, a European involvement in the World War I, but it was quite short. World War II brought Mr. America face to face with the very opposite of a prosperous society. He met have-nots everywhere, from the Rhine to Naples, from India to Hiroshima. He saw disintegration, poverty, disease, corruption on a world-wide scale and some Americans started to try to do something about them. Cynics have said, do say and will go on saying that America interests herself in the health of the Old World merely because it wishes to avoid catching its troubles - finance in the red, disease which are catching, Communism. There can hardly be anyone in the world who does not have a particular view on the matter. Some plain facts remain. Citizens of the United States, to the tune of some two million, are today living and work in in some 70 countries where they used not to be. They are there today largely because the government of the United States thinks they ought to be there. They are working on an incredible variety of jobs. Some are efficient; some not. But they are there. Not very long ago it would have been extraordinary if someone suggested that volunteer teachers from America should go to a British colony in West Africa to teach English. But it has happened and on an impressive scale. Today, in ex-British colonies, in ex-French colonies, and in a lot of other countries, there are Americans working for an with new governments, in trade, in education, in hospitals, in dredging, in pumping up water for parched fields, in training soldiers, in building roads, in producing new crops. It has all happened very quickly and because it has, there have been some bad mistakes. But all the indications are that President Kennedy's Act for International Development, the new name and changed format for the idea started off by General Marshall in 1947, is a gigantic gesture in terms of money, administration and know-how, which is going to change the face of the earth and its people in need. It is a concept which is going to change the face of the earth and its people I need. It is a concept of help and self-help representing many billions of dollars. It is also a concept which is very conscious of the aid which is being given to parts of the world by Communist bloc countries. Today, the Communist bloc countries are now working in the less developed countries. Their record, generally, is good. If any of these countries were to be dependent only on the Communist bloc for their aid, this would give cause for concern because it would set the stage for a possible political take over. We visited four countries in which there are variants on this situation. We went to South Vietnam, hardly a Jefferson-style democracy but violently anti- Communist and actively at war with Communists. We went to Cambodia, coyly neutral, accepting aid from United States, from France, from the Soviet Union, from Communist China; and no fried of South Vietnam. We went to Pakistan, fully committed by military agreements to defense against possible Communist aggression, acutely conscious that Russia and China and unfriendly India are all too close for comfort. We went to Ghana, violently anti-colonial, sturdily independent, yet lurching, it sometimes seems, towards all that democracy is not. Of these four countries two have become independent of France, two of Britain: all are now partially dependent on American aid. The extent of dependence varies in each country. In South Vietnam, despite national pride and a certain amount of tub-thumping, there is not the slightest doubt that the country would fall flat on its face without American aid. Cambodia is poor, would like to be rich, would like to be completely independent. The Head of State, the shrewd and likeable Prince Sihanouk, has played political poker with the great power blocs for some years now. He has done it with skill and courage. Can he keep it up? Pakistan accepts giant spoonful's of American aid, but Pakistan worries about the amount of aid given to India, about American indecision over the Kashmir question. Ghana is new and in the hands of Dr. Nkrumah highly volatile. Is Nkrumah, the /'Messiah' of Ghana, heading towards a situation as in Cuba? Americans cannot help but notice the presence of Russian pilots and Chinese technicians in Accra. The permutations on the problem for Americans and they are by no means united in the desire for unqualified aid to all who want it or need it, are immense. Yet all have to be contained within one general policy. It is in this light that we visited some Americans abroad, in four countries. We went open-minded; we returned convinced that they are doing a good and thoroughly worthwhile job. Where the task involved direct interference in the internal affairs of a country we found acute difficulty, some hard feelings. Where it could be taken at face-value, a job being done because it is good that is should be done, we found co-operation and admiration. Yet how does a huge and powerful and positive country like the United States give aid to a large part of the world without involving itself in the internal affairs of the countries it aids? This is the dilemma at the core of the entire process. Our programme is a sketch of that process in action. This hour-long piece was recorded on film and aired as episode 9 of Intertel and episode 1 of Perspectives. (Description adapted from documents in the NET Microfiche)
Intertel, a dramatic breakthrough in the dissemination of ideas and cultural exchange through television, was conceived in November 1960. Five television broadcasters in the four major English-speaking nations joined to form the International Television Federation, to be known as Intertel, the first such international organization. The participants were Associated Rediffusion, Ltd. of Great Britain, the Australian Broadcasting Commission, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and for the United States, the National Educational Television and Radio Center and the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company. Intertel produced on a bi-monthly basis hour-long documentaries on important world topics, inaugurating a global television production agency dedicated to the creation of programs of substance and meaning. John F. White, President of NET, called Intertel "more than a fusion of the creative talents of the organizations involved in producing television programs of outstanding merit. It is a step forward to world understanding," he added. "I believe that the exchange of documentaries, while of great significance in the vastness of the mutual understanding in it can foster, is but the first step in a regular exchange of all forms of programming." Donald H. McGannon, President of WBC, hailed the new organization as "a pool of the technical and creative ability and knowledge of all the groups which will extend the international horizons of television in all aspects. This is the first practical step, after years of talking and hoping, toward the creation and use of international television for cultural exchange and an effective weapon for peace." By having observers examine topics far removed from their everyday assignments, Intertel gives viewers a fresh viewpoint. The founder members indicated that by dubbing these programs in foreign languages and making them available to all nations, they hoped television companies in Europe, Asia and South America will eventually join this unique project. The supervisory committee for the United States programming segments consists of Mr. McGannon and Mr. White; Richard M. Pack, WBC Vice President - Programming; and Robert Hudson, NET Vice President for Programming. Intertel came into formal being November 14, 1960, in a special meeting in Vancouver, B.C., and the culmination of plans for such an association which has been under way for a long time. John McMilliam of Associate Rediffusion, was named contemporary Coordinating Officer at that time. (Description adapted from documents in the NET Microfiche)
Broadcast
1962-08-06
Asset type
Episode
Genres
Documentary
Topics
Global Affairs
Public Affairs
Media type
Moving Image
Credits
Camera Operator: Osborn, Ron
Composer: Stevens, James
Director: Ingrams, Michael
Editor: Crawler, Aidan
Film Editor: Squires, Charles
Interviewee: Livingstone, Thomas
Interviewee: McMullan, Bill
Interviewee: Jauregui, Elizabeth
Interviewee: Hickman, Peter
Interviewee: Sharpe, Judy
Interviewee: Gutgesell, Alfred
Interviewee: Jauregui, John
Interviewee: Sharpe, Larry
Interviewee: Shine, Georgina
Interviewee: Pinder, Frank
Interviewee: Benoit, John
Interviewee: Carter, George
Interviewee: Davies, Russell
Narrator: Dyneley, Peter
Narrator: Ingrams, Michael
Producer: Hunt, Peter H.
Producing Organization: Associated-Rediffusion
Sound: Slade, Freddie
Sound: Welsh, Bill
Writer: Hunt, Peter H.
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Thirteen - New York Public Media (WNET)
Identifier: wnet_aacip_2291 (WNET Archive)
Format: 16mm film
Duration: 00:53:18?
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2329535-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 16mm film
Generation: Copy: Access
Color: B&W
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Citations
Chicago: “Intertel; 9; America Abroad,” 1962-08-06, Thirteen WNET, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed April 13, 2021, http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-75-70zpcgd6.
MLA: “Intertel; 9; America Abroad.” 1962-08-06. Thirteen WNET, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. April 13, 2021. <http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-75-70zpcgd6>.
APA: Intertel; 9; America Abroad. Boston, MA: Thirteen WNET, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-75-70zpcgd6