commercial broadcasting : the history of the dispute over public interest and the educative role of media
著者（英） Koichiro Shigaki
journal or
publication title
Doshisha American studies
number 56
page range 27‑59
year 2020‑03‑06
権利（英） International Institute of American Studies, Doshisha University
URL http://doi.org/10.14988/00027864
The American Ideal of Mediaʼs Role Beyond Commercial Broadcasting:
The History of the Dispute over Public Interest and the Educative Role of Media
Koichiro Shigaki
Introduction
The U.S. commercial media has set the business standard for modern-day media industries in other countries like Japan. The U.S. media industries have created entertainment programs that many people around the globe appreciate. Within this environment, why did non-profit public media emerge in the U.S.? What is the cultural background of the emergence of educational broadcasting known as public broadcasting today in the U.S.? While stemming from these questions, this paper explores an ideology of the mediaʼs role existing in the U.S. beyond commercialism by examining the American media history. Results reveal that the political disputes on the role of media to distribute knowledge in a democratic society, and discussions on the need for a non-profit public (educational) broadcasting have shaped the dynamics of American media industries.
The ideal of free distribution of knowledge has been the important issue in the discussions on the role of broadcasting for a long time in the U.S. There, the balance between regulations and free access to broadcasting facilities became the key issue. Especially, the right of broadcasting over radio frequencies and the management system of broadcasting became major themes for a long discussion. Broadcasting frequency allocation and broadcast licensing broke the free access/free speech ideal over the air, but the U.S.
preserved key uses, such as public interests of disseminating the information.
For this, America did not want to have only one resource but sought multiple sources. It was believed that educational broadcasting would be a good fit for this.
In the early 20th century, when the idea of “broadcasting” was formulated over the wireless experiment, everyone could broadcast over the radio.
However, as the radio wave was a scarce resource and radio communications easily interfered with each other, the federal government limited the number of broadcasters by implementing regulations and awarding licenses. For the majority of broadcasters, capital was required for maintaining a broadcasting facility and they needed to create a sustainable business model. Meanwhile, public universities took an important role in developing educative broadcasting program in the 1920s. At the same time, the major networks such as National Broadcasting Company (NBC) or Colombia Broadcasting System (CBS) took over a majority of radio frequencies to distribute information. This led to the political disputes on the educative role of broadcasting in a democratic society and the discussion on creating alternatives to an existing commercial broadcasting.
The long history of discussion on the educative role of broadcasting led to creating a decentralized public broadcasting system in the U.S. Later, broadcasting frequencies opened for many outlets with the inventions of cable broadcasting in the 1980s; public access channels and community media were established along with existing broadcasting system. This history may be the key to understand the uniqueness of the U.S. media beyond commercialism.
Educational broadcasting in the U.S. became known as public broadcasting and developed differently from other countries like Japan, where government centrally intervened in both broadcasting and education sectors through its course of development. Around 1920, the term “educational broadcasting” was coined by a land-grant university experimenting with wireless-communication in the U.S. The idea of educational broadcasting is not exclusive to the U.S.
However, it must be noted that American educational broadcasting developed uniquely after WWII, shaping the dynamics of non-profit media, and changing the landscape of the American media industries. There, commercial industries expanded on the basis of the ideology of the free market economy while the idea on creating the educational or public broadcasting expanded on the basis
of the ideology of free expression.1
Like public education on the ground, in buildings, free expression/
dissemination of information was the great leveler, especially in the era of peak immigration (1880-1920) in the U.S. and of course after when the immigrants were being assimilated. For those same immigrants, and working-class people, and farmers free news/agriculture information/community information was a resource to develop better lives.
To this day, higher education plays a vital role in the media industries.
Nearly all universities are equipped with a broadcasting facility. Some facilities are operated as an educational-access-channel or a PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) member station. A university involvement with broadcasting also led to creating an ordinary yet underrated concept of broadcasting, namely “a great way to disseminate knowledge and information.” Educational broadcasting further shaped the dynamics of program contents development within the American media industries. This history suggests there is the common assumption that useful knowledge should be shared to a maintain the democratic society, and informed people needed to be educated with available information to have a functioning democracy. American people seemed to employ this cultural ideology to form a unified community. These are apparently the driving forces maintaining the non-profit broadcasting and the development of American media industries.
1. Rationale of the Study
The purpose of this paper is to understand the emergence of American media industries today from a different perspective than one centered on the commercial side of broadcasting. The reason is based on the fact that the U.S.
created one of the influential media business standards that other countries adopt.
1 Both ideals or ideologies are closely related to American culture. These are not something particularly unique in the American media, but the ideologies are generally applied to all issues as well as all things maintaining democratic society in America. The origin of ideologies could be trace back to the constitution, and the history surrounded. Considering the origin of ideologies is very important to assess the influence of media on society in general. Nonetheless, this paper is not going to exam this as reviewing this point would take us beyond the scope of this paper, and it cannot be discussed here for lack of space.
Further, the U.S. has a different public broadcasting compared to the UK with its BBC or Japan with its NHK. No one really tries to explain the reason for its formation in the U.S. other than to say it was necessary to prevent monopolizing by big corporations, implying some criticism on the existence of commercial broadcasting. There is a reason behind the U.S. developed the commercial media initially without any BBC-like or NHK-like system, while simultaneously trying to establish alternatives to commercial or state-owned broadcasting. This paper attempts to demonstrate that broadcast development was influenced by the ideology of media beyond commercialism that America had had for long time. To do so, this study analyzes the early U.S. broadcasting history first, focusing on the discussions of the key issues in forming the concept of “public interest”; that, in turn, built the foundation for public broadcasting development and American media industries today.
2. Previous Studies
There are some significant studies that are always cited in many texts about American media history in both the U.S. and Japan. For example, Erick Barounwʼs three-volume series of media history texts describing a detailed history of American broadcasting industries. These volumes are so classic that almost all previous studies have mentioned it, both in Japan and the U.S.2 There is another text written by Starling and Kittross covering all aspects of American media histories.3 This classic book is still suitable for starting primary research on the topic of American media history. Czitrom focuses on the changes in American society and attitudes toward media technology.4 These are the examples of classic textbooks that are used for American media
2 Erik Barnouw, vol.1 (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1966); Erik Barnouw, vol.2,
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1968); Erik Barnouw,
vol.3, (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1970).
3 Christopher H. Sterling, and John M. Kittross, (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1978).
4 Daniel J. Czitrom, (Chapel Hill, NC:
University of North Carolina Press, 1982).
history classes in the U.S.5 Meanwhile, some studies focus on early stages of broadcasting development.6 The reason is that all foundation for the modern- day broadcasting system was formed in the early stages of broadcasting development with radio in the 1920s.
All of the previous studies about American media history are unique and sound essential to review. However, a majority of them center on the development of commercialism in the broadcasting industries and do not provide a conclusive answer for the questions this study trying to answer:
Why did non-profit media or educational broadcasting emerge in the U.S.?
What is the cultural background of the emergence of educational broadcasting known as public broadcasting today? Furthermore, these do not focus on the whole of American media history to find implication for todayʼs media. Even though Barnouwʼs texts and some other studies describe the larger history, these are written long before the Internet became the major information resource. Therefore, this study revisits the most studied subject, American media history now.
There are some detailed studies on the narrower history of American public broadcasting. For example, Engelman writes a detailed history on American public media. Although it provides detailed information, there is no further analysis on the implication of its history.7 Some studies are written by
5 There are many other textbooks available. Following are examples of texts focusing on the U.S.
media history. J. Emmett Winn and Susan L. Brinson,
(Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press,
2005); Donalad Lazer, ed. (Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1987); Michele Hilmes,
4thed (Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2013).
6 For example, Susan J. Douglas, 1899-1922 (Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989); Michele Hilmes,
(Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1997); Robert W.
McChesney,
, (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1933); William Peck
Banning, (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1946).
7 Ralph Engelman, (Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE Publication, 1996).
industry insiders and those who worked in public broadcasting stations.8 There are also news websites focusing on current topics related to public media in the U.S.9 Nonetheless, those studies are usually a bit critical on the commercial side of American media.
In Japan, there are many studies on the history of American media, too.
The study of American media from history to politics seems to be very important in Japan, and there are many studies written in Japanese.10 Uchikawaʼs study can be considered one of the classic texts cited in major studies although he mainly studies American media regulations and his studies are not centering on the media history, itself.11
While these studies are valuable for their own purposes, the majority do not focus on the reason behind the emergence of public broadcasting in the U.S.
Thus, this paper re-analyazes the early development of American broadcasting, and focuses on the significance of American public media history.
8 For example, Robert J. Blakely,
(Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1979); John Witherspoon, Roselle
Kovitz, Robert K. Avery and Alan G. Stavitsky, (Washington,
D.C: Current: The Public Telecommunications Newspaper, 2000); James Day,
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press,
1995); David Stewart, (New York;
TVbooks, 1999).
9 For example, current.org.
10 For instance, there were a lot of case studies conducted and published almost every year by NHK and NHKʼs research institute, Hoso-bunka Kenkyuu-sho. Following are the examples of major studies in Japan: Eiki Kogo, “Origin of Broadcast Journalism in the United States Laying Stress on Commercial TV news,” 35 (2014): 21-37; Shin Mizukoshi,
ng (Tokyo: Dohbunkan Publishing, 1993);
Masataka Kawamura, (Tokyo:
Bronds-Shinsha, 2011); Tetsuo Arima,
(Tokyo: Kokubunnsya, 1997); Masayoshi Akahori, “Contribution and Ideas of the Ford Foundation for the Developments of Public Broadcasting in the U.S.A,”
1, no. 1(1998): 1-18. There are more studies conducted in Japan. These are the examples of major studies cited in a recent study of American media in Japan.
11 For example, Yoshimi Uchikawa, “America no Hoso-ni okeru, syakai-teki Sekinin-ron,”
13 (1967): 5-30; Yoshimi Uchikawa, (Tokyo:
Yugai, 1989).
I The Early History of American Broadcasting
1. Two Backbones to Understand American Media History
There are two significant points of the development of American media industries after the concept of broadcasting fully developed in the 1920s America. These two points are crucial and a majority of studies in the United States mentions them.
The first point was a problem with financing the broadcasting stations.
When the radio broadcasting boom begins after 1920, the finance, ownership, and management of the stations became the major problem for broadcasters.
David Sarnoff, the first president of NBC, stated that the significant problem of broadcasting had to with the finance and ownership of the stations, saying:
“Who is to pay for broadcasting? And who is to do the broadcasting job?”12 While the financing was the problems of broadcasting stations after 1920, commercial stations had established a sustainable way to conduct business and to manage broadcasting stations, for example, by airing advertisements. A private broadcast corporation was also considered to be outside of government control and believed to be independent. Further, it needs to be emphasized that commercial broadcasting in the U.S. developed based on the firm belief of the free market economy. The commercial broadcasting was believed to contribute to boost the American economy by providing advertisement revenue, and also encourage competition among the commercial broadcasters to provide better contents. That is the whole reason that a majority of previous studies are centered on commercial industries, but less so on non-profit media.
Another point has to do with the fundamental principles of broadcasters, implemented in the Radio Act of 1927 and the Communication Act of 1934.
These two regulations instigated a lengthy discussion of the meaning of “public interest” within the media regulatory policymaking process. Both regulations stated that broadcasters should serve the public interest as long as they broadcast anything. These regulations also assert that a broadcasting license would be given to a prospect broadcaster that is following these principles:
12 Gleason Archer Jr., (New York: The American Historical Company, 1939), 29: David Sarnoff, “National Broadcasting Evisaged,”
(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968), 41.
public interests, convenience, and necessity. This becomes a fundamental philosophy for managing broadcasting stations, reconciling any disputes among broadcasters, and solving problems related to broadcasting communication.
While these principles seem to lay down the role of wireless communications and broadcasting, it gave only a vague idea of what the public interest should be.
Here in these regulations, broadcasting airwaves were considered to be a public domain. If the radio waves were for the public, then all people who wanted to broadcast could have had the right to obtain a broadcast license.
However, as the radio wave is a limited source, those who can get a license should be selected. Thus, some standard or principles for the selection process needed to be established. For the U.S., the principle of “public interests, convenience, and necessity” became the fundamental framework to be considered when a Federal Communication Commissions (FCC), gives a license to a certain broadcaster. Although a private corporation usually works towards a corporationʼs private interest to make a profit, because of this principle, the private corporation and commercial broadcasters need to serve the public interest.
By taking the regulatory words literally, it would sound as if contradictory ideas had been implemented in the regulation. Nevertheless, in the U.S. where there is a strong economic ideal of a free market economy, a profit-seeking corporation was believed to contribute to boosting the American economy, and eventually, this would serve the public interest. This logic was widely applied to the business of broadcasting at the time of implementing the regulation, especially the Radio Act of 1927.
Interestingly, the commercial broadcasters were considered to be serving Americaʼs public interest, hence Americaʼs commercial broadcasting could be considered to be in Americaʼs public broadcasting role, like BBC in the UK, but with financing by advertisements and sponsorship.13 Even though there was a
13 Even though other authors have never clearly stated American commercial broadcasting station as a “Public Broadcasting,” this conclusion can be drawn by looking at the historical context of the discussions and the word that people used in 1930s big discussions about the role of broadcasting in democratic society. To see the historical context, following primary sources are good examples. Harlod A. LaFount (Committee, FRC), “Should the U.S. Adopt the British System of Radio Control?” August/September, 1933, 205.
lengthy discussion on the establishment of American version of the BBC in the 1930s, it did not happen because of this belief of free-market economy.14
Meanwhile, in the U.S, there seems to be a belief that any sorts of power should not be concentrated on a particular individual or entity. This idea is similar to and may be the basis of the separation of the power stated in the United States Constitution. This idea, on the other hands, helped the commercial broadcasting stations to be considered independent, especially from the 1920s to the 1940s when the radio broadcasting was a significant national media technology. The private station became an alternative, independent station with no government interference.
However, the new discussion for an alternative to commercial broadcasting emerged when the television spread into American households in the 1950s.
Television was expected to become a powerful medium with unknown effects on the American mind. While commercial broadcasting was still considered to be without government control, there had been a concern that commercial broadcasters had become too powerful. Therefore, there was a need to create an alternative to commercial broadcasting. A non-profit educational broadcasting station managed by a state university was considered to be a new prospective alternative.
With this history in mind, I would like to break down the early stages of American broadcasting that set the foundation for American media industries today. Knowing the early birth of American broadcasting helps us understand why the commercial broadcasting emerged and how the fundamental principle of “public interest” was formed. It also gives us a clue to understanding the origin of non-profit media, eventually known as educational broadcasting then public broadcasting today.
2. Broadcasting as Free Communication to Unify America
To conclude the early stage of broadcasting in the United States, when the wireless communication was developed before the 1920s, everyone could
14 For details of its history, McChesneyʼs study is a great example. In fact, he argues this in his study as well. Robert W. McChesney,
, (New York; Oxford University Press, 1933); Robert W. McChesney, “The Battle for the U.S. Airwaves, 1928-1935,”
40, no.4 (1990): 29.
broadcast whatever they wanted just like the YouTube of today. If people were able to build working radio equipment, they could communicate whatever they wanted to.15 It was almost free to send anything over the radio in America, especially on the East Coast, where the city was almost entirely connected with infrastructure such as railroad systems.16
There is also the interesting historical fact that no one believed or imagined that profit could be made from only transmitting sounds over the radio.17 Even with the early form of commercial broadcasting stations, the radio stations were part of wireless equipment industries and used for the promotional purposes of selling radio equipment and related parts by an electronics company, such as General Electronic or rival company Westinghouse. Otherwise, radio was used by news wire companies such as AP or AT&T, later to become one of the most significant telephone mobile companies in the U.S. No one knew radio broadcasting could be profitable.
Here, amateur wireless enthusiasts took essential roles to develop the concept of broadcasting. They were not like an amateur radio enthusiast of today; actually, they were professional well-trained electronic engineers as well.
They could build radios by themselves and send the signals for their experiments, for example, sending phonograph music. David Sarnoff, later to become the first president of NBC, started his interest in radio from being an amateur wireless enthusiast. These wireless enthusiasts started the “Ham”
movement to spread knowledge of a building wireless equipment and disseminated their idea to increase the number of radio enthusiasts. Along the way, they began to believe the radio could take an essential role in America,
15 A majority of studies focusing on the early stages of American broadcasting mention these as a historical fact. All historical textbook such as Barounwʼs study, Hilms, and Cztrome mentioned this.
16 The early communications system such as telegraph and telephone spread to the United States because of the development of railroad system. For details, following are the example texts: Charles Briggs and Augustus Maverick,
(New York: Rudd Carleton, 1858); Barnouw, , 7-8.
17 For detail, see: Archer, ; Stephen Lippmann, “The Institutional Context of Industry Consolidation: Radio broadcasting in the United States, 1920-1934,” 86, no. 2 (2007); Clifford J. Doerksen, “ʻServing the Masses, not the Classesʼ: Station WHN, Pioneer of Commercial Broadcasting of the 1920ʼs,” 6, no. 1 (1999): 81-100; Noah Arceneaux, “A Sales Floor in the Sky: Philadelphia Department Stores and the Radio Boom of
the 1920s,” 53, no. 1 (2009): 76-89.
and contribute to foster a “true” form of the democracy where all people could participate and voice their opinion to the rest of the world.18
Wireless radio communication also gave hope to amateur enthusiasts that wireless communication could break down communication barriers among eastern European immigrants and American residents, wealthy people to poor people alike. Indeed, they tried to prove their point by forming the relay communications point to point and sending the following signals: “A democracy requires that people who govern and educate themselves should be so armed and disciplined that they can protect themselves”19
3. The Trace of Public Broadcasting or Non-profit Media Organizations
Inspired by wireless enthusiasts, universities with engineering and science departments took a vital role in spreading the idea of broadcasting. It is also worth noting that the origin of the public broadcasting system in the U.S. could be traced back to the radio stations operated by the land-grant universities.20 These university-operated radio stations were later called educational broadcasting stations.
In the 1930s, the number of educational broadcasting stations diminished due to the rapid rise of commercial broadcasting networks. However, these educational stations got some renewed attention from educators after World War Ⅱ , and there was an increasing demand for re-building it.
There are several reasons behind land-grant universities starting to broadcast educational content. First, the university was the place to develop and experiment with communication tools, including wireless radio. The second, they started to broadcast randomly to wireless enthusiasts to create the target listeners. Besides, land-grant universities usually had agricultural departments, and they started to broadcast weather forecasts to farmers with radio equipment as experiments, financially backed by the United States
18 Douglas, , 214; Engelman,
, 14.
19 Susan J. Douglas, (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1987), 296.
20 This is an institution of higher-education, especially with the department focusing on agriculture and technical education in the U.S., established by states to receive the benefits of the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890. The Morrill Land-Grant Acts allowed for the creation of land-grant colleges in the U.S. states using the proceeds of federal land sales.
Department of Agricultures to increase the productivity of American agriculture.21 The last reason was related to the broadcasting of forecast.
Besides forecasting, universities operating broadcasting stations started to broadcast lectures through radio, because the land-grant university was built to provide practical educational programs for all American and raise their educational level (whereas private universities were only expected to educate wealthy Americans). Airing the forecast was a part of this experiment to educate farmers about the weather to increase their productivities.
Later, the land-grant universities started to call their activities “educational broadcasting” to describe broadcasting educational contents over the radio.
These contents were recordings of the lectures, but this was believed to build a foundation for not only distance education but also educative entertainment programs existing today on American cable-television, such as cooking shows.
These stations were also believed to help to spread the definition of
“broadcasting” to the public. However, these educational stations diminished after 1930, losing their position over the commercial broadcasting due to unreliable financial management and a false perception of elitism of the universities only serving for certain groups of American people.
4. The Emergence of Commercial Radio Stations
Here it is essential to describe briefly the start of American commercial broadcasting. Unlike other countries, e.g. the U.K and Japan, the U.S. did not develop a centralized public broadcasting system nor state-influenced broadcasting. While broadcasting emerged with no thought of profit first, commercial broadcasting was created after American business entrepreneurs, emerging from the pool of amateur wireless enthusiasts, realized they could make a profit from merely broadcasting some contents that listeners wanted.
As it seems that there are different facts and roots of commercial broadcasting interrelated to form the foundation, the essential parts of this history are explained in the points below.22
21 Some example history text is: Randall Davidson, (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2006).
22 This time-line is based on the studies mentioned in this article as well as some primary sources available online.
1. The foundation of commercial stations was built from wireless industries selling radio equipment.
2. The origin of commercial industries started from the joint corporation, Radio Corporation of America (RCA) by General Electronics (GE), AT&T, and the U.S. Navy. Later, GEʼs rival company, Westinghouse, joined the group right after WWI ended to avoid business conflict and catch up with making profit by selling radio equipment.
3. The U.S. Navy borrowed the radio stations for national security during the WWI, and they even had an idea to create a U.S. Navy owned state- run national station.23 However, they needed to give back one of the station to the U.S. Marconi, which the parent company was the UK Marconi company in 1918 because of contract they made with a private sector during the wartime. The Navy instigated the idea of creating RCA with GE because they did not want to give the station with new technology back to Marconi company due to the fear of technology leaking to a foreign-owned company.24
4. The joint corporation, RCA, and other related companies did not realize they could make a profit by broadcasting, so they made a profit by selling radio equipment until Westinghouseʼs radio engineer broadcast the most listened-to phonographic music over the radio in 1920. They realized that amateur radio enthusiasts tuned into his programs. Westinghouse decided to broadcast the U.S. presidential election in 1920 on live from the station called KDKA.25 This was considered to be the first commercial broadcast,
23 Statement of Hon. Josephus Daniels, Secretary of the Navy, in House of Representatives, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fishers, Government Control of Radio Communication, 65th Cong., 2nd sess., December 12, 1918, 5; Robert W. Morrow, “Nationalizing American Radio:
Anti-Monopoly, Nationalism, and the First Alexander Bill, 1915-1917,”
18, no. 1 (2011): 17.
24 Douglas, 268; Morrow, 19.
25 This is mentioned in all major texts such as Barnouw, Starlling & Kitrross, Douglous, Engelman and Hilmsʼ study. I stated “this is debatable” because I found a text that has a different historical account: Gordon Greb and Mike Adams,
(Jefferson, NC: Mcfarland & Co, Inc, Publishing, 2003).
although it is still debatable.
5. AT&T, one of the joint groups related to the creation of the RCA, invented the idea of networks by connecting different radio stations by telephone line to air the same program in each station, which was called chain broadcasting. They then applied their telephone service to radio stationsʼ management, selling particular time to customers to air their contents, and calling it a toll broadcasting service. This led to creating what it was later known as a radio advertisement. Nonetheless, AT&T did not share their idea with other companies in the joint corporation. This led to the enormous disputes among the joint group members, and AT&T decided to leave radio industries and focus solely on telephone and telegraph service.26 AT&T sold their radio stations to RCA. As the result, the RCA gained different radio stations and eventually David Sarnoff, the engineer of RCA, created the NBC based on these stations.
These are the key events comprising the birth of a commercial network in the U.S. There are several other points to take account of the emergence of commercial broadcasting. First, the private companies did not see they could make a profit by merely broadcasting, but later they invented the way to manage a broadcasting station sustainably. Another critical point is that the Navy took on a critical role in creating commercial radio, especially by establishing a joint corporation with a major electric company like GE.27 This is important because American commercial broadcasting was not formed solely by private companies. There was no competition when the wireless companies started to form the base for the radio broadcasting industries. The origin of the commercial broadcasting business was far from media industries known today.
26 Besides, the federal government started to investigate the communication industries for alleged monopolies of communication business. RCA related companies needed to break the groups. For details, see Federal Trade Commission,
(1924), 19 and 28.
27 For the detailed account of US Navyʼs involvement with the development of the radio communication, see Captain L. S. Howeth
(Washington DC: Goverment Printing Office, 1963).
II The Problems Arising within Broadcasting Experiments
1. Who Would Pay for Broadcasting? And Who Would Do the Job of Broadcasting?
When radio broadcasting formed around 1917 to 1920, several problems of broadcasting emerged. The first was the ownership of the radio stations.
Another problem was the interference of radio waves preventing seamless communication through radio. These two became the significant problems that instigated the discussion of implementing a new regulation. However, implementing a regulation could mean that the government would interfere with broadcasting business, which contradicted the idea of a free-market economy.
David Sarnoff asked the questions, “Who is to pay for broadcasting? Who is to do the broadcasting job?”28 These two questions show that ownership and the control of the broadcasting station had become significant problems.
For a time, David Sarnoff, RCAʼs business management director, had thought that a broadcasting station should be non-profit, like a public library.
Initially, he saw a broadcasting station as the agent of public service, providing entertainment, such as music and drama sound recordings, along with sharing informercials and reading aloud the news provided by a newspaper company to the public.29 However, when RCA bought radio stations from AT&T, Sarnoff realized he could solve the financial problem of broadcasting after he, as an entrepreneur, got the idea of network franchising, and financing by advertising, just as AT&T did.30 Thus, commercial broadcasting became the answer to his two questions.
However, the problem still remained. The commercial broadcasting could become excessively powerful and could be monopolized by a powerful corporation to limit the accessibilities of a broadcasting facilities that everyone supposedly is able to air something. Nonetheless, at the time, no one foresaw that this could be a big problem. Commercial broadcasting was the answer to
28 Archer, , 29: Sarnoff, “National Broadcasting Evisaged,”
41.
29 Ibid.
30 Stephen Lippmann, “The Institutional Context of Industry Consolidation: Radio Broadcasting in the United States, 1920-1934,” 86, no. 2 (2007): 474.
Sarnoffʼs critical questions about the problem of broadcasting. Commercial broadcasting was the byproduct of solving the financial and ownership problems.
2. Interference and National Security
Along with the problem of ownership, interference of radio communication became a significant problem and the matter of national security. This instigated the discussion on creating the regulations to limit the numbers of broadcasting stations.
As it has been mentioned, anyone could broadcast as long as they could build the equipment. Before the word “broadcasting” was even known to the public, a majority of people using wireless communication were amateur enthusiasts, educational institutions, and the U.S. Navy controlled stations.
From 1910 to 1912, the U.S. Navy started to experiment with wireless communication because it was crucial to develop ship to ship, ship to coasts, or ship to airplane communication to make the navy stronger. Establishing a communication system over the ocean became the matter of national security.31 However, there was a problem with interference, especially with amateur wireless enthusiasts. In 1912, when the Titanic tragedy occurred in the Atlantic Ocean, the U.S. Coast Guards and Navy believed that they could have reacted quickly if there had been no interference at the time. The Titanic incident prompted action by the federal government, and the Wireless Act of 1912 was implemented: All wireless communicators needed to apply for a license. Nevertheless, it was easy to apply for a license, and anyone could obtain one. As soon as people could get a permit, they could broadcast over the radio, so there was no control in reality. As a result, the numbers of radio stations increased when the radio boom started in the 1920s. The department stores started to broadcast promotion within stores, churches broadcast their preaching, and educational institutions broadcast educational contents.32 The commercial station broadcast the informercial and entertainment programs.33
31 Christopher H. Sterling and John M. Kitross,
, 2nd ed, (Belmont, CA; Wadsworth Publishing Compnay, 1990), 34.
32 The following studies provide detailed images and case studies at the time: Doerksen, “ʻServing the Masses, not the Classesʼ”: 81-100; Arceneaux, “A sales floor in the sky” 76-89.
33 Ibid.
Amateur wireless operators could still air whatever they wanted.34 Thus, another practical regulation was needed.
3. Implementation of the Radio Act of 1927
Still, the numbers of broadcasters needed to be limited. The problems were, who was going to regulate, and how? Until 1927, there was no federal commission to control the industries in the ways needed in the U.S. The Department of Commerce and Labor (DCL) regulated wireless radio communications and wired communication such as telephone and telegraph, because all communication was considered the tools for commerce and nationwide activity that could easily cross the state jurisdictions. Thus, there was need for a new federal regulatory agency.35
Herbert Hoover, the secretary of the DCL, needed to solve the problems of interference immediately and came up with a new way to regulate radio broadcasting.36 He pointed out that a broadcaster needed to provide more than advertisements as radio should not be an advertising medium only.37 He also insisted that all broadcasters should serve the “public interest.”38 He got pressured by commercial broadcasters to solve this problem immediately because they needed seamless communications to conduct their business.39 Yet, he could not provide any practical solution to the interference of radio communication. However, the interference got so bad that no one could
34 The number of radio stations operated by amateur enthusiasts were reported in the following
report. U.S. Department of Commerce, (Washington D.C:
Government Printing Office, 1916), 5-8.
35 Harbert Hoover mentions his struggles of controlling the radio industries and solving the interferences in his memoirs. He argues that there was not any regulations that could be applied to solve the problems of interreference. Herbert Hoover,
(New York: The Macmillan Company, 1951), 139.
36 Czitrom, , 76.
37 Department of Commerce,
(Washington D.C: Government Printing Office, 1925 and 1924).
38 Hoover, 146-148
39 Ibid., 140; Christopher Sterling, ed. (New York, NY:
Routledge, 2007), 27. Hoover even mentioned in his memoirs that he was surprised that commercial broadcasters demanded to create some sort of regulations to control the interference.
broadcast without the interference of other broadcasters.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress started to react to the situation, as it was a matter of national security for the Navy too. They also began a plan to create a new government commission to regulate the communication system to resolve the problem of interference. They also thought a new agency with several members in decision making processes because the secretary of the DCL, and the next presidential candidate, Hoover, might gain too much power.
They wanted to avoid having Hoover making a policy decision alone.40 Although Hoover and some members of Congress opposed the idea of creating a new federal agency or commission, due to their political belief in small government, they agreed to create a temporary organization until a solution to radio interference could be accomplished.41 They passed the new communication law, the Radio Act of 1927, incorporating Hooverʼs idea that broadcasters needing to serve the public interest. In the same year, the Federal Radio Commission (FRC) was established, supposedly temporarily for a year; however, two of appointed committee members died of accident and illness. It did not work as an agency at all when it began.
Following year, the FRC became a permanent independent agency to resolve the still-unsolved problem, the interference. The Radio Act also stated that a broadcasting license would be given to a prospective broadcaster following these principles: public interests, convenience, and necessity.
However, it did not provide many details as to meaning. Besides, even commission members still needed to figure out what kind of authority and responsibilities the FRC had in addition to giving licenses.
The interference with broadcasting started to resolve after the birth of FRC and the Radio Act of 1927, because the law limited the number of eligible broadcasters who could apply for a license. Nonetheless, it created a new problem. There was a growing concern of the accessibility to a broadcasting facility. Broadcasting was supposedly a communication outlet that “everyone”
could enjoy, and access to a facility to present their opinions. The radio broadcast would have taken an essential role in a democratic society where
40 Barnouw, , 95-96.
41 “Coolidge and Hoover Opposed a Radio Commission,” , July 1926, 212. Accessed December 26, 2016. http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Radio-Broadcast/Radio- Broadcast-1926-07.pdf.
“everyone” could give their voice to America.
4. Discussions on the Role of Media in the American Society
Even though the new regulation seemed to resolve the problem of interference for the moment, it instigated a different set of problems which are still relevant today. Who would get permission to broadcast? If broadcasters got a permit to broadcast, what kind of contents could they broadcast?
Eventually, those problems led to the congressional discussions on the following points: 1. Who controls the media and to what purpose? 2. Are educational institutions allowed to broadcast? 3. What kind of responsibilities and authority did this government agency have? These congressional discussions became, in a way, a debate on the role of media in America.
Based on the Radio Act of 1927, all broadcasters who were allowed to use the scarce resource of radio waves needed to broadcast according to the principle of “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” This meant, at the same time, the FRC would give a license to those who could promise to follow the principles; otherwise, the license could be revoked. However, the FRC did not give a specific guidance, nor could they give any bases on which the FRC would give broadcasters a license. As a result, there was a room for free interpretation.42
Here, a broadcaster that was able to provide entertainment on a nationwide scale and had technical capabilities was considered to be a perfect fit for these principles.43 There was also the economic ideal of a free market economy with less regulation. Based on the free market economy, a commercial broadcaster was believed to serve the public interest by contributing to the American economy. Thus, this law worked in favor of commercial radio broadcast networks such as NBC and CBS, which were established in 1926 and 1927, and made a foundation for the biggest networks in the United States today.44
A majority of amateur radio enthusiasts and educational institutions did not have the capability of broadcasting nationwide with limited listeners.
42 Barnouw, , 202; McChesney, ,
22-24.
43 Ibid.
44 McChesney, , 29.
Therefore, these stations were not considered as serving the public interest of America as much as commercial stations could. However, in the 1930s, the American economy stagnated due to the Great Depression, and criticism of market fundamentalism arose.45 Along the way, the business standard of commercial broadcasters was questioned too for excessive commercialism, since they needed to follow public interest, as specifically stated in the Radio Act of 1927. Meanwhile, educational institutions saw the opportunity to show the importance of educational broadcasting. They started to make an argument for raising the standard of programs over radio broadcasting by focusing on the educative role of broadcasting, instead of making a profit providing with the only entertainment programs and advertisements.46
Under these circumstances, two major lobbying organizations promoting educational broadcasting were established with opposing views. This resulted in compelling political disputes: expanding commercial stations with educational contents vs. establishing a BBC-like a non-profit broadcasting network.47
One organization, called the National Committee on Education by Radio (NCER), argued for creating a BBC-like broadcasting network financed by state universities. Joy Elmer Morgan, a former president of the National Education Association, become the head of this organization. He stated, “Whoever controls the distribution of ideas will, in the end, control the destiny of America.”48 Therefore, he felt the freedom of expression of American people needed to be secured. In order to do so, he argued, educational broadcasting could have a significant role. He said, “The United States should select and adopt the essential features, the fundamental principles which underlie the British system.”49 The important thing here, however, is that he was not arguing to
45 Ibid., 32.
46 Robert, W. McChesney, “The Debate Over Public Policy and the Emergence of Commercial
Broadcasting in the United States, 1927-1935,” 21
(1991): 173; “An Unholy Alliance,” February 1, 1932, 16. Accessed October 22, 2013. http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-BC/BC-1932/1932-02-01.pdf; “A Vicious Fight Against Broadcasting,” , 1931, 10. Accessed, October 22, 2013.
http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-BC/BC-1931/1931-12-01-BC.pdf: 10.
47 Joy Elmer Morgan, “Should the U.S. Adopt the British System of Radio Control? Argument Favoring,” August/September, 1933 202-206.
48 Ibid., 204.
49 Ibid.
create BBC America, but rather to create a network of educational stations to make a well organized and financialized entity.
On the other hand, the National Advisory Council on Radio in Education (NACRE), the other lobbying organization, argued that educational institutions needed to cooperate with commercial broadcasters like NBC and CBS, who had more listeners.50 The Congress and FRC were in favor of the ideas of NACRE, yet they feared broadcasting industries were becoming too powerful.
In fact, the members of Congress were concerned that the standard of broadcasting programs would be affected by commercialization. Senator Clarence Dill strongly stated, at the hearing for creating regulations on communication industries, “The great feeling about the radio is that it will be monopolized by the few wealthy interests.”51 It seemed that there might have been a chance that a BBC-like broadcasting would be established in the U.S.
aside from commercial broadcasting.
These two organizations promoted educational broadcasting, but their political influence was limited.52 If they had worked together for the same cause, the result might have been different. Moreover, due to financial difficulties caused by the sluggish economy, educational broadcasting stations operated by universities were being sold to private companies as well as NBC networks, and the number of non-profit educational stations decreased.53 Some congressmen even believed that universities were for elite Americans, thus educational broadcasting would not serve the general American public.54 The head of NACRE, Tyson Levering, who had been working with NBC, had concerns over the conduct of educational institutions, and he was weighing the
50 See, Eugene E. Leech, web version.
(Washington DC: Current, 1999). Republished in Eugene. E. Leech,
(1983), Accessed October 27, 2012. http://www.current.
org/wp-content/themes/current/archive-site/coop/index.shtml.
51 Congress, Senate, , 70th
Congressional 2nd Session, February 4, 1929, 24.
52 McChesney, “The Debate Over Public Policy and the Emergence of Commercial Broadcasting in the United States,” 173; James A. Brown, “Struggle against Commercialism: The 1934 ʻHarney Lobbyʼ for Nonprofit Frequency Allocation,”
33, no. 3 (1989): 273-291.
53 This was mentioned in all of major historical studies of radio broadcasting besides the studies by Barnouw, Engeleman, and Blakely.
54 LaFount, “Should the U.S. adopt the British System of Radio Control?” 203-205.
difference between propaganda and educations55. Most of all, he thought like other congress men, educational institutes like a university only worked for a certain social group but not for “all” Americans. That may be the reason NACRE argued in favor of working with commercial broadcasters that had more viewers to reach.
There was a widespread fear of broadcasting being monopolized by big corporation, but the federal government and the FRC at that time said that educational broadcasting was possible even in a commercial framework, and did not take any special measures.56 As a result, broadcasting industries in the U.S. became an oligopoly and developed into the modern-day media industries, dominated by a small number of corporations, that we know today.
The strong American belief in the free market economy resulted in the idea that pursuit of profits would contribute to boosting the American economy, thus they served the public interest of American society. The broadcasting industries accepted this logic, and commercial broadcasters that contributed to economic development providing public benefit was considered, in a way, as “public broadcasting.” Indeed, the FRC committee member said: “I think our system of broadcasting is typically American, and that suits our democratic temperament as no other system I have yet encountered.”57 The Communications Act, implemented in 1934, inherited this idea and the interpretation of the Radio Act of 1927.
Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the educational aspect of broadcasting was considered crucial in the whole discussion of the implementing the Communication Act, and of the role of all broadcasting, regardless of whether it was commercial or non-commercial. Even the FRC and those who were in favor of commercial broadcasters thought there needed to be more than just advertisements and entertainment within the responsibility broadcasters had.
55 Tyson Levering, “Education vs. Propaganda: Are They Incompatible?”
(1938): 431-434.
56 McChesney, “
176.
57 LaFount, “Should the U.S. Adopt the British System of Radio Control?” 205.
III The Emergence of Television and Its Development After WWII
1. Discussion on the Role Model of Broadcasting and Its Educative Role
Although the non-profit educational broadcasting presence had diminished during the 1930s, and the discussion of the role of broadcasting stopped for a while because of WWII, a similar discussion about the role of broadcasting emerged after the war due to the spread of Television to the American household in the 1950s. In the U.S. at that time, the role of broadcasting became one of primary concerns because the Cold War had begun. As the red scare occurred right after WWII, all individuals and groups, including broadcasting networks like NBC, were investigated for their loyalties.58
Meanwhile, the commercial broadcasting industry had already predicted the new economic prospects of television broadcasting before the 1950s and had been preparing for the start of television broadcasting.59 At the start of TV broadcasting, interference problems that occurred in the 1920s were expected to happen for television broadcasting as well. The FCC needed to set new guidelines for television broadcasting to prevent another incidence of interference.
The FCC, formed by reorganizing the FRC in 1934, temporarily suspended the license renewal and issuance for television broadcasting in 1948 to make a channel allocation policy. The FCC still needed to figure out how to establish their authority, and to prepare new policies for the new medium. For the FCC, it was clear that they would have a hard time responding to the rapidly developing broadcasting technology if they solely relied on the premise of legally defined principles in the Communication Act, “public interest, convenience, and necessity.”
There, the FCC commissioners further assessed their own role as a federal agency and reconsidered their responsibilities and authority. They also began looking for new, detailed guidelines on the role broadcasters should take.
Although the FRC, as predecessor to the FCC, was in favor on commercial broadcasting as very American way of broadcasting, the FCC emphasized
58 For details of media history after the WWII in the U.S. following are good primer to see: Erik Barnouw, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968);
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1970); Sterling, and Kittross, . 59 Anne W Langman, “Television,” June 30, 1956, 55.
mediaʼs educative role and showed concern over the quality of programming contents. In 1946, the FCC published a report as well as the guideline,
known as the Blue Book, as the cover was blue.
According to the Blue Book, broadcasters were required to serve the public welfare, and they needed to recognize social responsibility as broadcasters.60 Besides, this guideline defined the meaning of public service with specificities, and also stated that minority tastes should be reflected in the program because not all people could broadcast or access the broadcasting facilities.
This guideline also suggested that it was necessary to discuss the role of media and consider an alternative way to broadcast among the industries in the future, such as non-profit broadcasting.61 Then, the book described educational programing and emphasized that broadcasters needed to keep in mind the specific educational program ratio and the balance of program contents.62 This book argued that the content covered in commercial broadcast programs should include all viewpoints in a broad and balanced manner.63 On this basis, the FCC expressed their concern with the excessive advertising in commercial stations and called for reducing the amount of advertising. This guideline became a discussion on the “fairness doctrine” (i.e. to fairly represent all views) implemented in 1949, and eventually led to the debate on how the FCC should respond to the broadcasting of US news programs or any other programs containing political issues.
In response to this guideline, NBC and other commercial broadcasters were strongly opposed and counter-argued that the FCC was trying to strengthen censorship. Here, commercial broadcasters were concerned about the criteria for issuing and renewing a license for broadcasting and the authority of the FCC. For the commercial broadcasters, this was related to the rights of broadcasting, and they feared that government intervention was a
60 Federal Communications Commission,
(Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1946). This guideline was also based in the Communication Act of 1934.
61 Ibid., 15.
62 Ibid.
63 Ibid.
