Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

III. COMMISSION DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevent factors which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of these competing applicants is most qualified to be granted a permit for construction of a television station. In this case the Commission found that each party was qualified to construct a television station and that the parties were substantially equally qualified as to several factors. The Commission awarded preferences, however, to Tribune and Pinellas because of their studio locations and facilities and to Tampa Bay because of the policy of diversification of control of media of mass communication. Determinative preference was awarded to Tribune based on its live program proposals and the promise of its effectuating them. In weighing the diversification factor, the Commission stated: “We are cognizant of the benefit to be obtained by a grant to Tampa Bay which would add a median for the dissemination of news and information independent of other such media in the area. However, this fact, although requiring careful evaluation, loses some emphasis when there is a variety of diversely owned stations and newspapers in the community. We conclude that Tribune's overall superiority clearly outweighs the comparative advantage enjoyed by Tampa Bay because of its lack of other newspaper and radio interests in the area. B. Factors considered by the Commission, classified as to preference awarded

to the parties 1. No preference allowed any party as to following factors : (a) Legal, technical, and financial qualification. (6) Coverage of area around the station.

(C) Intention to affiliate with a network or manner of integrating network programing into initial program proposals.

(d) Between Pinellas and Tribune on basis of integration of local ownership and management, and participation in community affairs. (No evidence presented by Tampa Bay on this point).

(e) Past experience (Tampa Bay's proposed manager's television xperience and the radio experience of the other two applicants). 2. Preference to Tribune: (a) Preference over Tampa Bay because of studio location.

(6) Preference over Tampa Bay because facilities afford a greater assurance of implementation of programing when considered in relation with program proposals.

(c) Slight preference over Pinellas because facilities afford a greater assurance of implementation of programing when considered in relation with program proposals.

(d) Determinative preference awarded to Tribune because of its clear superiority in amount, content, and promise for implementation of local live programing, based on its proposal and its past record of performance as a radio licensee and record of civil interest.

3. Preference to Tampa Bay :

(a) Preference over the other two applicants on basis of diversification of control of media of mass communication.

4. Preference to Pinellas:
(a) Preference over Tampa Bay because of studio location.

(6) Preference over Tampa Bay because facilities afford a greater assurance of implementation of programing when considered in relation with program proposals.

(c) No preference over Tribune. C. Factual basis for conclusion as to diversification

Tribune publishes one of two English language newspapers in Tampa ; operates one of two 5-kilowatt full-time radio stations in Tampa; controlling stockholder have controlling interests in two daily newspapers in Richmond, Va., an AM and an FM station in Richmond, and is an applicant for a television station in Richmond. Pinellas is licensee of one of two 5-kilowatt full-time radio stations in St. Petersburg; principal stockholder is controlling stockholder of one of two daily English language newspapers in St. Petersburg. Tampa Bay has no affiliation in the area; certain stockholders are also stockholders in a radio station in Rochester, N. Y., which is an applicant for a television station in Rochester; one other stockholder has an interest in a radio station in Clearwater, Fla.

I. PROCEEDING

In re applications of the Enterprise Co., Beaumont Broadcasting Corp., KTRM, Inc., for construction permits for new television stations, Beaumont, Tex.

II. RESULTS

A. The examiner's initial decision looked toward a grant to KTRM. B. The Commission, in its final decision, granted the application of Beaumont (9 R. R. 816).

C. The court of appeals reversed and remanded the Commission's decision for further proceedings because of an agreement entered into after the decision by KTRM, W. P. Hobby and Beaumont which, in effect, would give W. P. Hobby a 3272 percent interest in any company awarded the grant.

III. COMMISSION DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevant factors which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of three competing applicants is more qualified to be granted a permit for construction of a television station. Each applicant was found to be legally, technically, and financially qualified. The Commission was unable to conclude that significant differences exist among the applicants in any area of comparison other than that of diversification and concentration of control of the media of mass communication. There were no other significant countervailing circumstances or other factors of inferiority or superiority to balance the clear superiority to which Beaumont was entitled in this respect. B. Factors considered by the Commission classified as to preferences awarded

to the parties 1. No preference allowed the parties as to the following factors : (a) No preference to any party as to any factor except as listed below. 2. Preference to Beaumont:

(a) Clear and determinative preference awarded to Beaumont on basis of diversification of control of the media of mass communication.

3. Preference to Enterprise :
(a) None.
4. Preference to KTRM:

(a) None.
C. Factual basis for conclusion as to diversification

Each applicant has an AM station in Beaumont, Tex. Beaumont's president and largest stockholder (together with his family) has a large interest in an AM and a TV station in Wichita Falls, 375 miles from Beaumont. Enterprise has an FM station in Beaumont and publishes the only morning and evening daily newspapers in Beaumont. W. P Hobby, with the exercise of certain options he holds, can acquire 35 percent of the stock in KTRM and become the largest stockholder. Mr. Hobby is controlling stockholder in the Houston Post Co. which publishes the Houston Post having limited circulation in the grade A and grade B contours of the proposed Beaumont station. The Houston Post also is licensee of AM, FM, and TV stations in Houston (79 miles away) which service would overlap the service area of the proposed television station.

[blocks in formation]

In re applications of McClatchy Broadcasting Co., Sacramento Telecasters, Inc., for construction permits for new commercial television stations (channel 10, Sacramento, Calif.).

RESULTS

II.

A. Examiner's initial decision looked toward grant to McClatchy.

B. Commission, in its final decision, granted the application of Sacramento Telecasters (released October 4, 1954, 9 R. R. 1190).

C. The court of appeals subsequently affirmed the Commission's decision (January 27, 1956; United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, case No. 12,470).

III. COMMISSION DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevant factors which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of the two competing applicants is more qualified to be granted a permit for construction of a television station. In this case the Commission found that each party was qualified to construct a television station and that the parties were substantially equally qualified, except for a few factors. The factor of integration of ownership with management resulted in a preference to Telecasters. McClatchy's past record of performance gave it a preference. Considering these two criteria as indicating the likelihood of proposals being effectuated, the Commission allowed McClatchy slight preference. The policy of diversification of control of media of mass communication weighed strongly in favor of a grant to Sacramento Telecasters. In its decision the Commission used the following language: "In sum, the Congress, the courts, and this Commission are in agreement that a permit should not be withheld from an applicant be cause it is otherwise engaged in the dissemination of news. The diversification factor is simply one more criterion to be considered in the comparative process." B. Factors considered by the Commission, classified as to preference awarded

to the parties 1. No preference allowed either party as to following factors : (a) Legal, technical, and financial qualification. (6) Priority of filing. (c) Diversified and well-balanced program service. (d) Proposed staffs, facilities, and equipment. (e) Awareness of needs of community. 2. Preference to Telecasters : (a) Greater integration of ownership with management.

(b) Freedom from ties with other radio, newspaper, and television interests in Sacramento as well as throughout the Central Valley of California (diversification).

3. Preference to McClatchy:
(a) Past record of performance

(6) Slight preference on likelihood of effectuating proposals. C. Factual basis for conclusion as to diversification

McClatchy holds a construction permit for a television station at Fresno; operates the only 50 kilowatt AM station in Sacramento; publishes 1 of the 2 daily newspapers in Sacramento; publishes the only daily newspaper in Fresno and Modesto; operates radio stations in 4 cities in the Central Valley besides Sacramento. Telecasters has no newspaper interest. Telecasters' proposed general manager and its only stockholder having an interest in a broadcasting station, will dispose of his broadcast interest.

I. PROCEEDING

In re applications of Radio Fort Wayne, Inc., Anthony Wayne Broadcasting, for construction permits for new television stations, Fort Wayne, Ind.

II. RESULTS

A. The examiner's initial decision looked toward a grant to Anthony Wayne.

B. The Commission, in its final decision, granted the application of Radio Wayne.

C. The court of appeals remanded for further proceedings to determine the effect of the death of one of the partners in Anthony Wayne Broadcasting.

D. The Commission again granted the application of Radio Wayne (9 R. R. 1221).

III. COMMISSION DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevant factors which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of the two competing applicants is more qualified to be granted a permit for construction of a television station. Both applicants were found to be legally, financially, and

technically qualified. No significant differences between the applicants was found in regard to the engineering proposals, studios, staffs, and equipment. Anthony Wayne was given a slight but definite preference as to proposed program services, and a preference with respect to integration of ownership with management and participation in civic activities. Radio Fort Wayne has past experience as a radio licensee and would have been given a substantial preference here had it not been for defection in fully performing as promised to the Commission in its previous proceedings for a grant of the radio license.

No overall preference was given either applicant on basis of diversification of control of the media of mass communication. But a substantial and, in fact, determinative preference was awarded to Radio Fort Wayne because of the practices engaged in by the newspaper controlled by Anthony Wayne's partners. This newspaper and the only other major newspaper in Fort Wayne are joined operationally and have joint advertising rates whereby advertisers must advertise in both papers. Although this has not been held illegal by the courts, the Commission considers this practice destructive of competition and contrary to the public interest to the extent that it adversely affects Anthony Wayne's comparative standing. B. Factors considered by the Commission classified as to preference awarded the

parties 1. No preference allowed either party as to the following factors : (a) Legal, technical, and financial qualifications. (b) Engineering proposals. (c) Studios, equipment, and staffs. (d) Likelihood of meeting needs of community.

(e) No overall preference on basis of diversification of control of media of mass communication.

2. Preference to Radio Wayne:

(a) Radio Fort Wayne would have been granted a substantial preference here except for defection to its previous promises to the Commission in previous proceedings for a grant of a radio license.

() Determinative preference over Anthony Wayne because of the latter's newspaper practices which the Commission feels destroy competition and are contrary to the public interest.

3. Preference to Anthony Wayne : (a) Slight preference as to proposed program services. (6) Participation of owners in civic activities and integration of ownership with management. C. Factual basis for conclusion as to dirersification

No overall preference was awarded on the basis of diversification of control of the media of mass communication. Anthony Wayne controls 1 of the 2 daily newspapers in Fort Wayne (which has a tie-in with the other daily newspapers as discussed in the decision). Radio Wayne owns the smallest of 4 Fort Wayne radio stations and 2 other radio stations and a TV station in other area. Radio Fort Wayne's local preference is offset by its other, more scattered interests.

I. PROCEEDING

In re application of Oregon TV, Inc., Columbia Empire Telecasters, Inc., Northwest Television & Broadcasting Co., for construction permits for new television station (channel 12), Portland, Oreg.

II. RESULTS

A. Examiner's initial decision looked toward a grant to Oregon TV.

B. The Commission, in its final decision, granted the application of Oregom TV (9 R. R. 1401).

C. The court of appeals subsequently affirmed the Commission's decision..

III. COMMISSION DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevant factors which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of three competing applicants is more qualified to be granted a permit for construction

of a television station. Each applicant was found to be legally, technically, and financially qualified. No preference to any applicant was given on the basis of the awareness of the changing needs of the community, the likelihood of effectuating program commitments, and in regard to facilities and staffing. The various preferences which were awarded the individual applicants are specifically outlined below. B. Factors considered by the Commission classified as to preference awarded

to the parties 1. No preference allowed any party as to the following factors : (a) Legal, technical, and financial qualifications. (b) Awareness of the changing needs of the community. (c) Likelihood of effectuating program commitments. (d) Facilities and staffing proposals. 2. Preference given to Oregon: (a) Local ownership. (6) Preference over Northwest as to participation in civil activities.

(c) Preference over Columbia in regard to integration of ownership with management.

(d) Preference over Columbia as to allowance of opportunity for diversified expression of local activities and interests.

(e) Great preference over Northwest with respect to program proposals.

(f) Preference as to diversification of control of the media of mass communications.

3. Preference to Columbia :
(a) Preference over Northwest on basis of civic participation.
(6) On basis of radio and TV experience and past record as licensee.
(c) Preference over Northwest on program proposals.
4. Preference to Northwest :
(a) Integration of ownership with management.

(b) Preference over Oregon on basis of radio and TV experience and past record as licensee. C. Factual basis for conclusions as to diversification:

Columbia's stockholders are licensees of AM and FM station in Portland, Oreg., publisher of 1 of the 2 daily newspapers in that city, licensee of radio and TV stations in San Francisco, and part owner of the licensee company of a radio station in Seattle, Wash. One Northwest stockholder is part owner of the licensee companies of radio and TV stations in Hawaii and San Francisco. Oregon TV owns no media of mass communication.

I. PROCEEDING

In re applications of Tampa Times Co., Orange Television Broadcasting Co., Tampa Television Co., for construction permits for new commercial television broadcast stations, Tampa, Fla.

II. RESULTS

A. Examiner's initial decision looked toward a grant to Tampa Times.

B. The Commission, in its final decision, granted the application of Tampa Television Broadcasting Co., and denied rehearing (10 R. R. 77).

C. The United States Court of Appeals subsequently affirmed the Commission's decision (February 9, 1956; U. S. Ct. of App. for D. C. Circuit, Cases No. 12,588 and 12,589).

III. COMMISSION'S DECISION A. Summary

The Commission considered and weighed all relevant facts which might be determinative in a comparative proceeding to determine which of three competing applicants is more qualified to be granted a permit for construction of a television station. The Commission found that each party was qualified to construct a station. Comparing Tampa Television against Orange Television, the Commission found Tampa TV's programing proposal superior because of its provision, through its auxiliary studio, to serve St. Petersburg and the St. Petersburg programs planned. Tampa TV was also preferred on its ability to carry out its programing in view of the uncertainty as to a portion of Orange's local live programing be

« ПредишнаНапред »