OCR Text |
Show ItrueUarfH Washington liiyvst General Houseclcaning in Federal Communications Board Is Needed History of Control of Radio Is Story of Troubled Days; Public Concerned Because Free Speech Involved; Split on Board Adds to General Confusion. By WILLIAM ERUCKART VNU Service, National Press Kldg., Washington, D. C. WASHINGTON. It seems among the inevitable and unavoidable things that there must be growing pains when the government starts execution of any new policy. This always has been the case. I assume as-sume it is going to be true always, and it does not matter whether that new policy involves something as inherently governmental as government govern-ment supervision of public services serv-ices or something as inherently political po-litical as the national emergency council. The latter institution ought to have as a part of its title some words designating its value as the hod carrier in political emergencies, such as the recent "purge" of Democrats Dem-ocrats who insisted on being Democrats Demo-crats as distinguished from New Dealers. With that preface, we can examine exam-ine into the situation that exists in the federal communications commission. com-mission. As laymen whose only contact con-tact with radio is on the listening end, or whose only contact with telephones is to use them for business busi-ness and social intercourse, or whose only contact with the telegraph tele-graph is to send or receive messages, mes-sages, well, obviously we laymen do not know much about the F. C. C. But that does not excuse any of us for lack of interest. For F. C. C. is just ai, close to you and me as the interstate commerce commission is, and unless I miss my guess it will be even closer in the years to come. There has been a measure of control con-trol over radio for years, and they have been troublesome years, both for the agency administering the law and the industry forced to abide by the law. Within the last few years, however, there has come into existence the F. C. C. which is concerned con-cerned not alone with radio, but with telephones and telegraphs. These latter industries, however, are themselves settled down and out of their teens. They have got by the growing pains, but as for radio, the story is quite different and decidedly de-cidedly more important, because there are fundamental dangers to you and me in the situation. Federal Control of Radio Story of Troubled Days The history of federal control of radio, as I said above, is a story of troubled days. The bulk of the trouble has been due to the type of personnel selected for administration administra-tion of that control. That is to say, politics is to blame as much as anything. any-thing. Politicians will endorse any screwy bird, long-haired theorist or narrow-eyed half-breed if such endorsement en-dorsement will get him votes or help hold the -royal order of nose-pickers in line at election time. And that is why, or largely why, the federal communications commission com-mission at this writing is undergoing undergo-ing pains like I used to have when 1 allowed my childish enthusiasm to overcome my judgment and ate apples ap-ples before they were ripe. I wouldn't care how many of the boys on the government payroll had tummy tum-my aches about their jobs, or how many private and bitter words passed between highups or low-downs low-downs in the commission except for the fact that precedents are being established that will affect you and me directly as the years roll by. The things that have developed in the F. C. C. concern us because they involve free speech, involve it as directly as any attempt to use censorship on your newspaper or mine. Besides, there is the certainty certain-ty that radio has been used to foment fo-ment or put to sleep some national issues. It brings the nation within any small room that happens to house a couple of good, workable microphones. If there was ever a place for establishment of basically sound and wise policies, it is in the government supervision of radio. It is hard to get at the facts in the current dust storm within the commission. com-mission. There are so many stories sto-ries afloat, however, that somewhere some-where there must be some truth. And this belief is buttressed by the known fact that President Roosevelt is considering what to do to get the tangle straightened out. Trouble Shooter Fails To Smooth Out the Mess To go back a bit, it will be .recalled .re-called that Mr. Roosevelt sought more than a year ago to smooth out the .ness by transferring Frank Mc-Ninch Mc-Ninch from the job of chairman of the federal power commission to that of chairman of the federal radio ra-dio commission. Every one conversant con-versant with the situation said at that time that the new chairman was a good trouble shooter and that he would get things working as a highly technical agency ought to work. But the truth is that Mr. McNinch has not succeeded. If anything, any-thing, there have been more rows and the work of the commission has been slowed down even to a worse condition than it was. The whole thing would not amount to a hill of beans except that it seems utterly impossible to get sound and judicial execution of a technical law under such circumstances, circum-stances, and the matter becomes of moment to everyone because this monster, radio, is still in swaddling clothes. The battle within the commission crops up every once in awhile, just as it did when the commission recently re-cently fired Hampson Gary, its general gen-eral attorney. Mr. Gary was asked for his resignation, and an alternative alterna-tive of another appointment elsewhere else-where in the government. But he stuck out his chin, and said "no." Well, he promptly was fired. Too Much Interested in Fighting Among Themselves From all of the stories I have picked up, I suspect that Mr. Gary was no great shakes as a lawyer. On the other hand, it was equally apparent that Mr. Gary was being supported by a couple of commissioners commis-sioners who had hard noses and wouldn't quit fighting. It is an incident inci-dent that is related as an illustration illustra-tion and as a basis for the statement state-ment that most of the members of the commission and a substantial portion of the subordinate personnel are much more interested in fighting among themselves than in trying to understand and administer an intricate intri-cate law. This column is not the place to attempt a list of the many rulings of the commission that have done the industry no good. Attention can be called, however, to the procedure under which these decisions are brought about, having in mind that such decisions have just as much force as the law itself. It is the regular routine in a governmental gov-ernmental agency for consideration of problems, determination of policy, poli-cy, interpretation of law, to have their initiative in suggestions from the top individuals. They are named as the policy-makers. They have to assume responsibility. In the case of the communications commission, there seems to be something of the same procedure followed, except that the individual members of the board, or some of them, persist in acting individually rather than collectively col-lectively as a board. This would not be so bad if the board members as a whole were in accord. But they are not. There is a split as wide as Pennsylvania avenue. ave-nue. The result is that on many, many occasions underlings have brought forward propositions that served only to fan the flames of disagreement dis-agreement between board members. And, of course, as these proposals became known the portion of the radio ra-dio industry concerned was thoroughly thor-oughly upset because it had no way to defend itself no place to tell its side of the case. General Houseclcaning In Commission Needed Again, even this condition could be corrected and something of a workable work-able nature developed if the bulk of the subordinates around the commission com-mission were sound thinkers. That, unfortunately, however, seems not to be the case. The place is packed and jammed with numerous men who think they are hot shots, whose only claim to recognition is that they, themselves, claim to be experts, or who have been unable to make good in the industry and have succeeded through political endorsement to get a place at the feed trough of government gov-ernment checks. So I say that I am unwilling to charge continuation of the mess to Mr. McNinch. He apparently has tried, but as long as some members of the commission manage to gain public attention by their nauseating blurbs and as long as some of the silly flock, claiming to be "original New Dealers," continue to spew out venom about "unfairness of newspapers," news-papers," it is likely the communications communica-tions commission is going to get nowhere no-where very fast. Much of the silly propaganda, that newspapers are unfair to the New Deal, bubbles to the surface from points other than the communications communica-tions commission. Those who serve as the mouthpieces for such clabber, clab-ber, however, can be seen flocking together frequently. It is only natural, nat-ural, therefore, to suppose that they are active in spreading their views among commission underlings who, in turn, get the germs incubated Xithin their own organization. I said earlier that it may be Mr. Roosevelt will have to ask for a general gen-eral housecleaning and resignation of most of those in key positions. It is quite likely that he will dodge that action if any other way can be found to solve the problem. In any event, T hope that congress looks into the situation. If it does, maybe may-be something concrete will be done to establish a sound agency one that will consider the interests of listeners and services and manufacturers manufac-turers equally, just as the Interstate Commerce commission does in its supervision of rail and other forms of transportation. Western Newspaper Union. |