Fly in the Appointment

No one in Washington loves a fight more than the Federal Communications Commission's sorrel-topped, razor-tongued chairman, James Lawrence Fly. This week, having easily won Senate confirmation of his reappointment to FCC, Chairman Fly could look forward happily to another seven years of hard work and hard fights.

A former anti-trust lawyer (once general counsel for TVA) and a longtime opponent of radio "monopoly," Larry Fly faced no dearth of problems or opponents.

Fights & Foes. Fly's most immediate fight is in Congress against the Sanders Bill, which proposes sweeping changes in the communications act, one of which would split FCC into two divisions and strip the chairman of much of his authority. His major opponents are CBS and NBC, which consider Fly prejudiced and think he wants to reform them out of business; the National Association of Broadcasters, which Fly has delighted to compare to John Randolph's dead mackerel in the moonlight ("It shines and stinks"), and newspaper owners, whom Fly is frankly trying to keep out of the radio business for fear of a news monopoly.

In testimony before the House Interstate & Foreign Commerce Committee, Fly indicated that the Sanders Bill would hamstring reform, and declared, "If you want to turn this vast industry over to a couple of men in New York [presumably RCA President David Sarnoff and CBS President William Paley] you can go ahead and do it."

That Larry Fly has opposition even in his own camp was shown when Commissioner T. A. M. Craven followed him as a witness before the House committee. Craven praised the radio networks, expressed the view that newspapers should be allowed to operate stations, and described FCC's present plan of organization as "basically unsound."

Other Ways. A number of critics who agree with Fly that radio and radio programs can be improved, but disagree with his methods, approve the point of view of Bernard B. Smith, a Manhattan lawyer and student of radio. In the June Harper's, Smith argued that the way to improve radio's service to the public is not to weaken the great chains but to strengthen them by taking programs out of the hands of the advertising agencies. Writing with a sympathetic understanding of network frailties, Lawyer Smith pointed out that the ad agencies-not the networks-develop and control virtually all sponsored programs.

Smith's suggested solution: let the networks control and develop their own programs, selling advertisers only the right to insert commercials. Sponsors would be charged on a sliding scale, varying with the actual size of the listening audience. Under such a system, networks could offer a balanced bill of fare, and they could find sponsors (at lower rates) for programs with restricted audiences, such as the Toscanini concerts and the Budapest String Quartet.

FCC's Fly made a carefully noncommittal reference to the Smith article last week.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.