Radio Interprets the News
MUTUAL NETWORK COMMENTATOR
Six QUESTIONS have been asked by the editor of the DARTMOUTH ALUMNI MAGAZINE concerning radio and I am going to endeavor to answer them in this article of about twenty-five hundred words. The article is being written exactly as though I were writing a script for delivery on the air, even to the extent that I am typing it myself. Right at this moment I am sitting in a comfortable compartment on a through Pullman car from Dallas to New York. The reason that I came by train back to New England after a lecture tour of Texas, was that I knew that it would be the only way in which I could prepare this discussion for the March issue of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE.
The editor asks first of all: "Is radio sufficiently aware of its responsibilities as a purveyor and interpreter of national and world news? How does it compare with the press in this respect?"
I believe that some radio stations are aware of their responsibility in purveying and interpreting news, but I feel, after an intimate association with radio throughout the United States for more than a decade, that there still is much to be accomplished in this field. There are many radio stations which could do a better job of public service in this respect. Insofar as radio and press are concerned, the press is far ahead of radio. This is due, however, to the communications already available to the press. It is due to the fact that the press has been in the field for generations past; the present stature of the press has been attained only after centuries of development. As a matter of fact, radio in almost complete measure depends upon the press for coverage of news. Only in such outstanding instances as the Nurnberg trials and in the round-the-world-pickups has radio depended upon itself for coverage of world news. Domestic news is in a somewhat different category, as the major networks of the country maintain key men at strategic points for spot coverage and interpretation of news.
Question number two is as follows: "Is there a conflict" between this responsibility and the radio's emphasis on entertainment and its financial dependence upon commercial sponsors?"
As the late President Roosevelt would so often say .... after considerable reflection upon a query .... "I should say .... yes." I believe there is oftentimes a conflict between news and public events being broadcast on the one hand and sheer entertainment on the other. I do not believe that sponsors dictate this policy but the dependence of radio upon sponsors.... which is nothing more nor less than the dependence of newspapers upon advertisers, only in the radio field .... quite naturally makes a radio station operator think twice before he sacrifices a commercial program.
An example of this might be stated in these words: If the Jones manufacturing company was desirous of buying time on the air, and there was a news sponsorship available, the radio operator would think a long time before he carried that news broadcast sustaining (without sponsorship) if the Jones company was willing to purchase a record-spinning program in the same hour.
Question number three is: "Is it radio's job to try to mold public opinion or merely to reflect it?"
That is a question which causes more disputes than probably any other that the good editor of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE could have asked. It is extremely difficult for me to answer it in an unprejudiced manner because the task which I try to carry out on the air five days a week is a combination of reflection and molding. A truthful answer on my part is that radio should do both. In straight news broadcasts, radio of course gives to the public the unvarnished news as it comes off the press association wires or as it is gathered by other means. Through news commentators, or analysts —which ever you prefer to call themradio gives the public a combination of straight news and interpretations. But no radio station is worthy of its existence if it fails to give to the public an opportunity to mold opinion, and by this I simply mean that it should afford its facilities to all groups, irrespective of race, class, color or creed. Most radio stations do this and, as a matter of fact, some radio stations have outstanding records in public service. All are required to maintain certain standards by the Federal Communications Commission because licenses are granted only "in the public's interest, convenience and, or, necessity." One problem which a radio station operator faces is that of deciding just how much time he can afford to give to this "molding" of public opinion. The newspaper publisher is in exactly the same situation, but the publisher has a tremen dous advantage over the radio station operator. If the publisher (this is in normal times only because now, of course, the publisher is still faced with the shortage of paper) decides that the giving away of space is imperative on a certain day and he has not the room to get it in, then he is always able to "go up" two pages or so in his edition. In other words, increase the number of pages to take care of the overflow. Radio is in no such position. There is no such thing as a "rubber clock." There are only so many minutes to the hour and only so many hours to the day. In fact, there are only so many hours that the public is listening, unless you want to broadcast to "milkmen and cops." The newspaper publisher will counter by saying that there is no such thing as "rubber type." That is true. You can't stretch it, but you do have in the newspaper business an elasticity which is absolutely denied to radio.
Question number four is divided into four queries. I will deal with them separately. The first is: "What of the role of the news commentator in the field of public opinion?" There, of course, the editor strikes home insofar as this broadcaster is concerned. I believe that the news commentator has upon his shoulders the greatest kind of responsibility. I not only believe that; I know it, dogmatic as that may sound, to be true. I have travelled hundreds of thousands of miles in the United States during the war and in the battlefields of the Pacific and I have learned at first hand, through the most intimate kind of association with peoples all over this nation, just how much the mass of the people rely upon news analysts to aid them in fashioning and shaping their opinions. The intelligence of your listening audience determines the degree to which the words of the commentator are taken as sacrosanct. The public, however, does repose a great faith in news analysts who have been on the air for a long time.
The editor asks: "Does radio maintain high enough standards with regard to the men and women to whom it entrusts this role?" The answer is in the affirmative. Individual stations and networks have long been aware of the necessity of giving the pub'ic honest reporting. One may not always agree with a commentator, and nationally known figures on the air have bitter opponents as well as staunch friends, but strangely enough, although I have heard many persons take issue with news analysts, I have never heard an educated person question the honesty or sincerity of any analyst. Therefore, I would answer "yes" to the question of "can we trust our present commentators?"
"What ought the qualifications of a commentator to be?" There can be no hard and fast rule applied in the making of any such decision. The first requisite should be "complete honesty and sincerity." That should be given number one priority. Knowledge of a subject.... or a wide variety of subjects, such as is needed to qualify for a commentator's position is not sufficient. There must be intellectual honesty above all. There must be no "axe" to grind. There must be a willingness to present both sides of a question and then a determination to fight with all one's strength for what one believes to be right.
The role of the commentator must lean more toward molding and interpreting opinion than toward reflecting it than toward mere factual recitation of world happenings.
No man should qualify for a commentator's work unless he is widely travelled unless he loves people .... unless he knows what "makes them tick." The commentator should know his America inside and out. He must be as familiar with Market street in San Francisco as he is with Boylston street in Boston .... Canal street in New Orleans.... Ross avenue in Dallas. He must know that the Northwestern tracks end at Omaha and the Union Pacific picks up to Ogden where the "SP" takes over. He must know that Burma is a "crown colony" now on the verge of complete independence and that Hindenburg said after the battle of Tanneberg: "You can never defeat the Russians. The answer is simple .... there are too many Russians." This .. . . after a great German victory meaning a pyrrhic victory. He must understand the issues of reciprocal trade .... the negro problem .... the governorship tangle in Georgia .... the differences between Stassen and Taft on the labor bills now before the Congress .... the charges against Boston's Mayor Curley and the reasons why so many persons are leaving the teaching profession to engage in other lines of endeavor. He must know the army and the navy and air force and he must know his official Washington. You ask what should be his qualifications? In short, he must be a jack of all trades and a master of none. That is the answer, with, of course, certain qualifications.
This commentator has had no vacation in five years and five years ago he was just starting. A vacation would mean only cessation of broadcasting for a short period but it would not enable one to rest through ignoring the news of the day. Two weeks hence it would be all but impossible to pick up the dropped threads and to do an intelligent commentary .... so fast is the tempo of events today.
"To what extent is a commentator hamstrung by sponsors and broadcasting policy?"
I can answer that only in the light of my own experience. I can speak for none other than myself. At this writing I have approximately one hundred forty-seven sponsors in one hundred forty-seven different cities. I say "approximately" because they are "cancelling out" and new ones are coming in, dependent upon economic conditions throughout the country. I know, out of these one hundred forty-seven, possibly one dozen. Certainly no more. In all of the six and one half years in which I have been heard coast-to-coast on the Mutual network I have never received, with but one exception, a letter from any sponsor asking me to discuss any particular subject on the air. I have never received a letter either of praise or of condemnation from any sponsor, and during my period of broadcasting it is safe to say that more than three hundred different concerns have sponsored my program on what is known as a "co-op basis." Therefore, when one asks me if I am hamstrung by sponsors 1 answer with a definite "no." I'm not only not hamstrung by them but I don't even know them. But they continue to buy the broadcast, and to spend on it, in station time and talent fees .... and by the latter is meant remuneration to the broadcaster himself.... hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Radio is still in its infancy. The radio commentator, I believe, will always be an integral part of radio. The public is used to him and it wants him to continue. His responsibility is great and I believe he will assume it and live up to it without letting the public down. At the risk of reiteration .... he must have in him the milk of human kindness and realize there is a "right" and there is a "left." Neither is right but somewhere there is the middle road. He must endeavor to find through the process of equalization and this he can do if he is honest. He needs no degrees. Insofar as this broadcaster is concerned he "never graduated from nothing." With the exception of a certificate of admission to the freshman class at Dartmouth College he has nothing to show that he ever attended any institution of learning in this country .... no diplomas of any kind. The years spent at Dartmouth, however, are among the most precious of life. The honorary degree from Southwestern University in Georgetown, Texas .... which is the oldest university in Texas .... is his most precious possession and die greatest honor bestowed upon him through the broadcasting field. It's an honorary doctorate of literature and it came through hundreds of hours .... thousands of hours .... during which he wrote more than five million words .... hours of broadcasting and many more of travelling and reading and re search. Hours on hours of conversation with people in all walks of life .... from the White House to a street cleaner.... from the commanding general to the GI in the fox hole .... from the boss of the corporation to the boy who collects the mail.
Radio is a blessing to mankind. Those who are in it are in great measure aware Of their responsibilities. I think they will continue to shoulder them.
