Back to Index

 

 

 

 

 In Re Renewals of BROADCAST LICENSES FOR ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA AND MISSISSIPPI, 1973; Part 1 of 2

 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

 

42 F.C.C.2d 3

 

MAY 31, 1973 

 


JUDGES:

 

THE COMMISSION BY COMMISSIONERS BURCH (CHAIRMAN), ROBERT E. LEE, H. REX LEE, REID, WILEY, AND HOOKS, WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNSON DISSENTING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT, APPROVED STAFF ACTION REVIEWING BROADCAST LICENSES FOR ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA AND MISSISSIPPI FOR 1973.


OPINIONBY: JOHNSON

 

DISSENTBY: JOHNSON

 

DISSENT:

DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON

For my entire term I have dissented to the automatic renewal of licensees guilty of substandard performances in programming and (more recently) employment.  The 1973 Arkansas-Louisiana-Mississippi renewals represent the last group that will cross my desk during my official tenure as Federal Communications Commissioner.  Therefore, I and my staff and seminar students have prepared a major report on broadcasting in America, incorporating many of the complaints and suggestions of my seven years, for this one final renewal dissent.

BROADCASTING IN AMERICA

The Performance of Network Affiliates

in the Top 50 Markets

July 1973 -- A case study prepared by FCC Commissioner Nicholas

Johnson and his staff and seminar students

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Page

Table of Contents

4

Table of Tables

4

Credits

5

INTRODUCTION (and overall programming ranking)

6

Chapter 1.  PROGRAMMING PERFORMANCE

 

I.  Introduction

14

II.  News & Public Affairs

16

III.  Commercialization

25

IV.  Local Programming

30

V.  Confidential Financial Information

38

Chapter 2.  EMPLOYMENT

 

I.  Introduction

49

II.  Analysis of Minority Employment

52

III.  Analysis of Female Employment

59

IV.  Remedies for Claims of Employment Discrimination

61

V.  National Employment Analysis

64

Chapter 3.  PATTERNS OF OWNERSHIP

68

Chapter 4.  HOW YOU CAN IMPROVE TELEVISION IN YOUR COMMUNITY

 

I.  What Can You Do?  (an Introduction)

100

II.  How Do You Prepare?

103

III.  What Action Can You Take?

118

Appendix A.  Systems Methodology

123

Appendix B.  Citizens' Organizations & Resource Materials

126

Appendix C.  Additional Tables of Information

128

Appendix D.  The Ten Best and Ten Worst Stations

166

Appendix E.  Setting Minimum Levels of Performance

170

Appendix F.  The Top 50 Markets

171

TABLE OF TABLES

 

Table 1.  Ranking the network affiliates

 

in the top 50 markets on their overall

 

programming performance

7

Table 2.  Overall programming ranking

 

including rank in each of the

 

programming criteria

14

Table 3.  Ranking of performance in

 

news, public affairs and "other"

 

programming

19

Table 4.  Ranking of performance in

 

category of Public Service announce-

 

ments

23

Table 5.  Ranking of performance in

 

commercialization category

28

Table 6.  Ranking of performance in local programming

34

Table 7.  Ranking based on the percentage

 

of gross revenues allocated to

 

program expenditures

44

Table 8.  Ranking of the total percentage

 

of minority employees relative

 

to the percentage of minorities in the SMSA

53

Table 9.  Ranking of the percentage

 

of minorities employed in high pay

 

positions

57

Table 10.  Ranking of the percentage

 

of women employed in high pay

 

positions

59

Table 11.  National total of full time,

 

minority and women employees of

 

affiliates in the study in 1972

64

Table 12.  Stations reporting fewer than

 

5 minority employees in 1972

64

Table 13.  Total full time, minority and

 

women employees in high pay

 

positions in 1972

65

Table 14a.  Stations employing 0 or 1

 

minorities in high pay positions in

 

1972

65

Table 14b.  Stations employing 0 or 1

 

women in high pay positions in 1972

65

Table 15.  Stations showing a decrease

 

in employment of minorities or

 

women in 1972

66

Table 16.  Cross reference of owners to call letters

74

Table 17.  Ownership Information

77

CREDITS

This report is very much the product of a multi-group effort.  The groups involved included my own staff, a group of Georgetown University law students in a seminar I was teaching, FCC employees outside of my office, and guests appearing before the seminar.

After the markets and stations were selected, decisions had to be made as to which categories of data to include and exclude, and the analyses to which they should be subjected.  The data had to be extracted from FCC files.  Computer programs were written.  Additional research, writing and editing produced the text.  The text and charts were laid out and typed many times.  Each of these tasks involved uncounted hours of labor.

The principal participants in my own office were Larry Gage and Elaine Weiss.  It was they who did the lion's share of the administration of the group effort, following up on the thousands of details necessary to the project's timely completion, editing the seminar students' contribution, and adding their own substantial segments of text.  Karen Possner, a doctoral candidate in Communications at the University of Iowa, made valuable contributions to the seminar sessions and this report.  Chuck Shepherd helped out with some of the charts.  Bonnie Herbert and Karen Margrave bore the considerable burdens of typing and preparing this substantial manuscript at a time when their normal tasks were especially heavy.

The Georgetown law students were: Phil Argento, Thomas J. Collin, Raymond C. Fay, Ronald G. Gabler, Larry Harbin, Karen B. Possner, Lucilla A. Streeter, James R. Tanfield, David Wagner, James B. Wilcox, Jr. and Brady Williamson.  They participated in my seminar with the advance knowledge that the burdens would be substantial and executed the assignment with great ability and good spirits.  Derrick A. Humphries participated in the first two months of the seminar.  The contribution of Larry Harbin in preparing and executing our computer programs warrants special mention.

Those FCC employees outside of my office who gave us invaluable assistance include: Pearl Cook, Larry Eads, John Foret, Alex Korn, Quentin Proctor, Allan Stillwell, Wally Johnson, David Westin and Harold Kassens.  We very much appreciate their cooperation -- occasionally requiring their staying well beyond the FCC's normal 4:30 pm. closing time.

Seminar guests who gave us an evening of their time included: Sam Buffone, a former seminar student and currently an associate in Stern Concern; former FCC Commissioner Kenneth A. Cox; former FCC General Counsel Henry Geller, currently with the Rand Corporation; Dr. Everett Parker, Director of the United Church of Christ Office of Communications; Tracy Westen, a former legal assistant of mine and currently Director of Stern Concern; and Dr. Clay T. Whitehead, Director of the White House Office of Telecommunications Policy -- as well as most of the FCC employees mentioned above.  Each contributed in his or her own way to the seminar participants' understanding of the performance and regulation of broadcasting in America.

The other friends and advisors who have had some input during the past seven years to my thinking about broadcast regulation in general and this approach to it in particular are too numerous to itemize but are no less important to the end product.

With thousands of pieces of data copied and handled many times, there are undoubtedly errors somewhere in this report.  All I can say is that we have done our best to keep such errors to an absolute minimum and express our regrets in advance to any broadcaster who has been adversely affected by such error.

 

NICHOLAS JOHNSON, Washington, D.C.

June 1973

INTRODUCTION

The revelations surrounding Watergate have only dramatized what many concerned citizens and public interest lawyers have known for a long time: we cannot rely on government to solve our problems.  The regulatory agencies set up to serve the public interest all too often end up almost totally subservient to industry pressure.

Whatever may be the case elsewhere, however, the Federal Communications Commission is a classic case of what now Chief Justice Burger once called "a curious neutrality in favor of the licensee." n1

 

n1 Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ v. Federal Communications Commission, 359 F 2d 994 (D.C. Cir. 1966).

Seemingly congenital pro-industry bias, of course, is no reason to give up on the agency.  Quite the contrary.  It must be watched all the more closely.  There must be appeals to the courts and Congressional and press exposes of the FCC's most egregious decisions.  There must be public participation in license renewal hearings, fairness doctrine complaints, FCC rule makings, Congressional hearings involving the agency, and so forth.  Still, it is only the better part of wisdom and imagination to try to come up with alternatives to government at the same time efforts are being made to maximize the potential of the FCC.

One such alternative is represented by this report.  It is, quite simply, an effort to use public disclosure of broadcasters' performance, and comparative rankings of those broadcasters, as a means of rewarding the better stations and punishing the worst.

It is true, of course, that this analysis of what is, after all, FCC data, may attract the attention of FCC staff or Commissioners, or may provide an incentive to outraged citizens to file license renewal challenges against the worst stations.  This report may be more seriously considered by broadcasters because they are aware of that potential threat.  But that is not the principal purpose of the report.  The major hope is simply that the mere publishing of this data will, standing alone, provide reinforcement for the better stations and an incentive to improvement by the worst.

It is true that an FCC Commissioner was involved in the preparation of this document.  But in many ways that should be irrelevant to its impact.  The data used is publicly available from the FCC's files.  And broadcasters have little to fear from the vote of one dissenting Commissioner on a seven-person Commission.  In short, this is the kind of study that any group should be able to do -- nationally, as this one, or locally, and in more depth.

This report represents the attempt of one Commissioner, his staff, and seminar students to analyze the performance of each of the network affiliates in the top fifty television markets in the country.  Because the findings are presented in the form of rankings of those stations, in areas of performance from employment to programming, it is perhaps fitting to begin the report with the overall composite ranking of the affiliates with regard to their programming performance.

Quite simply, this table ranks each of the stations in the study based on a composite of all of the programming criteria analyzed in Chapter one.  In this table KPIX-TV, San Francisco, ranks as the best-programmed station in the top fifty markets, and WCCB, Charlotte, N.C., ranks as the worst.

TABLE 1. -- Network affiliates ranked by composite of all programming criteria

 

Rank

Call letters

Net. aff.

Mkt. No,

Location

1

KPIX

CBS

8

San Francisco

2

WJZ

ABC

19

Baltimore

3

KING

NBC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

4

KDKA

CBS

9

Pittsburgh

5

KYW

NBC

4

Philadelphia

6

WPLG

ABC

18

Miami

7

WMAL

ABC

10

Washington D.C.

8

WTAE

ABC

9

Pittsburgh

9

WFMY

CBS

48

Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal

10

KGW

NBC

26

Portland

11

WWL

CBS

31

New Orleans

12

WRC

NBC

10

Washington D.C.

13

WABC

ABC

1

New York City

14

KNBC

NBC

2

Los Angeles

15

WIIC

NBC

9

Pittsburgh

16

WTIC

CBS

22

Hartford-New Haven

17

WNAC

ABC

6

Boston

18

KATU

ABC

26

Portland

19

WHAS

CBS

36

Louisville

20

KCRA

NBC

27

Sacramento-Stockton

21

KOIN

CBS

26

Portland

22

WBNS

CBS

28

Columbus

23

KTAR

NBC

45

Phoenix

24

KOMO

ABC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

25

WLWT

NBC

20

Cincinnati

26

WCBS

CBS

1

New York City

27

KMOX

CBS

12

St Louis

28

WSM

NBC

30

Nashville

29

WKY

NBC

41

Oklahoma City

30

WAST

ABC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

31

WSB

NBC

17

Atlanta

32

WBZ

NBC

6

Boston

33

KSL

CBS

50

Salt Lake City

34

WMAR

CBS

19

Baltimore

35

WZZM

ABC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

36

WDSU

NBC

31

New Orleans

37

WRTV

NBC

14

Indianapolis

38

WBFN

CBS

25

Buffalo

39

WNBC

NBC

1

New York City

40

KNXT

CBS

2

Los Angeles

41

KPRC

NBC

15

Houston

42

WCPO

CBS

20

Cincinnati

43

WMAQ

NBC

3

Chicago

44

KOVR

ABC

27

Sacramento-Stockton

45

WITI

ABC

21

Milwaukee

46

WCAU

CBS

4

Philadelphia

47

WSYR

NBC

43

Syracuse

48

WBAL

NBC

19

Baltimore

49

WBRC

ABC

38

Birmingham

50

WPVI

ABC

4

Philadelphia

51

WPRI

CBS

34

Providence

52

WAPI

NBC

38

Birmingham

53

KUTV

NBC

50

Salt Lake City

54

KWTV

CBS

41

Oklahoma City

55

WTOP

CBS

10

Washington D.C.

56

WCKT

NBC

18

Miami

57

WSOC

NBC

35

Charlotte

58

WOAI

NBC

45

San Antonio

59

KSTP

NBC

13

Minneapolis-St Paul

60

WAGA

CBS

17

Atlanta

61

WSIX

ABC

30

Nashville

62

WOTV

NBC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

63

WXII

NBC

48

Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal

64

KTRK

ABC

15

Houston

65

WLWI

ABC

14

Indianapolis

66

KSD

NBC

12

St Louis

67

WTVJ

CBS

18

Miami

68

KTVI

ABC

12

St Louis

69

WWJ

NBC

5

Detroit

70

KHOU

CBS

15

Houston

71

WLCY

ABC

24

Tampa-St Petersburg

72

WFBC

NBC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

73

WKBW

ABC

25

Buffalo

74

WTMJ

NBC

21

Milwaukee

75

WBBM

CBS

3

Chicago

76

KGO

ABC

8

San Francisco

77

WJW

CBS

7

Cleveland

78

KSAT

ABC

45

San Antonio

79

WVUE

ABC

31

New Orleans

80

WTVT

CBS

24

Tampa-St Petersburg

81

WAVY

NBC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

82

WBTV

CBS

35

Charlotte

83

WLWD

NBC

39

Dayton

84

WCCO

CBS

13

Minneapolis-St Paul

85

WFAA

ABC

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

86

WLAC

CBS

30

Nashville

87

KCMO

CBS

23

Kansas City

88

WTEV

ABC

34

Providence

89

WMC

NBC

29

Memphis

90

WTEN

CBS

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

91

KOCO

ABC

41

Oklahoma City

92

WLKY *

ABC

36

Louisville

93

WBAP

NBC

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

94

WJAR

NBC

34

Providence

95

WTNH

ABC

22

Hartford-New Haven

96

KFMB

CBS

49

San Diego

97

KTVK

ABC

45

Phoenix

98

WTOL

CBS

45

Toledo

99

KMGH

CBS

32

Denver

100

WDHO *

ABC

45

Toledo

101

KDFW

CBS

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

102

KABC

ABC

2

Los Angeles

103

WHNB *

NBC

22

Hartford-New Haven

104

WISH

CBS

14

Indianapolis

105

KXTV

CBS

27

Sacramento-Stockton

106

WAVE

NBC

36

Louisville

107

WNYS

ABC

43

Syracuse

108

WHEN

CBS

43

Syracuse

109

KCPX

ABC

50

Salt Lake City

110

WHTN

ABC

33

Charleston-Huntingto

111

WLOS

ABC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

112

KGTV

NBC

49

San Diego

113

KOA

NBC

32

Denver

114

KIRO

CBS

16

Seattle-Tacoma

115

WLS

ABC

3

Chicago

116

WKYC

NBC

7

Cleveland

117

WXYZ

ABC

5

Detroit

118

WRGB

NBC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

119

WSPD

NBC

45

Toledo

120

WKRC

ABC

20

Cincinnati

121

WCHS

CBS

33

Charleston-Huntingto

122

KNSP

ABC

13

Minneapolis-St Paul

123

WGR

NBC

25

Buffalo

124

WSAZ

NBC

33

Charleston-Huntingto

125

WEWS

ABC

7

Cleveland

126

WHIO

CBS

39

Dayton

127

WFLA

NBC

24

Tampa-St Petersburg

128

WREC

CBS

29

Memphis

129

WSPA

CBS

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

130

KENS

CBS

45

San Antonio

131

WLWC

NBC

28

Columbus

132

WISN

CBS

21

Milwaukee

133

WJBK

CBS

5

Detroit

134

WDAF

NBC

23

Kansas City

135

KMBC

ABC

23

Kansas City

136

WTVN

ABC

28

Columbus

137

WVEC

ABC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

138

WKZO

CBS

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

139

WBMG *

CBS

38

Birmingham

140

KOOL

CBS

45

Phoenix

141

WHBQ

ABC

29

Memphis

142

KBTV

ABC

32

Denver

143

WQXI

ABC

17

Atlanta

144

WCCB *

ABC

35

Charlotte

 

 

* Denotes UHF network affiliate.

This report represents an effort to do more than just charge the Commission once again with the refusal to develop any positive standards for the performance of its broadcast licensees.  Such charges have often been made, in any different forums.  This is an effort to demonstrate the type of analysis that could be made of the available indicia of a licensee's performance prior to the renewal of its right to profit from the public airwaves.

The Commission has often been confronted with the opportunity to develop minimum standards in areas of programming, ownership and employment.  Each time those standards have either been rejected or thoroughly emasculated by the Commission majority.  n2 When former Commissioner Kenneth A. Cox was Chief of the Broadcast Bureau, he sent letters to stations with percentages of news and public affairs programming below certain minimum levels -- a practice swiftly ended by the full Commission. 

 

n2 The most celebrated, of course, was the 1946 "Blue Book," Part II, which attempted for the first time to set minimum standards for service to the public; it did not last the decade.  It is reprinted in F. Kahn, ed., Documents of American Broadcasting 141-146 (rev'd. ed. 1972).  Most recently, former Commission General Counsel Henry Geller proposed a minimum level of performance below which a broadcaster would be questioned at renewal time; his proposal -- that broadcasters program at least 15% local, 10% news and 5% public affairs, both overall and in prime time -- was never seriously considered by the Commission majority.

The major problem seems to arise from the broadcasters' (and most Commissioners') refusal to accept the fact that there is most emphatically a difference between censorship of programming, which the Communications Act of 1934 specifically prohibits, n3 and assurance of adequate levels of service in areas important to the listening or viewing public regardless of the subject matter or content of the programming presented.  n4

 

n3 47 U.S.C.   326.

n4 For an excellent explication of the broadcaster's point of view, see Kalven, "Broadcasting, Public Policy and the First Amendment," 10 J. Law & Econ. 15 (1967).

When Kenneth Cox was an FCC Commissioner he attempted to come up with some method at license renewal time for determining whether or not a licensee had adequately served the public interest -- or whether it deserved further inquiry because of poor performance.  One simple standard used the data available on the license renewal form.  It merely required the licensee to demonstrate that 5% of its program week had been devoted to news, 1% to public affairs, and 5% to "other" non-entertainment programming (which came to be known as the "5-1-5" standard) -- far too low, especially for television licensees.

Other approaches were also tried.  The occasion of the Oklahoma renewals (all the licenses in any given state expire at the same time) was used to do a book-length study of broadcasting in the state of Oklahoma, describing the communities in detail, noting the various sources of information available, from print as well as broadcast media, and generally describing the performance of the licensees seeking renewal at that time.  n5

 

n5 Renewal of Standard Broadcast and Television Licenses, an Oklahoma Case Study, 14 F.C.C. 2d 1 (1968).

Later, in the state of New York, n6 and for the renewals processed jointly from Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia, n7 still another approach was used.  Stations were ranked by all the criteria available from their license renewal form -- news and public affairs, the number of public service announcements, and so forth -- in a manner that is similar in some ways to the procedure of this larger study of network affiliates. 

 

n6 Renewal of Standard Broadcast and Television Licenses, 18 F.C.C. 2d 268, 269, 322 (1969).

n7 Renewals of Standard Broadcast and Television Licenses, 21 F.C.C. 2d 35 (1969).

The impact of each of these efforts upon the Commission was minimal, although it has recently adopted a badly-needed new renewal application which somewhat improves the quality of the data collected from licensees.  n8 It has not, however, acted favorably on any proposals for minimum standards on that information.  n9

 

n8 In the Matter of Formulation of Rules and Policies Relating to the Renewal of Broadcast Licensees, Docket No. 19153, FCC 73-451 (May 4, 1973).

n9 For example, see the Henry Geller proposal discussed in note 2 supra.

The impact upon the industry, however, has been somewhat more significant, and has been a motivating factor in this study.  For example, even though broadcasters and their lawyers know that a failure to meet the 5-1-5 standard will have no effect whatsoever upon license renewals, they are increasingly programming to meet those standards if only because they dislike even the minimal adverse attention of a dissenting opinion buried deep within the official FCC Reports.  When the New York and Washington studies were published, broadcasters were quite pleased to attract public and advertiser attention to their high ratings -- and very quick to call Commissioners' attention to any miscalculation that resulted in even a slightly lower rating than they felt they deserved.

In attempting to mount a project that would have an effect on as wide a segment of American broadcasting as possible, there has been great selectivity in both the stations chosen and the criteria used.  It would have been impossible to evaluate each and every one of the more than 8,000 radio and television stations in this country.  First, television was chosen over radio, because its influence is more widely felt and also, quite frankly, because it was an easy way to eliminate the vast majority of licensees at the outset.  The 50 largest television markets in the country were selected from among the some 12,000 communities in the United States, because they contain more than 65% of the American population and constitute the most "cost effective" focus.  n10 The "top 50" have often been selected by the FCC as a natural break in its broadcasting regulations.  Finally, the three network affiliates in each market were selected (rather than including independent television stations as well) because those are the choice of roughly 85% of the nation's viewers at any given moment.  n11 Moreover, as they tend to have the largest revenue of any stations in the industry, one can fairly hold them to the highest standards.  Theoretically, then, that produces a population of some 150 stations (three network affiliates in each of 50 markets).  However, factors intervened to reduce the final sample to 144, although for some purposes (such as employment there was information available on 147.  n12

 

n10 The "top 50 markets" used in this study were determined on the basis of the most recent rankings by the American Research Bureau, published in ARB's 1972 Television Market Analysis on November 20, 1972.  No more current data will be published until after September 1, 1973.  The market's rank is determined according to the average number of households reached from 9 a.m. to midnight within a survey area.  Survey areas are the geographic areas comprised of those counties in which ARB estimates 98% of the net weekly circulation of home market stations occurs.  Because the average number of households is reported by thousands, two markets are tied for the 41st rank and three are tied for the 45th.  Accordingly, we list no 42nd, 46th or 47th rank.

The only exception to ARB's top 50 markets was our deletion of Wilkes Barre-Scranton, which would have been number 49, from our study and the concomitant elevation of Salt Lake City, otherwise market number 51.  This was done because we felt it unfair to compare the results in Wilkes Barre-Scranton, an all-UHF market, with those of its VHF competitors, even though we retained five markets in which one network affiliate broadcasts on UHF (they are appropriately identified in the rankings).

The top 50 markets include parts of some 43 different states and help send over 82% of the members of the House of Representatives to Congress.

n11 That is not to say there aren't a few enormously successful independents that should have been included in a study of America's biggest broadcasters.  However, we felt we had to draw the line somewhere, and we could not have justified the inclusion of independents in less than all the top 50 markets.

n12 Three network affiliates located in the top 50 markets were eliminated from our study.  Three additional stations were excluded from the over-all ranking and public service announcement portions of our report, but were included in the employment and ownership portions.  The details are listed below:

 

Call sign

KSCT

Channel

39

Affiliation

ABC

City

San Diego

Market number

49

Excluded from

Entire Study

KSCT became San Diego's ABC

affiliate early this year.  Prior to this, XETV, a

Mexican station, was the ABC affiliate.

The Commission has no jurisdiction over,

and therefore no data pertaining to,

broadcasters outside the U.S.

Call sign

KRON

Channel

4

Affiliation

NBC

City

San Francisco

Market Number

8

Excluded from

Entire Study

KRON's 1968 renewal was designated

for hearing on 3/19/69; a final decision

was not made until 5/3/73.  During

this period, the station was "in docket" and

not required to submit renewal application

information.  Thus, we had no more recent

data than that reflecting the station's

performance between 1965 and 1968.

Call sign

WCVB

Channel

5

Affiliation

ABC

City

Boston

Market number

6

Excluded from

Entire Study

WCVB is just barely into its second

year of operation after a Commission and

court battle that lasted nearly a decade;

its licensee was a successful competing

applicant for the frequency formerly

licensed to WHDH, Inc.

Call sign

WGHP

Channel

8

Affiliation

ABC

City

Greensboro

Market number

48

Excluded from

Composite ranking and public service announcements only

WGHP was renewed in 1966, but its

1969 renewal application was designated for

hearing on 6/1/70.  As yet unresolved,

the most recent renewal application data

reflects the station's performance between

1963 and 1966.

Call sign

WKEF

Channel

22

Affiliation

ABC

City

Dayton

Market number

39

Excluded from

Composite ranking and public service announcements only

WKEF is a new UHF station which

only commenced operation in 1969.

Call sign

WTAR

Channel

3

Affiliation

CBS

City

Norfolk

Market number

44

Excluded from

Composite ranking and public service announcements only

WTAR was renewed in 1966, but its

1969 renewal application was designated for

hearing on 1/21/70.  As yet unresolved,

the most recent renewal application data

reflects the station's performance between

1963 and 1966.

As an additional footnote, we wish to underscore the competitive problems faced by the five UHF affiliates that have been included in our study (WLKY, Louisville, 91st in our composite programming ranking; WDHO, Toledo, 100th; WHNB, Hartford, 103rd; WBMG, Birmingham, 139th; and WCCB, Charlotte, 144th).  UHF stations are traditionally at a severe disadvantage in competing for viewers in a market, even when they are affiliated with a network.  Virtually all UHF stations operate deeply in the red for years after they go on the air, and it can be expected that their performance will radically improve as they edge toward profitability.  Finally, it must be noted that at least one of the UHF stations in this study, WDHO, Toledo, has been ranked on the basis of data submitted to the FCC before it had acquired even the financial stimulus of a network affiliation.

The analysis of the performance of those stations has been limited to information supplied by the broadcasters themselves on official U.S. Government forms in public files at the FCC.  n13 No monitoring (viewing or listening) of any of the stations was undertaken.  Nor was there even an examination of TV Guide or local newspaper listings for additional information.  There was neither the time nor the manpower, and there was an affirmative desire to avoid any data gathering or subjective analyses that would subject the findings to "tis-taint't" arguments with broadcasters. 

 

n13 In order to provide the broadest possible view of television in the top 50 markets, it was occasionally necessary to use station data reported by former licensees.  For example, if a station received its license renewal in June, 1972, and was sold in August, 1972, our data was taken from the information of the earlier licensee.  This was the case with the seven stations listed below:

KBTV, Channel 9, ABC, Denver, Colorado.

Present licensee: Combined Communications Corp.

Former licensee: Mullins Broadcasting Co.

Date of change: September 19, 1972

KGTV, Channel 10, NBC, San Diego, California

Present licensee: McGraw-Hill Broadcasting Co.

Former licensee: Time-Life Broadcasting, Inc.

Date of change: June 1, 1972

Former call letters: KOGO

KMGH, Channel 7, CBS, Denver, Colorado

Present licensee: McGraw-Hill.

Former licensee: Time-Life.

Date of change: June 1, 1972

Former call letters: KLZ

KOCO, Channel 5, ABC, Oklahoma City

Present licensee: Combined Communications

Former licensee: Cimaron Television Corp.

Date of change: August 29, 1972

WCHS, Channel 8, CBS, Charleston-Huntington, W. Va.

Present licensee: Rollins Telecasting, Inc.

Former licensee: WCHS AM-TV Corp.

Date of change: April 30, 1973

WRTV, Channel 6, WBC, Indianapolis

Present licensee: McGraw-Hill

Former licensee: Time-Life

Date of change: June 1, 1972

Former call letters: WFMB

WTMJ, Channel 4, NBC, Milwaukee

Present licensee: WTMJ, Inc.

Former licensee: The Journal Co.

In addition, data other than form 303 programming data from the seven stations listed below was partially affected by similar changes in licensees:

Financial and Employment Data:

WXII, Channel 12, NBC, Greensboro/Winston Salem/High Point, N.C.

Present licensee: Multimedia, Inc.

Former licensee: Triangle Broadcasting Corp.

Date of change: October 2, 1972

WBTV, Channel 3, CBS, Charlotte, N. Carolina

Present licensee: Jefferson-Pilot Broadcasting Co.

Former licensee: Jefferson-Standard Broadcasting Co.

Date of change: November 7, 1972

WDSU, Channel 6, NBC, New Orleans

Present licensee: Cosmos Broadcasting of Louisiana

Former licensee: WDSU-TV, Inc.

Date of charge: November 29, 1972

Financial data only (taken partially from former and partially from present licensee):

WPVI, Channel 6, ABC, Philadelphia

Present: Capital Cities

Former: Triangle Publications

Date of change: April 27, 1971

WSAZ, Channel 3, NBC, Charleston-Huntington, W. Va.

Present licensee: Lee Enterprises, Inc.

Former licensee: Capital Cities

Date of change: April 27, 1971

WTEN, Channel 10, CBS, Albany-Schenectady-Troy, N.Y.

Present licensee: Albany TV, Inc.

Former licensee: Capital Cities

Date of change: April 27, 1971

WTNH, Channel 8, ABC, Hartford/New Haven

Present licensee: Capital Cities

Former licensee: Triangle Publications

Date of change: April 27, 1971

Finally, station WWYS-TV, Syracuse, New York, was granted a modification on December 12, 1972 that changed the name of the licensee from WRG Baker Television Corp. to WNYS-TV.  The actual owners of the station remained substantially the same.  And station WOTV, Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo was granted a change of call letters on July 1, 1972, from WOOD, although the licensee also remains the same.

The findings are grouped into three separate chapters dealing with programming performance, minority and female employment statistics, and ownership information.  A fourth chapter is devoted to the use of this information by interested community groups or individuals.  Appendices have been added that deal with the computer programming methodology, potential sources of information and assistance for those interested in pursuing the subject further, and additional information not included in the main body of the report.

The method of analyzing the stations' performance has been to select the most precise criteria available from the data collected and then simply rank the stations based on their performance.  Thus, in programming, some four factors were isolated and explored.  They were then combined for determination of a single overall ranking based on a composite computation of programming performance.

By this method, television station KPIX, San Francisco, owned by the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company, was the best-programmed station among network affiliates in the top 50 markets as of June, 1973; WCCB, Charlotte, N.C., was the worst.  There is often a wide range of performance among affiliates within a city.  But Pittsburgh and Portland would appear to be among the best, and Charleston-Huntington, W. Va., and Kansas City, Mo., among the worst.  Baltimore seems to have the best performance overall in local programming, Washington in news. public affairs and other; Syracuse scores lowest in both categories.  Oklahoma City stations have the most public service announcements; Nashville stations the fewest.  Westinghouse Broadcasting Company's five television stations ranked 1, 2, 4, 5 and 31, thus making Westinghouse by far the best multiple owner in the country.  The stations of Taft, ranked 49, 120, 123, 134 and 136, showed that corporate owner to be one of the worst.

In the employment chapter, stations with low or non-existent minority or female employment are singled out for special mention, and all the stations in the study are ranked on the basis of total employment as well as employment of minorities and women in high-paying positions.  Stations WTEV, Providence, WNYS, Syracuse, and WCAU, Philadelphia were among the best, while KSL, Salt Lake City, KMSP, Minneapolis and WKZO, Kalamazoo-Grand Rapids were among the worst.

In the ownership chapter, the findings have been collated and rearranged to show the performance of individual owners, especially when (as is most often the case) they own two or more stations.  In each section Commission policy is considered and its shortcomings pointed out, but the most important part of this report is the information regarding the relative performance of each network affiliate in the top 50 markets.  See Appendix D for a summary of the ten best and ten worst stations in each area of programming and employment and Appendix E for a summary of what we consider to be the minimum tolerable levels of performance in each of those areas.

Finally, Chapter 4 is included on the assumption that anyone interested in improving the quality of broadcasting in this country can use this study as a handbook for the further pursuit of those improvements.  This report is necessarily incomplete.  Only the action of concerned people in their own local communities can ensure that it will have maximum impact on improving broadcasters' performance.

Chapter 1

PROGRAMMING PERFORMANCE

I.  INTRODUCTION

The composite programming ranking announced in the Introduction to this report consists of an evaluation of the programming of each of 144 network affiliates in the top 50 markets on the basis of four distinct programming criteria: a combination of news, public affairs and other programming; local programming; commercialization; and allocation of financial resources to program expenditures.  Each of these areas will be explained in detail, and individual area rankings given, in the four sections of this chapter below.  The composite programming ranking that precedes the substantive discussion in this chapter was determined by transposing the quantitative performance of each licensee in each of the four areas onto a scale of 0 to 100, then weighting them equally in determining the final average on which the overall ranking was based.  For a more complete explanation of the analytical models used in this section, see Appendix A.  The programming criteria are presented in Table 2 in the form of the station's rank in each of the four areas.  For a composite ranking that presents the criteria based on the relative scale of 0 to 100, see Table 1-a in Appendix C.

Network affiliates ranked by composite of all programming criteria

 

 

Call

Net.

Mkt.

 

Rank

letters

aff.

No.

Location

1

KPIX

CBS

8

San Francisco

2

WJZ

ABC

19

Baltimore

3

KING

NBC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

4

KDKA

CBS

9

Pittsburgh

5

KYW

NBC

4

Philadelphia

6

WPLG

ABC

18

Miami

7

WMAL

ABC

10

Washington, D.C.

8

WTAE

ABC

9

Pittsburgh

9

WFMY

CBS

48

Gnsb-HighPt-Win Sal

10

KGW

NBC

26

Portland

11

WWL

CBS

31

New Orleans

12

WTC

NBC

10

Washington, D.C.

13

WABC

ABC

1

New York City

14

KNBC

NBC

2

Los Angeles

15

WIIC

NBC

9

Pittsburgh

16

WTIC

CBS

22

Hartford-New Haven

17

WNAC

ABC

6

Boston

18

KATO

ABC

26

Portland

19

WHAS

CBS

36

Louisville

20

KCRA

NBC

27

Sacramento-Stockton

21

KOIN

CBS

26

Portland

22

WBNS

CBS

28

Columbus

23

KTAR

NBC

45

Phoenix

24

KOMO

ABC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

25

WLWT

NBC

20

Cincinnati

26

WCBS

CBS

1

New York City

27

KMOX

CBS

12

St. Louis

28

WSM

NBC

30

Nashville

29

WKY

NBC

41

Oklahoma City

30

WAST

ABC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

31

WSB

NBC

17

Atlanta

31

WBZ

NBC

6

Boston

33

KSL

CBS

50

Salt Lake City

34

WMAR

CBS

19

Baltimore

35

WZZM

ABC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

36

WDSU

NBC

31

New Orleans

37

WRTV

NBC

14

Indianapolis

38

WBEN

CBS

25

Buffalo

39

WNBC

NBC

1

New York City

40

KNXT

CBS

2

Los Angeles

41

KPRC

NBC

15

Houston

42

WCPO

CBS

20

Cincinnati

43

WMAQ

NBC

3

Chicago

44

KOVR

abc/

27

Sacramento-Stockton

45

WITI

ABC

21

Milwaukee

46

WCAU

CBS

4

Philadelphia

47

WSYR

NBC

43

Syracuse

48

WDAL

NBC

19

Baltimore

49

WBRC

ABC

38

Birmingham

50

WPVI

ABC

4

Philadelphia

51

WPRI

CBS

34

Providence

52

WAPI

NBC

38

Birmingham

53

KUTV

NBC

50

Salt Lake City

54

KWTV

CBS

41

Oklahoma City

55

WTOP

CBS

10

Washington D.C.

56

WCKT

NBC

18

Miami

57

WSOC

NBC

35

Charlotte

58

WOAI

NBC

45

San Antonio

59

KSTP

NBC

13

Minneapolis-St Paul

60

WAGA

CBS

17

Atlanta

61

WSIX

ABC

30

Nashville

62

WOTV

NBC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

63

WXII

NBC

48

Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal

64

KIRK

ABC

15

Houston

65

WLWI

ABC

14

Indianapolis

66

KSD

NBC

12

St. Louiis

66

WTVJ

CBS

18

Miami

68

KTVI

ABC

12

St. Louis

69

WWJ

NBC

5

Detroit

70

KHOU

CBS

15

Houston

71

WLCY

ABC

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

72

WFBC

NBC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

73

WKBW

ABC

25

Buffalo

74

WTMJ

NBC

21

Milwaukee

74

WBBM

CBS

3

Chicago

76

KGO

ABC

8

San Antonio

77

WJW

CBS

7

Cleveland

78

KSAT

ABC

45

San Antonio

79

WVUE

ABC

31

New Orleans

80

WTVT

CBS

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

81

WAVY

NBC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

82

WBTV

CBS

35

Charlotte

83

WLWD

NBC

39

Dayton

84

WCCO

CBS

13

Minneapolis-St. Paul

85

WFAA

ABC

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

86

WLAC

CBS

30

Nashville

87

KCMO

ABC

23

Kansas City

88

WTFV

ABC

34

Providence

89

WMC

NBC

29

Memphis

90

WTEN

CBS

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

91

KOCO

ABC

41

Oklahoma City

92

WLKY

ABC

36

Louisville

93

WBAP

NBC

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

94

WJAR

NBC

34

Providence

95

WTNH

ABC

22

Hartford-New Haven

96

KFMB

CBS

49

San Diego

97

KTVK

ABC

45

Phoenix

98

WTOL

CBS

45

Toledo

99

KMGH

CBS

32

Denver

100

WDHO

ABC

45

Toledo

101

KDFW

CBS

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

102

KABC

ABC

2

Los Angeles

103

WHNB

NBC

22

Hartford-New Haven

104

WISH

CBS

14

Indianapolis

105

KXTV

CBS

27

Sacramento-Stockton

106

WAVE

NBC

36

Louisville

107

WNYS

ABC

43

Syracuse

108

WHEN

CBS

43

Syracuse

109

KCPX

ABC

50

Salt Lake City

110

WHTN

ABC

33

Charleston-Huntington

111

WLOS

ABC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

112

KGTV

NBC

49

San Diego

113

KOA

NBC

32

Denver

114

KIRO

CBS

16

Seattle-Tacoma

115

WLS

ABC

3

Chicago

116

WKYC

NBC

7

Cleveland

117

WXYZ

ABC

5

Detroit

118

WRGB

NBC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

119

WSPD

NBC

45

Toledo

120

WKRC

ABC

20

Cincinnati

121

WCHS

CBS

33

Charleston-Huntington

122

KMSP

ABC

13

Minneapolis-St. Paul

123

WGR

NBC

25

Buffalo

124

WSAZ

NBC

33

Charleston-Huntington

125

WEWS

ABC

7

Cleveland

126

WHIO

CBS

39

Dayton

127

WFLA

NBC

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

128

WREC

CBS

29

Memphis

129

WSPA

CBS

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

130

KENS

CBS

45

San Antonio

131

WLWC

NBC

28

Columbus

132

WISN

CBS

21

Milwaukee

133

WJBK

CBS

5

Detroit

134

WDAF

NBC

23

Kansas City

135

KMBC

ABC

23

Kansas City

136

WTVN

ABC

28

Columbus

137

WVEC

ABC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

138

WKZO

CBS

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

139

WBMG

CBS

38

Birmingham

140

KOOL

CBS

45

Phoenix

141

WHBQ

ABC

29

Memphis

142

KBTV

ABC

32

Denver

143

WQXI

ABC

17

Atlanta

144

WCCB

ABC

35

Charlotte

 

 

 

News,

Commer.

Financial

Rank

Local

Pa

 

 

and other

1

31

13

1

103

2

6

59

4

24

3

76

48

6

3

4

4

6

30

57

5

2

7

23

123

6

10

1

81

52

7

28

40

41

9

8

52

60

10

15

9

96

38

2

76

10

67

35

49

2

11

7

24

70

31

12

49

15

101

7

13

63

77

49

1

14

3

3

138

35

15

17

53

101

8

16

68

28

5

110

17

37

41

24

59

18

50

96

24

13

19

35

84

33

20

20

27

14

70

69

21

84

29

57

12

22

22

19

81

61

23

8

64

63

48

24

32

66

57

28

25

1

118

129

44

26

75

4

108

27

27

59

11

101

36

28

24

97

63

16

29

16

78

36

70

30

135

119

8

4

31

5

56

49

116

31

15

16

49

138

33

57

90

88

6

34

11

25

78

104

35

112

45

41

14

36

20

55

81

55

37

65

39

36

64

38

55

21

57

80

39

60

17

88

58

40

21

8

121

88

41

29

22

78

94

42

40

49

98

33

43

41

2

132

74

44

134

120

16

5

45

72

111

16

41

46

42

9

121

73

47

117

127

13

10

48

19

33

88

101

49

23

12

49

144

50

14

62

112

45

51

115

94

3

113

52

126

46

16

63

53

83

104

63

11

54

77

82

70

25

55

79

10

117

50

56

71

27

41

117

57

122

75

16

47

58

58

88

30

93

59

43

91

57

71

60

70

5

121

79

61

82

125

30

22

62

48

37

106

67

63

118

105

28

21

64

18

95

63

100

65

64

26

129

37

66

36

68

70

108

66

105

87

33

46

68

86

140

24

19

69

9

31

129

112

70

25

30

108

127

71

61

44

81

96

72

104

63

13

130

73

78

106

13

130

74

13

92

106

89

74

33

18

141

65

76

94

70

98

30

77

69

43

101

77

78

90

131

28

38

79

107

112

41

34

80

80

32

117

51

81

121

54

36

84

82

46

52

88

120

83

30

42

137

83

84

12

74

139

72

85

47

114

70

85

86

39

101

114

49

87

54

69

101

97

88

130

110

41

32

89

38

80

114

92

90

110

103

70

39

91

62

124

81

53

92

136

142

11

23

93

132

50

36

115

94

114

47

70

91

95

81

81

57

124

96

51

20

132

128

97

88

122

49

75

98

87

71

63

122

99

44

73

117

98

100

139

144

6

29

101

26

34

121

141

102

123

115

88

17

103

116

23

63

136

104

73

65

78

135

105

101

36

121

66

106

95

85

88

86

107

144

143

8

18

108

127

89

88

54

109

142

136

16

40

110

140

107

16

102

111

143

137

12

60

112

111

102

88

62

113

56

79

108

132

114

66

83

108

125

115

53

61

142

68

116

113

86

121

43

117

89

116

132

26

118

100

121

36

129

119

124

113

41

107

120

74

138

33

133

121

85

132

24

140

122

109

141

13

126

123

141

109

41

81

124

119

58

70

139

125

92

134

98

56

126

45

123

132

87

127

120

51

132

78

128

131

108

57

114

129

103

57

117

121

130

106

93

81

134

131

99

67

121

118

132

97

98

121

82

133

93

99

114

106

134

34

72

144

131

135

102

133

88

90

136

128

130

63

105

137

137

135

41

95

138

108

100

88

142

139

125

117

49

143

140

98

76

140

119

141

138

139

49

111

142

91

128

142

42

143

129

126

112

99

144

133

129

81

137

II.  NEWS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS

"60 per cent of all Americans over the age of 21 rely on television as their primary source of news." Barry Cole, Television (1970).

To argue that Congress intended television to be dedicated summarily to the aggrandizement of the personal or corporate fortunes of its licensees is to argue the absurd.  Rather, Congress intended that television frequencies be used to serve the public, n1 and any reasonable interpretation of "serving the public" must include equipping them to be better citizens, via the informational programming most often encountered in the rather cumbersome categories known to the Commission as "news," "public affairs" and "other." n2

 

n1 See 47 U.S.C.   307(a)(b).  Indeed, the Commission stated early in its development that:

It is axiomatic that one of the most vital questions of mass communications in a democracy is the development of an informed public opinion through the public dissemination of news and ideas concerning the vital issues of the day...  It is this right of the public to be informed, rather than any other right on the part of the government, any broadcast licensee or any individual member of the public to broadcast his own particular views of any matter, which is the foundation stone of the American system of broadcasting.

Quoted in Walter Emery, National and International Systems of Broadcasting, at 13, Michigan State University Press (1969).  For legislative history of the Communications Act, see Rosenbloom, "Authority of the Federal Communications Commission," in Coons, ed., Freedom and Responsibility in Broadcasting at 96 (1961).

n2 The categories of "news" and "public affairs" are self-explanatory.  "Other" programming is described as all programming not falling in those two categories or in the categories of "entertainment" or "sports."

The Commission first determined that news and public affairs were "critical programming categories" and began collecting this data in its current form in 1966, when it adopted the license renewal application now in use.  n3 But collecting this data and putting it to significant use are two entirely different things, and the practice of this Commission to date has been to make no inquiry whatsoever into a licensee's news, public affairs, and other non-sports, non-entertainment programming, no matter how badly a station had performed, and more than a few stations have been renewed notwithstanding a total failure to deliver programming in one or more of these categories.  n4 Even a major television station like WCCO-TV, a Minneapolis CBS affiliate, was renewed automatically in March, 1968, despite no public affairs shown during the composite week and only 30 minutes weekly proposed for the future. 

 

n3 FCC 2d 175 (1966).

n4 See, e.g., Herman C. Hall, 11 FCC 2d 344 (1968).

Although the Commission has never set standards in its renewal procedures for weighing the news and public affairs data it receives, a 5% news, 1% public affairs and 5% "other" standard thought to be comparable to the minimum diet necessary to stave off complete informational starvation was established and discussed at one time by just two of the seven Commissioners (Cox and Johnson).  n5 Since those standards have been so minimal and so easy to comply with, many previously offending broadcasters have made an effort to do so, as can be seen by a glance at the raw data in the three categories.  n6 There continues to be some, however, who do not choose even to provide that infinitesimal level of public service, who regularly devote more minutes of time to commercials than to the three informational categories combined; and yet the staff continues to do nothing every two months but provide, as a gesture of courtesy, a compilation of those stations falling below the 5-1-5 standard in each bimonthly "package" of renewals for the remaining concerned Commissioner to use in his lonely dissents. 

 

n5 See discussion of these studies at notes 5, 6 and 7 in the Introduction to this Report.

n6 The ten best and ten worst stations in each category may be found in Appendix D.

The news, public affairs, and other programming information required of a licensee on his renewal application is collected in the form of hours and minutes of air time devoted to each.  Of course, quality of programming cannot be determined from this data.  It is impossible to tell without actual observation, for example, whether a station's news operation is of the wire service "rip and read" variety or whether there are mobile camera units roaming the city to provide original feeds at all hours.  Until such information is available, however, we must rely on what the stations are required to tell the Commission quantitatively about their programming operations.  For, although a station broadcasting only 8 hours of news in a 140-hour week may in fact be investing more time, expense, and imagination in its production than one airing 14 hours in the same week, the only presumption we can make is the contrary -- the more news, the better the potential for service to the public.  We proceed therefore on the assumption that, all other factors being equal, a station running 14 hours of news on a weekly basis better serves the public interest and need than a station running 8 hours.  The same reasoning would apply to public affairs and other programming.

Another shortcoming of the existing renewal application is that it makes no inquiry into when during the broadcast day news, public affairs, and other programming are being aired.  It is conceivable, for example, that a station may air one hour of public affairs between 3:30 am and 4:30 am daily and, when this is added to its other public affairs programs, post a total of 10 hours for the week.  n7 It should be self-evident, however, that the seven hours of programming in the early morning can be written off as little more than no programming at all, reaching such a small audience as to be of virtually no service to the public.  This lacuna in our information must be borne in mind when reviewing these figures, and local program guides or station logs should be consulted to learn the distribution of news, public affairs and other programming in a particular station's broadcast week. 

 

n7 In addition, many commercial stations will run the same public affairs special more than once, thereby getting credit for two or even three hours of programming for just one show.

Our ranking of station programming performance is based solely on the hours of programming presented.  For the overall ranking of this performance factor, we have simply added together the number of hours and minutes of news, public affairs and other programming presented during the composite week and ranked the stations on the basis of that total.  We list the number of hours of each of the three categories separately, and provide a ranking for each.  For example, the top station in the overall news-public affairs-"other" ranking, station WPLG, Miami, can be seen to be number 9 in news, number 7 in public affairs and number 12 in other programming.  These additional statistics are provided in this chapter because a station's failure to devote substantial time to any one of them is indefensible whatever its overall raking, and such a station should be singled out for further inquiry.  n8

 

n8 WLWI, Indianapolis, for example, was number 26 in its overall news, public affairs and other ranking, due to a fine showing in the latter two categories (32nd and 4th).  Its news programming, however, placed it an abysmal 127th, thereby clearly delineating an area in which the licensee could improve.

Although the percentage of the total programming week devoted by a licensee to each of these categories is available from the station's license renewal form and has been used in similar studies in the past, n9 we have decided in this study to use the raw total of hours.  This has been done because the use of percentages, we feel, tends to favor those broadcasters with a shorter broadcast week.  For example, a station on the air 120 hours a week with 12 hours of news would be programming 10% news, while a station broadcasting 146 hours a week with 13 hours of news would actually show a lower percentage.  We feel the additional hours of news programmed by the latter should be given greater credit than the higher percentage of the former, and have acted accordingly. 

 

n9 See the studies cited in notes 5, 6, and 7 in the Introduction to this Report.

In addition to the hours of news, public affairs, and other programming broadcast by a station in the composite week, the disparity between a station's promised performance and its actual performance and the decrease (or increase) in performance levels from one renewal period to the next can also be revealing measures of a station's service.  Indeed, the Commission has said as much in a few specific instances in the past.  n10 And even the current Commission, which at one time or another has indicated that it favors the total elimination of existing Commission programming standards, concedes that a station's "promise vs. performance" is a valid indication of its performance in the public interest.  n11 While we have not attempted, due to the length of this study, to relate the licensees' most recent performance to either his current or his previous promises, the necessary information is readily available, in the licensee's public file or at the FCC for those who are interested. 

 

n10 See, e.g., WKBN Broadcasting Corp., 30 FCC 2d 958, 975 (1971); Southern Broadcasting Co., 26 FCC 2d 998 (1970); WMOZ, Inc., 36 FCC 201, 241 (1964); and KORD, Inc., 31 FCC 85, 88 (1961).

n11 See Letter from Clay T. Whitehead, Director of Office of Telecommunications Policy, to Rep. Carl Albert, March 13, 1973.

Network affiliates ranked by total hours of news, Public Affairs, and "Other" in composite week

Rank

Call letters

Net. aff.

Mkt. No.

Location

News and rank

1

WPLG

ABC

18

Miami

17.90

9

2

WMAQ

NBC

3

Chicago

19.98

4

3

KNBC

NBC

2

Los Angeles

22.00

1

4

WCBS

CBS

1

New York City

16.13

27

5

WAGA

CBS

17

Atlanta

17.72

12

6

KDKA

CBS

9

Pittsburgh

20.20

2

7

KYW

NBC

4

Philadelphia

18.55

6

8

KNXT

CBS

2

Los Angles

17.05

19

9

WCAU

CBS

4

Philadelphia

16.37

25

10

WTOP

CBS

10

Washington D.C.

172.12

17

11

KMOX

CBS

12

St. Louis

16.25

26

12

WBRC

ABC

38

Birmingham

13.97

54

13

KPIX

CBS

8

San Francisco

16.62

23

14

KCRA

NBC

27

Sacramento-Stockton

20.15

3

15

WRC

NBC

10

Washington D.C.

14.83

41

16

WBZ

NBC

6

Boston

18.53

7

17

WNBC

NBC

1

New York City

15.08

39

18

WBBM

CBS

3

Chicago

14.28

49

19

WBNS

CBS

28

Columbus

13.60

55

20

KFMB

CBS

49

San Diego

19.27

5

21

WBEN

CBS

25

Buffalo

15.90

30

22

KPRC

NBC

15

Houston

15.80

32

23

WHNB

NBC

22

Hartford-New Haven

15.20

36

24

WWL

CBS

31

New Orleans

16.77

20

25

WMAR

CBS

19

Baltimore

15.07

40

26

WLWI

ABC

14

Indianapolis

8.17

127

27

WCKT

NBC

18

Miami

14.37

46

28

WTIC

CBS

22

Hartford-New Haven

13.58

56

29

KOIN

CBS

26

Portland

14.03

53

30

KHOU

CBS

15

Houston

14.65

44

31

WWJ

NBC

5

Detroit

14.80

42

31

WTVT

CBS

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

16.77

20

33

WBAL

NBC

19

Baltimore

14.07

52

34

KDFW

CBS

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

16.65

22

35

KGW

NBC

26

Portland

16.48

24

36

KXTV

CBS

27

Sacramento-Stockton

17.22

16

37

WOTV

NBC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

14.68

43

38

WFMY

CBS

48

Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal

12.82

67

39

WRTV

NBC

14

Indianapolis

12.62

69

40

WMAL

ABC

10

Washington D.C.

10.43

101

41

WNAC

ABC

6

Boston

11.43

84

42

WLWD

NBC

39

Dayton

11.83

74

43

WJW

CBS

7

Cleveland

11.57

81

43

WLCY

ABC

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

8.08

129

45

WZZM

ABC

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

6.25

137

46

WAPI

NBC

38

Birmingham

15.63

33

47

WJAR

NBC

34

Providence

13.35

63

48

KING

NBC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

13.48

61

49

WCPO

CBS

20

Cincinnati

11.27

88

50

WBAP

NBC

11

Dallas-FortWorth

15.02

29

51

WFLA

NBC

24

Tampa-St. Petersburg

16.10

28

52

WBTV

CBS

35

Charlotte

15.13

38

53

WIIC

NBC

9

Pittsburgh

17.55

13

54

WAVY

NBC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

13.50

58

55

WDSU

NBC

31

New Orleans

17.12

17

56

WSB

NBC

17

Atlanta

17.40

15

57

WSPA

CBS

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

11.32

87

58

WSAZ

NBC

33

Charleston-Huntington

14.37

46

59

WJZ

ABC

19

Baltimore

11.58

79

60

WTAE

ABC

9

Pittsburgh

11.82

75

61

WLS

ABC

3

Chicago

9.50

114

62

WPVI

ABC

4

Philadelphia

9.32

117

63

WFBC

NBC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

11.33

86

64

KTAR

NBC

45

Phoenix

17.85

10

65

WISH

CBS

14

Indianapolis

18.42

8

66

KOMO

ABC

16

Seattle-Tacoma

12.88

66

66

WLWC

NBC

28

Columbus

9.33

116

68

KSD

NBC

12

St. Louis

17.47

14

69

KCMO

CBS

23

Kansas City

11.72

77

70

KGO

ABC

8

San Francisco

10.05

107

70

WIOL

CBS

45

Toledo

13.37

62

72

WDAF

NBC

23

Kansas City

17.75

11

73

KMGH

CBS

32

Denver

11.58

79

74

WCCO

CBS

13

Minneapolis-St. Paul

13.50

58

75

WSOC

NBC

35

Charlotte

13.50

58

76

KOOL

CBS

45

Phoenix

15.33

34

77

WABC

ABC

1

New York City

10.58

98

77

WKY

NBC

41

Oklahoma City

14.58

45

79

KOA

NBC

32

Denver

14.32

48

80

WMC

NBC

29

Memphis

15.82

31

81

WTNH

ABC

22

Hartford-New Haven

8.87

121

82

KWTV

CBS

41

Oklahoma City

12.25

72

83

KIRO

CBS

16

Seattle-Tacoma

14.23

50

84

WHAS

CBS

36

Louisville

15.27

35

85

WAVE

NBC

36

Louisville

11.47

82

86

WKYC

NBC

7

Cleveland

11.73

76

87

WTVJ

CBS

18

Miami

12.05

73

88

WOAI

NBC

45

San Antonio

15.17

37

89

WHEN

CBS

43

Syracuse

11.37

85

90

KSL

CBS

50

Salt Lake City

10.57

99

91

KSTP

NBC

13

Minneapolis-St. Paul

14.10

51

92

WIMJ

NBC

21

Milwaukee

12.40

71

93

KFNS

CBS

45

San Antonio

12.82

67

94

WPRI

CBS

34

Providence

12.98

65

95

KIRK

ABC

15

Houston

10.97

91

96

KATU

ABC

26

Portland

10.85

94

97

WSM

NBC

30

Nashville

13.00

64

98

WISN

CBS

21

Milwaukee

10.23

104

99

WJBK

CBS

5

Detroit

10.05

107

100

WKZO

CBS

41

Kalamazoo-Gr Rapids

8.58

124

101

WLAC

CBS

30

Nashville

10.83

95

102

KGTV

NBC

49

San Diego

13.57

57

103

WTEN

CBS

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

10.62

97

104

KUTV

NBC

50

Salt Lake City

10.32

102

105

WXII

NBC

48

Gnsb-High Pt-Win Sal

10.88

93

106

WKBW

ABC

25

Buffalo

8.75

123

107

WHTN

ABC

33

Charleston-Huntington

10.22

105

108

WREC

CBS

29

Memphis

11.05

89

109

WGR

NBC

25

Buffalo

10.50

100

110

WTEV

ABC

34

Providence

11.63

78

111

WITI

ABC

21

Milwaukee

9.55

113

112

WVUE

ABC

31

New Orleans

10.08

106

113

WSPD

NBC

45

Toledo

9.68

111

114

WFAA

ABC

11

Dallas-Fort Worth

12.62

69

115

KABC

ABC

22

Los Angeles

9.75

110

116

WXYZ

ABC

5

Detroit

10.30

103

117

WBMG

CBS

38

Birmingham

7.73

132

118

WLWT

NBC

20

Cincinnati

11.00

90

119

WAST

ABC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

9.22

119

120

KOVR

ABC

27

Sacramento-Stockton

9.57

112

121

WRGB

NBC

37

Albany-Schenectady-T

11.47

82

122

KTVK

ABC

45

Phoenix

9.50

114

123

WHIO

CBS

39

Dayton

8.38

125

124

KOCO

ABC

41

Oklahoma City

8.00

130

125

WSIX

ABC

30

Nashville

5.35

141

126

WQXI

ABC

17

Atlanta

9.22

119

127

WSYR

NBC

43

Syracuse

9.25

118

128

KBTV

ABC

32

Denver

9.97

109

129

WCCB

ABC

35

Charlotte

5.08

142

130

WTVN

ABC

28

Columbus

7.42

133

131

KSAT

ABC

45

San Antonio

10.95

92

132

WCHS

CBS

33

Charleston-Huntington

8.85

122

133

KMBC

ABC

23

Kansas City

7.37

134

134

WEWS

ABC

7

Cleveland

8.12

128

135

WVEC

ABC

44

Norf-Newp News-Hamp

10.63

96

136

KCPX

ABC

50

Salt Lake City

6.00

139

137

WLOS

ABC

40

Gnville-Sptnbg-Ashvi

8.00

130

138

WKRC

ABC

20

Cincinnati

5.88

140

139

WHBQ

ABC

29

Memphis

6.47

136

140

KTVI

ABC

12

St. Louis

6.15

138

141

KMSP

ABC

13

Minneapolis-St. Paul

8.20

126

142

WLKY

ABC

36

Louisville

4.53

143

143

WNYS

ABC

43

Syracuse

6.55

135

144

WDHO

ABC

45

Toledo

1.67

144

 

Rank

Pub. affairs and rank

Other and rank

 

 

 

 

 

 

Composite

1

11.12

7

16.82

12

45.833

2

9.10

15

14.00

21

43.083

3

10.03

9

10.78

70

42.817

4

4.10

83

21.72

1

41.950

5

4.97

59

18.92

6

41.600

6

7.13

31

13.50

27

40.833

7

11.43

3

10.83

69

40.817

8

4.10

83

19.63

5

40.783

9

3.62

98

20.12

3

40.100

10

9.92

10

12.52

38

39.550

11

4.70

68

18.22

8

39.167

12

6.07

39

18.72

7

38.750

13

10.72

8

11.37

59

38.700

14

7.67

20

10.57

77

38.383

15

9.37

13

13.78

23

37.983

16

7.78

19

11.17

65

37.483

17

11.13

6

11.08

66

37.300

18

5.57

48

17.42

9

37.267

19

5.60

47

16.87

11

36.067

20

4.22

80

12.08

46

35.567

21

7.45

23

12.05

48

35.400

22

7.32

27

12.03

49

35.150

23