F

mI

THE BBC ANDAMERICAN

BROADCASTING1922-1954

VALERiACAMPORESI

IAI-iu.\ aAllloRlsl teachcs lisual Media llisi0ry in ihe ,{fi History and lieory Depsnnent 0f üetinivesidad Autó¡oma de Maüid srnce 199s. Slie is also professor of the ?hD lilm Studies Program at the

Modern la¡guaBe Depxdment. of t}e saDe unilersitv. Stre has been woüi¡s o¡ nedia a¡d lristory since her

undetg¡aduate ytds at the Udlcsi§ ol Bolog]la (ltaly) where sle gradnaied rith a 'lcsi di lauea'or'ramenceofArabia ud üe Mlth 0llhe lmper l He.o E Bdtain'whicl has bmn parti¿lly published in a nunlber olessays

in speci¡]jrd jomals. Aftcr a one lear slay at the Urilersi§ of ¡¿si ¡nglia {Nonrich, GB) as a sraduate llsitinsstndent, she ,vas adnitted as a ¡esearch student to t}e ?hD ?rogrm of the l{islorr_ l]nd Cnilizaüon Depl. 0l the

European llnive$itr Instjtúe (nore¡ce, IlaD In 1990, sle obtained her PlrD. in History at the EUI wit} a the-sis 0r lesisia¡ce to Aoericmüation in the hisiory ol lhe ¡ ¡.C. wlich fo¡ns the core ofüis booL Sincc 1989 she

Ias been liviq and worling i¡ Maüjd, }üÚc she is puNuing research on rclrcsentations of spmjsh culturálidotrtt in nln listory (includjng the leculimties ol mm c0$mptio¡) which she blished as a bool (Para

gra¡des y clicos, Lrn cne pra los españohs, 19,10.1990, Madrid, 199J) a¡d in various articles i¡cluded i¡ colleG

tive volumes. H or[ent research intere$s r¿¡ge fton ldious hisLorical approaches t0 i¡terterluality inluopem filn historyi studies on changin8 p¡r¡neten of verisimlitude (h praducnon ar¡d rcccpnon) in audio

risual ploductsi and ¡ lons tem lroject on Europea¡ film histow in the 1960s úd üe establishmetrt of elecho¡icDcdia. Shclas publishedexteisivelyi¡specElizedjoumals, snchsRsae dlistoiremodeme etco emporaine,

His¡o¡ic¿l Jou¡n¿l ol liln, Radio and Teleusio¡, yedia culturc and societ_,, tuchivos de la Filmoteca Vrlencia¡a,

Memoda e ctrca, Pasato e presente a¡d otheN; as well as i¡ collectin mtholosies. A rnember of theI¡temational \sociation of Medi¡ ,nd Ilistorl (L\VHI§I) si¡ce 1985, she las rec$ily been elected as a mem

bet of the Connc¡ ofthe -{$@iation. C0 founder ol Secueruias. Revista de listoria de] ci¡e (Madrid, sDcc 1991),

she is one of t¡c assooate ediion 0l the ¡mal

¡lSlCtJ-LI llls'l0lric.\L -L\D l.!.flUi in fom, this bool hs tieoretical ¡úrbitions. It ¡tiempis to lonnulaiea¡ ,nalitical pafiem whúh would neb to determine what happens when somcthjDs Iüe a cultuni productdenned by its national orisins is jmpoded Lnto a foreip coü¡try The case-study arál1§ed thai is to say lle Éco¡-struction ol British attitudes to{¡rds ¡rncúca in br0adcas¡ng policies a¡d progHrnrncs, shonld tlerefore be readrgii¡st ¡ mo¡e seneral baclgmund which endeavours t0 come to terns riü mass comudcation theories, on o¡eside, md sociolosic¡l and listorical anahsis on national idetrtjtt oa the othe¡. ,{.s a c0nclusion io the presence olAmenc¡n produc,s in Britjsh b¡oadcastiry, a strong arguneni emeryes rvlich scriously questioDs tle aralrtic¿loldatjltncss oftcrms and expressions suci as "Anericmjsatio¡', 'Anencán inÍuenct', 'Arnerican impaci', ánd

so forth. The enthdis wlidr üey placc ¡pon the U.S. side 0fthe process lends in itably to co¡ceal thc impor-l¡nce ¡¡d compleÉtr of the reaciions of those who dealr wiLh it, and miglt probablv be beiter approached tahing

as a sttuting poj¡t a native [uropean cultural nation¡]isnr, one ol \ihose main detuiq¡ h¡tucs would be iis un

ililil004

European Press Academic PublishingCover Design by Biz Stone 30 EIJRO

Per Antonio

Table of Contents

Achnowledgmenrs

IáRT ONE. BRITISH VS. AMERICAN APPROACHES1-O A PUBLIC SERVICE IN BROADCASTING

Chapter 1. A natiolal institution 17

I I - ITIEPERCEPTIONOFTHEAMERICAN'CIIAOS'ANDTHEBI RTH OF BROA DCASTI NC IN f]ftI']'AIN, ]9221927 11

I,2 ] IIE U,S AS A SOURCE OF INSPIR,AIION AND AS A TOO

PLIW ERFUL COM PETlTollr lllE l{OLti OF BUSINF,SS llll THE FEAR OF AN r\NiElt|CAN INVASION: INTERNATIONAL

BROADCASTINC lN I llti l9l0s 26

I 4 THE U.S INVASION CO\IES TRtlEr THE AJvl[RICAN FOIICESNEIWORK ANI) THE (] S. ]\'IODtrL IN 1I]E POST WAR DEBATE ON

CoMN¡ljI{CIAL ttAD]OI 5 THEBRITISII WAY TO COI\,IMERCIAL IELEVISION

Chaptcr 2. A different language. British broadcasters

talk abou¡America

2,I ,'BRfI ISIt MI]NTALITY ATITS REST' IIIE BITOADCASTER

1.2 FIRST IN,IPRESSIf)NS OliU S tsltOADCASTINC.l920s l9l0s23 NOSECOND THOUCII IS AFIERTHEWAR

I \\]],ALl\ ADITTTPT\TI q\'I ¡ñP HIUN A MI]II ICA i\¡NES OF THE B B C

25 lHEB BC AND ITS AUDIENCET SCATIERF,D DATA ONA PL]ZZLINC RFI,ATIONSHIP

Chapter 3. Attitudes cowards Audience Rese¡rch

:]] CI\INC THE PUI]LIC \IIIAI \!E 1'HINK THEY NEED,AND NoT wHAl l llEY \\ANT: BEFORE 1916

3.2 COLINTING HEADS : AFlEli l916]3 U S AI]DIENCE RESEARCII AS SEEN FRONI BRITAIN

AN AI'I'EMP I AI A CENERAL EV LUATION

vllXI

1].l,"ll:1,,, ., N,.p.,,...r,r,i.ulor .,,r,.,...p,.,J,. J. o.,Ji,,r..,,,...r r.,..,..r,,n.rr,...t.,.ñ..,.,n..t,,a..,, nt,"r"{rL ng.r.j tir,B ", nrt,.,rtr.s,,, - ¡ r', 1, r,, Lnn.iu,, i.,.., .1., p..t.r ,,..

ISBN 88-8398-001 )

Ozr)00 h. t-u¡,rern t,c,\ A!JJcDi. l.utrti\h,,,FV,¡ VJIL B.,nÍ,ni.4 - [ucecLh,u lt tr toty

wmfc p_a_p_com

«¡tr¿es;gn t y BizsL(,neprjhtc¿ i" tt¡q

49

5l

69

69

IV l\1,\ss( ur:l rrui

I)AIi'I''I'\Io. Il It] I)ISCOVERY OF NAIIONALIlIA I)I'I'IoNS oII ]NIORMATION AND

IiN'I'IiI{IAINMI]NT

Chapter 4. Before thc wrr: drc llritish prrblic gers

accluainted with U.S. radio 89

il.l THE PRE HISTORY O¡ lltANS^l LAN llcl llROAI)CASTINC.1923 1929 39

'12 IIISCOVERING AMERICA:THE PAROI)Y ANI)'l¡ltl lltiALIHINC.TH¡ 193(k 9l

4:l aoi\¡l\lllNtcaf rNc RET

45 INIPORTINC IDEAS FROM THE LI S.A INTLIELATEI9I0s l15,1.6 RESISTING A\¡ERICANIZA I ION 125

Cihapter 5. Arnerican m¿t€dal in the BBC output: the war

4.1 THE NORTH AMERICAN TiEPRESENTATIVII. l916

5l THtr ll BC ATWAR: DONÍESTIC AND INTERNATIONALDIMENSIOÑS OF CRO\!TH

t35

5 :]'PROCRAN'INIE IN¡ILTRATION'5.4 THF, ANÍERICAN FORCbS NE WORK AND TI]E RETURN T')

DEFENS¡YENESS 19.14 1950

5 5.AFIERTHE\!AR

Chapter 6. Being British: The 'BBC style' through thetest of time 1922-7950s

6t aN ovERvtE\! oF IlrE lr. fl c s par_lcyTowARt)sAiTIERICAN INTERFERENCES

6.2 EXPLORINC IN'JICATORSOFRRITISHNDSS

5.1 luEtsltltIloFANcLo.AI\'lERtcANaRoaDc^sTINc.t9404:t t:19

155

177

t8t

Conclusion 197

Notes 201Bibliography 23tIn<le¡i 251

TtlE FoLLowINc ABBREVIATToNs IIAVE REEN usED:

BBC WAC: British Broadcasting Corporation-Written ArchivesCentre

CAB: Puhlic Record Of6ce. Cabinet OIfice

FO: Public Record Office, Foreign Offrcc

HO: Public Record Office. Ho¡ne Office

LCI-MpBRsr Library of Congress, Motion Pictur§, Bloadcasting andRecorded Sound Division

MO-FR: The Tom Harrisson-Mass Observation Archive (FileRepol.ts)

NSA: Nationrl Sound Archive

Oml History, Columbia: The OIal History Collcction, ColumbiaUnivcrsity,'Radio Pionecrs Prcject'

US-NA: U.S. N¿tional Archives

ACKNOIILEDGEMENTS

ln 1954, when the so called 'dissident ciDena' was acquiriÍg visibilityiD Francoist Spain, two young directors began to think about makinga movie that would stage the profound roots of an aLrthcntic nationalidentity to juxtapose the nationalist spirit with that of the rhetoric ofdictatorship. When the first prcposal ofthis rural drama was rejectedby producers, they clecided they would build up thcir story around wineand Coca Cofa. The film, eventually t],]led l4/elcone, Mr Marshall!(iBienvenido, Mr. Marshall!, L. Garcia Berlanga, 1954), ended up as

a comedy on the reactions ofa small village ofcastille, whose mayorhaving announced that aUS delegation would visit the village and rvhodecides to organize a general make up ofthe village, so as to givc it atwically Spanish look, to impress the powefül forcigners.

Withi Europe, wherever you go, you car most prob¿bly detecl in therecent cültural historyofthe countryyou live some examples ofsimilarstories, imaSes, writteri texts, $,here r€ference to the United States ofAmcrica is used to define loc¿lculturc and customs. either in antithesisor as a desirable f'uture. When it lvas fi¡st conceived as a PhD thesis. inthe late 1980s, Md,§r Crlture a d National Tradírrors aimed at offerillgan elabo¡ate desc ption ofa rather specific Europea[ vemion ofthatsame basic attitude. Hopefully it will still help to clarify what happensto cultur¿l products as they move across national ft.oniiels.

Books have at least one merit, to their authors. They operate as

gigantic reminders of the iúellectual and emotional debts which onehas accumulated while working on the ploject. It is a deep pleaslrre torecord on these pages the effective help I received from various peopleafld iNtitutions without which I would h¿ve never dreamt ofgetting tothe eüd ofmy research. I hope rhey will not be too disappoinled whenthey see the eventual product ofthe wo¡k they helped to bring to life.

\1-\SS 'I]II

L]RIi A\I) N1'II

I wish I had bee11 able to leam all that they taught me- Unforhtnately,many persoñal flaws survived: they should all be ascribed to mylimitatio s.

As a re elaboration ot' my PhD thesis, this book wou ld not exist h¿dI not had the luck ofhaving Prolesso¡ Alan S. Milward as a supervisorat the Eu¡opcan Unive¡sity Institute. The way in which I could get tograsp a feasible, intercsting, sensible subject matter fof my thesis had alot to do with the pecüliar way in which Professor Milward teachcs hisstudents. I shall always bear in mind the nixture ofgenuine curiosityard wárm distance with which he used to discuss the differeüt slagesol my work. Evc¡ytime I sat down talking to him, I had the feelingthat I had to convince him of every single step I took. As it went witha delicatc human attitüde, the task was not ¿s terrifying as it ightsound. Rather, it \las a stimulating plolcssional training in historicalresearch. as wlrll as in acadcnic life-

In molc general terms, the tsuropean University Institute, both as aninstitution and as a group of peIsons, has bccn a nccessary conditionlor the existeDce of this book throughout every single phase of itsprogressive elabor¡tion. Insol'ar as llnancial and organizational supportis concerned, the EUI fi11anced my scholarships, along with the It¿tianMinistry oaForeign Affairs, alld allowed for my trips and maiDtenanceduring my research stnyings in Great Britain and the United States. Asfbr ilrtellcctual i11fluences, Professor Dnniel Roche, who was teachingmodern cultural history at the EUI, a d Prof¡ssor Tiziano Bonazzi,my extelnal PhD supervisor ftom the University of Bologm, bothexercised a defiritive influence on some theoretical assumptions whichlay behind the basic conception of the book. They hclped me to bea\rare of lo¡tg teml cukural trends and warned nre against doubtfLrlgeneralized statcmcnts.

While at the EUI, I also had the chance to meet Philip Schlesinger,thcn working inthe Deparlñent of Pol itical and Social Sciences, who notody acquairted me with mass communication theories on the problemofnational ideDtity, but also introduced me to Paddy Scanncll and DavidCardiff, who were then working in London on the oustanding socialhistory ofBritish broadcasting. Paddy and David gave mc crucial adviccson sourccs and how to interyret them, let me have access to some

unpublished material they werc working on, and indeed guided my steps

within thc huge and complicated world ofBdtish mdio history in suchan effective way which I rvould have never been able to ligure out on myown. Following thcir suggcstions, I also managed to t¿lk to tuo actualprctagonists, Harnan C eselvood and Leon¿rd Miall, who both openedtheir houses and memories to help me *,ith charm and generosity- Asfo¡ actual archival rcscarch, thanks are due to Neil Somerville ¿nd hiscolleagucs at the BBC Wdtten Archives Certre in Readiog who delvedout a generous and often unsuspected amount ofmaterial rclating to nrysubject. Without their steady ard intelligent assistance I am quite surethat I migbt havc got lost uilhin my own mind.

As for the U.S. side, I wish to thank Emily Roscnbcrg whosecomnlcDtarics deeply e¡rjched my k[owledge of ¿ wider internatiomlcontext. Besides, her invit¿iion to a panel ofthe American HistoricalAssociation chaircd by Professor Costigliola in 1988 offered me theopportunity to experience live reactiol'ls to nly $,ork on the other sideofthe Atlaltic in a historical moment when sensitivity a¡d academicinterest towards these issue was ¡ather intense.

Last but not least, I owe a great debt to David Elhvood, who stands atthc vcry beginning ofmy tmining as a histodan ofaudiovisual cultureir my undergraduate years at the University of Bologna. He not onlysupervised my 'tesi di laurea' and taught me how to use the basicanalytical tools ofa social and cultural historian, but was eager to makeme acquainted with the internationai dimension ofmy ñeld ofresearch-He introduced me to the world ofthe International Association ofMediaandHisto¡y (IAMHIST). which ererted a cruci¿l influence on my uork,andprovidcdmc with my first opportunity to discuss my research $.ithina highly speci,rlized environment- Furthermore, his warm and stcadypresence as a friend transformed my llrst steps in the professional worldto ¿n utterly pleasant experience.

Some chapters and parts of chapters were published, in ea¡lier versions,in collections a¡d ¿cadeüic journals, and I wish to thank their editorsand publishers: Revue d'His¡oire Modetne et (bntenporai e, Hís¡oricalJour¡¡al al Filn Radio a¡td Television, Me¡lia CultLffe a rl Sacieh,,Passnto eprcse te,XX secola,Ellwood and Brunetta, eds. (1991), Ellwood and Kroes(199'1). They hclpcd ne io kccp a $,ork in progress attitude towards mywork which made easier the task ofrcel¿boratirg the original manuscript.

INTRODUCTION

Apparently,

Atnerican populor culture trdvels thc \Norki with edse

(Liebes-Katz, 1990: 3).

'[his pervasiveness has bee¡ commcnted upon on both sides of theAtlantic with sither distrust, enthusiasin, and detachment, or, withcuriosity, á11 through the twentieth century. Political programmcs,cultural manifestos, novels, films, works ofart, scientific essays, nlongwith pamphlets aod newspaper articles have gradually built up a solidintertext which features as its rrain character some soft ofrelationshipwith American inass cúl1ureper.se, and as a[ ageú ofchange as it entersa foreign domain. Within that debate, a range of crucial exprcssions,trs wcll as images, and terms of thought were coined which acquireclan almost undispúed universal circulatioD, sr¡ch as Americaniz¿tion,'Americar impact,' American influence,'or Americanmodel .It seomsreasonable to pinpoint the inter-war years as a crucial mome¡t offbundation and establishmcnt of that illterte)(t. lt was iü the yenrs

tlút followed the end of the First World War that the United Statesof America, through the medium of its ptoducts and systcl'ns oforganization, became a feature ofdaily life throüghout Europe. Whilecultural reactions are not univocal nor mechaüically determined, itcá¡t hardly be disputed that the powerful presence abroad of actualobjects, ideas, and imagcs originally conceived and produced in theUnited Stntes did work as a calalyst ofcomplex reactions which wouldin the eod sum up to a far from coherent but extremely active pattemof thought and inspiration. This book aims at exploring a casc in thehis(ory of the European elites's response to the American invasion, inan cffort to historicize exprcssions and categories which are often usedas neutral analytical toolsr-

¡l \ss aL:LrLrRli 1ñD N ft oN.1L.1RátnfioNC 13

Thcse arc thc basic qucstions which this book is aimed atr. The actualsubject matter, a lbcused and systematic cnquiry into British reactionsto Americ¿n inlluence, via a case study ofBritish broa<Icasting, shouldthen be read within that contcxt. As for the choice of the speciflcinquir¡ it seemed a reasonable prolongation of previous studics. Thereservoir ofsources upon which the history ofBdtish brcadcasting hasbeen rcconstructed is litcm¡ly fillcd up with references to thc U.S. as apolitical and institutiona¡ model to be rejected or imitated, on onc side.and as an cxporter of cu¡tural products (ideas, prcgrammes, artists).on lhe olher. HJrLlly 5urpflsrng if orrc corrsrders lhrt broJJcJ-trngconstituted siDcc ils very beginning a particlllar¡y scnsitive field fronrthe point of \,iew of the internatio¡alization of culture. Apad f.roütLe possibility of cxchanges of progmm¡les, ideas and artists. mdioprogranrmes could easilybc h¿nsmitted beyon(¡ national boundaries. Infact, the international vocation olbroadcasting could only be rcstrainedby means of political and economic agreeDents enforced by nationalgovernnrents. And in ¿n intc¡national free markel for cultura¡ products,as the film indüstry had demonstrnted, the United Slates would álwavsbc I he rnoil d) namic interprctrr ot thc new rechn ique. rnd rhe .rrongc,t

Since the very bcgirning ofrhe history of sou11d broadcasrins in theI IIted Ki gdom. lhc Briri.h clite. rvhá deilI uith rhe ncw riediumshowed a distinct sensitivity towards this state of things and tendcdto produce a bipolar vision of broadcasting where a straightforwardBritish national culturejuxraposed itsclfto an equally idenrifiabte U.S.'model.'As Asa Briggs described it in 1961.

eft tudlly the British an.l lmericdn brca¿cdstíng systens were to beso conqletel¡, di/J¿re t,o e bdse¡l on aconr:ept of.púbtic serN¡ce,,theotherJult, ¡ntegra¡e¡l into the business rysten - that in dll (:()ntrove$¡e,about the place ol ra.li.) ¡]1sociery they werc to be taken as the tw(, (:híefcon t rd sting rypes. (Bt;ggs,l96l-1979: I :59)a

That a coDtrastcxisted is out ofdoubt. Before anyreliable studyoftheU.S. presence in the history oftsritish broadcastil1g is undertaken, thehistory olthat bipolar image, and ofthe circunstances \,hich concurredin its c.calion, have to be reconstructed and critic.rlly examined. Withirthe rationale of this work, chapre. I should be read as an :rttempt inthat direction, a gencta¡ introduction to the themcs investigated. It deals

with the building up and subseqüent develop cnt ofthe notion ofU.S. broadcasting as a political and institutional model \\'hichjuxtaposcditselfto the British solution. It reconstructs the contents ofthat notiorland endeavouN r comparison bctwecn it and the actual \,r.orkings ofU.S.broadcasting (as derived from published studics). Images ofU.S- radioarc read agaillst thc backg roun d ofthe soc inl and econo icfolces whichparticipated in the defrnition and transformation of the institütionsof British broadcasthg. The analysis covcrs thc years between iheearly 1920s (when the British Broadcasting Compa y was sct Lrp as a

r¡onopolistic enterprise) through 1927 (when it \qas transformed intopublic corporation) 1() 1954 (with thc break-up ofthe B.B.C. monopoly¡n(l thc appcarancc ol Independent Television)-

llut lhc slrugSle iD defe,rce of a 'peculi¡r'ly British' system $.as

only Drernt to prcvide for an institutional f¡an,cwo¡h *hich had tobe filled up with huma behgs and actual radio programmes. Theanalysis of the actual significance of U.S. bro¡dcasting within üeworld of brcadcasters and of their productions constitutes the h¿rd

corc of the p¡esent work. Chapter 2 furnishes a general descriptionofthe broadcasters, the men and women who were asked to interpretthc messages ir defence of the national identity. Thci, image of, a drcl¡tionship with, the U.S. rádio system is analysed firstly fu gcncral

tcrnls, thc emphasis being placed upon conceptions of broadcasting

rather than on specific programme shategies. Chapter 3 deh,cs deepcrin this aspect ofthe Anglo-American collfl ontation in brcadcasting and

a,lalyzes in detail the B.B.C. execlrtives' attitude to the audiencc (and

. rLlie ce resecrch)-¿s cornpdred to lhe Amencar.'l'hc last thrcc chapters deal exclusively with the Corporation's outprLt

bctween the mid-1920s ¿nd the post-wnr years. fhey are mcant tocxplore ihe substáDtiality of the notion of a national cultural identitywhich the B.B.C. men seem to have struggled to del'end when devisinglhcir programme strategies as against the American influence. ln thccoursc ofthis analysisthe contents ofthe British national culture rvhichIhc B.B.C. invented5anddiffusednsngnirst U.S. cultr € ishighlightcd.la chrpten 4 and 5 the n¿rration rcvolvcs around a description oftheAnrcrican material which was being impoltcd, and th.3 channels and

lillcrs which were built up by the British to deal \\,ith it. The dcgrcc andnirturc ot'tho process of Americanization'ofprogran res a1€ asscsscd

¡I.{SS '

T] I ]ILRE ,\\"D N1T]ON AI. TR \Dft IoNS

and projccted against the brcadcastcrs, own mythology. Chaptsr 6brings together the most significant indicators of the supposed .British,tradition and attempts to draw a few general conclusions upon its

As for the spechum of archives ¿nd sources e ployed, thc firstselective c terion topinpoint was that only the material in which someteference was made (or could be detected) to U.S. broadcastiDg w¿spicked up. Evidence is therefore biascd so as to reveal either actualdealings with thc U.S. radio industry, or images ot' U.S. broadcastingentertainedby contemporaries. Those i mages contained varying degreesof reality, depcnding on the nature of the source examined. Thech¡se for a defnition of the exact degree of rcality has entailed theuse ofunhomogeneous types of documents belonging to the politicaland professional world. Publishcd sources (parliamelltary debates andpapers, articlcs fiom pe odicals and specialized journals, publishedmemoirs) are therefore compared with unpublished written documentsand with the var ioüs in stitutions' internal corrcspondence. Besides, oralsources are employed both in the form of interviews which completcwritten memoirs, andof radio .ecordiügs, indispensabte to subsrantiatememos and ll3tters on the B.B.C. output6. Civen the natu¡e of thequestions posed the narration does not follow a chronological olderfiombeginningto end. Büt a tempor¡l succession of facts is establishedas crucial within each one ofthe themes evokcd. Time is üo irrelevantelement in the argumentation. And the choice of the period is nofaccident¡I. It is meant to describe the histo cal peculiarities whichaccompanied the whole history ofsound broadcasting in Britain beforethe ad\€nt oftelevision as a nass medium and to follow it in a changhgsocial and economic conlex1

PART ONE,

BRITISH VS. AMERICANAPPROACHES TO A PUBLIC SERVICE

IN BROADCASTING

Broadcdsting organ¡:etl o a 'Charter' basís . . . represents noto l.t,the'iusfe nil¡eu beti'e¿n the p ure ly authorít¡ltiw 'ar:l.lrcas to thcpoplc oJ ¡i stdte »:sre t u d the pdrtitan fopagan(la oJ each severalorÍ:an ol public¡¡,, but also inci(lentally . . . a tve of orgdni.atir»1thot lligh¡ be dpplied *ith arlwntdge to certaül othet public serríce.t.l¡titils lhdt passess the character ol social ecessit! and lel arcobl¡g¡!¿ . . . ro steer d precariou.t tourse betwee fhc Scy a of mn¡or

nlitiLs dn.l olfcidl rcutine o the o e hat1d, ah(l the Char!'bdis oJ

t t,,,-:h\lt'titat, t T luttatrc on th.other.'