FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554

June 25, 1969

IN REPLY REFER TO:

Professor Joshua Lederberg
Department of Genetics

Stanford University Medical Center
Stanford, California 94305

Dear Professor Lederberg:

I found several communications from you in different
piles of correspondence here in my office and I did want to reply
to your letter of June 9. I very much appreciate having a copy
of Dr. Siegel's paper.

I was very pleased that we had the opportunity for
even a brief conversation, and was very impressed with your
article in the Post last Sunday. Let me try to answer some of
your questions.

I believe that most of the motivation for our present
television programming is to respond to the lowest common
denominator of the largest possible audience. In an essentially
three supplier market, this leads to the kind of programming
we have. Ido think that Madison Avenue is not well informed
about public taste, and that television programmers are not
particularly innovated in searching out or developing latent
public desires for quality programming. I would point to some of
the ratings that ''quality'' programs have received--some of the
CBS playhouse productions were the highest rated in their market,
and the hour-long special on Justice Black did very well. The

piece on Japan was also very highly rated. I also think
that controversial or unpleasant programming --where all difficult
situations are not resolved ina space of a half hour, tend to upset
people who see them and therefore, advertisers do not want to
associate their products with such programming. I think this has
adverse, direct and indirect, effects through this advertiser concern.
Professor Joshua Lederberg
June 24, 1969
Page 2

Finally, I think that many of the people who are responsible for
programming decisions are somewhat out of touch with the
intellectual and youth interests in our Nation. The people who
run the mass media tend to be the people who attend the rotary
clubs and go mainly to corporation board meetings. I would
appreciate knowing your reaction to these suggested factors.

You have asked about the current status of some other
matters. The Commission is presently reviewing CATV policy--
our most recent proposals in this area are enclosed. Several new
Common Carriers have proposed competing systems with Bell
network--the only case to come before us for decision is now
pending before the Commission and has been pending for some time.
As for the shared use of private lines, a recent recommended
decision by the Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau has suggested
that present Bell tariffs are unlawfully discriminatory. That
question is now pending before the full Commission. And Bell,
itself, has proposed some relaxation in its sharing provisions
for private lines, Finally, the domestic satellite matter is now
also pending before the Commission.

I hope this information is useful t u. Please let
me know if I can be of further help.

   

Enclosure