Radio Matters Ventilated in Auckland

Radio Record, Volume I, Issue 37, 30 March 1928, Page 3

Radio Matters Ventilated in Auckland

Company, Government and "Radio Record" all Condemned

Dealers Repudiate Destructive Criticism and Support Quality of Programmes.

UCKLAND has enjoyed quite a field week on radio. Arising out of the change in the directorship of 1YA, the executive of the Auckland Listeners League called a public meeting, the ostensible object of which varied according to the quarter in which the announcement was made. The executive’s letter to the general manager gave the object as "dissatisfaction both with the programmes from 1YA and the whole system of broadcasting." The secretary’s telegram to us gave the object as "to discuss the years operations and future of broadcasting." The president, in a letter elsewhere, declares it was a protest against lack of co-operation. E freely and courteously published, as raquested, the secretary’s notice of the meeting and, although not invited, decided to attend because of our interest in radio. To our surprise we found, on arrival, that amongst other subjects for condemnation. was the "Radio Record." We will not express any opinion on the secretary’s action in using our columns as he did and not advising us of the intention to attack the "Radio Record." It does not square with the pious declaration of League speakers that "they do not attack without giving the opportunity for defence." T is probably correct to say that the mainspring of action in relation to the meeting was the staff change mentioned. it was a former staif change, that in relation to Mr. Prentice, which we believe was largely responsible for the formation of the League. Then, following a provisional meeting which clected the promoters to the executive, a public meeting was called and, by using the names of, Mr. Harris, Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Prentice as having been "invited" to speak, there was attracted a large gathering. On this occasion the same tactics were employed. An "invitation" to attend was graciously given the general manager, the secretary to the Post and Telegraph Department and the late station director. In our contact with public life we have invariably found it regarded as courteous to secure an acceptance before using a public man’s name as a "draw; but these small details were ignored. It may at least occur to the public. however, that, as on the two occasions when the League has staged a public meeting, none, of the "Jions" whose names were used as "bait"? has attended, and the League executive has then used the opportunity to push through ready-made resolutions, some guarantee should be required on any future occasion as to the bona fides of the announcements made. On their face, the League’s record is not too good. ‘HE great use made by the league in its publicity of the "invitation" extended to Messrs. Harris, McNamara and Stringer, carried with it, we think, an obligation in courtesy to explain to the meeting its failure to produce the "invited" speakers. No such attempt was made. Although they had dragged in the name of a high Government official, no explanation was made to the disappointed

audience of his absence. Although the League had a letter in reply from Mr. Harris it was not read, nor was it announced that he requested the League to give details of the alleged "‘dissatisfaction with programmes and the system of administration" and had offered to mect the executive. Such action would have been fair but it was not done. THILE obviously the prime inspiration of the meeting was the change in staff, it is very significant that that matter was not even breught before the meeting. Apparently those responsible had become wiser in the interval following their call for publicity. In the alternative, attention was concentrated on programmes, although even here, the League weakened from the secretary’s original wholesale condemnation to one of admitting appreciation of the artists but demanding "more variety," and slightly longer hours on Sunday transmissions. With these points we can quite agree, but were they important enough to warrant all the stir? HE most interesting part of the meeting was, we think, that in which the "Radio Record" was attacked as being "prejudicial" to broadcasting. We found this quite entertaining and took tho opportunity to speak, although we had not been invited or informed of the prespective attack. We will not pay the League’s executive the compliment of taking it seriously on this point. When it is recollected that three members of the executive of the League are the radio writers of Auckland papers, and that we have recently had very good cause indeed to write very strongly about the utterly unfair criticism emanating from Auckland and being deliberately spread throughout the country; that, in fact, we were forced, in the interests of radio, to expose a definite concerted plan to pinprick broadcasting by a gentleman who boasted of his "pull" with the Press-no more need be said. There is no room for argument in our view that the worst enemies of broadcasting in New Zealand have been those who have persistently written down broadcasting and have refused to give credit for the very marked advances made in‘recent months. TF the Auckland Listeners’ League is in reality concerned with furthering broadcasting its most effective means of doing immediate good is to exercise such restraint as is possible over the lucubrations of its executive Press members and, while not in the slightest checking deserved and reasonable criticism or suggestions for betterment, repudiating the utterly unreasonable attitude adopted of late in some articles. The fact that Auckland dealers who are concerned with fostering sales have been at last impelled to declare their considered view that "the concensus of public opinion was that the programmes as a whole compared more than favourably with those given by Australian stations, especially in view of the restricted amount of local talent available," should show that the Press campaign mentioned has been a hindrance and not a help to radio.

OLLOWING a deal of propaganda in the’ Auckland Press, Mr. William Goodfellow, a director of the Radio. Broadcasting Comincur? pany, gaye an interview on the position a few days prior to the rublic meeting. He stated that in his opinion a great deal of unnecessary and entirely misleading publicity had recently been given regarding certain decisions of the general manager of the Radio Company. He had personally looked into these matters very carefully, and had ‘no hesitation in stating that the management had taken the only possible action under the circumstances. It was very regrettable that a small section of Auckland listeners seemed determined to use every possible pretext in an-endea-vour to discredit the ability and sound judgment of the general manager. NOT MONEY TO BURN. Continuing, Mr. Goodfellow stated that he had, within the last few weeks, visited all the leading cittes of the Dominion, and on every hand heard nothing ut praise for the broadcasting services. It was generally recoguised that a very marked advance had been made during the past year. Referring to the question of finance, he stated that the impression had been created that the company had money to burn. Such was not the case, ‘fhe total income for the past vear was under £40,000 for the maintenance and operation of four stations, and during several months the expenditure had actually considerably exceeded the revenue. This could be readily realised when he stated that one station-3L0 Melbourne-had now a revenue of nearly £100,000, and this station was the standard the New Zeaalnd Compatiy apparently was expected to equal. ‘The expense of running four stations was very great. T‘or instance, the payment of copyright alone ran into thousands « year. NO UNDUE CONTROL. Dealing with the question of management, he said that it had been stated that there was undue control of the Auckiand station by the head office. This was not correct. Tach station was treated as a unit. A station director was expected to use initiative and to keep in intimate touch with local conditions. He was solely responsible for his programme and was expected to recomimend for engagement the best ayailable talent. The station director was further expected to use tact and influence in persuading artists to give the class of performance which the public demanded, Interference from head office merely implied that the work was not satisfactorily performed by the staion, and that, therefore, assistance had to he given. A local station director had, in fact, power to deal with all routine imatters, and it was largely’ questots of policy which were dealt with by the head office at Christchurch, which was just as satisfactory as Wellington for adiministrative purposes.

"THOUGHTLESS CRITICISM." The broadeasting company claimed to have engaged the leading artists and performers available in this country, and these artists were working with eniiusiasm at the hig task of providing daily concerts, while at the same time keeping in view the necessity for an excellent standard of performance. The thoughtless criticism which was being indulecd in by a few individuals can only have the result of weakening that enthusiasm and seriously handicapping the efforts of the performers. Yun conclusion, Mr. Goodfellow stated that neither himself nor Mr, Harris would attend public. meetings, but at all times the management would be pleased to receive constructive and helpful suggestions for the benefit of the large and increasing number of radio listeners throughout the Dominion.

THE PUBLIC MEETING ee

Usrty Hall, Owen Street, was filled with, about 300 people on the evening of Monday, March Li, on the occasion of the Listeners’ League inecting. Major H. S. Robinson presided, Mr. A. C. Jacob, president of — tlic league, said he would like to let them know what the league had done. They had had a memorable mccting at Scots Hall about the beginning of June, but they were up against rather a brick wall, especially in the general manager, who was endeavouring to carty out in New Zealand what a big body of men aud an Advisory Board in Wngland found great difnculty in doing. He could only say that, as far as he could see, ‘Mr. Harris was either one of the greatest egoists of this world, or he did not realise the responsibilities of his position." Soon after the Scots Hall meeting the "Radio Record" came ont with a leader calling for the closest cooperation between the listeners and the eompany. As they were asked to cooperate, they naturally tried to_co-oper-ate; they met Mr, Harris in July, together with the dealers, at 1YA, and asked him to do certain things. Mr, Farris said he would like to do those things, but they had no money, They offered to float the balance of the capital, and asked that listeners should | have representation with regard to pro--gramines, but Mr. Harris didn’t want that. "I don’t know what he wanted. As far as I can see he didn’t want cooperation, he wanted isolation," ITowever, he said if we would submit « scheme he could consider it, We sib-

mitted a scheme, which was, briefly, that, as far as LYA programiies were concerned, they should be governed by a committee of three-we suggested the station director, a member of the Gov-

ernment, and a representatve of the listeners-and that this committee should be advised how anuch motey was allotted to 1YA and spend it. Mr. Harris would not agree to this. If he

had, they were prepared to circularise listeners with the request to, co-operate with the company and endeavour to undo the "shake-up" we gave them in May. We were prepared to appeal to

other societies to co-operate in regard to programmes and send out 16,000 addressed envelopes to listeners; ‘and, finally, we had in mind a Radio Clympia to give radio a boost. The whole of that went *‘phut" because Mr. Harris would not consent to disclose how much money Auckland station would get for programmics. Thereafter Mr, Harris said he would submit a scheme. ‘This came along in November, but it was puerile. AUCKLAND WANTED MORE MONEY. ‘fhe speaker went on ty refer to the listeners conference held in Wellington aud the representations made to thie Secretary of the Post Office at the crmclusion of that conference, partie 1arly with regard to the reconstitution of the Adyisory Board, At that time Auckland had far the bigger majority of listeners, and they considered there was no reason why they should not get more money for their programmes. They said they were tired of keeping Christchurch and Ounedin going on Auckland inoney. Mr. Harris remained in Christchavch, and they never saw him, and his ete ~ swers to their letters were usually very short. "Coming nearer home," said Mr Jacob, ‘we may complain that, perhaps, the programmes of LYA are not changed a great deal, but we- cannot say the same of the staff; it is always the same story: the company is always | in the right, and the people who are dismissed are always in the wrong!" Dealing with programmes, Mr. Jacob said; ‘‘We appreciate our artists, and when we are criticising our programmes we do not mean anythin personal against our artists.’ He di not know why the league should have "all this abuse hurled at us for daring to hold a meeting."" They certainly gave Mr. Harris and Mr. McNamara pleuty of warning. They also gave» an open statement of facts to the papers, and what was the result? ‘They had had a rather low-down attack om Auckland and its meeting through the ‘Radio Record."". That was what they got for calling the people together at the end of two and a half years of broadcasting!

MR. TIARK COMES FORWARD. Mr. Tiark opened his speech by moving that, while the control cf broadcasting was in the hands of the present ineflicient administration, no real improveinent in broadcasting could be exe pected, and after eight months’ experience the meeting reaffirmed its lack of confidence in either the capacity or good intentions of the Radio Broadcasting Company. Mr. ‘Tiark proceeded in rather a melodramatic style to speak in support of his resolution. He inycighed against the ‘‘monopoly" given the company, criticised the articles of association as being the most extraordinary he had ever seen, and the ‘‘most colossal piece of impertinence," ete. Being o a ‘Nosey-Parker disposition," he had recently made a legal search and found that cértain alterations had been made in them to nermit of shares being transferred, [These alterations are quite formal, we understand, and designed merely to permit of shares being transferred in the event of death, etc.---Ed.J Mr. Viark continued that they had been accused of pin-pricking. This (Continued on Page 14.)

Radio Matters In Auckland

(Continued from Page 3)

he denicd. But they were determined Hat their voice should be heard. ‘‘We Jo not charge without allowing a defence," declared Mr. ‘Yiatk. ‘‘We come out on the open platform, and our president invites anyone to defend or criticise as he thinks fit." Doubtless some of you have seen this before, said Mr. ‘Tiark, as_he brandished a copy of the ‘‘Radio_ Kecord" before the audience. "I didn’t buy it-I borrowed it," he declared, at which evidence of nationality the audience cheered loudly. ; Next Mr. ‘Tiark waved a clipping of Mr. Goodfellow’s interview, ss given in the Auckland "Star." ‘*"Ihe best: part of that,’ said Mr. Tiark, "is the photograph, I don’t think much of the rest of it,’ to demonstrate which he 1ead a good deal of it. ‘‘But we do not discredit," said the speaker, ‘‘neither are we here to go into a long controversy as to the whys and whierefores of changes of staff. We have no desire whatever to dictate. All we wish is that they shail deliver the goods.’

Traversing Mr. Goodtellow's — statement that, in travelling through the main centres of New Zeanald, he had found general satisfaction with the service given by the Radio Broadcasting | Company, Mr. ‘Tiark quoted North ‘Yaranaki aud Rotorua as places that appatently had been misSed. ‘Why can’t Mr. Goodfellow and Mr. Harris come to our meeting?’ Mr, ‘Tiark plaintively asked. ‘We can only come to the conclusion that they are not interested in yout wishes or ours. Nevertheless we will peg away, and some day perhaps the Government will realise what a horrible mistake they made when they placed the monopoly in such hands." Mr. ‘Tiark now reverted to the "Radio Record," and proceeded to devote special attention to the letter, published in our issue of March 16 under the heading of ‘Manufacturing Discontent," wherein was outlined the ‘hobby" chosen by a gentleman with a pull" in relation to pin-pricking the Broadcasting Company. Mr. Tiark read the letter, but, said he, ‘I won’t read vou the rest of the article-there is no

necessity."’ ‘The letter, he announced, had not been addressed to the "Radio Record," and he invited the person to wliom it had been addressed to say how it had got inlo the paper. Mr. ‘liark concluded by dramatically asking the writer of the letter to confirm this statement. The writer, whose name in deference to his wishes we do not give, nervously mounted the platform, and explained that he had written the letter to an, officer of the company in a spirit of "kidding," and with a view to giving him in the latter part some idea of how things were going. He had written in a jocular fushion-‘‘like Alphonso, just jossing him.’? Some of the words as published in the "Record" had been put in and the context altered somewhat. He did not wish to blame the man to whom he had written and thought there had been some mistake. Mr. Tiark’s motion was duly seconded, after which a member of the andience suggested that an amendment should be added, notifying the Radio Broadcasting Company that, failing the provision of better programmes, they would dismantle their sets at the end of three months, After some further discussion a more mature member of the audience advised the gentleman responsible for this idea not to be silly. He would not like to see them make themselves ridiculous by passing any such proposition. A COMPARISON OF TALENT.

The Rev. Mr. Coates said he had a little crystal set with which he would not part for anything in the world, He did not wish to get anything beyond 1YA, and as far as he was concerned he regarded the fare offcred as being most excellent. THEY HAD TO REMEMBER THAT AUCKLAND DID NOT PROVIDE THE RANGE OF ART: ISTIC AND MUSICAL CULTURE TMAT THE SOUTHERN CITIES He had recently been in Dunedin and Christeharch, and while there had been entertained at fricnds’ houses with a range of talent superior, he thought, to much that was put over the air from YA. This showed, in his opinion, that the southern cities, due to what factor he did not definitely know, certainly had a wider range of cultural attainment than had Auckland, where the claims of the epen-air life perhaps operated as a barrier. In his opinion it was plain that 1YA_ had procured the very best talent available

in the City of Auckland, ahd the company could not Le blamed if the city was not able to provide the full range of talent desired by listeners. When a variety of talent was available, he had no doubt that the company would engave it. He was very thankful that they did have a very excellent trio that gave them such beautiful instrumental music. He was thankful, also, to Mr. Montague and others for their elocutionary items. ‘The talent employed was the best available so far as Auckland was concerned. He thought the great object of an organisation such as the Listeners’ League was to offer some construc: tive criticism, and to make useful suggestion; but, in making any criticism, they had to make them with an inner knowledge of the local conditions, If anvone knew of artists who ought to go on the air, let them suggest them ; he thought the management would he very glad of any such suggestion, ‘Their programmes, generally speaking, were excellent. He personally wished they might get more of the gramophone records, they were now so very fine and so excellently produced-very much

better in point of fact than some of the local talent. If they could suggest better performers, he would be glad, but he thought it was very unfair to be always dunning the company over the programmes. He took it that the progtammies were good, and that they would be better if the city could produce the goods. They couid not get visiting artists because they would not go on the air, and much of the music cf some of the lighter pieces was copyrighted by J. C. Williainson, etc. The copyright position affected the programmes more than listeners realised.

QUESTION OF TRANSMISSION, Mr. R. I, Haycock, one of the earliest listeners in the Waikato district, said that he did not think there was very much to. worry about in regard to the quality of, the programmes, but this was not the case with transmission. formerly he had been able to get 4YA beiter than he could now get 2YA. A little cross talk occurred as to whether it was necessary for applications made to perform at LYA to be sent to Christchurch. ‘The asstrance was given that it was not, but that after programmes had been arranged by the local station and changes were found necessary for copyright reasons by head ciice, adyices were sent out from there. THE CHILDREN’S SESSION. Mr. G. McB. Salt advanced that the jleague had sent forward many constructive suggestions to Christchurch, but the replies were generally brief. Mr. Salt read a brief acknowledgment from the company to resolutions forwarded by the league in connection with the clhildren’s hour. {But Mr. Salt did not explain that, following on that brief acknowledgment, Mrs. Hall, organiser of the children’s sessions, had interviewed him and another prominent member of the league’s executive and had offered them the positions of "uncles" at LYA in order to apply their ideas for improvement, ctc. Mr. Salt had first accepted the position but on it being announced,

withdrew.-itd, | Mr. Salt proceeded to say they were making no attempt whatever to decry the individual performers at 1YA, Their complaint was that the programmes lacked variety, and in this connection he cited the ‘"‘typical’ programme broadcast from YA as a sample of variety in that only one artist appeared twice on the programme. Now they had the same performers week by week. ‘They would also like variely in the form of novelties, burlesques, etc. Hours of service should also be length ened, particularly on Sunday evenings. In a small way they should be able to provide even better service and longer hours than 8,0, Mr, Tiark’s motion was carried.

THE GOVERNMENT CONDEMNED. Mr. Knowles moved regretting that the Government had not as yet taken steps to set up an Advisory Buard and had made uno financial statement to listeners. Mr. Harris, in the ‘‘Radio Record," had said that the Broadcasting Company was not a private company formed to exploit the public, but a public company formed under Government regulation to administer a public utility in the interests of the community. Well, he would like to know one that was_ more private! Mr. McNamara had said that he could not see why listen. ers should want to see the accounts. He said the Government auditor had been through the accounts and was_ willing to give a certificate. THAT DID NOT SATISFY THE LISTEN: ERS, WHO WANTED TO SATISFY THEIR CURIOSITY IN REGARD TO SALARIES, RENTS, FEES, ETC. Some of the things they would like t» know were: (1) the cost of operating; (2) the money spent on programmes; (8) the amount of reserves; (4) the proportion of license fees drawn from Auckland that wese spent in Auckland. Mr. Knowles’s motion was duly seconded and carried. "THE RADIO RECORD." Then Mr. Jacob solemnly moved the league’s third prepared resolu: tion: "That this meeting is of the opinion that the ‘Radio Record,’ from its failure to maintain an unbiased attitude with regard to broadcasting is prejudicial to the interests of broadcasting in New Zealand.

Then we sat up, expecting to hear something desperate regarding our misdeeds, but were sadly disappointed, All that Mr. Jacob could produce was the fact that we had excised a few words from a communication sent forward by the league for our second issue, and in recent weeks had published an article repudiating some false and vicious criticism from an Auckland paper, and had published the letter to which Mr. ‘liark had so melodramatically taken exception. ‘This was the evidence which, in Mr. Jacob’s opinion, justified him in asking an intelligent audience to adopt his view as_ to the "prejudice" we were exercising on New Zealand broadcasting! On the chairman asking for a_ seconder, some little delay occurred in eliciting any response, but at last a genticman near the door seconded the resolution, on which we felt justified in mounting the platform, and, somewhat to the surprise of the executive, introducing ourselves to the chairman, with the request that we be allowed {o speak to the audience. ‘This being granted, and a graceful welcome accorded by the audience, we pleaded "onilty" to the first indictment, that we had excised ten or twelve words from the league’s original literary effusion, |

Our reason was, first, that the words excised contained an untrue Statement, and secondly, were phrased in offensive language, Since that time another communication from the secretary, Mr. Salt, in contiection with the proposed Anglican station, had been published in full as being quite in order. Further, hospitality to the league’s announcement of the meeting had beén courteous! given by us in our issue of March 16. This announcement stated that the subjects for discussion were (1) the year’s operations, and (2) the future of broadcasting. That statement made no mention ' of the "Radio Record" being down for discussion, and further, we had not been invited to attend to defend ourselves in any such discus: sion. This, surely, was in sirong contrast with Mr. Tiark’s declara: tion that they did mot make any charges without giving the opportunity for defence. Coming to the letter of "the gentleman with a hobby,’? we commented on the fact that Mr. ‘Tiark had read that letter, but had not read our comments upon it, which left the audience with a yery incomplete view of the matter. We therefore read our comment upon this ‘"pitiable hobhy." ‘The writer of the letter had declared that the letter as published had had words inserted and its context altered. This was emphatically untrue, as we had in our pocket a certified copy of the letter, which could be shown to the writer to prove the point. [This was subsequently done, to the satisfaction of the writer, on which he withdrew the offensive term he had used in regard to its publication.] We did not withdraw one icta from our view that we were justified in publishing that letter, as ownership rested in the recipient aud not in the writer. ‘The original recipient was an ofacial of the Broadcasting

Company, and on receiving this advice that it was proposed to adopt the hobby of pin-pricking broadcasting, and apply destructive criticism through the Press (with which the writer had "‘a pull’), and on sceing that course in actual operation through a steady stream of biased and warped propaganda from Auckland regarding broadcasting, that official, in honour bound, and in loyalty to his employers, the Breadcasting Company, had handed it to the management, so that the management could take steps to protect itself and listeners from this subversive propaganda.

We cited instances Of the biased matter which had been appearing in the Auckland Press, uotably in connection with the charge in the directorship of IVA, Edison Night, and contemptible comments thereupon, ridicule upon the American appreciation of the New Zealand broadcasting system, and, finally, personal attacks upon Mr. Harris. This matter had been appearing, not only in the Auckland Press, but had been telegraphed throughout the rest of the ‘country, and was calculated to give listeners in general a wholly erroneous impression of the position, and so damage broadcasting in general. We pointed ont to the writcr of the letter that, while such matter as he had written might be mentioned face to face in a ‘Goshing" spirit and be taken at face value, this did not apply when put into black and white and read at a distance of hundreds of miles in face of the apparent execution of the plan outlined. The writer himself, if in a position where he was responsible for the conduct, say, of a musical society depetdent upon public appreciation, would expect any member of that society who received a letter outlining a method of attack upon it, to hand same to him as leader for defensive action. This was all that bad been done in connection with the letter sent. Its publication was absolutely justifiable, and we would do the very same thing again. A considerable number of questions were asked by various members of the audience in the course of quite a bright litle half-hour, at the end of which the set resolutions having been duly carried, the meeting terminated with "everybody happy."’ ,

GENERAL MANAGER'S REPLY

COMPRIIIENSIFE RMSTTBW _

JUBSEQUENT to the meeting, a reply to the points raised was made by Mr. A. R. Harris, general manager of the company. Mr, Harris stated that he wished to make it quite clear that he was at all times ready to meet the executive of any responsible body of listeners of radio societies. He was invited to attend the meeting, but was not consulted as to the convenience or otherwise of the date chosen, nor was his permission secured regarding the use of his name in connection with the meeting. He could not undertake to attend public meetings at the peremptory demand of any section of listeners. Dealing with the actual points made at the ineeting, he expressed surprise that no new ground had been covered, all the points having been traversed ou a number of previous occasions and fully answered by the Government or the company. ‘Ihe letter of the league had stated fhat listeners were very dissatisfied, both with the programines from 1YA and the whole system of administration of broacasting. He would like to know what steps the league had taken to secure this extraordinary comprehensive kuowledge of the views of listeners. ‘he company desired full contact with listeners in order to as--(Continued next page.);

Radio Matters In Auckland (Continued from Page 14)

certain their wishes, and had the benefit of a steady stream of letters as well as much personal contact. In spite of these advantages, the company did not claim to know perfectly the whole mind of listeners, as was claimed by the Auckland Listeners’ League, and he would be very glad to know the method pursued by the executive ‘in obtining its comprehensive Knowledge. As against the wholesale con--demnation of the league, the company’s correspondence and contacts showed that listeners did very definitely appreciate the improved service that had been made possible by the forward move following the establishment of nd A FINANCIAL COMPARISON. _ In spite of the disadvantage of having to operate four stations on much less money than the leading Austratian companies had to operate their one station, capable and experienced listeners of high musical taste were agreed that the New Zealand stations were giving programmes which, in general excellence, compared favourably with the Australian -stations, although necessarily without the range of novelties available in those larger cities, simply because of greater population resources. 3L0, Melbourne, had an annual income of £98,000; ZFC, Sydney, £52,000; 3AR, Melbourne, £42,000; while ‘New Zealand Had fast year but £35,000 with which to operate four stations. This sum was very much smaller than the misleading figures that had been freely used by many critics. THE PROGRAMMES. It was remarkable that, while the Jeague in its letter was "‘very dissatisfied with the programmes of 1YA,"’ all the speakers at the meeting admitted that the artists engaged were the very best available, and that they were not making any attack upon them. They reduced their complaint wholly to one of lack of variety. He appreciated this point, and listeners could be assured that every effort was being made to secure variety. Variety, however, deended on talent of suitable calibre being available. The company’s policy was:to procure the best performers available, and encourage them to widen their repertoire, to which end comprehensive arrangements had heen made for the regular supply of suitable new music. In this connection the copyright question was very important. Notwithstanding that the company was paying about £60 per week for copyright, it was very restricted indeed in what it was allowed to broadcast, They had not been able to obtain a catalogue of the works available for performance, but, on the other hand, they were continually receiving lists of works prohibited for broadcast. Some of these were often the lighter forms of music, which was the very class of music required by listeners. They had also to forward to Australia details-of all items broadcast, not only vocal and instrumental, hnt also gramophone and pianola records. The same information had to be given with respect to relays, whether from theatres, dance halls, concert chambers, or elsewhere. In everv case the title of the item, the composer’s and publisher’s names, must be myen, inyolvihg a large amount of work. Because oi this, all programmes had to be sent to head office. ‘he system was for local programmes to be arranged at local stations, so as to suit local conditions, but the question of copyright was so complicated that it was not practicable or ecouomical to dealt with it except from one centre. From this they would understand that it was sometimes necessary to alter local arrangements, as until they got the proposed programmes and compared them with lists of prohibited copvright music which they were continually receiving, they could not approve of the programmes for hroadcast As regards the statements that aJ] announcements were prepared by head office, they were nutrue. COMPARISON WITH BRITAIN. Mr. Harris proceeded to make an interesting comparison with the results achieved in Britain by the British Broadcasting Corporation in comparison with New Zealand. The British Broadcasting Corporation had some 21 stations, and in the territery covered there were some 44,000,000 people. New Zealand had four stations operated Hy the Broadcasting Company, and the population concerned was 1,378,000. Tor England to compare with New Zealand’s position she would have 128 stations instead of 21; in other words, New Zealand on a popuation basis had six times more stations than England. On a power population basis, we had already installed for the New Zealand people ten times more service than that, provided in England. All this had been done in face of the fact that Itneland had a three vears’ advantage over the New Zealand Compsny. In comparing the patronage won, it was to be noted that the number of licensed listeners in New Zealand to the population gave a ratio of one license to every 35 nersons. When Eneland had heen oneratine her service for the same period as New Zealand had, there was onlv one listener to every 43 persons, in spite of the fact that in|

Itngland the population per station was greater, the fees lower, and the facilities for broadcast much greater than in New Zealand. ‘The fact, however, was that the public response here had been greater, and no better tstimony could be secured as to the real efficiency of the company’s enterprise. SOME METHODS NOT HELPFUL. There was nothing really fresh to add in the matter of accounts, Mr. Harris said. Under the company’s agreement with the Government, all expenditures were subject to Guvernment audit to see that the terins and conditions of the contract were being observed. The company had invested £50,600 in plant to enable a satisfactory Dominion broadcasting service to be carried on. "The company frllv apnreciates the desires of listeners, and is doing its best to meet those desires, but TI cannot agree that the methods adopted by some listeners are alwavs the most helpful." Mr, Harris said: "If listeners really want inrprove: ment it would be far better to pull together than to undertake destruc: tive propaganda. which is without foundation in fact. The effect of this cen only be to give over a period the general impression tg the public of chronic grouchiness, which will hinder increased participation in the undoubted enjoyment possible from radio. "Tn entertainment value, radio has nothing to compare with it. lt is the most economical and comprehensive news and entertainment service possible. It takes tight into the home news of the day, market reports, instruction and entertainment, music, sports, ‘and national events. ‘The future of this service is immense, and its capacity for instruction and expansion unlimited. Its growth will be best served by cocperation rather than by unjustified criticism." |

DEALERS’ VIEWS

SUPPORT FOR THE COMPANY. ‘4 : That helpful suggestions would be better than destructive criticism of the policy and programmes of the Radio Broadcasting Conrpany, were the views expressed at a special meeting of the Auckland Radio Dealers’ Association, following on the Jeague meeting. Mr. V. R. Johns presided over a good attendance. While admitting that some items on the programmes were not popular, members thought the con: sensis of public opinion Was that the programmes, as a whcle, com: pared more than favourably with those given by Australian stations, especially in view of the restricted amount of local tatent available. It was agreed that programmes had improved considerably during the year, and, from information available, members expressed satisfaction that further improvement could be anticipated. . It was said that many recent im: provements and innovations were the direct result of suggestions from private listeners, and the hepe was expressed that such suggestions would continue to be made. , ' | ! | . }

LETTER FROM THE LEAGUE

(To the Editor.) Sir,-In case your readers may have got the impression from your issue of the 16th inst. that the Auckland Listeners’ League is connected with or is adopting the tactics set ont in the anonymous letter published by you, I should be obliged if you would publish this letter. I agree with the views expressed by the meeting that a private letter written by a lis.ener to an empioyee of the company should not have been published in your paper, especially as its position on the same page which referred to our meeting would give the average reader the impression that the Auckland League favoured such sentiments. The writer of the letter is not connected in any way with the executive of the league, and if you had cared to make inquiries the policy of the Auckland League since july last has been to try and produce a workable scheme of co-operation between the company and listeners. I might add that should you have taken exception to varions criticisms in the papers--and such papers wave a perfect right to criticise those who handle a public utilitv-as far as the league is concerned, I do not know of any official statement which was made to the papers this year by the league prior to our meeting last Monday. Should you desire to produce a paper which is impartial both to the company and listeners, I trust yon will verify the facts before again imputing to the Auckland League motives that do not exist,[Will our correspondent cite where we have made anv such imputation against the league ?.-Kd.] I should like to add that the meeting on Monday was a protest against the company and Government for nof attempting to produce better co-operation hetween the listening public and those in charge of such a national utility, although promises to do so had been made by hoth. Iam glad to see in yesterday’s papers that the company is making overtures towards co-operation of some sort, and trust that you will allow space in your paper, should my executive so desire. for the publication of its scheme of co-operation, |

The public will then be able to judge’ between the two schemes, and also as to whether the Auckland League has deserved ihe criticism which has .appeared both in your paper and in other papers from the company. In conclusion, I should like to quote your words appearing in your leader of the first issue; "Broadcasting cannot succeed without the fullest co-operation between the listening public and the company providing the service for their delectation." Also your conclusion: "It will be only by mutual co-operation and mutual understanding that the common desire will be attained." To attain the common desire both the company and the listeners must be prepared to meet each other and give way on essential points. The co-operation must be mutual and not one-sided. A writer once very wisely said: ‘Men cantiot co-operate successfully for any purpose if the sole bond between them is self interest.’",--Yours, etc.,

A. CECIL

JACOB

_ President Auckland Listeners’ League.

stood since our establishment ready to vender the fullest help to any leagne to some extent «ntrainedd matprialWe must object to our correspondent’s statement that we have imputed motives to the Auckland League that do not exist. We have done no such thing. Where have we discussed tlie Auckland Listeners’ League and made any such imputations? Will our corresponden* please justify his statement? ‘The suggestion that some dark horse on the league’s executive was out to "tear things up a bit’ was in a letter which, in spite of our friend’s opinion to the contrary, we think we were perfectly justified in publishing | in order to expose to the public that there were some interests-we did not. say the Auckland Listeners’ Leaguewhich were definitely out to pin prick and damage broadcasting, and which the daily evidence in the Press indicated to be in operation. The keenness of the league to be disassociated from this course of action endorses our view of its disreputable character and justifies our exposure of it. As a solicitor, Mr. Jacob knows that ownership of a letter rests in the recipient, not in the writer; further, he knows we did not reveal the writer’s name-the league brought that out-but revealed only the methods proposed. ‘The suggestion about the contagious influence of juxtaposition on the same page is too thin altogether. We will freely concede that the execu. tive of the league aims to help broadcasting; but we do very seriously question the wisdom with which that aim has been prosecnied, inasmuch as speakers at bath of the public meetings held-not excluding our correspondent himself-have endeavoured, in our view, to create prejudice rather than present facts fairly. Our corres~ pondent is a member of a very honourable profession and will know whether the guise in which the company’s contract with the Government and its articles of association and alterations thereto were presented to the two public meetings was strictly fair and honourable or whether those statements were warped in such a way as to excite prejudice on the part of those ignorant of legal niceties. It is true that the public and the Press haye a right to criticise anything that affects them, and no one has ever disputed that right. But misstatements are not criticism; and to be effective criticism must be fair, The league would be serving a very use ful purpose if it sought te correct misstatements that have appeared in the Auckland Press. As these papers are contributed to by members of its own executive, a request that thev should verify such statements hefore permitting them to be published should micet with a favourable reception. If our correspondent wonld undertake this rather than charging us with an act of which we are innocent it would be more to the point. Avcording to the general manager's statement, the company has been consistently working towards an effective scheme of cooperation with those interested in broadcasting for months past. A preliminary scheme was submitted the Auckland executive in November last --the same one that our correspondent so helpfullv characterises as ‘‘puerile’"’ -and, incidentally, although confidential, a summary of it was published in the Auckland Press. ‘The scheme now submitted has evolved from that. Finally, we would say that, in spite of the leagne’s attack on "The Record," we will willingly publish its scheme for the information of the public, nor will we demand payment therefor, as the Auckland Press did to the company. We have always or set of listeners in furthering radio, and the league has only itself to blame for not having more publicity through our columns We are quite impartial and desire only to see broadcasting flourish for the fullest satisfaction of all. We are quite prepared to criticise the company when it deserves it, but we believe in giving those concerned a fair chance of evolving order and harmony out of limited and before embarking on criticism which jn that stage would be «unjustified. — 4a.