RACE BROADCASTS BANNED

Radio Record, Volume II, Issue 1, 20 July 1928, Page 4

RACE BROADCASTS BANNED

PHE T rotting and Racing Conferences have together decided to ban their meetings from public broadcast on the erounds advanced that thereby illegal betting is encouraged, and the business community distracted by the time taken in listening. Unquestionably the racing authorities are entitled to manage their own business in their own way. And the public, although it might not like the decision, would have no valid ground for objecting if the conferences said that in their judgment the broadcasting of race meetings kept people away and diverted money + from the "tote" to other channels, and by doing these things was affecting their financial strength and the security of their investments. But the conferences have not advanced those reasons-in fact, we do not believe they apply-and have based their decision upon grounds which: are debatable and fitly the subject of public comment, | ‘THE party most concerned is the public. How will the public appreciate the action of the Racing Conference and the Trotting Conference? It is the public that supports these sports, and it is entitled to express its view concerning the news service it would like in relation to them. The allegation is that broadcasting promotes illegal betting ; that hotels, clubs, Dilliard saloons have sets installed, and the receipt of the news proniotes the-activity of the bookmaker. What are the police doing-if these statements are correct? But are they? All race meetings are not broadcast. The bookmaker docs business on all (presumably), and has made it his business, as a matter of common knowledge, to acquire his information by other means in respect of all meetings. He did this before the advent of broadcasting, and the system still obtains. Banning broadcasting will not ban the bookmaker, It will simply limit the pleasure and curb the enjoyment of a large body of inoffensive listeners because of a questionable claim that a public utility is the subject of abuse. Every modern convenience and utility is the subject of injury as well as good. The motor-car dispenses death as well as health; chemistry saves life as well as takes it; all utilities are subject to wise administration and the _ assessment of merit by balance. Where does the balance lie here? Our view is-that the wheel of progress cannot be stopped. That the public, if it is entitled to the recreation of racing in an exacting world, is entitled to the additional service of pleasurable and rapid descriptions thereof. The reasons advanced by the conferences for their decision are not in our opinion valid in themselves, and are but a cloak for other reasons. The decision rests with the public, and we believe the public will not be slow in expressing disapproval and disappointment at the failure of these responsible conferences to balance out the merits of the case, and allow the good of the greatest number to have sway.