(8 of 8)
Clear Responsibility. Kintner, staunch defender of television's status quo (and of Madison Avenue's creative contributions), asserts that the U.S. networks themselves can take care of whatever is wrong. But his view of network responsibility is qualified. Says he: "The ultimate responsibility is ours, but the ultimate power has to be the sponsor's, because without him you couldn't afford to run a network."
This view is part of the questionable notion that the main task of a TV program is to get the highest possible number of viewers for the sponsor, thereby achieving the highest possible profits. Every other business also operates for profit, but there is an important difference. Detroit and Hollywood, for instance, sell their own product, and if car sales or movie attendance is poor, the product is changed. In contrast, television as now run does not sell its product, i.e., entertainment; it exists only to sell other wares.
Critics both within and without the industry feel strongly that this need not be so. One solution: pay TV, in which viewers would in effect buy only the programs they want. Another, more immediate notion: network executives with vision must persuade sponsors that high ratings, i.e., the largest possible audience, are not everything. Some sponsors (too few) have, in fact, joined Du Pont (Show of the Month), Hallmark (Hall of Fame) and others in recognizing that quality shows can build a company's "image" and help sales even if ratings are relatively low. Admen, including McCann-Erickson's Terry Clyne, point out that the present rating system takes into account only the size of a show's audience, not its quality. The big case against the tyranny of ratings is that it obscures the network chiefs' clear moral and esthetic responsibility to be leaders of taste and to fight for the best shows. TV Reporter Mike Wallace articulates a widespread argument when he says: "The networks must have the guts to stand up and say to the sponsor, 'I'll run my network; you sell your products. If you want to use us, O.K., but on our terms.' "
By week's end, with the Harris subcommittee hearing temporarily closed, the impact of the scandals seemed to have stirred up an encouraging number of TV viewers; the industry itself was less responsive. "The philosophers can say it's a good thing all this came into the open," cracked Robert Kintner. "As president of NBC, I find it hard to be philosophical."