(2 of 2)
Substituting Uggams. Although CBS remained grimly silent last week, the network had already made its position clear at recent Washington hearings. Lately, Senator John O. Pastore has been expressing concern over what he considers the violence and questionable moral content of TV shows. While CBS President Frank Stanton eloquently defended TV's right to free speech in Washington last month, he also assured Pastore's Senate Subcommittee on Communications that he would police his air waves with renewed vigilance. Despite the assurance—or perhaps because of it—the Smotherses' April 6 show was studded with gibes at Pastore, both from Tom and his guest, Dan Rowan of Laugh-In. Rowan awarded Pastore ("Pastore—P-a-s-t-o-r-e") the "fickle-finger-of-fate award" for "keeping up the good work." As one CBS official put it privately last week, "Tommy had been sticking his finger in the network's eye and something had to be done."
The Smotherses can do little more than complain publicly. They considered a lawsuit, but discarded the idea, Tom explained, when they learned that it would keep them off the air during the probable two or three years of litigation. ABC and NBC have pointedly ignored the brothers' overtures. Rapprochement with CBS seems unlikely, especially since the network has already drawn up plans for a new variety-series replacement starring Leslie Uggams. One possibility would be for the boys to accept an offer from the Canadian TV network to produce what Tommy only half-jokingly calls a "Smothers Brothers in Exile" show in Toronto. Except for that unlikely outcome, Tom Smothers is probably justified in saying, "What I'm afraid of most is that this whole thing will dry up and blow away and be forgotten."
*Support for the brothers came last week from Federal Communications Commissioner Nicholas Johnson, who criticized the "ignominious silence" of broadcasters who are dedicated to "free speech for profitable speech only. A study of the occasions on which the broadcasting industry has raised the banner to 'free speech,' " said Johnson, "leaves one with the distinct suspicion that these occasions almost invariably coincide with the industry's monetary self-interests."