STRUCTURING THE PROGRAM August, 1955 - August, 1957 There were many things to do in getting the program underway. In early discussions with the Deans of Journalism and Liberal Arts it became evident that although Dean Marvin had provided a rationale for the development of an academic program in radio several years previous,1 there needed to be a more complete and up-to-date document. This would be a "philosophical statement" to which all could agree, and which would be the basis for the future requests for courses, faculty, equipment, facilities and budget. This was to be my primary responsibility in the several weeks left before fall classes were to begin. There was also no time to lose in seeking a positive response from the Legislature in the matter of educational television. The request for a construction permit (CP) to activate the channel assigned to KU had been languishing at the FCC for many months because that agency would take no action without assurance that the state would provide adequate funding. The Legislature had to be convinced that educational television for the state was worth funding, and that channels 11 and 7 (for KU and K-State) needed to be funded as soon as possible. To be successful with any of the above, it was necessary to become familiar with the people and the operations of a large university. Who were the new colleagues in Journalism and Speech? How did they feel about the attention now being given to a new program, which would inevitably compete for funds? Who were the facilitators or "movers"? Who might want to throw up road blocks? What were the paths of action, and what policies governed requests for courses, personnel, equipment and facilities? It is one thing to be given a general "blessing" by the administration and quite another to get specific approvals which would cost money and might divert funds and facilities from other units. The University of Kansas which exists in the nineties is significantly different from that of 1955. And because a lot of the events and problems to be chronicled in this narrative involved the relationship of Radio and Television (variously referred to as "Radio-TV," "RTV," and later as "Radio-TV-Film," or "RTVF") to various units on campus, a brief description of their structure, operations and "main players" would seem to be in order. A. Major Units and "Players." The Chancellor of the University was Franklin Murphy. He was a charismatic and visionary leader, and very much an authoritative figure. As noted in the previous chapter, he was anxious to move ahead with radio and television and he had made the fundamental decisions of staffing and organization to make it possible. The main people in his central administration were: George B. Smith, the Dean of the University, who was responsible for all academic programs; Raymond Nichols, the Executive Secretary, responsible for all fiscal matters; John Nelson, Dean of the Graduate School and Chairman of the Budget Committee; and Keith Lawton, Director of the Physical Plant. The Dean of the School of Medicine (in Kansas City) was W. Clarke Wescoe.2 The University at that time was a very centralized operation and these men had considerable power. Luckily, I found them to be open minded and ready to support the new program. The Graduate School had final approval of the requirements for all academic programs offering advanced degrees. Courses carrying graduate credit had to be approved by a faculty curriculum committee and, finally, by the Dean. There were few committees in the School. In fact, Dean Nelson was considered by some to be THE Graduate School; certainly nothing happened at that level without his support and approval. Nelson, along with George Smith and Raymond Nichols, comprised the Central Budget Committee, and they made all of the final budget decisions subject, of course, to review by the Chancellor. Because of its nature as a joint program, Radio-TV was part of two major academic units of the University. The William Allen White School of Journalism and Public Information was one of the several "professional" schools. Burton Marvin was the first Dean of the School and he would serve it well until his departure in 1965. He was a gentle administrator who preferred to seek consensus rather than dictate policy. He had a very broad view as to what constituted "journalism." Some in the School believed that "real" journalism could be found only in the print media, but not Marvin. He never failed to support the growing RTV program. There might have been some grumbling from a few faculty members about the attention being given to the new program. However, as they learned more about the program they became increasingly supportive. The school had three "sequences:" These were News-Editorial, Advertising-Business and Radio.3 The word, "Television," was added to the name of the radio sequence immediately. After two years of work in liberal arts, the student transferred to the J-school for the final two years. With requirements successfully completed, the student would graduate with a Bachelor of Science degree. A Master's degree also was offered. Almost all of the professors had professional experience in newspapers, magazines, agencies or radio as well as having earned academic degrees. Each sequence had a professor who also served as its "Head," the equivalent of a department chairperson.4 The sequence heads held meetings of their own faculty, and it was in this forum that most course additions and changes as well as sequence requirements would originate, to be brought before the full faculty of the School for a final vote. Sequence Heads also advised the Dean on a number of policy matters, including salary recommendations. Promotions were first approved by a committee of peers within the desired rank, and those subsequently approved were sent on to central administration.5 There seemed to be a positive, collegial atmosphere among the faculty. The Department of Speech and Drama was a department in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. As described in the course catalog of 1955-56, the Department offered "study and training in (a) general speech, (b) acting, directing and staging of plays, (c) public address, (d) radio, and (e) speech correction."6 Each student major was required to take five "core" courses plus additional course work in the area. In 1955 Professor Allen Crafton was serving his last year as Department Chairman after a long and fruitful tour of duty. He was succeeded by Professor William Conboy. In 1957 the Department was re-structured to offer work in four primary areas: Theater and Drama, Public Speaking, Radio-TV, and Speech Correction and Audiology. Each area had a "Division Head." The operations of the divisions were similar to the Journalism sequences, but while the J-school sequences met together only occasionally, the Speech heads met weekly -- usually over lunch at the faculty club. The many meetings provided an excellent opportunity to exchange information and to discuss the problems and possibilities in each division. Through all those years I was never able to detect an "us or them" mentality with the division heads in regard to matters within the Department. Conboy and the other division heads were hoping that the new program in Radio-TV would include greater opportunities for students having non-journalism interests in these media. The Radio and Television Committee, as created by the Chancellor, had a rather unique place in the structure of the University. It was a rather complex area: The faculty members of the Committee had academic appointments in Journalism or Speech and, in some instances, in both. The operations budget of RTV was made a part of Journalism, but carried a budget number apart from the other academic programs of that school. (The budget for the radio stations was also divorced from the other programs.) Curricular matters which originated with the RTV committee were channeled through either Journalism or Speech depending on course content. Requests related to the acquisition or promotion of a faculty member likewise went through one or both areas. Recommendations as to faculty loads and salary originated with the RTV committee chairman and were discussed with Marvin or Conboy. When it was time for the University to consider operating budgets, all such requests from RTV were brought to the Dean of Journalism by the Chairman of the RTV Committee. Linton and Marvin would then go to the Central Budget Committee for a general discussion, after which Linton would leave so that Marvin could have a final word with the Budget Committee. Prior to the summer of 1955, the radio stations (KFKU,KANU-FM) were under the supervision and budget control of the Extension Division, which was a unit reporting directly to the Chancellor. However, R. Edwin Browne, as the Director of the Stations, also reported directly to the Chancellor's office. In the summer of 1955 this changed completely: The stations became a part of the School of Journalism and placed under the direct control of the Chairman of the new RTV Committee, with Browne continuing to serve as Director. He and Glenn Price were given academic appointments in Journalism and became members of the RTV Committee. Now the administrative reporting ladder became much more complicated for Browne. He would meet first with Linton on budgetary/personnel matters. Together they would go next to Marvin, and all would then appear before the Central Committee. Browne would leave first, followed later by Linton. What seems on paper to be incredibly complicated actually worked quite well. Discussions were full and open, and in all of the years of the existence of the Central Committee I was never surprised by their final decisions. Of course, at times I'm sure I wished that I had the last word with them, and I suspect that was true with Browne; such is human nature. In the fall of 1955, I was concerned about what kind of relationship might develop between the Radio-TV program and KANU. Not only was this a new situation, but apparently central administration had some concerns. For example, Dean Marvin had shared with me the fact that internships had been minimal in spite of an agreement to do them, and he told me that Browne had simply refused to consider any classroom teaching assignment. How would this work out? I also knew that central administration wanted me to double check all station budget requests, because they had no one with the expertise to evaluate them. There is no question but that the people of KANU were uneasy, for here was a new person who would make decisions relating to their operation. One morning I was visiting the station, checking budgets, assignments and operations -- just getting a "feel" for the whole operation. I was sitting at a desk near the hall when I heard one of the engineers exclaim heatedly to Ed Browne, "who is this guy Linton, to come in here and tell us what we can do. He's probably going to mess up everything." As I turned from the desk and looked up, I don't know who was more embarrassed -- Ed, the engineer or myself! Introductions were quickly and a bit awkwardly made and then everyone went back to work. Very soon this engineer would become the person responsible for maintaining the equipment of the RTV labs. He carried on this difficult task with great dedication, which did not end until his retirement many years later. It did take some time for Browne to adjust to the new administrative arrangement and to the role of the stations in the academic program. At one point he requested a meeting with the Chancellor to "clarify" the relationship. This was done, but not in a manner of his liking: Murphy reiterated that the stations were a part of the educational program and Browne would, indeed, report to Linton on all matters.7 Once he realized that there was no turning back, he became a valued and contributing member of the RTV Committee and he tried quite hard to create some student experiences at the stations. Two other divisions of the University had a close working arrangement with the RTV Committee: The Department of Buildings and Grounds was responsible for all small remodeling projects which were designed by the KU architect. They constructed the several radio and television labs and maintained them. The Purchasing Division was responsible for all purchases of equipment and supplies. They processed all requests, making certain that everything conformed to the purchasing procedures of the State of Kansas. It is not an understatement to say that at times the state procedures were difficult to follow. One added comment about academic department chairmen: In the fifties and sixties, and even longer in many cases, the chairs of academic departments held considerable power. They had the direct ear of the deans on many matters, especially salaries and work loads. They often made the final decision on teaching assignments. Through special and annual reports they could influence the present and future operations of their department. The extent of the "democratic process" certainly varied with schools and departments. In the case of Radio and Television, bi-weekly meetings of the RTV Committee were held to consider all aspects of the new program. An attempt was made to gain consensus on all matters, but at times it was necessary for the Chairman to make the final decision, and to hope that most everyone would be in agreement. Going in to the new semester there was confidence that all requests from Radio-TV would be given fair treatment and that no person or unit seriously opposed the development of this area. The Faculty Club was the scene of a number of preliminary discussions with people from central administration. (It was located in the former University High School across the street and east of the Student Union.) Many faculty members and administrators ate lunch there, in a tradition of family-style seating, and so it was easy to become acquainted with many people very quickly. Also, there were two pool tables on the top floor, and a number of important people, including Dean Marvin and Dean Smith, liked to play a game or two before heading back to the office. Discussion of serious business was frowned upon but still it was the perfect place to float ideas. In the next few years a number of suggestions were put forward, and sometimes there would be an early indication as to the probability for success should they be put in more formal dress. B. Getting Underway 1. Program Philosophy. As mentioned in Chapter I, the first task was to develop a philosophy or concept concerning the new academic program in broadcasting. What was it that we, the faculty, could do for the students who possibly were interested in this area? Since radio courses and facilities already existed, it was necessary to develop a statement which also called attention to the new area of television. The main points were as follows: (1) we can give any student the opportunity to learn something about this vital medium, (2) we can give certain students the opportunity to use the tools of television as a possible vocation, (3) we can give selected students the opportunity to pursue advanced study in the field, (4) we can utilize the medium...to more efficiently teach larger numbers of students, and (5) we can utilize the medium to broadcast programs of strong educational merit, programs of intellectual entertainment, and programs of a general public relations value...to the larger public.8 To expand on these points: The first one addressed the rapid growth of television. TV already was having a major impact on society. Surely the University had a responsibility to provide courses which would help young people understand this medium, to learn how to live with it, and to be aware of its possible effect on beliefs and life style. To do this, beginning courses would be wide open for general enrollment. Points two and three were the real reasons for this academic major: The faculty would prepare students for careers in broadcasting and related areas. Various courses would prepare them for entree positions and give them background for more rapid advancement. Point four moved away from education for broadcast careers to the utilization of the media in general education. In 1955 there was much interest and experimentation with closed circuit television (CCTV) as a classroom tool. It seemed important to state that Kansas would not ignore such possibilities. In fact, the University already was using CCTV in the operating amphitheaters at the Medical Center. The last point was made to remind all readers that radio and television were communications media -- pipelines to a larger public. The planning and production of program material would provide excellent laboratory training for broadcast majors while at the same time it would bring entertainment and information to the general public. The University already was reaching the public in this fashion with the radio output of KANU/KFKU. It was just as important -- perhaps more so -- to do the same with television. After enlarging and supporting the five major points of the statement, an attempt was made to address other issues. First there was the assurance made to all academic units, especially the College of Liberal Arts, that any professional education in radio and television would be based upon a liberal arts background. This would be similar to the requirements already in place in Journalism. The statement provided an excellent opportunity to re-introduce and expand the concept of an "inter-discipline" major, to suggest that students in Speech and Drama could major in broadcasting as well as those who were in the School of Journalism. This was not a new idea, but it went against the 1953 directive from Chancellor Murphy (that the major program would be in Journalism) and it went beyond his 1955 statement. It suggested that each area had unique course material addressing different vocational aims of the students. The new Radio-TV Committee would provide the administrative attention necessary for the development and successful operation of such a program. It also seemed necessary to underscore the importance of a laboratory experience. The radio lab existed in the form of KDGU, but there was nothing in television -- no facilities, no equipment -- and the cost of providing a lab would be significant. Classroom theory had to be accompanied by an activity. It was noted that this was analagous to theatre with its stage for performance; to speech correction with its clinic; to public speaking with forensics. Clinical theories and practices needed a laboratory for testing, plays needed to be produced before an audience, speeches needed to be delivered. In like fashion radio and television materials needed to be produced, listened to and watched, and then critiqued. As noted before, the relationship of the radio stations KFKU/KANU to the academic program was a bit sticky, perhaps prickly. Central administration and the Dean of Journalism were on record as favoring more student intern possibilities and closer ties. Browne's vision of a prestigious, cultural radio station did not include any significant use of students. However, whether he wanted it or not the stations were now part of the academic program. It was important to underscore this change as well as to establish a norm for any future television operation. ...broadcasting must be considered to be a part of the academic life of the school. The mission of educational broadcasting can only be fullfilled when the station is a part of a regular instructional, financial and administrative structure. Only in this fashion will educational quality stand undiluted by irrelevant objectives, and in this way the cost of such an activity does not seem to be educational window dressing.9 Another statement was made to recognize that students would be interning at stations on campus: Beginning students will work with the radio equipment of the wire-wireless laboratory and they will have a television lab. The advanced, qualified student will work with specific assignments at the FM and (future) TV stations. At all times there will be a close liaison between operations and training.10 The mission statement was circulated to central administration and the several academic units. The response was immediate and supportive. Dean George Waggoner of the College put it succinctly when he wrote, "the entire statement suits me very well, and it points the directions toward which I hope we will go rapidly."11 2. Analysis of the Curriculum. Class schedules for the 1955 fall semester had, of course, been "set" in the spring prior to Dixon's resignation. At that time the radio courses had been scheduled by the Dean, and most of them carried the name of the instructor as Dixon or "staff," since there were so many unanswered questions of staffing at that time. Dixon had handled the courses in continuity writing, radio speaking, radio acting and radio production. An professor from the news-editorial sequence taught radio news and special events. The following courses were actually taught in the fall: Sp 37 (3) Introduction to Radio and Television. Key. Sp 47 (3) Radio Speaking. Hyden, Linton. Jo 125 (3) Radio and Television Continuity Writing. Key, Price. Jo 176 (1-4) Laboratory in Radio. Hyden. Sp 175 (3) Radio Production. Linton. Jo 177 (2-3) Internship in Radio. Staff. Sp 178 (3) Principles of Television Production. Linton. Sp 375 (2-4) Seminar in Radio. Linton.10 A quick analysis of the curriculum by the RTV Committee revealed several deficiencies. First, although the word "television" had been inserted into some course titles there was no real indication of course content involving this medium. At this time there was no structure to the coursework, and it was evident that some sort of core curriculum would need to be created and approved as soon as possible. Also, there was no graduate program in radio and television and so new courses would have to be sent to the Graduate School for approval, along with a request for a new master's degree. In the early fall of 1955, the Radio-TV Committee recommended several curricular changes which were subsequently approved by the appropriate faculties and placed in the spring (1956) schedule of courses. These first changes merely reflected the new "television" content of several courses. Both the course title and description of these courses were modified. Two courses were changed from upper level to lower level: Jo 125, Continuity Writing, became Jo 75; and Laboratory in Radio, Jo 176, became Jo 76. The latter course was divided into two sections to designate a "staff" or "management" context. Jo 78 (1-2hrs) Laboratory in Television, was approved and would be scheduled as soon as facilities and equipment were operational. A new course, Sp 178, "Principles of Television Production," (3hrs) was given a Speech and Drama label as a parallel to the existing radio production course. It was approved and first offered in the spring of 1956.12 Of course there was no television equipment at hand, and so the course had to emphasize production theory and planning. Simple "Bretz Boxes" (named for Professor Rudy Bretz, who created them) were used to simulate the coverage pattern of the different lenses. Many schools used them at this time; it reminded me of the wooden guns used in training by the first army draftees prior to World War II. By the end of the fall semester the Committee had agreed upon a "core curriculum," which would be taken by all RTV majors regardless of their school or college affiliation: Sp 37 (3) Introduction to Radio and Television Sp 47 (3) Radio and Television Speaking Jo 75 (3) Radio and Television Continuity Writing Sp 175 (3) Radio Production Jo 76 (1-4) Lab in Radio Jo 180 (3) Elements of Advertising Students interested in news or advertising/management would take additional courses in Journalism (and Radio-TV); those interested in production and performance would take additional work through Speech and Drama. There was general agreement by the Committee that this first core curriculum would be revised just as soon as additional courses were developed and approved.13 The RTV Committee unanimously approved the development of a new course in film. Specifically, 16mm sound film. There were -- and are -- great similarities in the basics of television and film production: Writing for these visual media is almost the same. Picture composition is the same, as is the design and use of various lenses. Lighting is similar in both the instruments used and the design involved. Editing, although completely different in equipment and procedures, involves the same principles of continuity. There were a number of other reasons for developing a film production program: Equipment was relatively cheap (compared to television) and it was portable, requiring no special studio for production; the picture quality of 16mm film was superior to the television system of 1955; films produced by RTV could be played at any television station or used in a regular projection mode with a live audience; finally, by moving in with film, RTV would be guaranteed a visual medium in case the acquisition of television equipment was delayed. (In the fall of 1955 the State Legislature and the Governor were threatening severe cuts in the KU budget which might erase the request for television equipment; also, there was no movement in the development of a statewide system of educational television.) The Committee also recognized that the film industry offered many employment opportunities for graduates familiar with the medium. There was, of course, the entertainment industry represented by the major film studios of Hollywood. But also, in the fifties, there was a boom in the production of educational and industrial films, using the 16mm standard. One of the largest production companies in the country was Calvin, located in Kansas City, Mo. It also had a laboratory for the processing and printing of the raw film stock. Even more fortunate for us was the existence of Centron Corporation, in Lawrence. It was an excellent production company, winning many awards in the category of educational/industrial films, including an Oscar nomination. With the assurance that basic film cameras and editing equipment would be purchased as soon as possible, and with the promise of a budget for film production as well as television production, the RTV Committee approved a new course, Speech 275, Principles of Cinematography, which I would teach. (I had gained considerable 16mm film production experience in my five years at Omaha University -- film clips were produced to be inserted into television programs, and at least one program-length film had been made.) In the 1955-56 school year many hours were spent at Centron observing production operations; Art Wolfe and Herk Harvey in production-directing and Dan Palmquist in editing were particularly valuable mentors. In addition, Calvin presented an annual film production workshop which was very helpful. The new film course was offered in the fall of 1957. Other changes in the undergraduate program were discussed but not acted upon in those early months. For example, the commercial radio industry had moved completely away from dramatic presentation to embrance a new format of music and news. It was the dawn of the era of the "disc jockey." There seemed to be little need for courses in radio acting or radio dramatic production. But some of the upperclass majors needed these courses to fulfill existing requirements, and since these courses were personal favorites of the Chairman of Speech, Allen Crafton, the decision was made to delay any possible action until after his retirement the following year. Accordingly, in 1957, Speech 171, Radio Dramatic Script Writing, became 171, Radio and Television Performance Techniques. It was taught by a new man from the Extension Division of the University, Tom Rea. Tom had extensive background in the performing arts. Another priority of the RTV Committee was the development of a graduate program at the master's level as soon as possible. Dean John Nelson had indicated that he felt the University could support such a program, and he was ready to examine a program proposal. This willingness to consider a master's program so quickly would seem to indicate a university-wide interest in new programs -- especially interdisciplinary. Our concept was to have a degree specifically titled "Radio and Television" supported, at first, by other required courses and faculty from both Journalism and Speech and Drama. The RTV Committee approved several new courses at the graduate (300) level: Special Problems in Radio, Special Problems in Television, Seminar in Television, and Thesis. The proposals were sent to the Graduate School by the spring of 1956, and in September of that year came the welcome news that the program had been approved. The administrative committee of the Graduate School approved a new program of graduate studies in Radio and Television. In essence this program is similar to the one in Radiation-Biophysics.14 The program committee for the degree consisted of Dean Burt Marvin and James Dykes of Journalism, Lewin Goff and William Conboy of Speech and Drama, and Bruce Linton of Journalism and Speech and Drama. The first 300-level courses were offered in the spring semester of 1957. The first student to be accepted into the program was Tom Hedrick, a graduate of Baker University. In that year he began an affiliation with the University that has continued (with several interruptions for work in commercial radio and television) to the present time. Another goal of the Committee was to provide more visibility for the new program. To be crass about it, some advertising and marketing was needed. Word had to get out to the present and future student population that more work was available in this area, and that students could major through Speech and Drama as well as through Journalism. Since the program was interdiscipline it seemed logical to request that a special section of the course catalog be titled, "Radio and Television," and also to ask that the timetable used at registration should have a separate section. The Committee noted that the interdiscipline program in Radiation-Biophysics already was printed in this way. The request was supported by both the School of Journalism and the Department of Speech and Drama, and it was approved. The first course catalog with the separate section was that of 1955-56.15 The separate section of the timetable appeared in the spring semester of 1957. This new section had a listing of RTV courses by department or school, number, credit hours and title. Each entry for undergraduate courses was then followed by the phrase, "See Journalism (or Speech and Drama).") Thus the student could turn to RTV to see what was offered and then consult the two areas to find the time and days the classes met as well as the name of the instructor. The RTV 300-level course listings were complete under the heading, "Radio and Television."16 By the end of 1956 there were fifteen undergraduate and graduate courses in the curriculum. Nine were offered each semester. Eleven courses had been revised and four more were added.17 The catalog copy of 1956-57 can be found in the Appendix. 3. Staffing the Program. There were only three men with experience and degrees in radio and television, but they were reasonably qualified. They were Bruce Linton, Wilson B. Key, and Victor Hyden. In the spring of 1955, before Prof. Dixon's resignation, the administration had agreed to look for a person with professional background in radio and television news. During the summer, Wilson B. Key had been hired as an Assistant Professor of Journalism and Speech (note the joint appointment.) He had a Masters degree in Journalism, and from 1953-55 he had been the Chairman of the Department of Journalism at Denver University. Victor Hyden also had been hired as an Instructor in Speech and Journalism. He had a Masters degree and experience in radio, but no teaching experience. The faculty of this area was rounded out by two people from KANU, both with professional experience in radio, but none in the classroom -- R. Edwin Browne as Assistant Professor and Glenn Price as Instructor in Journalism. In addition, other radio courses were covered, as in the past, by other members of the Journalism or Speech faculty. Thus, the radio advertising course was taught by an advertising professor, James Dykes, and the course in radio drama was taught by the Chairman of Speech, Allen Crafton. This relatively happy state lasted for only one year. Wilson B. Key abruptly resigned in August, 1956, only days before classes were to begin. He cited no disappointment with the program; rather, he had an opportunity in commercial television on the west coast which could not be refused. There was no time to hire a new tenure-track person. Luckily, a news-editorial professor -- Calder Pickett -- agreed (once again) to teach broadcast news. The administration also agreed to a proposal that two graduate assistants and two undergraduate assistants be hired to help with the other courses and labs in the department.18 The resignation of Key, and the possibility of sharing a production-type person with the University Theatre, allowed the RTV committee the opportunity of expanding the program rather early. Theatre was able to hire Arthur Kean as an Assistant Professor of Speech and Drama in September, 1957. He would be the Director of Theatre Lighting Design and he also would assist in various aspects of television production. The open faculty line, caused by the Key resignation, could then be used for someone who could teach at both the undergraduate and graduate level. It was especially important to find someone to handle research and to deal with program theories and practices. Permission was granted to search for such a person and, in late spring of 1957, Gale Adkins was hired from the University of Texas where he had been in charge of the research efforts in the area of broadcast education. An "ABD," he began in September, 1957. Also in 1957, Tom Rea was appointed as an Instructor in Speech and Drama so that he might teach the new course (171) in Radio and Television Performance Techniques. A master's graduate of Speech and Drama, he had a primary appointment in University Extension. In the same year, Monte Moore became an Instructor in Speech and Journalism. His primary assignment was to be the sports announcer for KANU and Director of the Sports Network, but he was given an academic appointment in order to teach the course in Radio and TV Speaking. Unlike the faculty situation, support staff was immediately necessary. The administration agreed very early that RTV should have a fulltime secretary to handle all secretarial needs for the committee chairman and, secondarily, for Key and Hyden.19 The first secretary (Nancy Duncan) began work as a "Clerk-Steno I" November 1, 1955. The Committee also requested a fulltime television engineer to maintain the new television equipment which (it was hoped) would be in place within a year. However, approval for an engineer was not given. The administration noted that the tight budget and the lack of any television equipment on board made it difficult to justify the request at this time. Another serious problem was the fact that there were no civil service categories for a television engineer. Existing categories relating to radio engineering would have to be modified and the salary range greatly increased -- no small undertaking. A happy circumstance did present itself. Roderick Davis, the KANU-FM Transmitter Engineer, had considerable knowledge of television equipment and had even developed a side business repairing television receivers. Davis was required to keep the FM signal on the air on its licensed technical parameters. This involved some maintenance and daily log readings. The latter could be done by anyone. It seemed possible that Davis could assume responsibility for the maintenance of the RTV equipment, provided some parttime funds were made available to Browne so that the transmitter could be covered. The funds were approved, and all parties agreed to the changes. Davis would be responsible for this equipment for many years. I also requested the parttime use of one of the KANU audio engineers, to handle the audio installation and assist with maintenance for television. This was not granted, and probably for good reason -- KANU really needed him fulltime. Rod Davis maintained the RTVF Eequipment for many years. The sixteen majors in broadcasting and others taking coursework were excited to see the changes taking place that fall of 1955. There was a faculty on board with real experience and academic degrees, courses were being modified and plans were being made for the move into television. At an early meeting of the majors and pre-majors it was obvious that they were anxious to get going. Now, all that was needed was a television studio and equipment. 4. Facilities, Equipment and Budget. Radio. In 1955 the KDGU studio in Flint Hall doubled as a classroom. The control room is behind the windows. The radio lab and associated equipment, as represented by the wired-wireless station, KDGU, was adequate. A large classroom on the second floor of Flint Hall had been converted to a radio studio. Adjacent to it, and joined by a sound-proof window, was a large control room containing an audio mixing board, two record turntables and reel-to-reel audio tape recorders. This equipment was fairly new. The biggest problem with KDGU was simply the fact that it was a "wired-wireless" station. Only a few dorms had transmitters and there was a limited potential audience. As a result the station staff, at times, had a hard time building staff morale. ("There's nobody out there to hear me!") It didn't help that some departments of the University thought of it as a student plaything -- a sandbox -- and it showed up in a number of ways. For example, a student in a news class, wishing to get a temporary parking permit to pick up equipment needed for an interview, encountered a nightmare of indifference. Even the staff engineer had a problem getting to the dorm transmitters to service them. The latter problem prompted me to fire off a memo to Keith Lawton complaining about the cavalier attitude of Buildings and Grounds, evident in the fact that the head of B & G "has not had the courtesy to reply to my letter asking for an easier way for the engineer to enter the dorm transformer room to service the transmitter."20 Eventually most problems were resolved, but in my opinion the station was never treated with any respect until it became an on-air FM station many years later. Was KDGU a "sandbox?" Probably not for students in management, news or sales, for they usually had a strong professional orientation. Possibly so for some of the people playing music; it was fun to spin records and "ride the airwaves" as a disc jockey. Perhaps the most famous disc jockey of this period (and most definitely a sandboxer) was the star basketball player, Wilt Chamberlain. At the request of Coach Dick Harp, we gave him a late night shift. It was said that the coach was happy to have him at the station rather than running around in his car at that time of night! Later he would do the same at a commercial station. KANU-FM represented, at least on paper, a follow-up lab for advanced students under an internship program. The studio equipment was excellent. In fact the quarters and equipment were superior to most commercial radio stations in the state. But it became obvious rather early that students would not be flocking to the station; by the spring of 1956 only four students had interned there.21 As has been noted in Chapter I, the greatest negatives to a potential intern were the programming and operational procedures of an educational radio station. Program content was, primarily, serious music. Students would have to take a "performance audition" involving the pronunciation of many foreign works and composers. There was little or no motivation to do so because the students were aiming for careers in commercial radio. Also, on a commercial station the announcer (the "d.j.") would operate the equipment and provide extemporaneous chatter; at KANU the announcer sat in a studio and introduced the music from a script prepared by another member of the station staff, and the records were handled by an engineer in the control room. Given these limitations, it became necessary to plan a campaign to persuade area radio stations to offer an internship. The Lawrence station, KLWN, was the first to offer an internship, and it was followed by others in Kansas City, Topeka, Ottawa and even stations all over the rest of the state, the latter in the summer months. At this stage in the development of the RTV program, the internship experience proved to be most important for majors interested in a position in commercial radio. Television. Space and equipment for television provided a far greater challenge. There was no existing laboratory (studio-control room.) With no movement in the approval of a state ETV system, there was no prospect of using a new University ETV station as a lab. There was no room for a lab in Flint Hall. The space assigned to Speech and Drama in the new building (to be named "Murphy Hall) could not accomodate a television lab. After a series of meetings between George Smith, Ray Nichols, Keith Lawton and myself, a solution to the problem was found. There would be a two-stage development. First the basement of Hoch Auditorium would be remodeled for television as soon as possible. Then, when the programs using the main stage of Hoch were moved to Murphy Hall, the television lab would be moved to that area, probably by 1958. Hoch basement would be adequate as an interim space. The square footage was sufficient, and there was (barely) enough ceiling height to install a light grid for lighting instruments. Basic problems were the lack of water (hence no restrooms), the presence of several two-foot square supporting pillars taking up space and blocking camera sight lines in the studio area, and only one entrance-exit, down a long, dark corridor. The main stage of Hoch Auditorium would be a better answer once it was available: There would be a very large studio area (the stage itself,) and a lighting grid and dimming controls were already in place. Also, it would be possible to construct a second floor control room on the west side, overlooking the stage . All of the planning and construction of both areas would be done by the University. The University Architect, Professor George Beal, immediately started work on the construction drawings for the basement TV lab. There would be a large studio, a control room, film-chain room and announce booth. A pipe grid would hold the lighting instruments and these would be controlled by a small control board. By March, 1956, the drawings had been completed and the Department of Buildings and Grounds promised a speedy construction. Speedy it was not, at least it didn't appear to be so. In June, 1956, a note was sent to Ray Nichols bemoaning the fact that apparently the space would not be ready until after Christmas.22 Of course the time frame was not realistic, but we were anxious to get started. Finally, an open house was held from 3-5 p.m. on March 10, 1957, to show off the new space and equipment to all interested students and faculty. Lawton's construction crew had done an excellent job; once the person got beyond the dingy corridor, he/she would find a functional and attractive TV layout. 1957: View of the TV studio from th econtrol room. 1957: The first TV studio, in Hoch basement. Lighting panel on the left; Vidicon TV cameras on the right. Stage one was complete. Now it was time to begin specific plans for the second stage, upstairs, which would include a large control room and announce booth overlooking the stage and a large storage room on the west side of the stage itself.. With the approval of Dean Marvin, I suggested an addition to the original plan. I proposed that station KDGU be moved into the Hoch basement space to be vacated when television moved upstairs. This would open up badly needed space in Flint Hall for classrooms and offices. I also suggested that the RTV faculty could move to the Hoch space. The administration agreed to the station move but nixed the move of faculty -- undoubtedly a very wise decision.23 The biggest problem in acquiring television equipment in 1955 was its mind-boggling price tag. The professional TV system was black and white, utilizing an "image orthicon" tube in the camera. A single camera "chain" (the camera and its electronic control unit in the control room) cost well over $50,000. A minimum studio would have two of them. Adding tripod dollies, lighting instruments and control, audio pickup and control, a film-slide chain and electronic switching would bring the cost to over $300,000. (In contrast, the total University equipment budget in 1955 was about a third of that.) Obviously a purchase order of this magnitude was out of the question. Fortunately, new developments in the area of industrial television equipment made it possible to consider a TV system which might be affordable. Several companies became aware of the fact that many universities could not afford state-of-the-art equipment but could use vidicon cameras and simpler switchers, and they hastened to fill this market void. In this system the "image orthicon" tube (which changed light energy into electrical signals) was replaced by a "vidicon" tube. The picture quality had less contrast (and therefore seemed "softer") and it took a great deal more light to achieve an acceptable picture. The main advantage was price: A camera chain could be purchased for less than $20,000. The RTV Committee proposed acquisition of basic equipment on a three-stage basis. The first stage would provide a minimal two-camera system, with basic lighting and audio, a kinescope recorder, a simple switcher and camera accessories for around $60,000. Stage two would add an Auricon-Pro 16mm sound-film camera and portable lighting equipment for $20,000. Stage three would be the purchase of a microwave relay system for around $25,000.24 The equipment manufacturer of choice would be Dage -- a company based at Michigan City, Indiana. (In September, 1955, I had visited the company and was satisfied that the vidicon system not only would work under optimum lighting conditions but it would produce a picture quality that would be acceptable by a commercial television station for airing. Which proved to be true.) This still was a lot of money, and a special request was required. No sooner had the request been sent to Topeka than the state schools were notified that general state budget problems required a cutback in some requests. Unfortunately, this included the television request. However, our momentary gloom was lifted in late November when the Chancellor wrote to the Committee with the news that the money probably would be restored.25 The Legislature did approve the request and in June, 1956, Ray Nichols approved the purchase request. In the meantime, it was possible to make some additional purchases of 16mm film equipment, using funds from the regular University equipment budget. The "package" included an Auricon sound-film camera, a sound "blimp" for an existing Cine-Special 16mm film camera, and associated editing equipment. This order, which was placed in May, 1956, would allow a parallel development of film and television production.26 During the period of 1955 to the fall of 1957 there were substantial increases in the operations budget for RTV. This budget was included as part of the overall School of Journalism budget, but carried a special number (2353.) Allocations were as follows:27 (KFKU, KANU budgets not included.) Maintenance Equipment Payroll Income 1955-56  1000 9135 300 950 1956-57 9000 45018 1700 769 Equipment in '56-57 included part of the special allocation. Payroll was for student assistants. Income came from various sources. C. Laboratory Operations and Program Production. The RTV Committee was anxious to begin some type of television programming as soon as possible. We believed that if the viewing public could see programming from KU there would be not only more interest in us but also in the possibilities for state-wide educational television. But how to do it when we had no television equipment? The obvious answer was to try to put programs on area television stations. Having produced such program material on stations in Omaha, I was confident that there would be interest in anything we might do. In fact, the first program opportunity came before we were quite ready. Ed McKernan, the Program Director of WIBW-TV, Topeka, proposed that KU, K-State and Emporia present a music series on the station. The schools would alternate programs. He wished to start immediately (October 1, 1955.) The RTV Committee contacted the Dean of the School of Fine Arts to see if there was any interest. There was, but several problems became apparent immediately: There were no funds to get large musical groups to Topeka (which is what the station wanted.) Fine Arts also was concerned that WIBW-TV planned to seek commercial sponsorship; Dean Gorton feared not only copyright infringement (of the music performed) but a negative reaction from the American Federation of Musicians who would not be happy to see amateur musicians used in a commercial venture. Also, apparently we would have no control of the production once the musical groups were at the studio. RTV had another reservation, unvoiced to all except the administration -- that the first television programming from KU should be of our own choosing and not shared by other schools, and it should be done when we were ready.28 It turned out that both K-State and Emporia had reservations about the project and the offer was regretfully turned down.29 The opportunity for a KU program presented itself almost immediately. The KU Medical Center (in Kansas City, Kansas) had been approached by both WDAF-TV and KMBC-TV, each suggesting the possibilities of a series related to health. Dr. David Ruhe, the Audio-Visual Director of the Medical Center, was very interested in the idea. He had little experience in the production of television material, therefore he requested help from the RTV faculty. He wanted advice as to which station would be in our best interest to use. More importantly, he wanted someone (it turned out to be this writer) to provide the production expertise -- to turn the material and people organized by Dr. Ruhe into interesting television programming. For a number of reasons, including the fact that the station gave us permission to assist with the production during the actual broadcast, we opted for KMBC-TV. Beginning in February, 1956, KU presented eight, one-half hour programs in a series titled, "Highroads to Health." Programs included such subjects as heart disease, polio, cancer, cleft palate and the flouridation of water. Many specialists from KUMC appeared, including the Dean, W. Clarke Wescoe. Even Chancellor Murphy appeared on one program. The Chancellor and I rode over to Kansas City together. During our drive back to Lawrence, after his appearance, he told me that he had a much greater appreciation for the skill and energy which went into the production of a program. He added that he couldn't wait until we could do such programming from our own campus. Perhaps it goes without saying that this was music to my ears. Another series was produced on a shoe-string. It was called "KU Bulletin Board." Each "program" actually was the length of a commercial --one to two minutes. It consisted of 35mm slides and a written narrative script. These were mailed to the cooperating stations (as many as twelve) every two weeks. As the slides were put on the air the staff announcer would read the script. The subject matter was as varied as the University itself. In late 1957, the "TV-Film Production Center" (as it was then called ) produced its first 16mm film, "New Born - Strike One." This 30-minute film was a "spin-off" from one of the Highroads to Health programs. It told the story, in dramatic form, of the treatment of cleft palate in infants by a team of surgeons and speech therapists. This film was used for many years, not only by television stations but by local health organizations. A scene from "New Born-Strike One". D. Outreach and Service One of the areas of responsibility assigned to the RTV Committee by the Chancellor was that of "outreach." As he stated, the Committee "is to be considered the University agency concerned with all matters relating to Radio and Television, including educational and operational activities.30 This responsibility was not long in coming. Immediately after my arrival on campus I represented the University at the formation of a "Joint Committee on Educational Television" for Kansas. Delegates of the five state schools met to develop a new strategy for convincing Kansas citizens and the Legislature that ETV was worth the cost and should be authorized and funded as soon as possible. (It should be remembered that both KU and K-State still had applications for construction permits pending before the FCC.) The Joint Committee also began to develop a policy for the operation of the network should ETV materialize. The Committee would meet a number of times in the coming years, but the policy was never finished. (A greater discussion of the dreary tale of ETV may be found in Chapter IV.) Another area of immediate concern was sports broadcasting. In 1952 the Kansas Association of Broadcasters had asked KU and K-State to originate radio broadcasts of their athletic activities -- primarily football and basketball. In response, each school originated the broadcasts of the games and distributed them for live broadcast via telephone lines to all stations who desired to carry them. The sports announcers were employees of the schools. The stations would pay the schools a fee for the broadcasts, which was based upon each station's coverage area, power and rate card. In return, each station could sell spot announcements during planned breaks in the program. Inevitably, in the first two years of operation a number of problems developed, especially relating to fees and sponsorship. In an October meeting between representatives of K-State, Ed Browne and myself, a basic "joint" policy was developed. It covered matters of good taste in content, prior approval of sponsors by the universities, and it outlined the differences between "regular" and "requested" services of the network.31 This Committee would meet many times in the next few years. The usual problems, from the point of view of the broadcasters, would continue to be fees ("always too high") and sponsorship ("why can't you trust our judgment".) The Joint Committee continued until the seventies, when the schools adopted the concept of selling the rights to originate a sports network to the highest bidder. In 1957 the RTV Committee had to make a recommendation to the Chancellor in regard to an offer of the gift of a television transmitter for the University. Meredith Publishing Company, the owner of KCMO-TV, Kansas City, had installed a new, powerful transmitter at their other television station in Syracuse, New York. They offered to ship the old, 5 KW transmitter to KU in the hope that it might be used if the state approved an ETV system. In so doing, of course, they would receive a considerable tax write-off. The Committee recommended that the Chancellor accept the gift. There would be no immediate cost. If ETV were approved, the existence of this transmitter would represent considerable savings. Even if a lot of time passed and the transmitter became obsolete the only cost to us would have been storage.32 The Chancellor accepted the transmitter and Meredith shipped it to a storage location on west campus. There it sat and slowly rusted away. The radio and television area also began an extensive program of services to other campus units. For example, various members of the RTV Committee and qualified students produced film clips to advertise "Math and Science Day," and edited existing film of previous Kansas Relays events into promotional clips which were sent to area television stations. In 1957, The School of Education embarked on a modest project involving closed circuit television (CCTV) in Bailey Hall. Dean Anderson requested that Gail Adkins become a consultant to this operation. Adkins was happy to assist, for his undergraduate degree was in education and his doctoral dissertation, in progress, related to the same area. 1957: "Your Highway Patrol" was the second sound film from RTV. Dr. Linton at the camera. In 1952 the School of Journalism had started an annual "Radio News Clinic" for the news broadcasters of the three-state area. The clinics were popular with the broadcasters and so the RTV Committee agreed to continue the service. Members of the Committee also became active in various area and national organizations, such as the Kansas Association of Broadcasters, the Association for Education by Radio, the University Film Production Association, and the Association for Professional Broadcast Education (APBE) later to be known as BEA, the Broadcast Education Association. TO SUMMARIZE, by the end of the second year (May, 1957) the initial structuring of the RTV academic program had been completed. Courses had been revised and new ones relating to television had been added. The staff -- a mixture of Journalism and Speech and Drama professors, old and new -- was reasonably well equipped to handle the existing coursework. New facilities for television had been completed in the basement of Hoch and equipment was operational. The staff of the radio stations, KFKU and KANU-FM, had begun to create a very few internship experiences for students who desired them, but KDGU and off-campus internships at commercial stations represented the primary radio "laboratory" experience for most of the students. A series of live television programs were aired on Station KMBC-TV -- a collaborative effort between that station, the KU Medical Center and RTV on the Lawrence campus. Other television programs, in the form of a 16mm motion picture and many 35mm slide film "spot announcements," were being aired on area stations. The RTV Committee and the total program was gaining visibility on-campus and beyond, thanks to a number of outreach projects and activities. But educational television for KU and K-State was no closer to reality than it had been in 1955. 1 Marvin, Memo to Chancellor Murphy, January 21, 1952. 2 With the exception of "Chancellor," all of the executive positions in central administration would have different titles during the years encompassed by this history. 3 A fourth sequence--Home Economics Journalism--was available but not accredited by ACEJ. Later this sequence would disappear, to be replaced by Photo-Journalism and Magazine sequences. 4 Under today's rules of "political correctness" perhaps the term department "chairperson" should be used throughout this narrative. However, we were not enlightened in 1955 or for many years afterward, and we had department "chairmen" regardless of gender. Where that word was used in official documents of the times, it will also be used here. 5 In 1970 a "School Committee," elected from the faculty, first considered recommendations from the sequences. Upon approval these would go to the full faculty for a final lvote. A second committee--the Faculty Committee--was created in order to have a group of elected faculty members who would advise the Dean on various matters. 6 University of Kansas Course Catalog: 1955-56, p. 322. 7 Murphy, Memo to Bruce Linton, R. Edwin Browne, et. al., March 14, 1956. Please note that most of the discussion of KANU and its staff in this narrative will concern its relationship to the academic program and the RTV Committee. For an excellent history of the station itself, please see Keeler. 8 Linton, "Training and Operations in Broadcasting: A Preliminary Statement," Sept. 1, 1955. 9 Ibid, p. 6. 10 Ibid, p. 8. A later statement underscored the relationship of the station to the academic program. In the budget crunch of 1957 it was necessary for department chairs to indicate program priorities. In my statement I said that "television development must have the highest priority. (The FM service)... must take its proper position relative to the total picture." Linton, "A Confidential Report of Possible Budget Procedures," Jan. 24, 1957. 11 Dean George Waggoner, Letter to B. Linton, Sept. 6, 1955. 12 "RTV Course Recommendations," Oct., 1955. 13 "Recommended Curriculum Changes in Radio and Television," Oct. 24, 1955. 14 James Hitt, Registrar, Letter to B. Linton, Sept. 12, 1956. 15 University of Kansas Course Catalog, 1955-56, pp. 169, 301. 16 University of Kansas Schedule of Classes, Spring Semester, 1957, p. 96. 17 Linton, "Biennial Report: Radio and Television," Aug., 1956. 18 Linton, Letter to Dean Smith, Aug. 2, 1956. 19 Linton, Memo to Raymond Nichols, Oct. 4, 1955. 20 Linton, Letter to Keith Lawton, Feb. 27, 1956. 21 Linton, "Biennial Report: Radio and Television," Aug., 1956, p. 8. 22 Linton, Letter to Raymond Nichols, June 21, 1956. 23 Linton, "Space Report," Memo to G. B. Smith and Chancellor Murphy, June 27, 1957. 24 Linton, "Preliminary Television Equipment Proposal," Oct. 1, 1955. 25 Murphy, Letter to B. Linton, Nov. 28, 1955. 26 Nichols, Letter to B. Linton, May 15, 1956. 27 Linton, "Special Report," 1973. 28 Linton, Letter to Murphy, Sept. 16, 1955. 29 Linton, Letter to Ed McKernan, Sept. 23, 1955. 30 Muurphy, Memo to B. Linton, et. al., Sept. 15, 1955. 31 "Radio and Television Policy." The University of Kansas and Kansas State College, Oct., 1955. 32 Linton, Memo to the University Budget Committee, March 7, 1956.