The years encompassed in this chapter were tumultuous. So much has been written about the problems of our country that no more needs to be said except for a few sentences to serve as a simple reminder and to set the scene. In these years we put a man on the moon. President Johnson initiated significant social programs (some of which had a beneficial impact on KU.) But we also experienced the hor ror of the assassination of President Kennedy and other national figures. There was civil upheaval over civil rights, with demonstrations, riots and killings. The Vietnam intervention exploded into a full war with terrible casualties and body counts over there and demonstrations, riots and killings over here. The cold war continued. The fight for women's rights became more militant.

All of this had an impact on the lives of the students, faculty and administration at KU and on the other residents of Lawrence. One non-violent reaction could be seen in the manners and dress of the students. They rejected their elders by expressing contempt for all who had achieved the ripe old age of thirty. Rejection was expressed by wearing torn and disreputable clothing: "Out" were neat slacks, skirts and sweater of the past; "in" were torn jeans, undershirts as outer wear and T-shirts. The latter carried angry slogans, and they also made it obvious that many females were "burning their bras" as an expression of more militant feminism.

There were demonstrations, parades and riots connected with both civil rights and the Vietnam conflict. There were confrontations between blacks and whites in the public schools and on the campus. In one frenzied evening the Military Science building was attacked. Later the Student Union was torched and almost lost. A non-student was killed in downtown Lawrence -- a bystander who had come to Lawrence to see all the excitement. Angry students -- and many non-students -- seemed willing to do almost anything to make a point about the explosive issues of the times. At one point the Chancellor asked faculty members to remain in their buildings overnight to protect them from very possible damage by these angry people. This overnight vigil in Flint Hall was the lowest point of morale in my teaching career, and I am sure that this was the case with many other faculty members. What was I doing, guarding a building from possible damage at the hands of the very people to whom I had devoted my life! Teach in the daytime; guard a building at night. It was an unthinkable stretch.

Area television stations, of course, dramatically increased their coverage of the local news. The riots and confrontations were made to order for pickup on the new, portable sound-film cameras. Our problems were televised throughout the state and nation, making it seem as if the whole educational process was halted. This was not the case. However, in my annual report I found it ironic that "at a time we were involved in a conference on 'Television and the New Persuasion' the city erupted in violence and the news media -- who did not choose to attend our conference -- suddenly appeared with cameras poised on the edge of the battleground, rather like vultures anticipating a feast."1 And feast they did.

Moreover, many people in the state -- especially parents of students and members of the Legislature -- seemed to hold the faculty responsible for all the terrible things which were happening. I remember one disheartening moment which illustrates the climate of opinion at that time. It was at the annual meeting of the Kansas Association of Broadcasters some days after several incidents of confrontation on campus. No sooner had I arrived but that I was backed up against the wall by angry broadcasters, most of whom I thought were friends. With fire in their eyes they asked, "What the hell is going on at KU? Why can't you control these hippies?" I tried to explain the situation as best I could, but nothing was going to assuage their anger and frustration which, of course, went beyond the campus events. En loco parentis in its most virulent form. Someone had to pay, and the faculty was a convenient target. No matter that we continued to teach our classes and even guard the buildings, there would be no raises that year for anyone.

Yet, during this period of national unrest the University continued to grow. There were more students, more academic programs and even a new school -- of Social Welfare. The area of RTVF shared this growth, perhaps reflecting a new public interest in -- and dependence on -- media communications, especially by the college age students. This was especially true by the end of the sixties. Course enrollments skyrocketed, and there were many new undergraduate and graduate majors.2 There was significant growth in the number and quality of the faculty (in spite of continued turnover.) The TV studios were moved to Flint Hall and KUOK finally got out of Hoch basement. In the early seventies, KANU would begin a transformation in staff, equipment and program philosophy which would make it an outstanding public radio station.

These improvements were very satisfying, but there was still a feeling of frustration, mostly centered on the lack of funds for daily operations. There was almost zero growth in funds for maintenance and lab classes. Equipment was replaced only when there was danger of a complete shutdown of the labs. The lack of modern television equipment (of broadcast quality and in color) made it impossible to release any programs in this format; the alternative was to concentrate on a number of 16mm film projects which, of course, could be shown on television.

A. Administration and Budget.

1. General Administration.

Chancellor Wescoe was a very popular administrator, especially with the students. But in 1969 he resigned to take a CEO position with a leading pharmaceutical company -- just in time to escape the more virulent student demonstrations. These were to be the lot of Chancellor Laurence Chalmers. Chalmers probably will be remembered most as the Chancellor who called off final exams and met with the students in a mass meeting at Memorial Stadium. He defused the dangerous confrontrations, but probably at the cost of his future effectiveness as a Chancellor when he also had to convince irate alums, the Governor and the Legislature that his approach to the situation had been the right one. He would resign in 1972. (There were three Chancellors during this period. Clarke Wescoe, who began in 1960, resigned in 1969; Laurence Chalmers served from 1969 to 1972; and Raymond Nichols was Chancellor for the school year of 1972-73.)

During the Wescoe years the administrative bureacracy expanded. The chief academic officer on campus became a Provost (James Surface.) There were more associates and assistants, all generating ideas and paperwork. There were more committees at every administrative level. Later in this period there was another reorganization which had the effect of adding more boxes to the chart of administrative offices. For example, the position of Provost became the Executive Vice Chancellor, and the Dean of the University became the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. And at the end of this period a Legislative Council was created which included representation from the faculty and students. The end result to the typical department chair -- certainly to this one -- was more data to collect, more reports to compile and more meetings to attend. For the first time I realized I was beginning to spend more time on administrative matters and less on teaching.

The School of Journalism had come under some criticism in the late fifties, mainly because of differences of opinion related to the philosophy of journalism education. In 1962, and even as late as 1965, it was suggested that the School revert to departmental status inthe College of Liberal Arts. One departmental chair didn't agree. In a note to Dean George Waggoner he said such a move was a "bad idea" and that what was needed was a "new Dean with the right stuff."3 For most of us, Dean Marvin had the right stuff. But whether it was criticism of the School and/or his leadership, he resigned in 1965 to accept a position as Dean of Journalism at Syracuse University.

The second Dean of the school was Warren Agee. A bright and affable man, he was popular with both the students and faculty. His national reputation as a journalism educator helped to quiet any residual criticism of the program, and his arrival touched off a regeneration of ideas about journalism education. Perhaps coincidentally, enrollments in the School picked up rather dramatically in the latter half of the sixties. He left in 1969 to become Dean at the University of Georgia. Lee Young, of the Magazine sequence, was appointed as Acting Dean until the new leader could be found. He was a quiet and able man who held the School together through the terrible months of 1969-70. Also in that year, Dana Leibengood became an Assistant Dean after serving many years in the Extension Division. Edward Bassett became the new Dean in 1970, and his impact would be immediate. Governance (a "hot" term in the seventies) changed somewhat in Journalism. In 1970, the faculty created two basic committees: A "Faculty Committee" would serve as an advisory body to the Dean, engage in long range planning and develop ground rules for promotion and tenure. The "School Committee" would be responsible for studying the curriculum and screening requests for new courses or changes and sequence requirements before these would reach the general faculty for final approval.4

On the Speech side, Bill Conboy continued to administer the program until the spring 1972, when he resigned to return to fulltime teaching. The Associate Chairman, Bobby Patton, was appointed to fill the position, which he did with great effectiveness for many years. There were several changes of division heads, but not in RTVF.

The writer of the "right stuff" memo had gone on to say that whatever happens, "I hope an increasingly healthy interdiscipline program in radio, television and film will continue." The faculty of RTVF certainly agreed, desiring a "continuation of RTVF through Speech and Journalism (as) a logical and practical reflection of the contents and methods of the RTVF fields."5 There was no real concern that the interdiscipline program was in danger, but with a new Dean of Journalism coming aboard we thought it wouldn't hurt to put a few points in writing. Putting points in writing -- providing a rationale for existance, answering administrative requests for data and other program information, or making special requests -- was a process engaged in at all levels of university life, especially by academic departments and schools. One year there might be a required "self study;" another might bring a request that the faculty predict future growth and needs. New "formulas" for measuring the effectiveness of a department would be developed, requiring departmental and school response. All of this paper work seemed to multiply in direct proportion to the number of new "assistants," "associates," and "vices" in a position of authority. Outside sources created more demand for reports: Legislative committees and accrediting committees, especially.

Lest this seem to be a biased recollection of the times, it should be admitted that departments and schools submitted requests and reports of their own volition, hoping to catch the attention of -- and get positive reaction from -- the same administrators. RTVF was guilty in this respect. Reports were sent forth in the hope that there was truth in the adage about the "squeaky wheel." Reports also were sent as a defensive strategy in case some official might not understand or appreciate the nature of this area study, always a possibility given the turnovers and new additions to central administration. In one report we said, "some programs, because of their inherent nature, demand the service of people from different fields. In addition, some programs (such as RTVF) require costly equipment and large amounts of facility space. RTVF...embraces journalistic skills, speech arts and research methods of mass communications (making it a logical area study.")6 The report went on to say that the resulting focus of effort outweighed the greater administrative effort involved in coordinating and communicating with the several faculties and administrative offices. The key was "cooperation." "The Chairman of Speech and Drama and the Deans of Journalism and the College have had to believe in this crossing of academic boarders and to give it their active support."7 Many years later the "greater effort" would not be enough to continue an interdiscipline program. But for now the concept was working well.

RTVF went even further in the 1964-65 annual report, by making a suggestion for a change in the official name of the School, pre-dating its actual re-naming by almost fifteen years. The RTVF faculty noted that, "because of the increasing impact of the RTVF media it would seem that the (traditional) concept of 'Journalism' is too narrow -- that it might be more descriptive (of modern journalism and communications)...to re-name the School as the William Allen White School of Media Communications." (There was no official response to this suggestion, but a number of the print journalism veterans told us later that they thought Bill White would be spinning in his grave!) A few years later, however, the name would be changed.

In the fall of 1969 the RTVF Committee decided that it was time for a "special report" -- one that would discuss perceived strengths and weaknesses of the program.8 With considerable statistical support the following points were made:

On a positive note --
     1-The program ranked in the top 12-15 in the country (based on the reports of Hal Niven of the National Association of Broadcasters.)

2-A significant percentage (45%) of all undergraduate majors were working in the field, while 73% of the Masters grads were doing so.

3-Alums reflected on their work at KU with warmth and appreciation.

And as to the perceived weaknesses --

1-The area of broadcast news was understaffed, as was production and film studies..

2-There needed to be better supervision of the lab operations by qualified people.

3-The introductory course needed more staff in order to provide for discussion sections.

4-KUOK was in dangerous quarters and needed to be moved.

5-The air conditioning in the TV studios of Flint Hall was seasonal, putting a lot of equipment under stress in the fall, winter and spring.

In the spring of 1970 all academic units were required to report on their organizational and operating procedures, apparently to make sure that all constituents (including students) were represented and due process followed in decision-making. RTVF replied in May, 1970.9 Perhaps the most interesting section of the report related to the participation of student representatives in the formation of policies: "Although (the representatives) do not have voting rights in non-curricular matters, they will be expected to offer their best advice in policy decisions pertaining to the just and efficient operation of the division. Such matters might be: Policy on facilities utilization by students, policy on student rights or ownership of materials produced as course work, and policy on student participation in hiring, retention and promotion of faculty."

More representative of voluntary reports by the RTVF Committee was the letter to the new Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Ambrose Saricks. We attempted to assure him that the academic program was in fine shape, the equipment situation was serious, but improving, and that the maintenance fund was less than adequate. As to KANU, it was "in fine shape, thanks to Dick Wright and Mrs. Petey Cerf (who gave money to partially fund a new transmitter.)" Audio Reader, we noted, "seems to be an unwanted child with no funding and no apparent solution to the financial problems involved." The letter closed with a renewed plea for the University to appoint a task force to look into the complex problems of the utililization and future needs of audio-visual equipment on the Lawrence campus.10 The letter was followed by a special report which re-stated a basic premise: "The undergraduate major in Radio-TV-Film is an inter-departmental program between the School of Journalism and the Department of Speech and Drama, administered by the Radio-TV-Film Committee."11

In early 1973, the Committee met a number of times to discuss the problem of the apparent lack of support for the program and, for the first time since 1955, there was serious discussion of the "area study" nature of the program. Two relatively new members of the faculty -- Dennis Lynch and Dave Dary -- wondered if the total program should move to the J-school.12 After extensive discussion the Committee decided that no action should be taken at this time, but that efforts be increased to make the central administration, and other administrators connected with the total program, more aware of our concerns. One result was the "Special Report of 1973." This forty page document was, by far, the most complete analysis of the program to date.13 In this report the Committee described the original rationale and beginning of the area study program in RTVF and its development. The Committee then made a number of predictions as to the future nature of electronic and film communications. This was followed by an analysis of the current program and a discussion of future needs which would have to be met if we were to meet the demands of the future.

The Committee noted that, "most educators agree that the communications 'professional'(of tomorrow) must have skills and techniques, know the theoretical foundations of broadcasting and film, and be broadly educated." There was special emphasis given to the need for flexibility:

But if the communications environment changes, as above, then the professional of tomorrow must have even greater depth and breadth within the total field of aural and visual communications. There must be flexibility: The ability to adapt to -- and have influence on -- the changes in the media.

In retrospect, the RTVF Committee had a surprisingly accurate look into the crystal ball. For example, looking to the next decade the committee predicted the increasing miniaturization and portability of equipment which would have a great impact on news programming. It predicted greater automation of radio programming, significant expansion of cable services to millions of people, increased local programming in television, and significant growth for public radio and television. All of these changes happened in the seventies, underscoring the accuracy of our predictions as well as the importance of greater support for the program.

2. The Budget.

The years from 1963-73 were the wrong years to experience budget problems. Certainly the State Legislature was never very generous, but the doors to the "state vault" now seemed to be even more tightly closed, especially after the appearance of unrest and demonstrations. The total process was more laborious and, because of the new layers of administrative bureaucracy, more open to denials or delays. How I yearned, at times, for the good old days when one could go directly to the Chancellor on a budget matter and get a "yes" or"no" quickly. But by 1972 the formal RTVF budget requests were made chiefly to the Dean of Journalism, even though it was still possible to address special requests and reports directly to Strong Hall, with copies to the Dean.14

Many of the equipment problems were the result of wear and tear from heavy student use. The RTVF Committee often suggested that KU establish a planned schedule for the regular replacement of expensive equipment -- a schedule of depreciation. There seemed to be agreement that this would be a good idea, but nothing ever came of it.

Strong Hall was not completely unresponsive to the needs of RTVF, although it sometimes seemed that way. Thus, additional faculty lines were assigned, enabling the program to attract some outstanding people. New space in Hoch was assigned and remodeled to provide new film editing cubicles. The television studios were moved to newly remodeled space in Flint Hall. And, in 1973, KUOK was able to get out of the lonely, dangerous quarters in Hoch basement; it was moved to a remodeled garage on the former Sudler property at the northwest edge of the campus.

All of these improvements were gratefully received. Yet, there never seemed to be enough money to support daily operations and to replace aging equipment. For example, in this ten years of significant student growth maintenance funds (OOE) grew from $13,500 to $14,729, an increase of less than ten percent. In that same period a total of $42,179 was allocated for equipment; in four of those years there was no allocation at all. (It should be remembered that the total allocation for equipment provided by the state for KU was completely inadequate. Many other programs, especially in the hard sciences, were competing for this money.)

The situation in RTVF was recognized even as early as 1965 by the AEJ Accrediting Committee. The visiting experts gave RTVF strong marks in every area except fiscal support and space. They found it hard to believe that we could have this strong program in the face of such deficiencies. Equipment breakdowns occured regularly. It was terribly frustrating for a student to spend hours preparing a lab production assignment and then, just when it was time to "air" it for evaluation and grading, a unit of equipment would fail, bringing the presentation to a crashing, sickening end. The faculty shared the student frustration, and so the RTVF Committee took every opportunity to ask for increases in the regular budget and to make requests for special funding, knowing all along that there was great competition for funds that were inadequate to begin with. An early request underscored the AEJ findings: "Excellence has been achieved in spite of -- rather than because of -- the physical plant and hardware. In comparison with our peers...we are poverty stricken."15

In 1965 KU celebrated its centennial. There was a major fund drive under the leadership of Stanley Learned. All academic units were asked to submit a wish list --whatever was needed to enhance their academic programs. These would be rated by a committee, and eventually funds would be alloted to chosen programs to the extent the drive was successful. A wish list for RTVF was submitted, but it "never made the cut." In the annual report of 1965-66 I noted a sad irony: "No one was interested in the problems and needs of RTVF (in terms of the wish list)...but when it came to problems of communicating information about the COP program in an interesting and entertaining manner..THEN the communicators (RTVF) were consulted and their services utilized to the fullest extent."16 Our services included slide programs and a 16mm motion picture, and we were highly commended by Mr. Learned and the committee.

As the sixties wound down and the RTVF requests in regard to equipment and space brought little positive response, the tone of the annual reports became more plaintive and a little bitter. Thus, in 1968-69 it was written that "(RTVF) is an area which has walked its mile several times over.....We are a part of an area (of communications) which will become more important in the next decade -- important to the layman, the politician, the professional."17 In a similar vein, in 1970-71: "Here I am...trying to impress the administration with the seriousness of our problems and to what purpose? There will be little re-ordering of priorities, the hoary disciplines will continue to call the tune."18

The faculty was not alone in pleading the case for better equipment. Commercial broadcasters wrote the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. For example, Jerry Holley, then Manager of WIBW-TV, said in part, "You have some excellent people (in RTVF...but their hands are tied simply because of the lack of necessary equipment to be able to instruct students in the art of radio and television broadcasting."19

The low point may have been in May, 1971, when Francis Heller, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, replied to yet another RTVF request: "The program is obviously imaginative, innovative and deserving of support. It is a matter of sincere regret...that in this particular year we are utterly unable to provide any of the funds requested.20 He added that he assumed we would try again in 1973.

The large 1973 report, mentioned earlier, contained specific requests for equipment (portable color television cameras,) staff and remodeled space. This time the report went to the new VC for Academic Affairs, Amby Saricks, and was endorsed by Dean Bassett of Journalism and Bobby Patton of Speech and Drama. There was some positive response, but no significant breakthrough as to color television. This would not come until years later.

Grants, gifts and allocations from non-state sources (such as federal grants and KU endowment) helped a great deal. For example, Commonwealth Corporation (a film distribution and motion picture theatre chain) provided funds for film production. Commonwealth had earlier supported Richard MacCann's research efforts, and at his departure the company agreed to provide an annual grant of $1500 to support film production. Danny Smart, the District Manager, said, "we are hopeful that our pledge will enable certain deserving students to pursue production at KU."21 The grant continued for three years.

One area -- that of the KU radio stations -- was having an even harder time convincing the administration to provide extra funds for equipment and space. A reasonable budget had always come hard for the stations. No matter how passionately Ed Browne (and even some of us on the academic side) believed that the stations were providing an important educational/cultural service to the state, there were those in central administration, and especially in the Legislature, who had their doubts. Members of the Ways and Means Committee routinely would ask the Chancellor why the state had to pay for this extra service. One defensive strategy, previously discussed in Chapter II, was to place the stations in an academic environment. While this may have protected them from direct assault from the Legislature they were still in competition within the University for allocations of state funds. The decentralization of administrative procedures also worked to their disadvantage; by the late sixties Ed Browne had to make his budget requests to the Dean of Journalism and to me, moving the problem to a lower level but not changing the ultimate dilemna, which was: Can such a radio service ever have a greater need than an academic program when forced choices have to be made? The needs of the academic programs in Journalism were critical and primary, and there was never enough money left to provide adequate funding for the station. At one point (in 1970) the RTVF Committee even suggested that the station might be better off to return to its pre-1955 status as a part of University Extension, even though we still believed that the best answer would be to give them more adequate funding and make greater use of the station as an advanced laboratory.22

Three years after Ed Browne resigned, the "Operations Director," Dick Wright (note the new title of the position,) found the situation just as frustrating. He must have been very upset when he wrote, "we have knocked ourselves out over here trying to make the University proud of its facility with absolutely no response...THIS IS A PROFESSIONAL STATION!!! My staff, rightly so, claims that we are more respected in Washington...than we are here at the University!"23 I had great sympathy for his frustration just as, I'm sure, Francis Heller had for me in replying to my request for funding two years earlier.

Nevertheless, KANU and KFKU enjoyed good support throughout this period. Between 1965 and 1972 the total payroll rose from $78,231 to $101,344 -- an increase of 30 percent. Maintenance funds went from $20,000 to $24,500 -- an increase of 23 percent. But there was little money for equipment -- a bit over $7400. The station did receive a grant of $81,000 from HEW in 1973 to equip six news studios and add a tape dubbing center, plus $25,000 from Mrs. Petey Cerf, then an "anonymous donor."

In 1970, the chancellor's office made a historic decision, which allowed the station to ask the public for donations to support programming. In a memo to Dick Wright, Keith Nitcher, the VC for Business Affairs, wrote, "We do not believe that it would be illegal to announce on the program that private support would be needed to continue the program."24 Thus began the fund-raising activities of the station, which today accounts for a significant portion of the operating budget.

B. Faculty and Staff.

There were significant changes in the faculty during the period of 1963-73, as the fulltime faculty members increased in number from three to six. Several new people were added, and they brought with them advanced degrees, professional experience and a great enthusiasm for teaching. They were creative and eager to experiment with courses and requirements to better equip the graduate for the rapidly changing demands of the world of electronic communications. There were also losses -- faculty members who resigned for one reason or another, usually to pursue what they perceived to be a better opportunity.

One of the more troubling losses, to the program and to me personally, was that of Darrel Holt. In his four and a half years with RTVF he had brought great insight and professional expertise, especially in the area of broadcast management. Ohio University recognized his worth and offered him an opportunity to join their program at a significant increase in salary which KU couldn't hope to match --unfortunately, a frequent problem. With regret he moved on in May, 1967. It would be several years before we could find a strong management person to replace him.

Gale Adkins had been the first faculty "hire" in 1956. He was responsible for most of the research output of the RTVF faculty in those early years. After a promotion to associate professor he wanted to spend more time with education BY radio-TV and so he took on the responsibility of managing the new closed circuit link with the medical center in Kansas City. In 1970 he accepted an appointment at Indiana State University, where he taught until retirement.

Another loss was R. Edwin Browne. He had put KANU-FM on the air, and had scratched and fought for every penny to keep it there. He had assembled a professional staff, introduced stereo FM broadcasting to northeast Kansas, and had brought to the radio audience countless hours of serious music as well as some educational features; this in spite of explosions, tower collapse, a failing transmitter, minimal state budget support, and an administrative change which tied the station to an academic program. He accepted the latter change with grace even though he knew that this placed the station in an administrative structure quite different from the one which was in place when he was hired. He provided internships for students even though he thought it to be a mistake. (Students were not professional enough to do any significant work on a large station such as KANU.) Perhaps the final straw (in his view) happened after he had returned from a one year leave of absence, during which time he managed a commercial station (KXTR) devoted to serious music. During that year a number of changes were instituted at KANU, most of which had been previously discussed: Evening hours on the air were expanded to include programming produced by advanced students, and more programs of news were added. Plans had been made to turn the main studio of KANU (which had little or no real use) into a news room with an office for the news instructor, and this was done. Dean Basset also suggested that upon his return Browne should take over the supervision of the student radio station, KUOK.25 It was obvious that he was not happy over the changes, and so he resigned and returned to the active management of KXTR.

The first exciting faculty addition in this period was Richard MacCann. In 1964 it became known that he was quite interested in the possibility of a position at KU. At the time he was the chief film reviewer for the Christian Science Monitor and the author of several highly successful books of film history and criticism. He also had a strong interest in the political use of the media. MacCann was a graduate of KU and he had a PhD. Bill Conboy of Speech and Warren Agee of Journalism shared our enthusiasm, but there were no faculty lines or funds available. We asked the College of Arts and Sciences to consider him for appointment as a Rose Morgan visiting scholar-in-residence, but the spot was not available. Then came a breakthrough: Gale Adkins took a leave of absence in order to pursue some research and lecture opportunities in England. Using his line and salary, we were able to offer MacCann a one-year appointment with no certainty of a continuance. He accepted the offer, and in the following year we were able to put together a permanent line, in part by declassifying an unused position at KANU (again robbing Peter to pay Paul.) MacCann taught courses in film history, criticism, documentary and the political use of media, and his presence and expertise prompted significant growth in these areas. Unfortunately, he moved on in August of 1969 to the University of Iowa, lured by the presence of a PhD program with its attendant emphasis on academic research and writing.

Glenn Price made a career move in 1966. Originally he was an announcer at KANU. Since he had a Masters degree in radio broadcasting he was, in 1955, given a joint appointment with the School of Journalism and Department of Speech and Drama. This gave him the opportunity to teach a course in radio speaking and to handle a few interns at KANU. By 1966 he realized that his interests were more academically centered, and when a position became open as an Assistant Professor of Speech and Drama and Assistant to the Department Chair he applied and was appointed. He continued to teach performance courses in RTV and to assist in the administration of Speech and Drama until his retirement in 1989.

For many years, one of the biggest problem areas in RTVF was that of broadcast news. The news courses had been taught by a succession of news-editorial faculty members, most often by Professor Calder Pickett. At each accrediting visit, while appreciating the contribution made by these faculty members, the AEJ Committee would point out that they had no professional experience in broadcast news. In the opinion of that committee, we were weak in this area.

Finally, in the latter half of the sixties, these courses were taught by people with professional broadcasting experience. First there was Marvin Arth, a prominent newsman in Kansas City. He agreed to teach parttime. Interest and enrollments in broadcast news courses picked up immediately. In 1969 David Dary, a veteran broadcast newsman, became an Assistant Instructor in Journalism while working on a masters degree. He took over the courses and created news internships at KANU and other stations. For the first time the station was providing the realistic experiences for advanced students which had been envisioned when the station was brought into the academic program. Dary became a fulltime faculty member in 1972, teaching news and public relations. He became head of University Relations for a short time, and then returned fulltime to the J-school. Later he moved to the University of Oklahoma to become Dean of their School of Journalism.

Three more hires in the late sixties and early seventies brought additional excitement and growth to the RTVF academic program. Peter Dart arrived from San Francisco State in 1969 -- a bright and enthusiastic man who brought new rigor to the areas of production and aesthetics. He would be one of the leading professors until the late eighties when, for personal reasons, he decided to move to McNeese State University. In 1970 Leon Smith joined the faculty, as did Dennis Lynch. Smith had a very strong interest in television production, while Lynch was eager to put more rigor and scholarship into the graduate program. All three men were PhD's with both professional broadcasting and academic teaching experience. (At this time in the life of the School of Journalism, there were more PhD's on the RTVF faculty than in any other sequence.) All were joint appointments with the Department of Speech and Drama.

Elizabeth (Betty) Czech, also a PhD, joined the faculty as an Assistant Professor of Journalism and Speech in the fall of 1972. She would have great impact on the student radio station, guiding its change from a wired-wireless operation to that of a licensed educational FM station, KJHK. Her strength was in writing and station operations.

Dale Gadd became an acting Assistant Professor (also a joint appointment) in the fall of 1972, teaching the introductory course, and a new course related to cable television. A year later he became fulltime tenure-track, replacing Leon Smith, who had moved on to another university. Later he would teach courses in creative writing and programming.

Another appointment was that of Dick Wright. He had been on the staff of KANU for over ten years and was known mainly for his broadcasts of jazz music. He also was a professional musician, a gifted singer. On several occasions Dick visited with me to discuss the program policies at KANU; he felt they were restrictive and that no one seemed interested in any of his ideas. Finally, in 1968, his frustration seemed to reach a peak, and he resigned to take a position at a local music store. When Browne resigned I immediately thought of Wright. He had a Masters degree in music, broadcast experience and, most important, he had ideas and enthusiasm. I wrote to Francis Heller: "Dick is familiar with the general operations of a university radio station and is in complete agreement...concerning the new policies."26 Dick served as Operations Manager through a crucial growth period involving the purchase of a new transmitter and a complex relationship with National Public Radio. Then he accepted a joint appointment in Fine Arts, which allowed him to teach coursework in jazz history and to continue his jazz programs on KANU. He retired in 1997, although he continued to teach the course in jazz history.

There were several changes at the KU Sports Network. Beginning in 1955, the head of the network was given an academic position as an instructor. This enabled the person to teach an announcing class and also one in "special problems" relating to sports reporting and play-by-play. There followed a situation that is probably unique in the relationship of university sports broadcasting to an academic program: When the network announcer, Monte Moore, resigned in 1960 to go with the Kansas City baseball team his former star pupil, Tom Hedrick, was hired. (Tom was the first graduate in the RTV masters degree program.) When Hedrick left for greener pastures in sports announcing in 1967, he was replaced by his former student, Gary Bender -- also a masters degree graduate. The trend continued: When Bender left in 1971 to do professional football, he was replaced by a former student, Jerry Bailey.

There were other changes at KANU. Mildred Seamon retired in 1967 after a long career at KU. She had been the Program Director from the time KANU went on the air, and years before that she had been the Director for the AM station, KFKU. James Stanley resigned in March, 1970. He had served as Chief Engineer and Program Director for a brief period in the sixties..

Also joining the faculty for the 1965-66 school year was a former student, Gene Boomer. He was given the rank of Lecturer and he acted as a coordinator and producer of television and film material.

Francis Ellis joined the RTVF staff as an engineer, in 1968. His assignment was to keep the CCTV equipment in Bailey Hall in operation -- a thankless and impossible task, given the condition of most of it. When RTVF was relieved of CCTV responsibility in 1972, Dean Bassett was able to have him appointed as a Lecturer. In this capacity he would teach one of the new "modules." When the modules were replaced he assumed responsibility for the maintenance and scheduling of equipment. Also, when station KCMO-TV gave RTVF their 16mm black and white film processor (they had moved up to color film processing) Ellis was willing to learn the procedures for processing the film. When RTVF purchased a used film printer Ellis also took on this task.

To re-cap, the following were fulltime faculty in RTVF and were members of the RTVF Committee during this period. (An asterisk indicates those who were no longer involved by August, 1973.

Gale Adkins,* Assoc. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Betty Czech, Asst. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Peter Dart, Assoc. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Francis Ellis, Lecturer, Journalism.
     Dale Gadd, Asst. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Darrel Holt,* Asst. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Bruce Linton, Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Dennis Lynch,* Assoc. Prof. Journalism and Speech.
     Richard MaCann,* Assoc. Prof. Journalism.
     Leon Smith,* Asst. Prof. Journalism and Speech.

The following faculty or staff members taught a RTVF course or lab and/or were members of the RTVF Committee, but they had major responsibilities elsewhere:

Marvin Arth,* Inst. Journalism.
     Jerry Bailey,* Lecturer, Journ. & Director, KU Sports Network.
     Gary Bender, * Lecturer, Journ. & Director, KU Sports Network.
     Gene Boomer,* Inst. Journalism.
     R. Edwin Browne,* Asst. Prof. Journ. & Director, KFKU, KANU.
     David Dary, Asst. Prof. Journalism.
     Francis Ellis, Lecturer & Engineering.
     Tom Hedrick,* Lecturer, Journ. & Director, KU Sports Network.
     Glenn Price, Asst. Prof. Speech and Drama, Asst. Chairman,
     Speech & Drama.
     Richard Wright, Lecturer, Journ. & Director, KFKU, KANU.

C. Curriculum.

There were many changes and experimentation with the curriculum in this period -- the result of a number of factors. Television was entering its third decade and radio broadcasting was approaching its golden anniversary. Scholars and media observers were, by now, providing deeper insights as to the relationship of the electronic media and film to society. New courses and units reflected this understanding: For example, Sp 78, Undergraduate Seminar; Jo 138, Mass Media and Political Thought; RTVF 333, Public Service Responsibilities of Broadcasting; and Sp 72, History and Criticism of American Broadcasting.

The addition of new faculty with different expertise and interests provided the opportunity to further enrich the curriculum. Thus, Peter Dart created Sp 170, Aesthetics; Richard MacCann offered Sp 273, Advanced Studies in Theatre and Film, Jo 278, Advanced Studies in Film Theory, Jo 376, Documentary in Broadcasting and Film, and RTVF 375, Development of Film Form in Europe and Asia; Dennis Lynch introduced a new, six-hour course (RTVF 300) in Research Methods in Mass Communications as well as Jo 274, Educational and Industrial Motion Pictures; and Betty Czech offered Jo 78, Introduction to Writing for Radio and Television.

1. The Undergraduate Program.

Two related problems provided the impetus to make some significant changes in the beginning production courses. First, how could more students be handled in the production courses, which were becoming increasingly overcrowded? As more and more students began to think about careers in these challenging and exciting media, ways had to be found to be more efficient.27 The second was, perhaps, more of a dilemna than a problem: How could students be taught how to operate complicated equipment and still have time to deal with more theoretical areas? In the early seventies, before PC's and CD's, students had little or no previous experience with technical equipment. The necessary operational skills ranged from the relatively simple task of loading a 16mm movie camera to operating an audio or television control system that looked like something out of a NASA control room. The skills had to be mastered before the student could produce a project which had a professional look as well as professional content. (Judging the professional content of a piece is always quite difficult, and even more so if it is out of focus, and time devoted to a discussion of operational failures takes away from the time available to critique more substantive areas.)

The first experiment (relating to the above dilemna in production courses) was to bundle all beginning production work into two, 4-hour courses. These were Jo/Sp 39, Basic Principles of Radio Broadcasting, and Jo/Sp70, Basic Principles of Television. The course descriptions were as follows:

Jo/Sp 39. (4) Basic Principles of Radio Broadcasting. The basic formats of radio -- including commercials, music, talks, features and general continuity -- are studied in terms of the writing, speaking and production theories and techniques necessary in radio operations. The student will write, perform and/or produce some programs as laboratory work on station KUOK.

Sp/Jo 70. (4) Basic Principles of Television and Film. Study and practice in writing, speaking and producing the basic formats in television, with an introduction to the basic techniques of cinematography. Laboratory programming in the television-film studios.

These courses were introduced in the 1967-68 school year. They were taught by a team: A senior professor provided the common lectures and other staff members handled the labs. The experiment was only partially successful. The basic problem was that in making two, 4-hour courses the faculty had unwittingly created a grade point monster which was not always fair to the student. (For example, in course 70 a student who had no interest in film was still required to master the film techniques; done grudgingly the result often was a lower gpa.)

Changes were inevitable. The first one was to divide course 39 into two 2-hour courses, 39 and 49, as "basic" and "advanced" principles of radio broadcasting. But by 1969 the faculty was discussing other possibilities. One possible solution kept popping up: Why not turn these semester courses into a number of shorter production "modules," each covering a basic production area? The student would have to master the skills and content of such an area before moving on to an advanced course.

The RTVF Committee developed eight 1-hour courses, each covering a basic production tool or procedure. These were called "modules." They served, in different combinations, as the prerequisites to any advanced course which involved the use of broadcasting or film equipment. The modules were accompanied by large textbook/workbooks -- one for each module -- written by Professors Dart and Linton. It took a full year to write them and the same amount of time to convince the faculties of Journalism, Speech and the College Curriculum Committee that they were a good idea. This was not an easy task. After all, just two years previously we had argued effectively (if not eloquently) in favor of two 4-hour courses and now they were being dumped in favor of eight 1-hour courses! Some professors had misgivings about the whole concept; others worried about the practical problems of scheduling and staffing. The various faculties finally approved the changes and they were introduced in 1971-72. The modules were:

Jo/Sp 38A Principles of Audio Control.
     Jo/Sp 38B Principles of Audio Recording.
     Jo/Sp 38C Performance
     Jo/Sp 38D Principles of TV-Film Lightng.
     Jo/Sp 72A Principles of Film Editing.
     Jo/Sp 72B Principles of Lighting Control
     Jo/Sp 72C Principles of Cameras and Lenses
     Jo Sp 72D Production Coordination.

Some of the detractors were right about one thing: There was initial confusion regarding prerequisite and content transitions for those students caught in the middle of the 4-hour block, and this required a lot of time in advising them in the selection of certain modules. However, within two years it became apparent to the faculty that the quality of student work in the advanced courses had improved dramatically.

This success did not prevent the RTVF faculty from tinkering with the module concept again. We called it "fine tuning;" other faculty in Journalism and Speech might have had other terms for it. Nevertheless, by the fall of 1972, the modules had been reduced to six, with a total of six hours of total credit. The modules were: (Note that numbering changes were made to minimize confusion.)

36A Principles of Audio Control and Recording (combining old 38A,B)
     36B Performance (old 38C, no change)
     36C Principles of Cinematography (combining old 38D and 72C)
     36D Principles of Film Editing (old 72A)
     77A Sound Filming and Editing (old 72A) Required only for advanced film
     77B Production Coordination (old 72D, no change)

Other courses were added, dropped or revised during this period, reflecting changes in the ways in which the electronic media and film operated and the types of employment paths available. Thus, courses in broadcast news were revised several times. Two courses in program planning were dropped and a new one added called Radio and Television Organization and Operations (Jo 236.) Station WDAF-AM and TV instituted a new internship program in 1969, involving several levels of intern experience, which prompted several changes in the internship courses and credit to make them reflect more specific experiences in broadcasting and film.28 By the end of the sixties the undergraduate course requirements provided five options for the student, reflecting the main areas for careers in broadcasting and film. Students in the School of Journalism could take an option in Broadcast News or one in Sales-Management.29 Those majoring through the Department of Speech and Drama could take options in either Production or Performance. A new General Option was available through either program, although it was dropped from the Journalism options by the spring of 1972. With the exception of the latter option, these were not new, but the required and optional courses within each of them had undergone changes.30

Mainly because of the presence of Richard MacCann, a new, non-professional option in Film Studies became available through Speech and Drama. It was to be for "students looking forward to careers as teachers, critics, archivists, and historians, and for those who desire, as part of their general studies in humanities, to specialize in the aesthetic and social aspects of the moving image. Stressing history, theory, and criticism courses, the Film Study curriculum also requires one production course and a related minor interest in Art History, Theater or American Studies."31 Now there would be two major paths through Speech and Drama -- Film Studies and Professional (Performance, Production or General.) A list of the requirements of all of the options as of 1971-72 may be found in the Appendix.

An offshoot of the Film Studies program was the creation of a Center for Film Studies in 1969, through Speech and Drama. Any grants or special funding could now be placed in this specific account in the Endowment Association. The new "major" had immediate growth, and Commonwealth Theatres of Kansas City (in the person of President Richard O'Rear) gave a grant of $1,000 per year for three years, to be used for research, publication projects and a graduate fellowship.

There was one question which bugged the RTVF Committee and the curriculum committees of Journalism and Speech and Drama throughout the existence of the area study program: Under which academic "home" should a new course be placed -- in Journalism, or Speech and Drama, or with a cross-listing in each? (There was no problem with the courses at the graduate level; as a separate program, under Speech, these courses were designated as "RTVF.") For many courses the listing was never a problem. Thus, news and advertising courses obviously were Journalism, just as the ones in performance or film history were in Speech. Some were easily cross-listed, such as the new modules. But as student credit hours and various ratios became more important in the budgeting process the academic designation of a given course became more important. For example, in 1973, RTVF offered The History and Criticism of Broadcasting only through Speech and Drama. But Journalism also offered a history course --The History of Journalism. Surely, the Journalism faculty argued, with this precedent the course should be cross-listed. The RTVF Committee agreed, and the course subsequently was cross-listed.32

There was another problem related to undergraduate courses. Throughout these years members of the RTVF faculty were troubled by what seemed to be an unreasonable restriction on the number of hours of journalism courses which could be counted for graduation. The basic concept of the "maximum hour" rule (no more than 35 hrs of professional courses) was not debated; professional schools needed to make sure that their students had a "balanced" education in which the great majority of the work would be taken in liberal arts. But RTVF majors through the J-school faced two problems: First, the 35 hour limit made it almost impossible for students to take the RTVF curriculum plus closely related courses, such as Reporting or Principles of Advertising. Second, many RTVF courses in Speech and Drama were considered by Journalism to be "professional," even though the College of Liberal Arts did not classify them that way. This meant that they were subject to the 35 hour limit. (It always seemed strange to some of us on the RTVF Committee that a Chemistry major in the College could take more courses in Chemistry, plus other sciences, than a Journalism major could take in Journalism which was, by definition, a professional school.)

One of the first tasks of the new School Committee was to examine the curriculum of each of the sequences. There was much discussion of the 35 hour requirement, especially as it related to RTVF. A specific case came up involving one student who had a large number of hours in both Speech and Journalism. The Committee voted to allow him to count them toward his degree.33 There was more discussion at the next meeting, especially relating to RTVF. While much sympathy was expressed, the Committee decided only that there "might be exceptions to the rule" but this would be on a case-by-case basis.34 A few years later the issue would be raised again.

2. The Graduate Program.

The Graduate program improved significantly in this period. There were, of course, a number of new faculty members who combined both higher degrees and industry experience. They came into the program full of enthusiasm and new ideas, creating new excitement about advanced study in broadcasting and film. Existing courses were revised, and new ones were introduced to strengthen the program. Of most importance, a second masters degree was added --a Master of Science degree, for which a student could submit an extensive production project instead of a thesis.

One new course was requested by the School of Education. They wanted an intensive summer course for school teachers who were turning to work for graduate credit, one which would teach them something about the use of the emerging new technology -- not as a class aid but for research. Dennis Lynch agreed to construct RTVF 309 (6 hours) Video Recording Systems as Research Tools.36 He taught it in the summer of 1973, and the RTVF was delighted to have some outside support for summer salaries.

It may be recalled that the Masters degree program in RTVF had been created as an entity separate from either Journalism or Speech and Drama. At the time of its acceptance the various deans (and certainly the RTVF faculty) felt that there were significant content areas unique to RTVF. In addition, such a degree was considered to be more "marketable" by the graduate. (Even though the graduate program of RTVF continued to be separate from that of the J-school there always was a need to cooperate in various ways, including the offering of a common course in research methods. This was taught by an RTVF professor, Dennis Lynch.)

By the mid-sixties the new Dean of Journalism, Warren Agee, wondered if the separate degree was a good idea. A note to him attempted to point out that "if a masters degree is for those who wish to plunge deeply into a subject area, then our radio-TV-film degree fills the need. If the degree is to be more umbrella-like then...an opportunity through Journlism would be in order...(and) that opportunity already exists."37 The answer seemed to satisfy him, and there was no further discussion of the degree program until years later.

The course catalog of the University continued to have separate listings for both the graduate and the undergraduate programs in RTVF. The requirements were described, but the courses were simply listed without further descriptions. The full course descriptions were found in either the Journalism or Speech and Drama sections, as in past years.

D. Students.

There is no question but that the tumultuous years of this period helped to turn the attention of young people to the power and influence of the broadcast media -- especially television. Many incoming students wanted to prepare for a career in broadcast news, and a considerable number of them hoped to find a career in the production of longer program formats, such as the documentary. Between 1965 and 1972 the number of undergraduate majors exploded from 49 to 223, and graduate students doubled their numbers, from 14 to 28. The student credit hours -- a measuring stick of a program's importance and highly favored by the administration -- grew from under 700 SCHR (student credit hours) to 2235. The biggest jump was from the 1969-70 school year to 1970-71, when enrollment increased by 37 percent.38

The RTVF program was now old enough that its alumni were beginning to move into important media positions --some of them highly visible. The RTVF Committee did its first survey of alumni in the spring of 1966. The results were quite pleasing: Fifty seven percent of all graduates had gone into broadcasting jobs, and the percentage jumped to 67 percent when counting jobs in related fields (such as with advertising agencies.) This percentage probably was a little low because all "non replies" were counted as "not being in the field." It also was encouraging to discover that 16 percent of the graduates had gone on to work for an advanced degree, and 80 percent were working in broadcasting or related fields. The fewest number of graduates worked in broadcast news, undoubtedly a reflection of the lack of a strong program in this area until the late sixties (at which time growth surged in all news-related classes.)

Radio-TV-Film attempted to keep in touch with as many alums as possible. The newsletter, "Segue," had first appeared in the early sixties, but after several years it fell by the wayside. But in this period it was revived, mainly because a graduate student volunteered to put it together. With a new title, "Segue II," the newsletter was sent out two or three times a year.

E. Laboratory Facilities and Equipment.

1. Facilities.

A running theme throughout this narrative has been the continuing struggle to have laboratory facilities specifically designed for radio, television and film operations. For the first few years everyone hoped that a new statewide ETV system would provide such facilities, which could be shared by the academic program. In the meantime, the labs would be housed in temporary space. But by the sixties it was becoming increasingly clear that there would be no state system with facilities in Lawrence. And so RTVF dreamed of its own, new facility, and passed the dreams on to Strong Hall as often as possible. Unfortunately, these dreams did not make any priority list of new construction; funds were available, it seemed, to modify existing space but not to provide anything new. The strategy for RTVF, then, was to be on the lookout for any possible space and to submit a request to have it assigned to the program as soon as possible. Of course, there were many growing academic programs at this time, and each one seemed to have a great need for more space. If a rumor surfaced as to the possible release of existing space, the rush would be on to stake a claim; not the wild stampede of an Oklahoma land rush but a storm of memos, position papers and meetings -- all very civilized but also very intense.

The situation as to TV-Film was this: The first lab studio was housed in remodeled space in Hoch basement -- temporary space, although it was not clear at the time just where or when the next move would take place. As noted in Chapter III, when Fine Arts moved to Murphy Hall, RTVF was quick to ask for, and be granted, the primary use of the main stage of Hoch. A control room was built on the west side, overlooking the stage. It was a definite improvement, but by 1964 it was obvious that the increasing use of Hoch by other academic and academic-related programs was creating a serious problem. A report in July, 1966, stated that 35 non-RTVF units had used Hoch in the previous years, for a total of 178 days (or 52 percent of the available days) and that TV rehearsals were interrupted 23 percent of the time. Even scheduled classes had been cancelled or interrupted 13 percent of the time. The plea was made to either hold down non-TV use or intensify the effort to find or create other space for this operation.39

Almost at the same time, it was announced that the Printing Service would be moving to a new building on West Campus, making available a large amount of space on the ground floor of Flint Hall. Acting quickly, I wrote to Dean Agee, requesting that "part of the space be allocated to Radio-TV-Film for the express purpose of housing the student radio station, KUOK, plus a small room for television news production."41 I noted that "tucked away in the basement (of Hoch) as they are, the students who work on the lab station feel like orphans...(and) we are not in a position to evaluate their work or get to know them." Dean Agee responded most agreeably: "As you point out, this move would bring most segments of our communications effort...into closer harmony."42

In subsequent discussions, later in the school year, it was decided that it would be more important to move just the television labs to Flint. KUOK would stay in the basement for the time being, and film editing would remain in the newly created editing space above the stage; these were at least usable areas and the need to get better space for television was becoming more urgent. The first idea was to put the TV studios on the second floor of Flint, using the present RTVF office space. The offices, in turn, would be moved downstairs. After further discussion it was agreed that the studios needed more room, which was available on the ground floor.

It was understood by all parties that even this move was still temporary because of the physical shortcomings of the space.43 It was large enough to house a modest TV control room, a telecine room, a studio, a small room for television news operations, and some space for engineering maintenance and storage. There were serious drawbacks for long range use: The lighting grid was very low, restricting lighting placement. Several large supporting posts restricted set design and camera movement. Remodeling took place in 1967, and the first lab operations began in the fall semester of 1968.

New quarters for KUOK would not be available for several years, even though most administrators agreed that a move was necessary. Several incidents underscored the need for a move. For example, in the spring of 1964 there was a small fire in the basement corridor leading to the station, caused by the combination of accumulated trash and student smoking.44 Another incident made the pages of UDK: In 1968 a student on a night shift found it necessary to relieve himself. Unfortunately, the janitor had been locking the door of the spiral staircase leading to the restrooms on the main stage of Hoch. The only recourse for the student was to water a tree outside the outer door. He was mad enough to leak (sorry) the incident to the paper, and the Editor was delighted to make a big story out of it. In a memo to Buildings and Grounds we noted that "obviously there has to be some solution to the problem other than the tree alluded to in the UDK article."45 There is no question but that the space was isolated, dangerous and frustrating to the students.

Whenever there was an opportunity the RTVF committee called attention to the problem of space for the station, and by 1970 the move of KUOK had a strong priority with the administration. Finally, in 1972, a solution appeared in the form of a two-story garage which was a part of the property known as Sudler House, located on the northwest edge of the campus. It had been deeded to the University and the house was used by Endowment. The garage space, however, was available.: The space was requested and Vice Chancellor Heller approved both the move and remodeling (estimated by Buildings and Grounds to be $983.47.)46 The garage had two floors. The upper floor housed the offices, record libraries, and a small production cubicle. The ground floor was large enough for a small "on-air" studio, another small production space, and a room for engineering maintenance. A spiral staircase was installed to connect the floors. The move was made in spring, 1973.

The University Stations also were suffering from space problems in this period. In 1964 Ed Browne requested that KANU be allowed to expand into the other half of Broadcasting Hall. He listed three critical needs for additional space: An expanding "LP" record library was outgrowing its space, more room was needed for equipment repair and storage, and planned new programming made it necessary to have a "modest" production facility.47 This request was endorsed by the Dean of Journalism, but no action was taken at that time by central administration.

A few years later the administration did respond by approving a remodeling project which was designed to make existing space more efficient. The main studio (Studio A) was quite large, in the fashion of the large radio stations of the thirties -- large enough to hold small musical groups or the production cast and crew of a radio drama. But this type of production was rarely done by the sixties. Musical groups were recorded during live performances elsewhere, and drama (regretfully) was no longer heard on the radio. In the summer of 1970 the studio was remodeled to create a newsroom and studio to house the expanded academic program in broadcast news. This would be the laboratory, and the advanced news students would provide more news programming for the station.

Proper housing for lab operations was not the only space need in this period. The growth of the RTVF program included additional faculty and graduate assistants who needed offices. A report in 1965 called attention to the fact that eight graduate assistants were crammed into two, 8x10 offices.48 In 1967 RTVF complained that "our space allotment seems to be in inverse proportion to our growth," citing, in part, that 600 square feet of office space housed three faculty members, two secretaries and seven graduate assistants.49 Action was finally taken in 1969. Existing space was re-arranged and some additional space was assigned to the program.

2. Equipment.

The labs of an academic, pre-professional program in RTVF require specialized space and equipment. Space, once found and designed for its special purpose, is relatively unchanging. Not so with the equipment it houses. The production process requires many types of specialized equipment. For example, audio production (radio, TV and film audio) requires microphones, recorders, amplifiers and editors; television and film requires all of the audio plus cameras, lights, processing amplifiers, switchers, recorders, editors, film chains -- the list goes on and on.

Acquisition and upkeep of the equipment is a nightmare for RTVF academic programs for many reasons. All of the specialized equipment was -- and still is -- appallingly expensive. This was especially true in the first three decades of television, when the cost of a good "professional" quality studio could run up to a million dollars. (As noted in Chapter II, we settled for "industrial" quality television, which produced a product of marginal professional quality at a cost we could almost afford -- at least for the absolutely essential items.) But rapid advances in technology always has made existing equipment outdated almost from the time of purchase, and within a short time replacement parts become difficult, if not impossible, to find. To make matters worse, this expensive equipment, once acquired, has to be placed in the hands of a succession of students. The inevitable result is heavy wear and continuous maintenance. So it is not surprising that the RTVF Committee initiated a stream of requests for funds to buy new equipment, maintain the old, and then replace it.

The greatest need (and the largest requests) were for the television labs. Wear and tear was fearsome, and technical advances made the equipment so outdated that students could no longer learn about current production practices, especially those related to color television and the editing of videotape.

In 1963-64 the priority request was for a videotape recorder to replace a defunct (and inoperable) kinescope recorder. Videotape recording had been used by professional television operations since 1958, and there was an industrial model available which might be affordable at $15,000. The request had been made in previous years but there was more urgency now. In the annual report for that year the administration was reminded that a recorder was necessary to review and assess the work of students. "It is hard to try and move a program along in the face of inaction or inability to grant this request. We can do very little more with the professional program in TV."50 The request was finally approved and a two-inch industrial grade videotape recorder was installed in the spring of 1965. As noted in the next report, "Lo and behold, on a gentle spring day last year I emerged from my sabbatical hermitage and heard the glad news that we could order the recorder."51

With that priority out of the way, attention was centered on the replacement of the two studio TV cameras. After eight years of hard use for classes and the production of programs carried on WIBW-TV, the vidicon-type cameras were no longer able to deliver a signal of even minimal broadcast quality. In addition, they were black and white whereas TV programs in color were now the rule. In 1967 these cameras were replaced, but unfortunately there wasn't enough money to upgrade to color. This meant that there would be no programs produced for the general public (except those which could be done using motion picture film) but at least the labs would be operational as a teaching area.

In 1970 hopes were high for at least the acquisition of equipment to replace some that was in poor shape. A subcommittee, headed by Leon Smith, recommended the purchase of video camera controls, a "sync" generator, switcher and film chain, totalling $47,941. The Journalism faculty noted that it was neither fair nor professional for the TV students to work with poor equipment.52 A $40,000 television equipment request was given top priority by both the budget committees of the College and the School of Journalism. Nothing happened. Again. My annual report was beginning to read like black humor: "Without (this equipment)...we cannot operate a television laboratory that isn't laughable. And we have laughed this fall until we are in complete misery."53 The administration responded in 1972: Alas, no color cameras, but some equipment was replaced, and funds were made available to purchase a color videotape machine which, for the time being, could be used to record material off the air.

But for at least one faculty member, it was too little, too late. Leon Smith resigned in the spring of 1972. In his letter of resignation he was very specific about why he was leaving. "KU has too good a program in Radio-TV-Film to hobble along with such marginal, if not inadequate, gear." He specifically noted that the television studio facility was still black and white even after a decade of network color, and that we lacked professional videotape editing and recording and telecine equipment.54

By the late sixties network and local television news was making extensive use of portable sound-film equipment, in color. Fortunately, the RTVF film equipment was much closer to professional "state-of-the-art" than was the case with television. Simply by choosing color 16mm raw stock a program in color could be produced for use on television. Also, film equipment was inexpensive -- at least in comparison to television -- and it had always been possible to add film equipment when there wasn't enough money to purchase TV gear. (For example, in 1970 a high quality sound film camera could run $10,000, but a studio color television camera could cost $100,000.)

But the film equipment also suffered from student use. By 1966 some of the silent Bell and Howell 70 DR cameras were in bad shape, and enough money became available to replace several of them. They cost around $800 complete with three lenses. In 1972, it was possible to purchase a sound-film camera and light kits for location shooting, giving the TV news labs an opportunity to shoot news stories and short features. The black and white film could be processed at Flint, using a newly acquired film processor, and the stories could be edited for cable or area television station use.55

Perhaps that processor was one of the most important acquisitions for film. It was a gift from KCMO-TV, Kansas City, in 1970. (They had replaced it with a color film processor.) Strong Hall provided the funds to place the processor in the basement of Flint Hall. It was installed Sept. 20, 1971, and was in operation by Dec. 7, 1971. Processing our own film -- at least the B/W film used in the first production classes and the broadcast news labs -- resulted not only in significant savings in the cost of processing but a ten-fold increase in the amount of film allotted to each student. The processor also produced income for RTVF through the processing of film for other units on campus. A special client was the Department of Athletics. For the next seventeen years thousands of feet of film were processed and workprinted, including game study films. Francis Ellis learned to operate this equipment and it became a valuable part of the lab operation.

It was our good fortune that production equipment for the radio labs remained in relatively good condition. One exception to this were the small, 10-watt transmitters which were installed in most of the dorms to carry the "wired-wireless" signal of KUOK. These devices had to be custom made, and at best they delivered a marginal radio signal. Constant maintenance was required, and there could be no solution to the problem as long as the system remained the carrier current. Of course, it was still necessary to replace some items. This was possible because the cost of microphones, audio recorders and record turntables was quite modest when compared with either television or film equipment.

By the sixties the used FM transmitter was exhibiting all the signs of a terminal illness. There were frequent outages and deterioration of the signal. Requests for its replacement began as early as 1963, at which time a new transmitter could be purchased for $20,000. As conditions worsened a stronger case was made in 1966, ending with, "The FM transmitter some day is going to give one last burp of electrons and die."56 In 1968 the outages were so severe that Ed Browne had to outline special procedures to be used when (not "if") KANU went off the air for a period of time. By 1969 the engineers were reduced to scavenging the country for replacement parts, since none were available from a manufacturer. In 1970 James Stanley drove a KU truck all the way to the east coast to pick up an old transmitter which had been designated for the trash dump. Time and parts were running out.

The terrible situation finally was resolved in 1971 with the purchase of a new transmitter and antenna. The funds came from a variety of sources. The federal government provided some of the money through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (It should be noted that "educational" radio and television became "public" radio and television in 1967 with the passage by Congress of the Public Broadcasting Act. The Corporation of Public Broadcasting and, later, National Public Radio, was created therein.) By the early seventies "public radio" was beginning to assume a more structured form and funds became available to improve the broadcasting at local public stations. KANU received a large grant which was used for the purchase of a new antenna. Other money came from Mrs. Petey Cerf of Lawrence. She was very interested in providing a radio service for the handicapped, but it would only be possible with the purchase of a new transmitter with the necessary "side-bands" to carry the radio signal. Mrs. Cerf agreed to provide a large grant for the purchase of the transmitter, provided that KU agreed to support a radio service for the handicapped. With the signing of the agreement the transmitter problem was solved.

F. Laboratory Operations and Program Production.

1. Radio Programming.

Students interested in radio continued to operate the lab station, KUOK. So many of them, in fact, that the station was on the air almost all hours of the day and night. The students had to be fairly serious, because it couldn't have been a lot of fun, isolated in the basement of Hoch. They sold time, planned the schedule, played their music (the fringe of "rock,) did play-by-play of KU athletic contests, especially the minor sports, and covered campus news.

Probably the hardest thing to do was to sell the time. Local merchants couldn't hear their advertisements (unless they were in a dorm or listened to a taped "air check") and so many were skeptical about the value of their advertising investment. The morale of sales people certainly was improved in 1972, for beginning that fall a salesperson would get a 15 percent commission on times sales. This payment procedure was already in use at the Daily Kansan.57

The broadcast signal from the tiny, 10-watt transmitters was quite unreliable, varying in frequency (dial) position and power. It's a wonder the FCC didn't clamp down because of the "interference" occuring on the broadcast band! Theoretically the signal would radiate only in the dorm interior, where it could be picked up on any radio tuned to the proper frequency. But the transmitters in the dorms on "daisy hill" often radiated outside. More than once I drove north on Iowa street and had no trouble picking up the station on the car radio.

Perhaps the most important boost to morale came in 1973 when the move was made to new quarters in Sudler garage. Shortly after this move was finalized the RTVF Committee began to discuss the possibility of applying for a broadcast license, using one of the frequency assignments recently set aside by the FCC for "low-power" FM broadcasting.

Meanwhile, at KANU-FM there were attempts to produce a more "up-to-date" sound by being more informal in delivery and changing program titles. However, the 90 hours/week of programming was much the same as it had been in the previous years. That is, music (most of it serious) made up 80 percent of the schedule and there was little news broadcasting.58 Some departures from this pattern began in 1968, when a few programs were submitted -- and subsequently aired on -- the new National Educational Network. The first one was a radio documentary, written by Professor MacCann. The network then carried a series titled, "The Art of the Organ," as recorded by Professor James Moeser, of the School of Fine Arts.

More changes took place in 1970. At that time Ed Browne was on sabbatical. As acting Director of the station, I took the opportunity to suggest some "experimental changes" which included a new philosophy of programming. It was approved by the station staff and carried on the front of the program guide that year.

"The programming of an educational radio station is more than cultural entertainment; it must expand a listener's awareness of his world, not merely to confirm a present awareness; it must bring him what he may not even have known exists, not merely satisfy an already developed taste."59

The idea was to broadcast more news (especially local) and broaden the scope of musical styles. (There was no intent to undermine Browne; he could accept or reject the changes upon his return. In the meantime, this would fit in with the expansion of the broadcast news curriculum and the construction of news studios in the old area of Studio A, which Browne supported.) A program grant provided funds for late night broadcasting, at which time the students produced a series called "TBA" -- To Be Announced. Finally, there were more broadcasts of other musical styles, such as "Bluegrass."

This experiment was not popular with a number of faithful listeners to KANU. Most of the critics really wanted a station which would broadcast nothing but serious music, and they resented what seemed to them to be a deterioration of the station's programming. One irate listener wrote to Chancellor Chalmers, suggesting that a Fine Arts committee "pass" on all programming. The Chancellor asked RTVF for comments which he might use in a reply, and the Committee responded, "a university station is, of course, similar to a library. We must provide many types of audio materials and we cannot afford to limit ourselves to a segment of programming taste."60 There was no further criticism of the changes. In fact, it was one of the more vocal critics who provided most of the funds to buy a new transmitter only a few months later.

Perhaps one reason for the decline in criticism was that the programming of National Public Radio was being carried on 104 stations, including KANU, and it was a varied service of music and informational programming. Station KANU originated a number of items for the network, including a documentary on Aaron Copeland, produced by a student, Mark Klugman. Mark won a "Major Armstrong" Award from the National Association of Educational Broadcasters.61 By 1973, KANU had originated ten programs for NPR, including "The Art of the Organ."

The new philosophy continued through the seventies, apparent in the increased programming of news and other styles of music. Many budding news reporters interned at KANU or worked as a member of the staff. TBA later was replaced by an all-night broadcast of jazz.

As noted earlier, when KU received a substantial gift to finance a new transmitter it had agreed to develop a special radio service for the visually handicapped. The new service was called, "Audio Reader." KANU supplied the listeners with a special radio receiver which was tuned to the radio signal being transmitted on a "side band" of the carrier wave. (It was not audible through the normal FM receiver.) Readers -- most of them community volunteers -- read daily papers, magazines and books each day and evening.

Everyone was enthusiastic about the new service, but it was on soft financial footing. Funds were necessary to administer and operate the program, pay the salaries of a small staff, pay for the side band power and purchase the radio receivers. The University of Kansas had agreed to support Audio Reader, possibly without a clear idea as to where the money would come from. At first the attempt was made to fund it from the KANU budget, along with some support from The Endowment Association. This was completely inadequate. The situation was finally resolved in 1973, when the legislature agreed to appropriate $35,000 a year to fund the basic service. (When this service began it was only the second one in the United States, and the first director, Pattee Spencer, somehow was able to overcome many of the obstacles. Today it is one of the premier programs in the country.)

2. Television Programming.

Except for a few months in 1963-64, it was no longer possible to send program material to Topeka for broadcast over WIBW-TV; they had moved their transmitter farther west, out of range of the microwave relay. In fact, it was no longer possible to use the equipment at Hoch for anything other than a class lab. The television equipment was too old and unreliable, and it could produce only a black and white picture. Also, there was no way to record and edit any material for distribution to other area stations or cable companies.

In 1966, RTVF was invited to provide programming for the educational station KTWU, in Topeka, but it wasn't possible; there had been no significant upgrading of the equipment. (Note the section on Channel 11, later in this chapter.)

Sunflower Cablevision did represent one possible programming outlet. When Sunflower began in the early seventies there was some discussion of cooperation between it and the University. In fact, as discussed later in this chapter (see Studying Cable Television), Sunflower wished to "wire" the campus in order to provide origination locations for educational programs which might then be carried to cable subscribers. In the meantime, the RTVF Committee sent a note to Max Falkenstein, then the Manager of Sunflower, indicating our desire to participate in programming, thus providing a lab opportunity for advanced TV students.62 The first programs began in January, 1972, and by April there were several programs on the air. These originated in the studio at Sunflower and most of the pre-recorded news items were done with KU's antiquated black and white equipment. It was moderately successful, marred by a few equipment failures, but the experience was better than nothing.

A number of remotes were tried, using the modest color equipment from Sunflower. These included clips of football practice, several Big 8 baseball games, a Big 8 gymnastics meet, and a speech by Senator Burch Bayh. Barbara Tourtelot also hosted a series called, "An Evening at the Cinema:" twice a week a panel of film students discussed the films currently playing in Lawrence. A number of students also were able to work as interns, and five students were hired to be members of the station staff.

3. Film Programming.

The 16mm motion picture lab did have the capability of producing a product of professional quality, and many films were produced in this period. Some of them were "contract" films, produced by the RTVF area for a client, utilizing advanced students in all phases of production, and usually under the direction of a faculty member. The largest client was the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics -- mainly the football program. When Pepper Rodgers became the football coach he commissioned a film to publicize the new season, called "The New Look." Rodgers also contracted with RTVF for the production of a "highlights" film. Each game was filmed in 16mm color, with cameras on the stadium photo deck and at field level. At the end of the season a highlights film was compiled which was then used in both recruiting and public relations. Probably the most popular highlights film was that which documented the season of the team which went to the Orange Bowl. These films were produced into the seventies, until they were replaced by the use of video clips. Following the installation of the B/W processor, the department also processed miles of black and white films which had been taken during team practices.

Other contract films were made in this period: "Boys State" documented the annual week when high school boys imitated state government; "The Men Upstairs" was produced for the Menninger Foundation; and "This is KU" and "KU, the Seventies" were films about life at KU, to be used in recruiting and general public relations. The latter film attempted to correct the distorted image of KU held by a number of Kansans; it won a "Special Merit" award at the 1972 convention of the American Alumni Council and the American College Public Relations Association.

Students who were concentrating on film production at the graduate level were able to write and produce a 16mm film in lieu of writing a thesis. Ten excellent films were made in this way from 1963-73, some of which were "contract films" commissioned by some area of the University. Thus, Ramona Rush wrote and produced a film for the School of Architecture, titled "Primitive Shelters." Other thesis films were "Children of Autumn," by Wendall Anschutz, "Kansas Water Management," by Clifford Brisbois, "Four Square Manhood," by Michael Lee, "Less Than Human, by Roger Doudna," Matte Techniques," by William Mauk, "Revertu," by Elliott Gage "You Can Help Them," by Tim Johnson, "Challenge of Flight," by Keith Jackson, and"Twenty Three to Alazon," by Jeanine Smukowski. Other films were "Filter Techniques," by Peter Haggart and Gene Boomer, "From Topeka with Love," by Gene Boomer, "Where is Yesterday," by Nick Eliopoulos, "A Dream is a Dream," by Ivan Wang, and "The Boy Friend," by Hoite Caston.

RTVF also funded several films from its own production budget. These were films which the faculty believed would provide a good student lab experience and which also would have good public relations value to the University if they could be seen by the general public, either through the medium of television or in direct projection of the film at meetings. Two such films were "Band Day" and "Sculpture Through Fire," and they both had some exposure on commercial and public television. But perhaps the most important program effort of this type was actually a series of short sound films which were funded by the Endowment Association and distributed to the television stations of Kansas and Missouri. The series was called "Emphasis." Each film was from one to four minutes in length and featured some aspect of university life which had strong visual appeal. The subject matter ranged from a quick report of a professor's research project to a KU "happening." For example, "Remote Sensing," "Legal Aid to Children," "Kansas Water," and the "Natural History Museum." RTVF produced thirty six of these from 1968-1973, at a cost averaging $295 each! At an "honors" competition of the Mid-American Conference of the American College Public Relations Association, three "Emphasis" spots earned an award of merit. These were on the Bureau of Child Research, the Museum of Natural History and the School of Law. They were written and directed by Peter Dart and filmed and edited by advanced students in film production.63

The intensive work in film production made it necessary to produce a "Policy For Student Film Production."64 It stipulated that equipment was available only to those students who were enrolled in specific production classes, and that availability of sophisticated equipment depended upon the capability of the student, as determined by an "operational test" with the equipment. The raw stock and film processing would be subsidized by RTVF, but advanced projects would have to be financed by the student. (By 1971, the Department could no longer provide film stock and processing.) If the student paid all production costs, ownership of the film would be retained by the student; in all other cases the film remained the property of RTVF. The policy also stipulated the procedures and "approval steps" which had to be followed by each student. These began with approval of the film idea and ended with the report on post-production.

As the broadcast news area expanded, some stations offered a few students the opportunity to work as a news "stringer." By 1969, this activity required an amended policy: The stringer had to be a major, and had to complete course 70 (and, for film, course 275) before being eligible to use the equipment. The student assumed full responsibility for the equipment, and had to reimburse the department for the use of material, such as raw film stock. Finally, in order to cut down on possible abuse of this privilege, the news story had to have a connection to the University.65

G. Outreach and Service.

The programming activities noted above continued to represent the major part of outreach and service to the general public. But there were other activities --from banquets to instructional and educational television.

The annual awards banquets, held in the spring, provided a means of recognizing outstanding broadcasters of the area as well as to call attention to the good work of the advanced students. The broadcasters were Robert Wells, Robert Schmidt, Max Falkenstein, Fred Conger, Edward McKernan, Roderick Cupp and Robert Hilgendorf. The annual banquets terminated with the fire at the Kansas Union in 1970, and they were not revived until 1980, at which time they became part of a larger meeting called, "Telecommunications Day."

In January, 1972, the broadcasters of Kansas announced a new "Manager in Residence" program. The managers agreed to spend three days a year in residence at the Kansas colleges and universities in order to discuss "various aspects of broadcasting with advanced students."66 The students would get to know the broadcasters as real people and would learn something about professional management. The various stations would underwrite the visits and the schools would house them, if necessary. In the spring the first two managers visited KU; they were Thad Sandstrom and Bob Hilgendorf.

In most of these years the area of RTVF also conducted successful seminars in broadcast news, which were attended by area news professionals.

One important service was that of coordinating the academic courses microwaved from Lawrence (Bailey Hall) to KUMC and, later, two-way audio/video of courses and meetings between various people on both campuses. Several grants, in 1964 and 1965, made it possible to install a basic system in 203 Bailey, consisting of a camera, lights, audio, and a television monitor. Gale Adkins was given the responsibility of coordinating the effort, and half of his academic load was assigned to these responsibilities. He also