This increase in news analysis, in news interpretation, requires an
even greater dedication on your part to the development of a broader
understanding and an intensified interest in seeking out all the facts.
The inherent danger is that news interpretation will slip over some
undefined line and no longer be interpretive but editorial without being
labeled as such. The danger exists that documentaries may begin to
reflect a single point of view rather than many. All of us, of course,
harbor personal opinions on a variety of subjects and you in the televi-
sion and radio industry are no exception. How difficult it is, and how
difficult it will continue to be, not to incorporate some of those opinions,
some of those feelings, however subtly, into these interpretive broad-
casts. Not only should this be guarded against in the interest in main-
taining high journalistic standards, but it should be guarded against
to protect the integrity of the radio and television industry. Certainly
if objectivity is abandoned in news interpretation, the public will lose
confidence. The facts, as presented, will lack authority simply because
too many viewers will realize that the station presenting the interpretation
has an axe to grind. And without this public confidence, without this
public reliance upon the radio and television industry as an authoritative
source, your role in public service will be greatly diminished.

There is another development within the industry that is relatively
new and, in my opinion, is certainly in the public interest. An increas-
ing number of radio and television stations are willing to broadcast
clearly labeled editorials on questions of importance. It had always
seemed odd to me that only one medium in communications—news-
papers—editorialized daily while the radio and television industry
seemed reluctant to do so. Of course, I was vaguely familiar with
certain regulations established by the Federal Communications Com-
mission regarding the equal time provision. However, I never con-
sidered it to be a major stumbling block. Now I am happy to see
that this hurdle apparently has been overcome. I think editorial
comment in all media ought to be encouraged. A democracy thrives
on a conflict of ideas because such a conflict guarantees that each
idea will be thoroughly discussed before and not after it becomes effec-
tive. I am also happy to note that the radio and television industry
is embarking on a program of presenting more news. Programs now
15 minutes long will be extended to 30 minutes in several instances.
A number of people, consciously or unconsciously, have regarded
radio and television news broadcasts as something similar to an ad-

465