In re Application of HAWAIIAN PARADISE PARK CORP. (ASSIGNOR) AND FRIENDLY BROADCASTING CO. (ASSIGNEE)
For Assignment of Licenses of Stations KTRG-TV and KUT-67, Honolulu, Hawaii
Docket No. 16889
ORDER
5 F.C.C.2d 71, 8 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 797
RELEASE NUMBER: FCC 66-863
September 28, 1966 Adopted
BY THE COMMISSION: CHAIRMAN HYDE DISSENTING; COMMISSIONER LEE ABSENT; COMMISSIONER JOHNSON CONCURRING AND ISSUING A STATEMENT.
At a session of the Federal Communications Commission held at its office
in Washington, D.C., on the 28th day of September 1966;
1. The Commission has before it the above application as amended.
It requests the assignment of the license of station KTRG-TV, Honolulu, Hawaii,
from the Hawaiian Paradise Park Corp. to the Friendly Broadcasting Co.
2. Examination of the application indicates that the assignee
proposes a major change in the program format to that of a substantial amount
of Japanese programming with a limited amount of other foreign language
programming. This proposal raises a number of substantial and material
questions of fact to be resolved by the hearing which we are ordering. Some of
these questions are: (1) The adequacy of the assignee's survey to support the
proposed programming; (2) the need and interest of the station's principal
community and service area for the proposed programming.
3. There are other questions to be resolved at the hearing. Such
an application presents difficult problems of control and supervision. In this
regard, we note that the Eaton stations have a history of rule violations, and
that this history raises a question of the adequacy of the supervision and
control of the operation of the Eaton stations.
4. In light of this past history and of the proposed programming
at KTRG and of the distance of the facility from Eaton's principal business
address (Washington, D.C.), substantial and material questions of fact remain
as to the assignee's proposals for control and supervision of the KTRG
television facilities.
5. The Commission finds that except as indicated by the issues
specified below, the assignee is legally, technically, and financially
qualified to operate station KTRG as proposed. However, in view of the
outstanding substantial and material questions of fact previously mentioned,
the Commission is unable to find that a grant of the aforementioned application
would serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity and is of the
opinion that the application must be designated for hearing on the issues set
forth below.
6. Accordingly, It is ordered, That pursuant to section 309(e) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, the application is designated for
hearing at a time and place to be specified in a subsequent order upon the
following issues:
1. To determine the adequacy of the assignee's survey of needs
and whether this survey of needs supports the assignee's proposed programming.
2. To determine the adequacy of assignee's proposed measures for
control and supervision at KTRG.
3. To determine whether a grant of the above application will
serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.
It is further ordered, That, to avail itself of the opportunity
to be heard, the applicants herein, pursuant to section 1.221(c) of the
Commission rules, in person or by attorney, shall, within 20 days of the
mailing of this order, file with the Commission, in triplicate, a written
appearance stating an intention to appear on the date fixed for the hearing and
present evidence on the issues specified in this order.
It is further ordered, That the applicants herein shall, pursuant
to section 311(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and section
1.594 of the Commission's rules, give notice of the hearing, either
individually or, if feasible and consistent with the rules, jointly, within the
time and in the manner prescribed in such rules, and shall advise the
Commission of the publication of such notice as required by section 1.594(g) of
the rules.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. WAPLE, Secretary.
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER JOHNSON
The questions regarding the merit of foreign language programming,
potentially involved in issue 1, raise for me weighty questions of national
policy and public interest. To require the applicant to answer these questions
in the absence of any rationally articulated guiding statement of general policy
from the Commission seems to me highly inequitable if not, indeed, impossible.
Moreover, even if the burden could be met in this case, the questions
seem to me of a nature more appropriate to general consideration than to
case-by-case adjudication.
Foreign language programming may provide a major (or the only) source
of news and information to large groups of people. It may encourage community
awareness, and acceptance, of minority language groups. On the other hand, it
may tend toward disintegration within a nation substantially bound by a common
language -- a possible result of any minority group programming. These are but
illustrative of many relevant and conflicting considerations now subject more
to instinct than empirical analysis.
Should the Commission (a) encourage, (b) tolerate or (c) discourage
stations (or programming) designed to serve minority racial, ethnic,
religious, or foreign language groups?
Until the relevant underlying considerations posed by that question
have been adequately defined, analyzed, researched, and the consequences of
alternative courses clearly charted for the Commission, it seems to me
unrealistic to expect anyone -- Commission or applicant -- to address the
foreign language issues in this case.
Meanwhile, it seems to me useful for the disposition of this
application, and consideration of the more basic issues referred to earlier, to
review the adequacy of assignee's survey of local needs.