Channel 9 Los Angeles as PBS (Historic Question)

[Markxxx]

I recall reading somewhere on the Internet that Channel 9 was the weakest of the 4 independent LA stations and sometime in the late 60s there was a movement to just donate the license to form an educational station or PBS station.

I'm sure it was never too serious but I can't find anything while Googling now. Does anyone have any info about this? I know it couldn't have been too realistic an option, but I thought it was interesting to discuss, considering how big LA is and having no PBS on the VHF dial must've been a handicap

 

[LKellerIII]

It probably was a handicap for KCET for a few years, but by the mid 60s, cable companies were putting KCET on Cable 6, and TVs were being manufactured with UHF tuners. RKO General owned KHJ-TV9. For their day, that company was pretty big in broadcasting, and I doubt they would have "donated" their station to PBS (then NET), or any other broadcaster.

I'm not sure which independent station in LA was lowest rated then, but for programming, KCOP 13 was at least as weak as Channel 9. At least 9 got the better movies - 13 played the worst 1940s "B" movies, and ran low rent Bill Burrud travelogues in prime time.

 

[w9wi]

I recall reading somewhere on the Internet that Channel 9 was the weakest of the 4 independent LA stations and sometime in the late 60s there was a movement to just donate the license to form an educational station or PBS station.

WNET/Thirteen, the main PBS station in NYC, is a converted commercial station. To this day the channel 13 assignment is still not reserved for non-commercial use.

WNET was *purchased* from their commercial owners in 1961. There may however have been a donation component; the non-commercial operator paid $6,200,000 for channel 13, but the commercial operator it was purchased from had paid $11,000,000 two years earlier. On the other hand, the commercial operator did get two radio stations in the deal, stations they didn't transfer to WNET's non-commercial licensee. (I have no idea whether a 5,000-watt radio station in Newark, NJ might have been worth $5,000,000 in 1961.)

 

[pqgeorge]

I recall reading somewhere on the Internet that Channel 9 was the weakest of the 4 independent LA stations and sometime in the late 60s there was a movement to just donate the license to form an educational station or PBS station.

I'm sure it was never too serious but I can't find anything while Googling now. Does anyone have any info about this? I know it couldn't have been too realistic an option, but I thought it was interesting to discuss, considering how big LA is and having no PBS on the VHF dial must've been a handicap

I believe it was KTLA/Channel 5 that was on the chopping block in 1964. Channel 5 was losing a lot of money at the time under Paramount ownership. From what I've been told, Paramount was planning divest the losing KTLA, and I believe it was going to be donated for Educational TV purposes (probably for a tax write-off). At that time, Independent stations like KTLA, KHJ, KTTV and KCOP were really not getting the audience that they should be in the number 2 TV market. At the time, the network LA affilliates (Channels 2, 4 and 7) had the lions share of the market. KTLA was sold to Gene Autry's Golden West Broadcasters in the latter part of 1964. Channel 5 became the TV flagship of the Los Angeles/California Angels baseball team in 1964.... and why not..... Mr. Autry already owned the Angels as well as KMPC radio. The station blossomed under Gene Autry. Brand new color facilites, brand new programming packages and a dedicated news department with Hal Fishman joining KTLA in 1965 brought Channel 5 out of the dumps and they never looked back.

 

[Markxxx]

I thought I read the other NYC VHF's helped donated things to WNET not only out of charity but also because it would get a competitor off the VHF dial.

I will keep looking for that site.

 

[Rollo-Smokes]

WNET/Thirteen, the main PBS station in NYC, is a converted commercial station. To this day the channel 13 assignment is still not reserved for non-commercial use.

WNET was *purchased* from their commercial owners in 1961. There may however have been a donation component; the non-commercial operator paid $6,200,000 for channel 13, but the commercial operator it was purchased from had paid $11,000,000 two years earlier. On the other hand, the commercial operator did get two radio stations in the deal, stations they didn't transfer to WNET's non-commercial licensee. (I have no idea whether a 5,000-watt radio station in Newark, NJ might have been worth $5,000,000 in 1961.

Correction: Channel 13 in Newark (not New York City) was converted to non-commercial by the FCC in 1961. National Telefilm Associates, the last commercial operator, had purchased the station from its original owners four years earlier for $4.5 million (not $11 million).

The radio stations, WNTA AM and FM, were packaged together separately from WNTA-TV (as WJRZ) and were split in 1965 when the FM side became Family Stations' WFME. The AM is now Salem's WWDJ. As for how a 5 kw station was worth $5 million in '61, remember this -- back then AM was still the dominant band, and AM/FM simulcasts still counted as ONE STATION.

 

[w9wi]

Correction: Channel 13 in Newark (not New York City) was converted to non-commercial by the FCC in 1961. National Telefilm Associates, the last commercial operator, had purchased the station from its original owners four years earlier for $4.5 million (not $11 million).

1966 Broadcasting Yearbook lists the $11,000,000 price. ("Sold in 1959 to National Telefilm Associates for $11 million in stock (including WNTA-AM-FM).")

It is of course possible the Yearbook got it wrong! (or the stock was seriously overvalued & the true value was closer to $4.5 million)

I do note when NTA bought the stations the previous year the price was only $2,500,000 plus a non-compete and consultancy deal worth just a bit under one million.

The FCC never converted the channel to non-commercial reserved. See regulations 73.606 (analog) and 73.622 (DTV). They do however recognize the conversion of the *station*. Thirteen could sell the station to a commerical operator - they would have to get the license converted to commercial status but that kind of thing has been pretty much rubber-stamped in the past.

(it might be different in this case simply due to the high profile of the station involved)

 

[LKellerIII]

"I believe it was KTLA/Channel 5 that was on the chopping block in 1964. Channel 5 was losing a lot of money at the time under Paramount ownership. From what I've been told, Paramount was planning divest the losing KTLA, and I believe it was going to be donated for Educational TV purposes (probably for a tax write-off). At that time, Independent stations like KTLA, KHJ, KTTV and KCOP were really not getting the audience that they should be in the number 2 TV market. At the time, the network LA affilliates (Channels 2, 4 and 7) had the lions share of the market. KTLA was sold to Gene Autry's Golden West Broadcasters in the latter part of 1964. Channel 5 became the TV flagship of the Los Angeles/California Angels baseball team in 1964.... and why not..... Mr. Autry already owned the Angels as well as KMPC radio. The station blossomed under Gene Autry. Brand new color facilites, brand new programming packages and a dedicated news department with Hal Fishman joining KTLA in 1965 brought Channel 5 out of the dumps and they never looked back."

I believe LA (and possibly New York) were the only markets in the 50s and 60s to have 4 independent stations. Most big cities in American had the 3 network affiliates and maybe 1 independent. Maybe it was a case of TOO much competition, and not enough ad revenue to go around.

KTLA may have been the most expensive to run - they produced more local programming than the others, and had the biggest news department. In those days, if you wanted to see live coverage of an event while it was happening (brush fires, the Baldwin Hills dam collapse, etc.), you didn't tune in 2,4, or 7 - you tuned in KTLA, which would reliably be on the scene with live "Telecopter" and "Telemobile" coverage.

You're right that Autry and Golden West improved things for KTLA, but Fishman was no big catch (pardon the pun). KTLA didn't get big ratings with news until they hired George Putnam away from KTTV in 1967 or so, and Autry paid Putnam a fortune to switch. George was reportedly the highest paid anchor in the US in the late 60s - making even more than Walter Cronkite on CBS. Hal was purely a second banana...it wasn't called "The George Putnam News" for nothing. Hal even followed Putnam back to KTTV in 69 or so, then back again to KTLA a year or two later. It wasn't until Putnam flamed out (reportedly in a rift with Autry), that Fishman came into his own.

 

[Tim L]

"KTLA may have been the most expensive to run - they produced more local programming than the others, and had the biggest news department. In those days, if you wanted to see live coverage of an event while it was happening (brush fires, the Baldwin Hills dam collapse, etc.), you didn't tune in 2,4, or 7 - you tuned in KTLA, which would reliably be on the scene with live "Telecopter" and "Telemobile" coverage.

You're right that Autry and Golden West improved things for KTLA, but Fishman was no big catch (pardon the pun). KTLA didn't get big ratings with news until they hired George Putnam away from KTTV in 1967 or so, and Autry paid Putnam a fortune to switch.  George was reportedly the highest paid anchor in the US in the late 60s - making even more than Walter Cronkite on CBS. Hal was purely a second banana...it wasn't called "The George Putnam News" for nothing. Hal even followed Putnam back to KTTV in 69 or so, then back again to KTLA a year or two later.  It wasn't until Putnam flamed out (reportedly  in a rift with Autry), that Fishman came into his own.

Interesting how we bring all this up now..at the tail end of KTLA's 60th Anniversary Marathon weekend..The news footage I saw over the weekend was mostly from 1965 or later..Except for the sad story of the little girl falling in the well in 1949..

 

[KeithE4]

I believe LA (and possibly New York) were the only markets in the 50s and 60s to have 4 independent stations. Most big cities in American had the 3 network affiliates and maybe 1 independent. Maybe it was a case of TOO much competition, and not enough ad revenue to go around.

LA and NYC were also the only metro areas in the '50s and early '60s with the maximum of 7 VHF channels - all of which were commercial allocations. The other big markets had 5 VHFs at the most, with one of those being a non-comm assignment.

 

[rickradio]

From Peter Q:

the network LA affilliates (Channels 2, 4 and 7)

Hate to nitpick, but in the interest of accuracy, "affiliate" is a misnomer. Channels 2, 4, and 7 in LA are O & Os, (Owned and Operated).

I agree with Llew. It's hard for me to see RKO wanting to unload KHJ-TV, especially after putting their popular AM station's "Boss Jocks" on it hosting TV shows. If they were to look at anything as a liability in their LA properties, I would think it would be KHJ-FM, which, in the words of Ron Jacobs (who was there at that time), "had all the status of a manual washing machine." After all, following that 1966 (David Eduardo?) FCC ruling that stations could no longer simulcast some or all AM programming on FM sisters, KHJ-FM couldn't ride the AM's coattails anymore, and had to start pulling as it were its own weight.

 

[Rollo-Smokes]

Correction: Channel 13 in Newark (not New York City) was converted to non-commercial by the FCC in 1961. National Telefilm Associates, the last commercial operator, had purchased the station from its original owners four years earlier for $4.5 million (not $11 million).

1966 Broadcasting Yearbook lists the $11,000,000 price. ("Sold in 1959 to National Telefilm Associates for $11 million in stock (including WNTA-AM-FM).")

It is of course possible the Yearbook got it wrong! (or the stock was seriously overvalued & the true value was closer to $4.5 million)

I do note when NTA bought the stations the previous year the price was only $2,500,000 plus a non-compete and consultancy deal worth just a bit under one million.

The FCC never converted the channel to non-commercial reserved. See regulations 73.606 (analog) and 73.622 (DTV). They do however recognize the conversion of the *station*. Thirteen could sell the station to a commerical operator - they would have to get the license converted to commercial status but that kind of thing has been pretty much rubber-stamped in the past.

(it might be different in this case simply due to the high profile of the station involved)

While updating the WNET article on Wikipedia, research I did over the summer gave me the info I mentioned in my previous post. The New York Times was my main source. And, last time I checked the Broadcasting & Cable Yearbook, channel 13 had an asterisk next to it. But, I'll check that again.

 

[w9wi]

While updating the WNET article on Wikipedia, research I did over the summer gave me the info I mentioned in my previous post. The New York Times was my main source. And, last time I checked the Broadcasting & Cable Yearbook, channel 13 had an asterisk next to it. But, I'll check that again.

My source for the lack of a non-commercial reservation on WNET's channel 13 are FCC regulations 73.606:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/13nov20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/octqtr/47cfr73.606.htm(analog) and 73.622: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/13nov20061500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2006/octqtr/47cfr73.622.htm (digital)

I can certainly believe the prices in my 1966 YB may have been inaccurate.