A COMPARI SON OF REUGEGUSLY-OMENTED RADIO STATIONS BY DEGREE. ,OF AGREEMENT WITH A MATEONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES POSITEON Thesis {or the Degree of M. A. MlCHIGAN STATE UMVZERSIW Keith Le May" 1966 TH EBIE‘ ‘Pfi—LAJ‘ Lnu-u~m.-mu “.b H, ._ J 5 9‘3"; x } 3‘. Q V i0!&)4:‘ ‘- k ‘- Llilchigzau I‘K‘ltfi r. E" - ,fi “,3. ' ‘ '5.) '.L?';.‘ ‘u‘. ~ I t J; I, if“ W-wt-u -m-" . : . ._ , ,. . i ._.r..‘ .. , _ , 2. _._,. V _ . _ .II iv. ..L r . z. , 1.“... _ 1 . .. . _.. ‘ . _ a ‘ . ¥ . 5.1 .. . g _ _ I D 1 . _ A, ‘ o- ..r. h\ ., .-._V . ....\\fll n..- LN \ A .131 plrtlal m1." k’r may» A COMPARISON OF RELIGIOUSLY‘ORIENTED RADIO STATIONS BY DEGREE OF AGREEMENT WITH A NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES POSITION O 2.3: . Ip- ' By Keith LeMay - 3 AN ABSTRACT A Thesis Submitted to Michigan State University 'in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Television and Radio ABSTRACT The intent of this study was primarily to compare responses of radio stations in relation to their corporate agreement or disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches. It was felt that their responses would differ significantly. The problem of this study was to determine just how-- and to what degree--re1igiously-oriented stations (stations owned and operated by religious groups and individuals) differ in their theological views, motivation for broad- casting, commercial policies, and other aspects of opera- tion. Also, a matter of concern was whether they might differ because of their forms of ownership: individual, group, school, or church. A mail questionnaire was sent to 216 stations selected from several lists of doubtful reliability. One hundred and ten stations returned the questionnaire--86 of which were eligible for this study. These 86 respondents include 28 stations agreeing with National Council and 58 not agree- ing with its position. [ Stations were asked to choose elements which would represent their theological views. It was found that National Council agreement stations tended to select those denominations agreeing with the National Council, to accept a "liberal" label, and to choose programs which agree with a National Council position. Stations not in agreement with the National Council, however, chose denominations and programs not in line with the National Council and accepted quite strongly the "conservative"label. National Council agreement stations tended to require a higher level of education of their staffs. They tended to be oriented denominationally and looked at their tasks as educators building upon the foundation the Church has already established. Non-National Council agreement sta- tions tended to see their role as that of a missionary bringing the Good News to their audiences. They also tended to carry a higher percentage of "religious"programs and saw a need to verbalize continually the Christian message. This study of over 30 of these stations leads the writer to propose the following recommendations for further study of religiously-oriented stations: 1. Study station management in terms of positioning on the Anderson-Tech "conservative-liberal" scales. 2. Compare theological position of station program- ming with a. its management's position on the Anderson- Toch scales and b. the station's agreement or disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches. 3. Study management's stated reasons for broadcasting, and conditions for cooperating with other religiously- oriented stations. Study acceptance of programs as to whether it is based upon theological agreement--or commercial, political, or other reasons. Study how stations perceive concepts like: "public interest" and the "community" they serve. new do they perceive their role in relation to local churches and clergy? Study operations as they may be affected by type of ownership. Study relationship of amount of local production I and station's theological views. A COMPARISON OF RELIGIOUSLYFORIENTED RADIO STATIONS BY DEGREE OF AGREEMENT WITH A NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES POSITION by Keith LeMay A Thesis Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Television and Radio 1966 PREFACE This study was the result of past service with two radio stations owned and operated for "religious" purposes, namely, nurturing the Christian community, sharing the Gospel with others, and general education and cultural service to the community as a whole. This writer had the opportunity to observe over thirty of these stations in the past eight years and noted many differences in their operations. There was an obvious need to discover some of the factors which might encourage inter-station cooperation. This study was undertaken to see if it would be possible to describe stations in terms of their corporate agreement or " disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches. Little research seemed to be in evidence, and there was a need. It is hoped that this thesis will be of help to others who wish to study the operation of the religiously- oriented station. The recommendations have grown out of ‘— ___.. ‘7.an discussions with many persons connected with religiously- , oriented stations, with religious broadcasting executives, and with communication research consultants. This writer would like to acknowledge the aid and counsel given him in this study. First of all, to Mr. John Groller, who made possible my first employment by a religiously-oriented station. His advice and constructive evaluations have always been helpful. My thanks to the ii staffs of KSEW in Sitka, Alaska, and KBMR in Bismarck, North Dakota, for affording a wide range of experiences for background and insight for this study. Personal thanks are extended to the faculty of the Department of Television and Radio at Michigan State University. Especially, this writer is indebted to Dr. Gordon Gray and Dr. Walter Emery,who have provided direction and counsel. Dr. Tom Baldwin provided numer- ous suggestions in his review of the manuscript. Insight into many of the research procedures and tools would not have been possible without the correspon- dence with Dr. William Millard, communication research consultant. Many student assistants in communication research at Michigan State University unselfishly gave of their valuable study hours to solve statistical prob- lems. Acknowledgements would not be complete without thank- ing my secretaries, Mrs. Marcia Ellis and Mrs. Peggy Robins, and my student assistant, Mr. Steve Brown, for their many hours devoted to typing and proofreading this manuscript. Finally my gratitude to Janalie, Linda, John and Charles for their willingness to give up many family out- ings in the interests of the author's involvement in this thesis. iii v ‘— ‘i "—_" TABLE OF CONTENTS PRH‘ACE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O TABLE OF CONTMTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Background Information B. Problem C. Objectives D. Hypotheses 11. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . I I I O METHODOLOGY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O A. Selecting the Stations B. Developing the Questionnaire C. Obtaining the Information D. Definition of Terms E. Statistical Procedures IV. PRESENTATION OF DATA . . . . . . . . . v O ANAI‘ YSI S OF DATA O O O O O O O O O O O APPENDIX A. QUESTIONNAIRE TABULATION . . . . . APPENDIX B. STATION QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING LIST APPENDIX C. PROGRAM THEOLOGICAL POSITION QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX D. RELIGIOUSLYeORIENTED STATION QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX E. QUESTIONNAIRE FOLLOW-UP LETTER . . BI$IOGMPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O iv Page ii iv 19 21 33 51 62 84 93 96 98 100 Table I. II. III. IV. VIII. LIST OF TABLES Some of the Broadcasting Stations Owned and Controlled by Church Bodies . . . . . . . . . . Some of the Special Stations Owned by Institutions Under Church Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Radio Stations Owned by Religious Institutions in the U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . Ownership of Stations Studied . . . . . . . . . Relationship Between Stations and their Denominational Preference . . . . . . . . . . . Station's Position Compared with that of Programs Aired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Station's Position Compared to Program Selected to Represent Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . Station's Position and its Efforts to Cooperate With Stations O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 14 36 37 38 4O w “V” a .«w I. INTRODUCTION During the past few years more and more articles have appeared in religious publications pertaining to radio sta- tions owned or controlled by religious organizations. These religiously-oriented stations, using a wide variety of com- mercial and programming policies, have drawn mixed reactions from both their churched and unchurched audiences. This thesis will attempt to state some of the facts regarding the present status of these stations, as well as offering some conclusions and proposals based on these facts. A. Background Situation The religiously-oriented station is not a new phenomenon in the United States, although the growth of such stations has seen an upsurge since World War II. In spite of this rise, the ratio of such stations to the total of all types of stations is not as high as it was in the early twenties, according to reports in publications of that period. In 1925 Armstrong Perry wrote in Popular Radio: One out of every fourteen broadcasting stations in the United States is today owned by a church and operated by a church...or under a church's direction . . . A prominent divine in New YOrk has announced plans for opening a station that will blanket the metropolitan district and a great deal of other territory. "Listen to me or nothing!" seems to be his slogan. Voliva, leader of the Dowieites, puts on a show at his station-- WCBD--as good as any, and slips in his religious theories at psychological moments . . . In the latest list of broadcasting stations, thirty- six ------ about seven percent ------ are owned and operated by '— ".~w—.“ “—_‘. fin‘ -- —_’._ ”W churches. A number of others, connected with colleges and other institutions, are also under control of reli- gious leaders. Among the sects represented are Presby- terian, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Latter Day Saints, Christian, Christian Scientist, Zionist, Congregational, Methodist Church (South), Lutheran, and Seventh Day Adventist. Some have low-power sets and transmit only their Sunday services. Others are using all the power the law will allow and operating all day long and into the night. 1 [Page 37 In his article,Mr. Perry went on to discuss the situation of religious broadcasting and compiled a list of stations "owned and controlled by church bodies" (Tables I and II). It was interesting to note that of the 41 stations cited in Table I and its footnote, only eleven were still operating: KFSG, KTW, WBBL, WCAL, WWL, KJS (now KBBI), WJD (now WDUB(FM)), WQAW (now WGTB-FM), WSAJ, KSL, and KFUO. Only the first five had been on the air continuously with their original license. Of the 25 stations listed in Table II, only Loyola University still had its original station, and those institutions operating stations lXN (now WESU(FM)), 3X1 (now WGTB-FM) 8YM (now WDUB (FM) ), and 8YYK (now WSLN(FM) ) had acquired their present licenses before 1954. 1It should be noted that Mr. Perry was writing about a situation which existed in a period of early broadcasting history. Federal controls were lax and allocation of fre- quencies poorly planned and supervised. Nor did the receiv- ing sets have a high degree of selectivity. When a nearby station went on the air, this often forced oscillations in all receivers within five, ten,and fifty miles. This con— tinued for as many hours as the station might choose to monopolize the air waves. Hence, Mr. Perry cited complaints of WBBR (owned then by the People's Pulpit Association) listeners against the station blanketing the whole island with its signal, eliminating all competing stations. adsoapsq s.onqnoeroz oom OOm oonHoo HdHo .pm spomoscHs .UHoHHapHoz H403 thmho>HsD dxmssnoz pmHooapos com OOO sshonoz sxmssnoz .oode thmho>HsD Onmom mmms Acoedpm poav on mwN seesaw pssso>oo oossw «HusHH> .Ososson 9mm: sonsno omeoasm pmeQsm on mOm oosHm ssomHHou ssdeHOOH .mssoHso 3oz Nm< onH Meow 3oz .noumoncom om<3 pmendm OH NON nossso pmemdm pmsHm mppomsaodmmdz .sopmoosoz mm<3 HsoHHomsn>m ooH mam .<.o.2.w .o .O .soewsssnss ems: osssoesonona one com ssenoosomonm poses sopmoesmss .oprsom sex HdsoHa moHows4 moq IdsHsosoOsousH one OOm Ho ovspHpmsH oHnHm «HssoHHHso .moHoms< moH mum .smwO oHpmH HsOHHowss>m oom mum IHowss>m Mada osom stHOHHHdo .mOHowc< moq Ommu HdnoomHam OH HHN nossno szanB «HssowHHso .mvsdHUom mmmu 3 Atopdpm posv OOH Omm :dHumHHno pmsHm sHssomHHdo .HOprHsz 00mm Room oHequ Ho Atopspm posv ... wmm monossno cdemHnso msmsdmss .xoom oprHH msmm .eo oeHoonoas museum sen noopsq OHHospdo Ho pmHsno memoh sdemHsno Omm Ova mo sossso OouHsdwsoom HnsommHs .oosousonousH NHhM Avopdpm posv OOH OON .so sdemHsso Hespsoo assHmHsoq .paoqo>ossm mmmu mumeso>O< omoHHoU :deQOHE hen npso>om OON wON msdsonmHz Hosssasm .mwsHHQm soHssdm NOmM sstopmnmosm OOm OON sdHnouznmosm pmHHh msNOB .omsdhe Mama pmemdm OOH OOm amemsm pmsHm ssdeHsoq .psono>ossm xnmu OHHospso OH Nmm OHHonde mHodnoHs .pm ondoH .omHom Oahu oHHonoso on new Hssoososo one msssoss .oessnsq Omen sstoahnmonm on own sanophnmonm pmHHm sepwsHamsz .daooda ommu soHpssHaoson Amppdav newqu so OOHHonpsoo sodepm no sodeOOH Hdmumm Meson. o>ekHr use OopsHoOO HHdo w H oHndB r’li- If, I}?! inlvl. If! E (III -| II. 11‘. , l .iv’un‘i'b’flnl In, -.. l' .oossm assesses HmoHHomssom ..os .nesoq .om AemoHO open one ”Hem.mev sossos .spso oxen oHsm HeuoHO ems .Assssoosomonmv oonHoo spec oeone ..sm .speo oooae HHmmHO use: "mNoH ohomon momsooHH Oo>Hooos ode OOHaB msoHuspm tonne oOOHosH you OHO wsHpmHH mHnBH I. . . n NHN a OHOdm ssHsmon\ .moHumedpm OoanHnsm Eon“ use :odeOHszaaoo poonHO an Oostpno was none Ho OOHH IdsHaosoO one wsHssoosoo soHpssHomsH .mOOdepm Ho whooos HsHOHHHo m.psoasso>ou one OH wepmHH who msoHpspm mm omens mmHnom mombmo Mm QHHHomBzoo 92¢ mm o monBHsb «Homoq essHmHOOH .msdoHHo 3oz H33 oHHoeoso m emu spenno>esp oHHososo .O .n .soowseonss sees onsoosm ooH oem soasso pmeoasm sns>Hao snow soz .snos soz cede assozpsq sdeoasoz ON OOm omoHHoo «thoosoo «pomossHs .Osossooz des QHHonpeo ON OON OHHospsU mMoHnunm .um momma .omsm Hm esmz szssHpmHsaO Auopdpm uosv oom mbN Ho Hoosom thsO HssommHz .NHHO msmsdm Goa seesaw ssHsop hasnoosonona ooH owm -sonosm sesameonmses essonnes .nesoa .om use; umemdm OH OON sossno pmeOdm pmsHm OHHO .msnesHoo ZOE: pmeasm on ONN thmso>HsD somHson OHHO .oHHH>ssHO an: onsooeoos oH oem oonHoo sssonos .os ensonmss .sonosso Gems OHHospso OOH HON szmse>HcD mHsoa .pm HhsommHz .mHOOH .pm 3m: ussso>oo shesopsonosm on emu one so eonsso .o .n .soomsssmss so: Aspsomv nossno pwHOonuoz Om NON pmHOonpoz NpHsHsB memos .omsm Hm OOaz sOHN we .no UHHowmon< OHHospso cdemHsso OOm mom s>HHo> .O sanHz mHosHHHH .soHN Ono: oHHonde OOH OOm oonHoo s>ocsHHH> sHsd>Hhmssom .s>ossHHH> SOD: cOHOssHaoson Amppdsv nmmeH kn OOHHosesoo OOHpsum Ho OOdeooq Hdnwmm. Hosea, oemk. use Oopdnoad HHso OossHvsoo H OHth III! _ (l’r‘l‘n‘i‘r’l‘UI’v i- ,I, n 1". 2"... U. - . .Osms we OomsooHH was cOHpspm one HNOH sH awsosplllsdHnouhnmosm .oNOHHoo SOHO o>osu .sts>Hmmssom .mpHU o>osu .oow oOOHosH Hos UHO oHnsp mHABH NWNN .Q .OHOsm HsHOQoALV UHHosudU ONOHHOU omosnas .pm «soH .pnomco>an HOMO oHHonpso sosnao>es= n.ssoe .om «someones .oHHH>omoHHoo axe pmHOonwoz s.emeHwoz OHHO OHsO .osdBdHon MWMN sOHpsHoomm< HsOHHowsd>fi ssHpmHHso m.:os mono» OHJO .sophsn Ohm pmensm thmHo>Hsb somHson OHAO .OHHH>sssO Sww sOHHdHoomm< HdOHHowss>m ssHpmHsno m.sos mono» OHOO .OcdHo>0Ho ngw OHHoapdD oweHHoo soH>dx OHOO .HpschosHU UONN genomes; omoHHoo maoosoopss oeeo .oHostanam seem osHospso oonHoo n.seoass .om soowseemss .soaq men sodeHoomm¢ HsOHHowsd>m sdemHsno w.soz manor sowono .OssHvsom owe OHHonpdo menssHoo Ho mpstsM sopwsHamdz .oprdom awe OOHpsHoomm< HsOHHomss>m sdHemHHnU m.soz mono» scamsHamdz .Oprdom our OHHonpdo menasHoo mo mHOMHcM waxes .apnoz whom >wm OHHonpso thmso>HsD «Homoq dsdeHOOH .msdoHso 3oz mum OHHonpdo oonHoo mOHsdso .pm ssdeHeoq .ndopoo Osssu NNO pmeQdm thmso>HsD HOHNsm mdxoa .oos: umMm OHHonudU menasHoo mo mpstGM .0 .9 .soewsHsmds HMO ssHsophnmoam oonHoo eppodedH «Hsd>Hmmssom .sOHmsfi own sstosnmonm mpHmso>Hs= cosmosHHm homsoh 3oz .souoosHsm SNN OHHospso oonHoo m.nmomow .pm «Hsd>H%mssom .annHoudHHnm HMO oHHoano menasHoo mo mpastM homson 3oz .NHQ menu «wN UHHonwso meHmso>HcO adsvsom mac» 302 .Msow Roz NNN pmHOoapos mpHmso>HsO ssSonoz HOOHpoossoo .ssoeoHOOHz sz OHHonpdo oonHoo sovmom mpuomOHOdmmds .souBoz MNH sm ooHHonpsoo Hansen OOdesHaoson use Oopdsono mqupdpm no OOHpsoon HHdo 5’? HmWUZHDHMZH Hmombmo mHGZD mZOHBDBHBmZH Hm nflzsc mZOHBOHm H¢Hofimm Huh ho Hfiom .HH OHQOB T‘— 7' *mm - - The number of stations increased,and in 1927 Quin A. Ryan, an announcer for WGN, wrote in Liberty (as quoted in Literary Diggst (1927)) : . . . we find one out of fifteen owned by religious organizations. Add to these the number of churches or sectarian schools participating in the operation of radio stations, and the ratio moves up to about one in every ten . . . the religious radio is deemed a divine blessing. It delivers to the hearthstone of the isolated and to the bedside of the shut-in the balm and inspiration of holy service----and welcomely, too, even to individuals who have been beyond the rim of any flock. if. 397 In 1930 the Literary Digest quoted a survey made in 1929 by the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America (now the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.) which tells that "the broadcasting of religion took first place in all radio broadcasting. No other subject had so large a hearing." if} 2E7 The following year the Digest quoted an announcement made by a joint radio commission rep- resenting the Federal Council of Churches and the Greater New York Federation of Churches: "The largest single enterprise on the air to-day is religious broadcasting under Protestant leadership." 15} 227' As early as 1922 the Digest had cited the use of radio by the churches. Large city churches were "installing transmitters to broadcast their services to smaller rural churches in the surrounding area, or else had their services broadcast." [5} 217' In 1926, the Digest noted the existence of radio churches, i.e., "churches with no con- gregations or buildings, existing only in the minds of the listeners, as created by the pastor and a choir in a radio studio." [51 397 In 1946 Judith Waller stated in her book, Radio, the Fifth Estate: There are in the United States today fourteen radio stations owned by religious organizations. Most were established to further the doctrine of the faith held by the group responsible for the station, and they are serving the adherents of their faith with a varied program of inspiration, information, and entertainment. In some instances, these stations sell time for com- mercial programs to help defray the cost of operations. In other cases the license is still held by the religious group, but the station is managed and operated by other interests. Such a station is WWL of New Orleans, owned by the Jesuits of Loyola University, but managed by W. H. Summerville. On the other hand, WMBI is owned and operated entirely by the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, all the program offerings being religious, inspirational, and informational in nature. The cost of operation is borne entirely by funds appropriated by the Institute or by gifts from interested listeners. 151257 Miss Waller named fourteen radio stations as being "owned by religious groups." (Table 111) Table III -* ..-- .—~.—.- - LIST OF RADIO STATIONS OWNED BY RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS IN THE U.S. California Los Angeles KFSG 1150 2500-LS Echo Park Evangel- istic Association Pasadena KPPC 1240 100 Presbyterian Church Colorado Denver KPOF 910 1000 Pillar of Fire Illinois Chicago WMBI 1110 5000 Moody Bible Institute Iowa Boone KIGQ 1260 250-D Boone Biblical College Louisiana New Orleans WWL 870 50000 Loyola University Michigan Lapeer WMPC 1230 250-D Liberty St. Gospel Church Missouri St. Louis KFUO 850 5000 Evangelical Lutheran Synod New Jersey Zarephath WAWZ 1380 5000-LS Pillar of Fire New York Brooklyn WBBR 1330 1000 Watchtower Bible and Tract Society Virginia Richmond WBBL 1240 100 Grace Covenant Pres- byterian Church washington Seattle KTW 1380 1000 First Presbyterian Wisconsin Appleton WHBY 1230 250 Father James Wagner Green Bay WTAQ 1360 5000 Father James Wagner [Wallen p. 2§7 Of these fourteen radio stations listed by Miss Wallen.only one was no longer broadcasting. WBBR, Brooklyn, owned by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses) was sold in 1958. Miss Waller's list did not include 8 stations1 (KID, KPAC, KSL, KUOA, KWLC, WCAL, WLET, and WSAJ) which existed at that time and which were included in this study. One of these 8 unlisted stations was the oldest religiously- oriented station still on the air; it was WCAL, owned by St. Olaf College (Lutheran) in Northfield, Minnesota. It went on the air in November 1918. The second station was that of the First Presbyterian Church, Seattle; it was KTW, which followed on August 20, 1920. A third organization, Grove City College (Presbyterian), put its station WSAJ on the air in 1921. Many of these early stations were still limited by specified hours and/or sharing their frequency with another licensee. On March 31, 1922, the Roman Catholic station WWL in New Orleans opened. It was owned by Loyola University of the South, but managed by William A. Dean, with the Reverend Patrick Donnelly, SJ, as its president. In June of 1924 the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon) opened KSL in Salt Lake City, the first of their thirteen licenses (held totally or in part). (KSL also added a tele- vision outlet, as did WWL.) In the same year the church 1Each of these stations was listed in 1944 and 1945 issues of the Broadcastinngelecasting Yearbook. WLET then was listed as WRLC. iv“ *— _ H. - V- o--"—’ '- founded by Amee McPherson, the International Church of the Four Square Gospel, opened KFSG in Los Angeles. For thirty- seven years KFSG had operated on shared-time with KRKD until it purchased the latter station early in 1961. Again in 1924, Grace Covenant Presbyterian Church in Richmond, Virginia, began operating their station WBBL. Also, the Evangelical Lutheran Synod (known today as the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church) went on the air with KFUO in St. Louis, Missouri (now in Clayton, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis). In the only known study of religiously-oriented stations, the author, R. W. Weber, claimed: The first religious radio station to be licensed by the government, KFUO, throughout all its years of operation has been owned and operated by the Lutheran Church. While other stations succumbed to the lure of commercialization, KFUO has remained on a sustain- ing basis. It is an independent station in the true sense of the word, for it carries neither advertising nor network programs.. 15p. 11g7 Mr. Weber's claim for KFUO as being the "first religious station to be licensed by the government" did not agree with the dates recorded by Broadcasting Yearbook and confirmed by the stations themselves. According to the Yearbook, there \vere seven "religious" radio station licenses before KFUO. At least some of these earlier "religious" stations could also have been described as "independent." They were not all guilty of having "succumbed to the lure of commercialization," bUt "remained on a sustaining basis." These stations had not carried "advertising nor network programs." There was evsan an earlier Lutheran station than KFUO, namely WCAL of 7 v -_——--v 10 St. Olaf College, the first religiously-oriented station, started some six years earlier. Therefore, the claim probably would have greater accuracy if it had stated only that KFUO was the "first Missouri Synod Lutheran radio station to be licensed by the government." KFUO was on the air only a few months before the government allocated them a new fre- quency, reducing them from a clear-channel status to shared- time basis with KSD. Finally, after many years of struggling under these limitations and court battles for less restrictions, KFUO was granted daytime hours on another frequency. In September 1941 they began under their new hours and, later, further increased their effectiveness with the addition of an FM frequency in January 1948. Eleven days after KFUO's first broadcast, the Pasadena Presbyterian Church in Pasadena, California went on the air with KPPC. This station also operated under severe shared- time hours. It was unable to increase its hours and finally expanded its operation through a new FM outlet in 1962. A second Roman Catholic station, WBAY, went on the air in 1926 licensed to the Norbertine Fathers in Green Bay, Wisconsin. (Like WWL, this Roman Catholic station also added a televi- sion station, WBAYHTV, as well as an FM outlet, WBAY-FM.) Three other stations went on the air that same year: WMBI, owned by Moody Bible Institute in Chicago (which added WMBI-FM, WDLM in East Moline, Illinois,and WCRF-FM in Cleveland); KWLC, owned by Luther College (Evangelical Lutheran) in Decorah, 11 Iowa; and WMPC, owned by the Liberty Street Gospel Church in Lapeer, Michigan. In 1927, WFGQ, owned by Boone Biblical College in Boone, Iowa, began broadcasting. In March 1929, KPOF, the first of five licenses (WAWZ and WAWZ-FM, Zarephath, New Jersey, KPOE,and WAKW-FM, Cincinnati) granted to the Pillar of Fire Church, went on the air in Denver. The same month two years later Pillar of Fire Church was to begin its station in Zarephath, New Jersey. During the thirties and up to the beginning of World War II, only five stations went into operation: 1931 Zarephath, WAWZ Pillar of Fire Church New Jersey (FM added) 1933 Siloam Springs, KUOA John Brown University Arkansas (FM added) 1935 Port Arthur, KPAC Port Arthur College Texas (Methodist) (FM-TV added) 1935 Appleton, WHBY Nobertine Fathers Wisconsin (Roman Catholic) 1941 Toccoa, WLET R. G. LeTourneau and others Georgia (FM added) After WLET went on the air in May 1941, there were no new licenses for religiously-oriented stations granted until 1946.1 From November 1946 and the beginning of operations for WMRP, the Methodist station in Flint, Michigan, the growth of religiously-oriented stations increased greatly. One reason for this large increase was the removal of restrictions caused by the war. There was an overall growth of FM stations. As the number of sets increased in metropolitan areas, more 1KID, Idaho Falls, Idaho, was acquired in 1944 by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (31. 78%) and other interests. 12 and more religious organizations began applying for FM licenses. For religiously-oriented stations the growth of AM operations was almost matched by the growth of FM operations. KSL-FM, Salt Lake City, Utah, with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormon) holding controlling interest, began in December 1946. The next year three more FM stations began operations: New YOrk City WFUN-FM Fordham University New Ybrk (Roman Catholic) Toccoa, WLET-FM R. G. LeTourneau Georgia (and others) Stockton 'KCUN-FM University of the Pacific California (Methodist) Some of the AM stations had turned to FM operations to increase their hours of broadcasting. Most of these stations had been trying, since the beginning of their AM operations, to remove restrictions from their AM licenses. These restrictions were: share-time basis with a commercial- secular or an educational station on the same frequency; specified hours only; and daylight hours only. When stations in areas already served by FM were unable to remove license restrictions, they often resorted to FM. Now their audiences were potentially greater with little increase in personnel and studio facilities. B. Problem Was there cooperation between these stations which claimed common goals? What factors contributed to coopera- tion--or lack of cooperation--between them? new did stations differ? 1 --- '“- 13 Costs of producing quality programs had increased over the years. Most religiously-oriented stations found that with their limited budgets, they were unable to achieve the caliber of religious programming that they initially had set as their goal. In a move to remedy this situation the stations had turned to religious program producers or other religiously— oriented stations for programs. They sought producers of programs which supported their theology and/or philos0phy of broadcasting. They sold time to this producer, gave him 'free' time, or bought his program. If the desired programs were not available from the producer, the stations turned to other religiously—oriented stations. If they could agree, they pooled programs for which each excelled. Each station was thus able to devote more time to the production of fewer programs. The religiously-oriented station, like other stations, wanted to remain independent and to control production of all of his programs. But because of economic necessity, it had to cooperate with other stations and inde- pendent producers in order to get the programs he desired. In the United States there were over 150 separate religiously-oriented station operations (an AM, an FM, or an AM-FM operation). For this study we examined 86 of these stations. ‘ZTable IE7 “m--— ‘O-. <— -- 14 Table IV. OWNERSHIP OF STATIONS STUDIED 16 by individuals 5 by individual local churches 34 by religious-educational institutions 7 by denominational groups (owners all of same denomination) 24 by interdenominational groups (owners not all of same denomination) We studied how these stations differed. Thirty-five of the stations cooperated with other religiously-oriented stations on a regular basis. This cooperation was due to at least four elements: a. common owner b. owners were members of the same family 0. owners were of the same denomination d. one of owners had an interest in the other station There were many obstacles to further cooperation...other than those which hinder a commercial-secular or educational station from cooperating with other stations. The major problem con- fronting the development of inter-station cooperation (through exchange of programs, tape or direct-wire networks, or exchange of ideas) was a lack of information on what contributed to, or hindered,such c00peration. Thus, it was important to determine what elements would aid cooperation...and what elements would discourage or prevent any such action between stations. Hinderances to cooperation between these stations had been previously found by the author to be differences in one or more of the following areas: a. Theology conservatism liberalism fundamentalism modernism humanism orthod0xy {wh‘ - -’ 15 b. Denominational affiliation c. Interdenominational agency affiliation National Council of Churches of Christ National Association of Evangelicals American Council of Churches d. Commercial policies --free time to religious groups; paid time to secular groups --basic production costs to religious groups --free time to all programs station selects; urge contributions from producers and listeners --support from national denomination or local church group --support from free-will offerings Were there any areas of cooperation beyond those of common ownership, common religious beliefs, and common commercial policies? We attempted to determine the elements needed for cooperation, as seen by the owners. Was cooperation limited to stations affiliated with a common inter-denominational agency (such as the National Council of Churches, National Association of Evangelicals, etc.)? Or would movements toward cooperation cross these agency lines? Did inter-station coop- eration even include stations all of the same denomination? Was it limited by the theology of the station, described by such labels as: modernism, conservatism, liberalism, etc.? Did inter-station cooperation follow these 'labels' across denominational lines, and across inter—denominational agency lines? Since it was felt that station differences and similari- ties hindered or promoted cooperation, thissmudy attempted to define these differences and similarities. ...—....“ v 16 C. Objectives This study attempted to provide further knowledge of religiously—oriented stations and how aspects of their opera- tion might contribute to, or might hinder, inter-station cooperation. Answers to the following questions could pro- vide insights leading to solutions to the problems of inter-station cooperation: I. Did stations differ in their choice of denomination to represent their theological views? 2. Did stations differ in their choice of a conserva- tive or liberal theological position? 3. Did stations depart from their own theological views when they chose programs to be aired? 4. Was it possible to classify religiously-oriented stations: (a) by a National Council of Churches agreement-- non-National Council of Churches agreement scale, or (b) by denominational affiliation? And how reliable were these scales? 5. To what extent did religiously-oriented stations exchange programs? 6. Did religiously-oriented stations form networks with other religiously-oriented stations? Did they differ in their choice of stations with which they would cooperate? 7. Did stations differ in their commercial policies toward religious groups? 8. Did stations differ in the way they viewed the pur- pose of their programs? What formats did they favor? --‘- ‘- 17 9. Did stations differ in the degree with which they exchanged programs and program ideas? 10. Did stations differ in their choice of staff qualifications? D. Hypotheses It was the plan of this study to test the following hypothesis: It_i§_possible 32 describe religiouslyeoriented stations lg terms 2: their corporate ggreementlgg disagreement with the .ggneral policies 9f_the National Council 2f Churches, and its broadcastigg agency, the Broadcasting and Film Commission. Religiously-oriented stations were compared in eight areas expressed in these minor hypotheses: 1. National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 13 their choice 2: denomination £g_represent their theological views. 2. National Council agggement stations will differ from non-National Council ggreement stations in their choice gf_g conservative g; liberal theolog- ical position. 3. National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council gggeement stations ig their choice 2: program . 18 National Council ggreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stationing their choice 9: stations with which they will cogperate. National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations ig their commercial policies toward religious gropps. National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations in the way thgy view the purpose 2: their programs. National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 12' the qgalifications theyrequire.gf their station personnel. National Council agpeement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 32 the types gf_program formats exhibited $3 the programs they broadcast. w'v—_ *— .. .— w “-A-’— 11. REVIEW OF LITERATURE A search was made of religious and non-religious broadcasting journals, as well as of leading representatives of religious broadcasting, for possible studies of reli- giously-oriented radio stations. Only one study of these stations in the U.S.A. was discovered. This study was a Master's thesis on the historical growth of KFUO, a Lutheran station in St. Louis, Missouri. Representatives of denomina- tional and inter-denominational broadcasting agencies, as well as personnel of several stations, were contacted. No knowledge of research, either completed or proposed, in this area of broadcasting was known by those queried. Most of these correspondents urged the writer to continue in the study of "any area" of the operation of these stations. A survey of the studies which had been conducted on "commercial-secular" stations, secular-educational stations, and missionary radio stations (outside the U.S.A.), disclosed some parallels. However, in these studies there were differ- ences in motivation in the first two cases. There were dif- ferences in audiences and the approach to these audiences in the last case. These differences, and others, reduced the practicality of relating these studies to the stations con- sidered in this study. 19 20 Denominational and station publications usually con- fined their articles to their own station(s). They were devoted, for the most part, to tracing the historical growth of the station or to highlighting its accomplishments and its future needs. There was a lack of evidence to indicate previous significant study in any area of the operation of religiously- oriented radio stations. .. ...-......‘74 III. METHODOLOGY A. Selecting the Stations The data used for this study was dependent upon the responses to the questionnaires sent out. The reliability of the responses was influenced by the accuracy of the list of stations to be queried. There was no known studies of these stations. All known listings of possible stations were private listings limited to: (1) stations within a geographic area, (2) stations of common theological agree- /ment, (3) stations using a producer's religious programs, or (4) members of station networks. Therefore, we could not be sure the final list used for thissmudy was all- inclusive, and still also, exclusive of stations ineligible for the study. The Federal Communications Commission did not require a station to indicate on its application that its purpose for broadcasting was of a religious nature. Hence, it did not have a listing of "religiously-oriented" stations. Nor was it possible to compile a list solely from the informa- tion submitted by the stations to the FCC. The FCC's cate- gories were limited to: educational or non-educational, and commercial or non-commercial. A station must indicate what percentage of its total broadcasting time will be devoted to the following categories: religion news agriculture discussions entertainment talks educational presentations 21 22 However, these categories were quite nebulous when it came to indicating which were religiously-oriented stations. For example, a religious program comprised almost entirely of discussion could be added to the percentage for "discussions" or religious newscasts to the percentage for "news." A high percentage under the "religion" category might not be a suf- ficient indicator of a station being a "religiously-oriented" station. Many "commercial-secular" stations, which sell their Sunday hours to religious program producers or sponsors, indicate a higher "religion" percentage than do some"religiou3hh- oriented" stations. But selling time to a religious program sponsor does not make a station a "religiously-oriented" station. Even the station's statement of purpose on his application might not give an indication. He might describe his purpose as offering 'public service' or 'clean program- ming,'and.not state emphatically that he wishes to propagate the Christian faith or his denomination's doctrines., Broadcastipg lists all station licensees, holders of construction permits, and applicants for licenses. However, unless the applicant or holder of a license or construction permit used a station name or title for the owner (e.g. Reverend), which denoted some religious affiliation, it was almost impossible to compile a reliable list from this magazhmu Approximately 60% of the stations were obtained from the list- ings in Broadcasting. Their selection from this source was i t 23 dependent upon one of three factors: 1. the station name denoted some possible religious affil- iation, e.g. "Logan County Christian Broadcasters." 2. the owner(s) was indicated as having some religious affiliation, e.g. "Reverend Charles Jones, President," "Tad Brown, owner, owns a religious bookstore,"cnrother. 3. the owner was an educational institution listed as being affiliated with some denomination in either the Directory of American Universities and Colleges or the Collegnglue _B_o_ok_, e.g. "Butler University _/_3wner of WAJC-FM7 is affil- iated with the Disciples of Christ denomination." Three other sources were utilized for compiling the final list of stations to be contacted. Radio station KEAR, San Francisco, permitted the use of its list, "Radio Stations Con- trolled by Christians, with Primary Emphasis on Religious Programming." Radio Station WMBI, owned by Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, provided two lists. The first was their revised list, "Radio Stations Controlled by Christians," which incorporated many entries from the KEAR list. WMBI's second list was of "Stations Airing WMBI Programs on a Regular Basis," (there was no implication that the stations on this second list were religiously-oriented). Some of the stations on the KEAR and WMBI lists of stations "controlled by Christians" might not be eligible for this study. Suppose a decision were made as to whether an individual station would adopt a policy of presenting "programs (no matter to what degree they may be _-—“-—-"— 24 considered religious, or secular) viewed as means by which audiences are built for, or presented with, some portion of the Christian message." It would have to be the decision of the station's owner or possibly of its general manager. This writer felt that even if the program director, commercial manager, announcer, or chairman or president of the board (especially, if an honorary position) were Christians, this would not ensure that the station would continue to maintain a policy favorable to the Christian Church. This would be especially true when these personnel leave or come into con- flict with the owner or manager who sets the policies. It is upon these grounds that some of the stations on the KEAR and 'WMBI lists were questioned. The KEAR and WMBI lists included the names of persons at the station who could be contacted. In checking some of the names against the list in Broadcasting Yearbook, it was found that many of these persons were neither owners nor managers. Their responsibilities, as listed in BroadcastingYearbook, were that of program director, commer- cial manager, or chief engineer. In several cases their names were not in the personnel listing of Broadcastigg Yearbook. For this study we contacted owners, presidents, and general managers of the stations, in most cases, to discover 'the responses of the stations to the questionnaire. In sev- eral cases the completion of the questionnaire was delegated to other personnel. We also contacted applicants for licenses since they would be able to answer the questions in the study even before their station would go on the air. . —*—w*m-‘ A —.H.‘* «...r 25 This study was primarily concerned with responses of stations in relation to their agreement or disagreement with the general theological position of the National Council of Churches. Such a dichotomy of theological positions would place stations owned by the Roman Catholic Church, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Mormons, many pentacostal groups, and others into a position of disagreement with the National Council. However, 'disagreement' for thissmudy represented a position also held by the National Association of EvangeLnxfls, its broadcasting agency, and the American Council of Christian Churches. However, this did not mean that these widely diver- sified groups agreed with one another, but merely that they might hold a common position of disagreement with the National Council of Churches. Related to this is a study by Dr. Hans Toch and Dr. Robert Anderson of Michigan State University. They found that some Roman Catholics were in closer agreement with Protestants than with members of their own faith on a conservative-liberal scale of religious beliefs. B. Developing the Questionnaire The questionnaire was divided into four areas of concern: (1) determining which of sample were religiously-oriented sta- tions; (2) determining the most reliable way stations could be compared: (a) by their agreement or disagreement with National Council of Churches, (b) by their choice of a conservative or a liberal position, or (c) by their denominational affiliation; (3) examining station programming; and (4) indicating tendencies toward inter-station cooperation. 26 In trying to develop a National Council of Churches-non- National Council of Churches agreement dichotomy, we did not attempt to use any policies of the National Council of Churches or non-National Council of Churches groups. An individual might agree with the National Council of Churches on all points except its stand on admission of Red China to the United Nations. At that point he might disagree. So, when asked if he agreed with the National Council of Churches, he might say No--not because of religious reasons--but political reasons. Hence, we evaluated the station's policies....by its interpretation of labels: National Council of Churches, National Association of Evangelicals, American Council of Churches, conservative, liberal, etc. C. Obtaining the Information various studies had been made on the art of increasing mail response by the postage and addressing procedures adopted by the surveyor. Most of these studies showed increases in response as one moved from franked postage to hand-affixed 4-cent stamps to hand-affixed 7-cent air mail stamps to hand- affixed 7-cent air mail plus special delivery stamps. Hand addressing was found to generally give superior results in comparison to typed addressing, which in turn had better responses than automatic machine addressing. These increases were usually attributed to the respondent feeling that the surveyor had gone out of his way and really felt that the respondent's answers were important. Why else would he go 27 to the greater expense and trouble! This writer utilized the hand-affixed 7-cent air mail stamp and a typed address. This had been felt to be the wisest choice since the addition of the special delivery stamp would not increase results enough to justify the greater expenditure of postage. Enclosed with each questionnaire was a self-addressed enve- lope with a 7-cent air mail stamp hand-affixed for returning the questionnaire. Attached to the questionnaire was a letter of introduc- tion to explain the purpose of the study, encourage cooperation, and instruct the respondent. [see Appendix 27 A follow-up letter, using the same stamp and addressing procedure, was utilized for those stations which did not respond within four weeks. [see Appendix E7. A new modified questionnaire was sent. This eliminated a printing error on the original form ("future objectives" section of Question C40. In order to determine the theological position of the programs used in the study, a questionnaire [see Appendix 97 had been sent to 10 denominational and inter-denominational broadcasting executives. They were asked to rate 35 different programs as to with which inter-denominational group: National Association of Evangelicals National Council of Churches American Council of Churches each program agreed. A compilation of their responses deter- mined the theological position of programs in Question A 4. 28 D. Definition of Terms Commercial-secular station - any AM or FM radio station which was not a "religiously-oriented" or an "educational" station. Stations were divided into two main categories: "religiously-oriented" stations and "secular" stations. "Secular" stations were usually either "commercial" or "educa- tional" in purpose. "Religiously-oriented" stations could be "commercial," "non-commercial," or "educational." "Educational" stations, whose primary purpose is educational, could be "reli- gious" or "secular." NCC agreement stations - those who indicated that their stations' views were not in general agreement with those of the National Council of Churches as determined by Question B 1. This definition did not imply that these stations have a common position since it covered Seventh Day Adventist, Southern Baptist, Pentecostal, and others [see Table 27 which hold widely differing views. It only denoted that they all gener- ally did not accept the National Council's views. Some, like the Seventh Day Adventists, might still associate with the National Council's broadcast agency, the Broadcasting and Film Commission. Ownership grouping - station ownership fell into one of the following groupings: (1) an individual (clergy or laity), (2) a local church, (3) an accredited or a non-accredited religious educational institution (church-related college, etc.), (4) a denominational group (minister, layman, and/or 29 churches all of the same denomination), or (5) an inter- denominational group (churches, ministers, and/or laymen, not all of the same denomination.) Religiously—oriented station - any AM or FM station whose programs (no matter to what degree they might be con- sidered religious, or secular) were viewed by management as means by which audiences were built for, or presented with some portion of the Christian message. Other purposes, such as profit, public service, education, entertainment, informa- tion, etc., were viewed as secondary. Percentages of reli- gious programs, theological views represented in programming, and policies of free time or sale of time were not considered of primary importance in comparison to the station's motiva- tion for broadcasting. "Religiously-oriented" included Protestant, Roman Catholic and Jewish ownership. Stations within the U.S.A. - stations were located within the 50 states and were operated primarily for audiences within these boundaries. This excluded any stations within the United States beamed at audiences outside United States territory. It also excluded any stations operated by United States citizens and which were located in other countries. Theological viewpoint - agreement or disagreement with a general National Council of Churches theological position. It was an instrument for dividing the stations into two groups with common patterns of theolOgical beliefs. [These patterns also could develop along a conservative-liberal positioning or along lines of denominational affiliationg7 30 E. Statistical Procedures Questionnaires were sent to every station known to possibly be religiously-oriented. [see Section A. Selecting the Station§7 Hence, it was necessary to use caution in determining if the difference between responses by NCC agree- ment stations and non-NCC agreement stations was due to a sampling error or if there was a real difference. We employed the nonparametric techniques of hypothesis testing. Since our sample of NCC stations was relatively small, we were not willing to assume that the scores under analysis were drawn from a population distributed in a cer- tain way...such as,from a normally distributed population. The "chi square test" was chosen because of its greater power and the ordinal level of measurement. For the most part we used the "chi square test for 2 independent samples" for determining the significance between the two groups: I'k 2 E as cited by Siegel £5. lO4-llg7. In this formula i. J O. = observed number of cases categorized in i-th row of j-th column E. = number of cases expected under Ho to be categorized in the i-th row of the j-th column To find the expected frequency for each cell (Eij)’ multiply the two marginal totals common to a particular cell, and then divide the product by the total number of cases, N. 31 The degree of freedom from an r and k contingency table may be found to be Degree of freedom (df) = (r - 1) (k - 1) where: r number of classifications (rows) k = number of groups (columns) The level of significance is then found by placing the com- 2 and df on a standard table of critical puted values for X values of chi square. When k is larger than 2 the X2 test may still be used if fewer than 20 per cent of the cells have an expected fre- quency of less than 5 and if no cell has an expected frequency of less than 1. If these requirements are not met, it is necessary to combine categories in order to increase the expected frequencies of the various cells. It was necessary to combine cells on several occasions in this study. These will be indicated in the next chapter. In the case where the scores fall into more than six cells, as in Questions B-2 to B-12, other nonparametric tech- niques were employed. For the questions cited, the Kolmogorov- Smirnov two-sample test was chosen. This test is sensitive to any kind of differences in the distributions from which the two samples were drawn ---- difference in location, in dis- persion, etc. It Will test not only whether one group is different from another group, but whether this first group is "higher" than the second. 32 Siegel £5} 127-1297'gives the formula for this two- sample test X2 = 4D2 n1n2 111 + n2 where D = maximum [Shl(x) - Sn2(X)_7' Sn1(X) being the observed cumulative step function of one of the samples n1 = sum of samples of first row n2 = sum of samples of second row It was shown that the above X2 formula has a sampling distri- bution which is approximated by the chi square distribution with df = 2. The level of significance is determined from a standard chi square table. When compared with the t-test, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test has high power efficiency (about 96 per cent) for small samples. In each case the 5 per cent level (CC = .05) was selected as the confidence level of acceptance or rejection in the sta- tistical analysis. IV. PRESENTATION OF DATA All stations were divided into two categories as determined by their responses to Question B 1: Question B l: The views of our station agree most often with the: American Council of Churches (ACC) Broadcasting and Film Commission (BFC) National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) National Council of Churches (NCC) National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) Each responded to the degree he agreed or disagreed with each of these agencies. The responses were divided into those who were "in agreement with a National Council of Churches position" (e.g. BFC or NCC) and those "not in agreement with a National Council of Churches position" (e.g. ACC, NAE, and NRB). It was against these two poles that all other responses were weighed. Other poles were considered: type of owner (Question A l) conservative-liberal position (Question A 3) types of programs (Questions A 4 and A 5) inter-station cooperation (Question A 6) However, the responses to a "NCC agreement - non-NCC agreement" division were most significant. Each,of the other poles con- sidered,reinforcedthe'NCC agreement - non-NCC agreement" division. 33 34 Section A Question A 1: Check the ONE category which most closely represents your station's owner(s): an individual a local church a religious educational institution a denomination,...gr churches, ministers, and/or laymen of the same denomination -__an inter-denominational group (churches, ministers, and/or laymen not all of the same denomination) Ill Responses were significant when we analyzed the responses for "local church" and "religious educational institution." Of the sample used, we found 75% of the "NCC agreement" sta- tions were owned by religious education institutions. Of the "non-NCC agreement" stations only 22% were owned by these types of institutions. But the vast majority of the non-NCC agreement stations (76%) were owned by either individuals or private groups. Of NCC agreement stations, 96.2% were owned by ”local churches," "religious educational institutions" (majority being church-related colleges), or "churches, ministers, or laymen of the same denomination." Only 32.6% of the non-NCC agreement stations had ownership of this type. Question A 2: The following is a list of possible terms used to refer to "religiously-oriented radio stations:" a. A Christian station. b. A Gospel station. 0. A religious station. d. An AM or FM station which may employ the same formats as a commercial-secular or educational-secular sta- tion, but the intent and purpose of these programs are divergent from the secular station. 35 e. An AM or FM station whose programming (no matter to what degree it may be religious, or secular) is viewed by the management as means by which audiences are built for, or presented with, some portion of the Christian message.... f. A religiously-oriented station. g. An educational station operated by a church or church-related college. Of this list of terms for "religiously-oriented," would any one, or a combination, of the terms describe the purpose and motivation of your station? When the educational station responses were omitted, it was noted that non-NCC agreement stations favored the term, "a Christian station" (50%), while the NCC agreement stations favored the definition which stressed the primary goal of communicating the Christian faith (18.4%Jk These responses were significant le= .01). Qpestion A 3a: What denomination(s) came closest to repre- senting your station's theological views? . Using the 1964 Yearbook of American Churches 153 §7, we divided the denominational preferences into two groups: those affiliated with the National Council of Churches and those not. When the responses of this grouping were compared with the two poles, NCC agreement stations and non-NCC agree- ment stations (Table V), we found the responses significant (oC= .01). l . . . Def1n1t1on "e." 36 TABLE V RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STATIONS AND THEIR DENOMINATIONAL PREFERENCE NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations NCC Affiliated denominations 23 82% l 6% Methodist American Baptist Presbyterian Evangelical Lutheran American Lutheran Protestant Episcopal Evangelical United Brethren Methodist Episcopal Denominations not affiliated 5 18% 18 94% with NCC Mormon Mennonite Bible Presbyterian Southern Baptist Nazarene Free Methodist Seventh Day Adventist Christian Christian Reform Pentecostal No answer .9. ggf 28 58 X2 = 26.76 Level of significance = .01 *The NCC-agreement stations were owned largely by churches and church-related colleges. They were more denominationally-minded and would more readily respond to this question. Question A 3b: Would you say that your station's theological views are: GENERALLY CONSERVATIVE? GENERALLY LIBERAL? The responses were significant (CC = .01). The non-NCC agree- ment stations tended to indicate a conservative position more 37 often than a liberal one (91.3% vs. 8.6%). The sample for NCC agreement stations tended to be evenly divided between both positions (39% vs. 46%). In examining the conservative- liberal positions according to ownership, it was noted that the educational institutions of non-NCC agreement tended to indicate a conservative position. Most of these institutions were Bible schools as opposed to liberal arts colleges in the NCC agreement group. Question A 4a: From the following list check each of the packaged program series that you broadcast [see list in questionnaire, Appendix Q7: All programs were divided into 2 categories: a. Those in general agreement with the National Council b. Those not in general agreement with the National Cbuncil We then found that stations carried programs which reflected their theological position (NCC vs. non-NCC). The responses were significant. It was noted that NCC agreement stations tended to carry a balance of programs of both types. TABLE VI STATION'S POSITION COMPARED WITH THAT OF PROGRAMS AIRED NCC Agreement non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations NCC agreement programs aired 17 17 non-NCC agreement programs aired 25 334 x2 = 4.44 Level of significance = .05 38 Question A 4b: Which ONE program in the above list represents your station's views: MOST CLOSELY? SECOND MOST? FARTHEST FROM? Again the programs were divided into the two categories as mentioned above. However, the responses were not significant. The NCC agreement stations operated by liberal arts colleges were responsible for the high percentage of "No answer" responses (42.7% and 78.6%). Many of these stations expressed lack of knowledge of the programs listed, especially the NCC- agreement stations (largely religious educational institutions). Both groups of stations responded poorly to choosing a program which is FARTHEST FROM representing their theological view. Of those who did respond, both groups were consistent in choosing "The Christophers" (Roman Catholic) program (50% in both cases). TABLE VII STATION'S POSITION COMPARED TO PROGRAM SELECTED TO REPRESENT POSITION NCC Agreement. Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations MOST CLOSELY AND SECOND MOST Choose NCC agreement program 9 32.1% 3 5.2% Choose non—NCC agreement 7 25% 53 91.3% program No answer 12_ 42.7% '_2 3.5% 8 58 2 X = 3.39 Not significant. 39 NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations FARTHEST FROM Choose NCC agreement program 0 0 2 3.5% Choose non—NCC agreement 6 21.4% 16 27.5% program No answer 22. 78.6% ‘22 68.8% 28 58 X2 = 2.06 Not significant. Question A 6: Here are a number of ways that religiously- oriented stations can cooperate with other religiously- oriented stations: a. receive programs from these stations: . b. send programs to these religiously-oriented stations: . c. exchange ideas....with these stations: . d. member of a religiously-oriented network....with these stations: . e. contribute to a religiously-oriented station newsletter ....with these stations: . f. regularly subscribe or read the following publications: the "Foreign Missionary Radio" newsletter? , Christian Century? , Christian Life? , the "Radio-Tele-Gram"? _, the Christian Broadcaster? , the "EEC News"? _., "Amplify"? , Broadcasti_g? , or other? . g. regularly attend national or regional meetings of denom- inational or inter-denominational broadcasting agencies. Which agencies? . The responses were not significant until all types of coopera- tion with NCC stations were combined and all types of coopera- tion with non-NCC stations were combined. The responses were then significant. Stations should have been given a blank to check if they did not cooperate. This would have allowed some interpretation of the great number of stations not responding. 40 TABLE VIII STATION'S POSITION AND ITS EFFORTS TO COOPERATE WITH STATIONS NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Categories Stations Stations 1. Receive and send programs ideas 2. Network member 3. Newsletter, magazines, meetings with NCC agreement stations 9 10.8% 6 3.4% with non-NCC agreement stations 3 3.6% 64 36.7% with both types of stations 2 2.4% 0 0 no answer 22_ 83.2% 104 59.7% 84* 174* 2 X = 28.27 Level of significance = .01 *Stations responded to each of three categories. Responses to these three categories then were combined. Hence,these totals are three times normal. Question A 7: In each of the two groups below, check the statement(s) which represents your station's policies: Group A free time to religious groups. sell time to religious groups. select groups to be aired and accept contributions. supported by listener and local church contributions. sell time to, or accept contributions from, secular groups. Group B __allow only religious groups of station's own denomination. __allow only religious groups agreeing with station's the- ological views. __Jallow any religious group to be aired. __allow only religious groups which are members of local council of churches. . -__allow only groups of Protestant faith. ‘__allow only groups of Roman Catholic faith. 41 Free time to religious_groups - Responses indicated that NCC agreement stations have more of a tendency to adopt policies granting free time for religious groups. Responses were significant. Sell time to religious groups - Results indicated a tendency of non-NCC agreement to sell time to religious groups. There was significance to the 1% level. Computations indicated that responses to all other statements were not significant.* Section B In section B of the questionnaire it was necessary to employ the Kolmogorov-Smirnov 2-sample test, but responses to the Questions B 2 - B 5 were not significant. Question B 6: Our station's programming attempts to keep to beliefs which all Christians hold in common, and refrains from emphasizing doctrines in which there is disagreement. Results indicated a tendency for non-NCC agreement sta- tions to avoid broadcasting doctrines in which there was dis- agreement but to air those which all hold in common. Responses were significant as determined by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (ordered categories). *Computations of responses to "allow only religious groups of station's own denomination" and "allow any religious group to be aired" indicated significance at the 5% and 2% respectively. Hewever, they were not appropriate since more than one of their expected values (Eij) was below 5% due to the small sample. 42 ,Question B 7: .233 stations feel that the motivation for the selection of gll_our programming is Christian in origin. Results show non-NCC agreement stations tended to feel motivation for all their programming as Christian in origin. Responses were significant «#2= .02). Question B 8: Our station is interested in a regular news- letter for all religiously-oriented stations in the U.S.A. Computations showed responses to be significant (OC= .02). The responses indicated that non-NCC stations tended to desire a common religiously-oriented newsletter more than NCC agree- ment stations. Question B 9: One of our purposes is to win listeners....to the Christian faith. The responses showed non-NCC agreement stations tended to indicate that winning listeners to the Christian faith as one of their purposes. Significance was at the 1% level. Question B 10: One of our purposes is to build a stronger Christian family by helping the local church to become stronger. Results were significant GfC= .01). They indicated non- NCC agreement stations tended to express the building of a stronger Christian family as a higher goal than did NCC agree- ment stations. 43 Question B 11: One of 223 purposes is to make known the Christian Gospel to every person everywhere. Communication of the Christian Gospel tended to be chosen as a purpose by the non-NCC agreement stations more often than the NCC agreement stations in this sample. Question B 12: One of ggr_purposes is to help the different religious groups to understand each other. To help different religious groups understand each other was shown to be one of the primary purposes of the non-NCC agreement stations. Responses were significant (0C = .01). Section C Question C l: The following are some possible attitudes of broadcasters toward religious programming: a. The Christian message should be permeated through all programs, "religious" or "secular" b. Some programs have only a "religious" goal in mind, while others have only a "secular" goal There was a significant difference (1% level) in the responses of stations in the degree that the Christian faith should affect programming. The non-NCC agreement stations indicated that the faith should be permeated in all program- ming, "religious" or "secular." Their responses showed this to be their present goal, as well as a future goal. 44 Qgestion C 2a: Below is a list of qualifications for religiously-oriented station staffs: a. Secondary education e. Theological seminary b. College f. Radio school c. Graduate school g. Previous radio experience d. Bible school or college h. Agreement with doctrinal position If you had your choice in the selection of your management personnel, which ONE of these qualifications do you feel is MOST ESSENTIAL? SECOND MOST? LEAST? Non-NCC agreement stations emphasized high school train- ing (secondary education, Bible school, radio school, and pre- vious radio experience) as qualifications for choosing management personnel. They also stressed agreement with their theological position. NCC agreement stations emphasized higher education (college, graduate school, and theological seminary). Then they chose high school education (second choice). The responses of what the stations felt MOST ESSENTIAL and SECOND MOST were both significant. Their responses to what they felt LEAST ESSENTIAL were not significant. Question C 2b: Of the management personnel of your station, which one of the qualifications typlifies the education or training of the GREATEST NUMBER? SECOND MOST? LEAST NUMBER? The non-NCC agreement stations had a majority of employees of high school level. The NCC agreement stations had a greater tendency toward college educated staffs. Their responses to 45 GREATEST NUMBER and SECOND MOST number of employees were significant.' (NOTE: "Agreement with theological position" was eliminated in computing GREATEST NUMBER to form a four cell computationo Under SECOND MOST responses the non-NCC stations tended to emphasize "theological position." Responses were significant. Responses to LEAST NUMBER were not significant. Question C 3: Here are some possible characteristics of a religious-oriented station: a. Making a reasonable profit b. Opportunity to communicate the station's views of the Christian faith to the community c. Opportunity to increase the Christian faith through all of station's programming (using each program as a means of communicating Christ) d. Serving the local churches e. Attempt to raise educational and cultural level of listeners f. Public relations for your station's organization (school, church, etc.) g. Opportunity to bring listeners to the Christian faith Characteristics were then combined into three general categories: a. Profit goal (a) b. General education or public relations goal (e and f) c. Propagation of the Christian faith (b, c, d, and g) By eliminating the profit category, responses were significant (OC = .01). They indicated a tendency for non-NCC agreement stations to emphasize the propagation of the Gospel more often than cultural and public relations goals. There was a ten- dency for NCC agreement stations to reverse these emphases. 46 When we examined the stations’ SECOND choices, we saw the same pattern being repeated. However, for second choice the profit goal became an important characteristic. Signifi- cance was at the 1% level. Responses to LEAST were not sig- nificant. ,Question C 4: The following is a list of some possible religious program categories: a. Talk e. Drama g. Interview b. Meditation f. Discussion h. Music c. News d. Variety (combining news, drama, etc. in one program, or in one series) The religious program categories were combined into two groupings: a. traditional religious programs (categories a, b, c, d and h) where either a minister with his ready meditation or sermon always handy-—or news wire scripts are available. b. programs where scripts and talent are usually not readily accessible and of which small-staffed sta- tions must steer clear. The non-NCC agreement stations indicated a tendency to draw least from the categories which required somewhat more prepara- tion, talent search, or money. The NCC agreement stations showed an opposite trend. These responses were significant (DC = .01). 47 All other responses were not significant. The section on future objectives was eliminated due to a printing error on some copies. Questions C 5: Here is a breakdown of possible objectives of a religiously-oriented station's programming: a. to present programs aimed at a representative cross- section of public. b. to present programs each aimed at certain segments of the public and go: try to reach people of all segments. c. to present programs each aimed at a different segment of the public, but over a period of a week to reach people in all segments. NCC agreement stations tended to feel a future need to communicate to all the public eventually and not to exclude any segment of their community. Their responses were signifi- cant (0C = .02). The remaining responses, other than those indicating their LEAST choices for future objectives, were not significant. Question C 6: In terms of religious affiliations, here are some possible target audiences for religious programs: a. Protestant groups d. Members of the public b. Roman Catholic groups in general c. Non-Christians The responses to all parts of this question were not significant. The NCC agreement stations tended to indicate 48 Roman Catholic and non-Christian audiences to have a low priority in their present and future programming. Stations seemed to have greatest difficulty in selecting which groups describe station's audience the least. Question C 7: Here are some possible policies for religiously- oriented stations to adopt in relation to "commercial-secular" stations: a. Concentrate exclusively on types of programs not carried on "commercial-secular" stations. b. Present some types of programs now carried on "commercial-secular" stations, but with a differ- ent intent and purpose. Though the responses to the stations' present program- ming policies were not significant, those for future policies were significant. They indicated a tendency for non-NCC agree- ment stations to want to air programs not normally available over commercial-secular stations. The NCC agreement stations, on the other hand, wanted to choose programs which could be heard over other stations--but with a different motivation for airing the programs. Question C 8: Here are some possible sources of program ideas for religiously-oriented stations: a. Denominational broadcasting agencies b. Inter-denominational broadcasting agencies (NRB, BFC, etc.) 49 c. Religiously-oriented stations d. "Commercial-secular" stations and "educational- secular" stations. NCC agreement stations tended to see denominational broadcasting agencies as their source of program ideas, as opposed to ideas from other religiously-oriented stations. Non-NCC agreement stations indicated an opposite trend. The responses of the two groups were significant in all three sections of the question: MOST OFTEN, SECOND MOST «#5 = .02), and LEAST (aCL= .01). It was interesting to note that 19 out of the 35 programs listed in Question A 4 were produced by inter-denominational groups (5 programs) and so-called non-denominational groups (14 programs). Yet none of the stations indicated the "inter-denominational" category as the source for their prOgram ideas. QuestiOn C 9: If you were planning to form a religiously- oriented station network, here are some possible qualifica- tions you might set for station membership: a. Agree with same inter-denominational group (NAE, NCC, NRB, etc.) b. Have similar 'commercial' policy (sell time, give free time, etc.) o. Be of same denomination d. Have similar reasons for broadcasting (serving Christ, making reasonable profit, raise educational levels, etc.) 50 e. Have similar doctrinal position (conservative, liberal, fundamentalist). Non—NCC agreement stations tended to emphasize "similar commercial policies" and"reasons for broadcasting" and de- emphasize "denominational affiliation" as important considera- tions for forming a religiously-oriented station network. The NCC agreement stations showed an opposite position. However, only the stations' responses to what they felt to be LEAST important were significant. V. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA This chapter is devoted to discussing the facts, which were presented in Chapter IV, based upon the hypotheses set down in Chapter I using the available evidence to support the hypotheses. Implications will be drawn also. The main hypothesis of this present study was: .13 lg possible_tg describe religiously-oriented stations 12 terms [of their corporate agreement or disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches, and its broad- castipg agency, the Broadcasting and Film Commission. There seemed to be sufficient evidence to support this main hypothesis. There was a difference between National Council agreement stations and non-National Council agreement stations in eight areas of this study. These differences were presented through the following analysis: Hypothesis 1: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 12 their choice of denomination to ropresent their theological views. This hypothesis was supported. There was a strong tendency (82%) for the National Council agreement stations to indicate denominations associated with the National Council of Churches. The non-National Council agreement stations tended 51 52 to choose denominations not associated with the National Council of Churches. Hypothesis 2: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council of_Churches agreement stations ip_their choice of a conservative or liberal theological position. National Council agreement stations tended slightly toward a liberal position (46% vs. 39%). Non-National Council agreement stations tended strongly toward a conserva- tive position (91.3% vs. 8.6%). Hypothesis 3: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 13 their choice of programs . National Council agreement stations tended to give a balance of programs but favored slightly those in general agreement with the National Council of Churches. However, the non-National Council agreement stations strongly favored those which are not in general agreement with the National Council. This reinforced Stogdill's comment that the difference between a liberal and a conservative is not in being unpreju- diced and free from value estimates. Rather it is the liberaPs ability to integrate a wider variety of elements into his value systems. Also, he is able to reconcile in his value system a greater range of discrepant elements. 53 Hypothesis 4: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations lp_their choice of stations with which they will cooperate. While all stations tended to cooperate primarily with those of a same theological position (Question A 6), the non- National Council agreement stations tended to cooperate to a greater extent. They exchanged programs and program ideas, formed religiously-oriented stations networks, and published newsletters to a greater extent than the National Council agreement stations. They wanted more inter-station newsletters (Question B 8) in the future. The non-National Council agree- ment station owners each controlled more stations than do National Council agreement stations. This undoubtedly is part of the explanation of the greater number of non-National Council religiously-oriented station networks and newsletters. In joining religiously-oriented station networks (Question C 9), the non-National Council agreement stations emphasized "similar reasons for broadcasting" and "similar commercial policies" as important factors. National Council agreement stations stressed denominational affiliation since their ownership tended to be denominationally-oriented. With the greater number of multiple station ownerships among the non-NCC agreement stations, we found these stations tended to indicate "other religiously-oriented stations" as their prime source of program ideas (Question C 8). Again, the National Council agreement stations with their predominantly 54 denominationally-oriented ownerships tended to stress denom- inational sources for their ideas. ,Hypothesis 5: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations in their commercial policies toward religious groups. National Council agreement stations tended to exhibit commercial policies granting "free time" to religious groups. Non-National Council agreement stations tended to stress the policies of selling time to religious groups. [There would seem to have been a possible misinterpretation of this ques— tion. Personal observation of many of these stations would lead this writer to believe that both give limited "free time" to the ministerial association. However, the non-NCC agree- ment stations have tended to feel that beyond that point churches should purchase time. The NCC agreement stations have tended to feel that further free time could be negotiated if the material is something worth while or needed to serve the communityg7 Hypothesis 6: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations 33 the way they view the purpose of their programs. National Council agreement stations, having a high per— centage of religious educational institutions as owners, 55 tended to stress a general educational or cultural goal for their programming. The Christian message was an often unspOKen foundation upon which this programming was built. The non- National Council agreement stations saw their programming primarily as a means of propagating the Christian faith. They tended to feel it must be verbalized continually in their programs. They felt the programs should meet two primary purposes: winning the listener to the Christian faith and strengthening the Christian, the home, and the local church. Hypothesis 7: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council ugreement stations iu_the qualifications they require of_their station personnel. National Council agreement stations tended to stress a higher level of education of their management personnel and exhibited this tendency in their present staffs. The high percentage of college-related stations would strengthen this tendency. They represented denominations which tended to stress importance of a higher education. The non-National Council agreement stations' present staffs were primarily of high school level of formal education,and they chose high school education and broadcasting training or experience as qualifications for replacement staffs. The non-National Council group also tended to stress the need for the staff personnel to agree with the station's theological position. 56 Hypothesis 8: National Council agreement stations will differ from non-National Council agreement stations iu the types of pro- gram formats exhibited iu the programs thgy broadcast. This hypothesis was only partially supported. Both groups tended to utilize the more traditional formats for religious programs where the talent for a sermon or medita- tion, or the script for a religious newscast, was not too difficult to obtain. There was a tendency for the National Council agreement stations to emphasize formats for which more staff effort was required (namely, drama, discussion, and interviews). The National Council agreement stations also tended to find the more traditional formats less desir— able. VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Summary The intent of this study was primarily to compare . responses of stations in relation to their corporate agree- ment or disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches. It was felt that their responses would differ significantly. The problem of this study was to determine just how... and to what degree...these stations differed in their theo- logical views, motivation for broadcasting, commercial poli- cies, and other aspects of operation. A matter of concern was whether they might differ because of their forms of ownership: individual, group, church, or school. From the data compiled and its analysis,we made recom— mendations for further study of the operation of the retufiously- oriented station. Many denominations have raised the issue of church ownership of stations. They urge placement of their programs on available time on existing stations. A mail questionnaire was sent to 216 stations on February l9-20, 1962. One hundred ten stations returned the question- naires--86 of which were eligible for the study. These 86 respondents comprised 28 National Council agreement stations and 58 non-National Council agreement stations. A complete tabulation of responses can be found in Appendix A. 57 58 The questionnaires were designed to provide: (a) face data, (b) information to form the National Council - non- National Council polarity, and (c) information to support the major hypothesis. The major hypothesis of this study is: It_i§_possible 39 describe religiously-oriented stations 12.£2£fl§.2£.32213 corporate agreement op disagreement with the general policies of_the National Council of Churches, and its broadcasting agency, the Broadcasting and Film Commission. B. Conclusions As might be expected, evidence found in this study sup- ports the following conclusions: 1. When Choosing a denomination to represent its theo- logical views, National Council agreement stations tend to choose a denomination which is associated with the National Council. The non-National Council agreement stations tend to choose one not associated with the National Council. 2. In choosing a conservative or liberal "label" to represent its theological position, a National Council agree— ment station tends to choose the liberal position. The non— National Council agreement station tends to choose the "conservative" position. 3. In choosing programs,the non-National Council agree— ment station will Choose those which are generally not in agreement with the National Council views. National Council agreement stations, while favoring programs agreeing with the 59 National Council generally, will tend to use both types to meet the needs of a greater cross-section of the public. 4. Non-National Council agreement stations tend to form multi-station ownerships and networks of religiously- oriented stations. They tend to look upon their task as primarily that of a missionary...and, secondly, that of an educator. 5. National Council agreement stations tend to be denominationally-oriented -- working through these channels. They look upon their task as primarily building upon the foundation the Church has already established. 6. National Council agreement stations would stress the importance of a higher education as qualification for their staff members. Non-National Council agreement stations tend to feel high school education is sufficient...and stress radio school and previous broadcasting experience. C. Recommendations As a result of this study, this author would propose the following recommendations for further study of religunsly- oriented stations: 1. That the Anderson-Toch (Michigan State University) "conservative-liberal" test be administered to the management of religiously-oriented stations to determine their theologi- cal position. It was found that an individual's position on several conservative-liberal scales is a more effective indica- tor of his religious beliefs than denominational affiliation. 60 2. That the theological position of a station's pro- gramming be compared with (a) the management's position on the Anderson-Toch scales and (b) the station's corporate agreement or disagreement with the general policies of the National Council of Churches. 3. That the station leadership be examined to determine (a) the reasons they give for justifying their own organiza- tion or for resenting other organizations, and (b) under what conditions they would cooperate with another organization. 4. That a station's programming be studied to determine if it reflects the theological viewpoint of its management or if the acceptance of programs is determined by commercial, political,or other reasons. 5. That a study be made to determine how religiously- oriented stations perceive the concept: "serving in the pubhe interest" and "community." Determine if the "community" they serve is: (a) cross—section of all social, religious, econom- ical, racial, and educational levels...or (b) limited to a segment, such as the evangelical or conservative Protestant community. 6. That a study be made of how stations perceive their role in relation to the churches of the community. Determine if cooperation with the ministerial association is perceived as: important and essential.... or a courtesy and an accomo— dation. 61 7. That a study of National Council agreement sta- tions and non—National Council agreement stations be made to determine if they differ in the amount of local pro- gramming they produce. 8. Study the effect that the type of ownership (individual, group, church, or school) has upon station responses. APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE TABULATION QUESTIONNAIRE TABULATION Section A Question A 1: Check the ONE category which most closely represents your station's owner(s): NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations an individual 0 0 16 27.5% a local Church 4 14.1% 1 1.7% a religious-educational 21 75% 13 22.3% institution churches, ministers, 2 7.1% 5 8.6% or laymen of the same denomination inter-denominational _l. 3.6% 23_ 39.5% group 28 58 Question A 2: Of this list of terms for "religiously- oriented? would any one, or a combination, of the terms describe the purpose and motivation of your station? a Christian station 2 7.4% 29 50% a Gospel station 0 O 3 5.2% a religious station 1 3.7% l 1.7% an AM or FM station which 1 3.7% 2 3.4% may employ the same for- mats as a commercial- secular or educational- secular station, but the intent and purpose of these programs are divergent from the secular station 63 64 Question A 2 continued: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations an AM or FM station whose 5 18.4% 15 25.8% programming (no matter to what degree it may be religious or secular) is viewed by the manage- ment as means by which audiences are built for, or presented with, some portion of the Christian message. (Other purposes, such as profit, public service, education, enter- tainment, information, etc., are viewed as secon- dary.) a religiously-oriented 1 3.7% 2 3.4% station an education station oper— 16 59% 4 6.9% ated by a Church or church-related college no answer 1 3.7% 2 3.4% Question A 3: Would you say that your station's theological views are: Generally conservative ll 39% 53 91.3% Generally liberal 13 46% 5 8.6% No answer 4 14% 0 0 2 X = 18.28 Level of significance = .01 65 Question A 3 (continued): What denomination(s) comes closest to representing your station's theological views (even though you may be an inter-denominational organization)? NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations Methodist 4 14.1% 1 1.7% Free Will Baptist 1 3.6% O 0 (American Baptist) American Baptist 4 14.1% 0 0 Presbyterian 7 25% 0 0 Evangelical Lutheran 2 7.1% 0 0 Mormon 0 0 1 1.7% Mennonite 1 3.6% l 1.7% Bible Presbyterian 0 0 l 1.7% Southern Baptist 0 0 2 3.5% American Lutheran l 3.6% 0 0 Protestant Episcopal 2 7.1% 0 0 Nazarene 0 0 7 12.0% Evang. United Brethren l 3.6% 0‘ 0 Free Methodist 0 0 3 5.2% Seventh Day Adventist 4 14.1% 0 0 Christian 0 0 0 0 Christian Reform 0 0 2 3.5% Methodist Episcopal l 3.6% 0 0 Pentecostal 0 0 l 1.7% No answer ‘_Q 0 9 67% N m Ullw co 66 Question A 4: From the following list check each of the packaged series that you broadcast: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations Accent on YOuth 0 2 Back to God HOur 2 12 Back to the Bible 0 32 Baptist HOur 0 10 Children's Chapel 3 6 Christian Celebrity Time 2 5 Christophers l 2 Church at Work 7 l Haven of Rest 0 8 Heartbeat Theatre 1 4 Hour of Decision 1 28 Hymns from Harding 1 10 Layman's Heur 2 9 Light and Life HOur l 12 Lutheran Hour 5 19 Master Control 1 4 Mennonite HOur l 7 National Radio Pulpit 2 0 Old Fashioned Revival 1 25 On Wings of Song 0 1 Patterns of Melody 0 l5 Pilgrimage 1 0 Protestant Hour 2 1 Psychology for Living 0 l6 Ranger Bill 0 9 Revival Time 2 l7 Showers of Blessing 2 12 Songs in the Night 0 15 Stories of Great Christians 2 18 YOur Story Hour 0 3 Temple Time 1 7 Unshackled 1 29 Voice of Prophecy 0 4 YOung People's Church of the Air 0 3 WOrld Vision 0 l6 67 Question A 4 (continued): Whice ONE program of the above list represents your station's theological views? NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations Most Farthest Most Farthest Close From Close From & 2nd & 2nd Most Most Accent on YOuth 0 0 0 0 Back to God Hour 0 0 1 0 Back to the Bible 0 0 18 0 Baptist HOur 0 0 4 0 Children's Chapel 0 0 0 0 Christian Celebrity Time 0 0 0 0 Christophers 0 3 0 9 Church at Work 3 0 0 0 Haven of Rest 0 0 l 0 Heartbeat Theatre 0 0 0 1 Hour of Decision 0 0 15 0 Hymns from Harding 0 0 0 0 Layman's Hour 1 0 2 0 Light and Life Hour 0 O 1 0 Lutheran Hour 5 0 l 0 Master Control 1 0 0 0 Mennonite Hour 1 0 l 1 National Radio Pulpit 0 0 0 2 Old Fashioned Revival 0 2 5 0 On Wings of Song 0 0 0 0 Patterns of Melody 0 0 l 0 Pilgrimage 0 0 0 0 Protestant Hour 5 0 l 0 Psychology for Living 0 0 0 0 Ranger Bill 0 l 0 l Revival Time 0 0 l l Showers of Blessing 0 0 l 0 Songs in the Night 0 0 0 0 Stories of Great Christians 0 0 0 0 YOur Story Hour 0 O 0 0 Temple Time 0 0 l 0 Unshackled 0 0 3 0 Voice of Prophecy 0 0 0 3 YOung People's Church of 0 0 0 0 the Air World Vision 0 0 0 0 68 Question A 5: Question Al6: religiously-oriented stations 0 Question eliminated. Responses were too low. Here is a number of possible ways that an cooperate with other religiously—oriented stations [INDICATE CALL LETTERS WHEREVER POSSIBLE OF THOSE RELIGIOUSLYOORIENTED STATIONS WITH WHICH YOU REGULARLY COOPERATE7. NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement ___ Stations Stations with with non- with with with with "NCC" "NCC" both NCC non-NCC both stations stations stns. stations Receive programs 3 2 0 l 29 0 Send Programs Exchange ideas No answer 23 28 Member of religiously— 0 0 0 0 12 0 oriented network No answer 28 46 Newsletter contributor 6 1 2 5 23 0 Subscribe to magazines Attend meetings No Answer 19 30 Question A 7: In each of the two groups below, check the statement(s) which represents y our station's policies: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations Checked No Checked No Answer Answer §E_.‘:K Group A free time to reli- 20 8 26 32 4.30 .05 S gious groups sell time to 3 25 31 27 12.48 .01 S religious groups select groups to be 6 22 5 53 1.79 .20 NS aired and accept contributions 69 Question A 7 (continued): Checked No Answer Checked No Answer X2 Group A continued: supported by listener 4 24 and local church contributions sell time to, or accept contributions from, secular sponsors 2 25 Group B allow only: religious groups of 5 23 station's own denomination religious groups 9 19 agreeing w/station's theological views any religious group 4 24 to be aired religious groups 25 which are members of local Council groups of Protestant faith groups of Roman 0 28 Catholic faith 03 O 28 = level of significance 11 14 15 12 47 44 57 43 58 46 49 58 .03 5.06 0.13 6.54 0.72 2.274 .90 NS .20 NS .05*NS .80 NS .02*NS .50 NS .20 NS NS *Not appropriate since more than one of the expected values (E- ) were below five. 13 Section B The Kolomogorov—Smirnov 2 - sample test was used throughout this section. Question B 1: These responses were used to form the NCC agree- ment -- non-NCC agreement dichotomy used throughout the study. 70 Question B 2: Dramatizations are the most acceptable form to the general public when conveying the Christian message. Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly No Agree Disagree Ans. NCC l 6 11 8 0 2 Non-NCC ,3‘ 20 , 14 14 l 6 X2 = 1.97 Level of significance = .50 Question B 3: Research shows that beliefs and attitudes are not greatly changed by radio and television broadcasts. NCC l 4 9 9 3 2 Non-NCC 10 4 6 16 16 6 X2 = 2.46 Level of significance = .20 Question B 4: Locally-produced programs will generally draw a greater audience than packaged program series originating outside the station and the listening community. NCC 3 9 6 7 0 3 Non-NCC 7 26 6 12 3 4 x2 = 1.2 Level of significance = .70 _Question B 5: Religious programs primarily 'reinforce' what the listener already believes. NCC 2 14 3 6 l 2 Non-NCC 2 28 13 9 0 6 X2 = 0.71 Level of significance = .70 Question B 6: Our station's programming attempts to keep to beliefs which all Christians hold in common, and refrains from emphasizing doctrines in which there is disagreement. NCC 5 9 3 8 l 2 Non-NCC 26 15 2 7 2 6 X2 = 6.5 Level of significance = .05 71 Question B 7: Our station feels that the motivathnl for the selection of all of our programming is Christian in origin. Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly No Agree Disagree Ans. NCC 6 12 3 3 l 2 Non-NCC 30 20 l 2 0 4 x2 = 8.35 Level of significance = .02 Question B 8: Our station is interested in a regular news- letter for all religiously-oriented stations in the U.S.A. NCC 4 9 4 5 2 4 Non-NCC 16 33 4 1 l 3 2 X = 8.72 Level of significance = .02 Question B 9: One of our purposes is to win listeners . . . to the Christian faith. NCC 8 9 6 5 0 0 Non-NCC 48 9 0 0 0 1 X2 = 17.4 Level of significance = .001 ‘Question B 10: One of our purposes is to build a stronger Christian family, by helping the local Church to become stronger. NCC 8 9 4 6 l 0 Non-NCC 47 10 1 0 0 0 x2 = 17.1 Level of significance = .001 Question B 11: One of our purposes is to make known the Christian Gospel to every person everywhere. NCC 6 16 3 2 0 1 Non-NCC 50 6 1 1 0 0 x2 = 30 Level of significance = .001 72 _Question B 12: One of our purposes is to help the different religious groups to understand each other. Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly No. Agree Disagree Ans. NCC ll 13 0 0 0 4 Non-NCC 8 23 9 7 6 5 x2 = 11.4 Level of significance = .01 Section C Question C l: The following are some possible attitudes of broadcasters toward religious programming: At present on your station, which ONE of the above attitudes do you feel receives MOST EMPHASIS? NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations The Christian message should 6 21.4% 34 58.5% be permeated through all programs, "religious" or "secular." Some programs have only a 18 64.4% 17 39.2% "religious" goal in mind, while others have only a "secular" goal. No answer ._3 14.2% _;Z 12.1% 28 58 X2 = 9.45 Level of significance = .01 In the future, which do you feel should receive MOST EMPHASIS? The Christian message should 5 17.9% 32 55% be permeated through all programs, "religious" or secular. 73 NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations Some programs have only a "religious" goal in mind, 19 68% 13 22.3% while others have only a "secular" goal. No answer 4 14.2% 13 22.3% x2 = 14.0 Level of Significance = .01 Question C 2: Below is a list of qualifications for religiously- oriented station staff: Note: In this question categories have been combined: high school = secondary education, Bible school, radio school, and previous education categories. higher education = college, graduate school and seminary categories. If you had your choice in the selection of your manage- ment personnel, which one of these qualifications do you feel is: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations MOST ESSENTIAL high school 8 28.5% 22 38% higher education 14 50% 18 31% agree theologically l 3.6% 16 27.5% no answer ..2 17.8% _2_ 3.5% 28 5 X2 = 5.88 Level of significance = .05 SECOND MOST ESSENTIAL high school 15 53.6% 21 36.2% higher education 5 17.8% 5 8.6% agree theologically 2 7.1% 20 34.5% no answer ‘_6 21.4% 12_ 20.6% 28 58 X2 = 6.11 Level of significance = .05 LEAST ESSENTIAL high school 6 21.4% 20 34.5% higher education 10 36% 21 36.2% agree theologically 6 21.4% 1 1.7% no answer 6 21.4% 16 27.5% 28' '58 x2 = 0.22 74 Level of significance = 0.70 Of the management personnel of your station, which one of the qualifications typifies the education or training of the : GREATEST NUMBER high school higher education agree theologically no answer x2 = 12.19 NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations 3 10.7% 30 51.7% 20 71.4% 20 34.5% 1* 3.6% 0* 0 ._§ 17.8% ..Z 12.0% 28 5 Level of significance = .01 *Column was eliminated in significance computations. SECOND MOST high school higher education agree theologically no answer X2 = 6.72 LEAST NUMBER high school higher education agree theologically no answer 7 25% 18 31% 9 32.1% 9 15.4% 1 3.6% 17 29.3% 1; 39.1% _1__4_ 24.1% 28 58 Level of significance = .05 6 21.4% 15 25.8% 8 28.5% 24 41.3% 5 17.8% 2 3.5% 9 32.1% 17 29.3% No significant to the .05 level. Question C 3: Here are some possible characteristics of a religiously-oriented station: In examining your station's purposes for broadcasting, which ONE of the above list applies to your station MOST OFTEN making a reasonable profit 0 0 4 6.9% 75 Question C 3 (continued): NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations categories with 7 25% 49 84.3% religious purposes categories with 18 64.3% 4 6.9% education purposes no answer ‘_3 10.7% _1_ 1.7% 8 ' 58 X2 - 32 Level of Significance = .01 with profit category eliminated SECOND MOST making a reasonable 0 0 11 18.8% profit categories with 7 25% 40 68.8% religious purposes categories with 18 64.3% 6 10.3% education purposes no answer 3 10.7% _1_ 1.7% 58 X2 = 28.44 Level of Significance = .01 LEAST making a reasonable 15 53.6% 26 44.7% profit categories with 9 32.1% 8 13.8% religious purposes categories with l 3.6% 13 22.3% education purposes no answer '_§ 10.7% 11_ 18.8% 28 58 Not significant. NOTE: Categories with religious purposes are: b. Opportunity to communicate the station's views of the Christian faith to the community C. Opportunity to increase the Christian faith through all of station's programming d. Serving the local churches g. Opportunity to bring listeners to the Christian faith Categories with educational purposes are: e. Attempt to raise educational and cultural listeners level of f. Public relations for your station's organization (school, church, etc 76 Question C 4: The following is a list of some possible religious program categories: From which category in the above list does your station draw: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations MOST OFTEN talk, meditation, 25 89.2% 47 80.7% news, variety and music combined drama, discussion 1 3.6% 2 3.5% interviews, no answer __2_ 7 .l% _9_ 15.4% 28 58 X2 = 0.55 Level of significance = 0.30 SECOND MOST talk,meditation, 20 71.4% 46 79.3% news, variety and music combined drama, discussion, 4 14.1% 2 3.5% interviews no answer .43 14.1% ‘12 17.1% 28 58 X2 = 1.8 Level of significance = 0.20 LEAST talk, meditation, 11 39.1% 6 10.3% news, variety and music combined drama, discussion, 9 32.1% 38 65.4% interviews no answer _8' 28.5 ‘13 24.0% 28 58 X2 = 9.86 Level of significance = .01 Of the eight categories, which ONE could be disregarded...wou1d be: MOST PREFERRED talk, meditation, 17 60.9% news, variety and music combined category...if budget 38 65.4% 77 Question C 4 (continued): NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations drama, discussion, 4 14.1% 4 6.9% interviews no answer .1. 25% ‘16 27.5% 28 5 2 X = 1.055 Level of significance = 0.30 SECOND MOST talk,meditation 14 50% 35 60.3% news, variety and music combined drama, discussion, 7 25% 5 8.6% interviews - no answer _1 25% ‘18 31% 28 58 2 . . . X = 2.87 Level of Significance = 0.10 LEAST talk, meditation, 10 35.5% 13 22.3% news, variety and music combined drama, discussion, 9 32.1% 27 46.5% interviews no answer ._9 32.1% .18 31% 28 5 2 X = 1.15 Level of significance = 0.30 NOTE: "Future objectives" section of this question was eliminated due to a printing error. Question C 5: Here is a breakdown of possible objectives of a religiously-oriented station's programming: a. To present programs aimed at a representative cross- section of public. b. To present programs each aimed at certain segments of the public, and 223 try to reach people of all segments. c. To present programs each aimed at a different segment of the public, but over a period of a week to reach peOple in all segments. Which ONE of the above do you feel approximates the present objectives of your station? 78 Question C 5(Continued): NCC Agreement Non—NCC Agreement Stations Stations MOST NEARLY cross section 10 35.5% 29 50% segments only 8 28.5% 9 15.4% all by segments 6 21.4% 11 18.8% no answer ‘_2 7.1% ._g 15.4% 28 5 x2 = 1.97 Level of significance = .70 LEAST cross section 5 17.8% 9 15.4% segments only 16 57.1% 23 39.5% all by segments 3 10.7% 14 24.0% no answer '_3 14.1% 12_ 20.6% 28 58 X2 = 3.10 Level of significance - .30 If you had your choice of the three above for future objectives, which ONE would be your FIRST CHOICE cross section 10 segments only 7 all by segments 9 no answer _2_ 28 x2 = 3.00 Level of significance = LAST CHOICE cross section 4 segments only 15 all by segments 4 no answer 5 28 X2 = 5.99 Level of significance = 35.5% 25% 32.1% 7.1% .30 14.1% 53.6% 14.1% 17.8% .02 30 12 12 58 PHPJN mmqmw 51.7% 10.3% 20.6% 17.1% 5.2% 38% 29.3% 27.5% 79 Question C 6: In terms of religious affiliations, here are some possible target audiences for religious programs: a. Protestant groups d. Members of the public b. Roman Catholic groups in general c. Non-Christians Which one of the above do you feel describes the present target audience of your station? NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations MOST NEARLY Protestant 11 39.1% 20 34.5% Roman Catholic and l 3.6% 3 5.2% non-Christians all of above 15 53.6% 28 48.2% no answer _l_ 3.6% _1_ 12.0% 8 5 2 . . . X = .89 Level of Significance = .70 LEAST protestant 0 0 1 1.7% Roman Catholic and 17 60.9% 22 38% non-Christians all of above 1 3.6% 7 12.0% no answer 12_ 35.5% '28 48.2% 28 58 x2 = 3.71 Level of significance = .20 If you had your choice in the future, which ONE would be your: FIRST CHOICE Protestant 6 21.4% 10 17.1% Roman Catholic and 3 10.7% 6 10.3% non-Christians all of above 18 64.3% 34 58.5% no answer _1 3.6% _8 13.8% 28 58 2 X = .29 Level of significance = .90 80 AQuestion C 6 (continued): NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations LAST CHOICE Protestant l 3.6% 4 6.9% Roman Catholic and 16 57.1% 12 20.6% non-Christians all of above 0 0 6 10.3% no answer 11_ 39.1% 'gg 61.9% 28 58 2 X = 4.78 Level of significance = .10 Question C 7: Here are some possible policies for religiously- oriented stations to adOpt in relation to "commercial-secular" stations: a. Concentrate exclusively on types of programs not carried on "commercial secular" stations b. Present some types of programs now carried on "commercial secular" stations, but with a different intent and pur- pose. Which of these two policies do you feel comes closest to that used by your station at present? No commercial- 10 35.5% 28 48.2% secular programs Commercial-secular 14 50% 14 24.0% programs No answer ,_3 14.1% ‘16 27.5% 28 5 X2 = 2.93 Level of significance = .10 If you had your choice, which do you feel your station should adopt in the future? No commercial- 11 39.1% 31 53.4% secular programs Commercial-secular 14 50% 13 22.3% programs No answer 3 10.7 14 24.0 '28 % '58 % x2 = 14.5 Level of significance = .05 81 Question C 8: Here are some possible sources of program ideas for religiously-oriented stations: a. Denominational broadcasting agencies b. Inter-denominational broadcasting agencies (NRB, BFC, etc.) o. Religiously-oriented stations d. "Commercial-secular" stations and "educational- secular" stations From which ONE of the above sources do program ideas for your station come? NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations MOST OFTEN denominational 20 71.4% broadcasting agencies inter-denominational 0 0 broadcasting agencies "religiously-oriented 3 10.7% stations commercial-secular 0 0 no answer 5 17.8% X2 = 4.90 Level of significance = .05 SECOND MOST denominational 17 60.9% broadcasting agencies inter-denominational 0 0 broadcasting agencies religiously-oriented 0 0 stations commercial secular 0 0 no answer %%_ 39.1% x2 = 6.38 Level of significance = .02 LEAST denominational 5 17.8% broadcasting agencies inter-denominational 0 0 broadcasting agencies religiously-oriented 8 28.5% stations commercial secular 6 21.4% no answer [_g 32.1% 28 X2 = 11.62 Level of significance - .01 Stations 28 48.2% 0 0 17 29.3% 0 0 %% 22.3% 25 43.0% 0 0 15 25.9% 0 0 .%§ 31% 18 31% 0 0 l 1.7% 19 32.7% gg_ 34.5% 58 82 Question C 9: If you were planning to form a religiously- oriented s tions you a. b. c. d. *network: tation network} here are some possible qualifica- might set for station membership: Agree with same inter-denominational group (NAE, NCC, NRB, etc.) Have similar 'commercial' policy (sell time, give free time, etc.) Be of same denomination Have similar reasons for broadcasting (serving Christ, making reasonable profit, raise educational levels, etc.) Have similar doctrinal position (conservative, liberal, fundamentalist) any effort of stations to cooperate through exchang- ing programs, ideas, etc., on a regular basis. If you were starting a religiously-oriented station network, w MOST I same ti simi po same simi br simi po no a x2 = 0.304 hich ONE of the above do you feel is: NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations MPORTANT inter-denomina- 3 10.7% 8 13.8% onal group lar 'commercial' 0 0 2 3.5% licy denomination 2 7.1% 0 0 lar reasons for 11 39.1% 33 56.9% oadcasting lar doctrinal 5 17.8% 9 15.4% sition ' nswer _Z_ 25% ._§ 10.3% 28 58 Below .05 level of significance. SECOND MOST same ti simi po same simi br simi po no a X2 = 2.21 inter-denomina- 6 21.4% 6 10.3% onal group lar 'commercial' 1 3.6% 17 29.3% licy denomination 2 7.1% l 1.7% lar reasons for 3 10.7% 3 5.2% oadcasting . lar doctrinal 4 14.1% 13 22.3% sition nswer 12_ 42.8% .l§ 31% 28 58 Below .05 level of significance. 83 Question C 9 (continued): NCC Agreement Non-NCC Agreement Stations Stations LEAST same inter-denomina- 3 10.7% 5 8.6% tional group similar 'commercial 6 21.4% 2 3.5% policy same denomination 7 25% 32 55.1% similar reasons for 2 7.1% 0 0 broadcasting similar doctrinal 1 3.6% l 1.7% position no answer _2_ 32.1% .18 31% 8 58 x2 = 7.06 Level of significance = .05 APPENDIX B STATION QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING LIST STATION QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING LIST (1962) CODE: appl = applicant for license rou = (Ownership grouping) 1 - individual, 2 - local church, 3 - religious-education institution, 4 - denominational group, 5 - inter-denominational group response = Not ret. - questionnaire not returned Not r-o - station not religious-oriented station NCC - National Council agreement station non-NCC - non-National Council agreement station NC - Returned questionnaire not completed (X) - responded but not counted in study (P) - predicted response g Response r non- o N N u Call No Not C C p_Letters City Owner Description Ret r-o C C Alabama 5 WYAM Bessemer X (P) 5 WSFM (FM) Birmingham X Alaska 4 KICY Nome Mission Covenant Church X 4 KSEW Sitka (was) United Presbyterian X Arizona 5 KHEP-AM-FM Phoenix X 3 AM appl Window Rock Navajo Bible School X Arkansas 3 KUOA-AM-FM Siloam John Brown Univ. (X) Springs California 3 KANG (FM) Angwin 7th Day Adventist X 5 KOXR (FM) Bakersfield (now KGEE—FM, new owner) X 1 KRDU Dinuba Hofer stations X 5 KECR (FM) El Cajon Family stations X l KIRV Fresno Rev. Benberthy X 5 KCIB (FM) Fresno Hofer stations X 3 KSDA (FM) La Sierra 7th Day Adventist X 3 KGER Long Beach John Brown School (X) 85 ‘yo. .2 I lai'a n 0‘ ~111150 . .. 1;; '. I I o . u .. ’7 "O 4 I II.- III] .' i: ..'g I] fill-- . 3‘ «ns'.. .-. nu" «II- 0 I .. I\.\ I I | 1 | I. 1' ’ '1‘ _ ‘.-, ...---. -_ o» - -v o u a o I- . . ‘ ..- . “ l ' 1 a 9 i A. I‘ ‘—._.-- I . o . . . I. -. -.. . , 7’. ‘ '. ‘ ...“! _ . ‘ I ’ I no t l I h . I g I l ' .' X: .' ': ...; .' .' , '1 . i . . .. - 'l’l."". sill-n ' i If 1" g' ’ ."): -«:s truninl" -- I I':'. till" lt-II-viih ” o III‘IJI‘I Il'-It II I!“ H :"ll"“ ‘ tllll” I‘I ". .l'vl ‘- l"|"’ll"lll ‘ ’ ht'l.’ In 0' n“.u.1‘ 7.], I .. ll-\‘ l' O. \ . 0 O . “ ' "‘ “ I'IIIINI l' l ."\ I b. . .1. .- .n'] 1 '1." \'_ _' .z....:»i (I H 11*”. l 1' ’0' '\ . i ' “'.; ' i' ..‘1 0'( ‘\ ‘1': ! .' -.-‘ L~li...‘ (n‘ ..-'I(" \.‘,‘."-1 I .‘l 0“ .w' ' - 'I‘. v" t‘ l.‘.‘-. ' \ \ n" \‘ l . 9!») . u-a . - o .’ I ‘ 9:" _\ \|\ I o (\ _ \ ‘ : 'L N ‘ ' "' ’ ' 1 n ‘1 ‘ ‘ t. \ ' v ' f. . . o '. -_ ‘ \ ‘I . I . . ~ . p. \ - 00“! . H s . , _ s - . . " C I I .fl ' ‘ .- . ‘ . ‘ . ' ' . . h . a . ,1 . . ‘ 4 n . 1 - \ . . , t - ' - ' ‘ ' a ‘ ‘ ‘ \ . 86 G Response r non- o N N u Call No Not C C p Letters City Owner Description Ret r-o C C 3 KBBI(FM) Los Angeles Bible Inst. of L.A. X 4 KFSG Los Angeles replaced by KRKD X 5 KHOF(FM) Los Angeles Maple Chapel X 4 KRKD-AM-FM Los Angeles 4 Square Gospel X 3 KXLU(FM) Los Angeles Roman Catholic X 5 FM appl Monterey Family Stations X 2 KPPC-AM-FM Pasadena Presbyterian Church X 5 KQMS Redding Rev. Jean Carpenter X 4 KDUO(FM) Riverside (was) 7th Day Adventist X (P) 5 KEBR(FM) Sacremento Family Stations X 3 KBBU(FM) San Diego Bible Inst. of L.A. X 5 KEAR(FM) San Francisco Family Stations X 3 KXXX(FM) San Francisco S.F. Theol. Seminary X (P) 3 KUOP(FM) Stockton Methodist X 5 WSCO Wasco X (P) Colorado 3 KLIR-AM-FM Hartford X 2 WSCH(FM) Hartford S. Church Bcstg. Fdn. X 3 WESU Middletown X 3 WGTB(FM) Washington Roman Catholic (X) Florida 5 WTWB Auburndale (was) Boca Raton Bible Conference X (P) 5 WMJR(FM) Ft.Lauderda1e (was) Crawford Stn. X (P) 5 WAYR Orange Park X 5 WGNP-WGNB(FM) St. World Christian X (P) Petersburg Radio Foundation 5 WVST(FM) St. (was) Crawford Station (NC) (P) Petersburg 5 WXIV Windermere (was) Great Commission X Gospel Association 3 WPRK(FM) Winter Park Congregational X Georgia 5 WAUD-WAUQ(FM) Atlanta Bob Jones University X 5 WCLA Claxton X (P) 5 WMAC Metter X (P) 5 WLET-AM-FM Toccoa (was) R. G. X Le Tourneau Hawaii 5 KAIM-AM—FM Honolulu Christian Bcstg. Assn. X (P) C-‘OHQ Call p_Letters Idaho 5 KBOI-AM-FM 5 KBGN-AM-FM 5 KORT 4 KID-AM-FM Illinois WDLM WNUR(FM) WPEO WJRL WCVS WETN(FM) commutative: Indiana WAFM(FM) WBBS(FM) WEVC(FM) WFCI(FM) WGCS(FM) WGRE(FM) WYCA(FM) WAJC(FM) WVAK mwpwmwwwwmmto OI WBOW Iowa 3 KFGQ-AM-FM 3 KWLC 5 KDMI(FM) 5 KLEE 3 KNWS 3 KWAR(FM) Kansas 5 KCLObAM-FM 5 KJRG—AM-FM 3 WTJO-FM 5 KFLA-FM WMBI-AM-FM WCMR-AM-FM WTRC-AM-FM WNDU-AM-FM City Boise (KBOI-TV) Caldwell Grangeville Idaho Falls Chicago East Moline Evanston Peoria Rockford Springfield Wheaton Anderson 87 Owner Description Mormon Christian Bcstg Co (KID-TV) Mormon Moody Bible Institute Moody Bible Institute Methodist O'Connor stations O'Connor stations Wheaton College (was) Great Commission School Crawfordville First Baptist Elkhart Elkhart Evansville Franklin Goshen Greencastle Hammond Indianapolis Paoli South Bend Terra Haute Boone Decorah Des Moines Ottumwa Waterloo Waverly Leavenworth Newton Ottawa Scott City (WTRC-TV) Methodist Mennonite Methodist Crawford stations Christian Church Rev. Denzel King (WNDU-TV) Catholic' O'Connor stations Boone Biblical College Evang. Lutheran (was) Crawford station Northwestern College American Lutheran Anderson stations Anderson stations Anderson stations Response non— N N No Not C C Ret r-o C C X X (P) X X (p) X X X X (p) X X (P) X X (P) X X (P) X (P) X (P) X X X X (P) X X X (P) X (p) (NC) (P) X X X (p) X (P) X (P) X X (P) X (P) X X (P) 88 G Response r non— o N u Call No Not C C p_Letters City Owner Description Ret r-o C C Kentucky (Added 1 WLJC(FM) Beattyville Rev. Forest Drake 1965) (P) 5 WWXL-AM-FM Manchester X (P) 1 WFLW-AM-FM Monticello X 5 WRVK Mt. Vernon X (P) 4 WMTC Vancleve Ky.Mtn.Holiness X (P) Louisiana 5 KTRY Bastrop X (P) 3 WWL New Orleans (WWL-TV) Roman Catholic X (P) Maine 3 WRJR(FM) Lewiston Baptist Maryland 4 FM appl Baltimore Protestant Episcopal 4 WCBC(FM) Catonsville Christian Bcstg.Co. X 3 WGTS-FM Takoma Park 7th Day Adventist Michigan 1 WJMYHFM Allen Park (was) Rev. Robert Parr X (P) 5 WTVB-AM-FM Coldwater X l WBFG(FM) Detroit (was) Rev. R.Parr(Bapt) X (P) 5 WOMC(FM) Detroit Sparks stations X (P) 1 WMUZ(FM) Detroit Crawford stations X (P) 5 WDOW Dowagiac Kuiper stations X (P) 4 WMRPHAM-FM Flint Methodist Radio Parish l WSHN Fremont Rev. Stuart Noordyk X 5 WFUR-AM-FM Grand Rapids Kuiper stations X (P) l WKLW(FM) Grand Rapids "Religious bcstg assn" X 5 FM appl Grand Rapids religious music publ. X 4 WXTO(FM) Grand Rapids Roman Catholic X (P) 5 WJHL-AM-FM Holland religious music publ. X 5 WHGR-WJGS(FM) Houghton Lake Sparks stations X (P) 5 WKPR Kalamazoo Kuiper stations X (P) 2 WMUS-AM-FM Muskegon ( X (P) 5 WKJR Muskegon Hts Kuiper stations 13859 (P; 5 WEXL Royal Oak Sparks stations X P 3 WSAE(FM) Spring Arbor Free Methodist X 89 G Response r non- o N N u Call No Not C C p Letters City Owner Description Ret r-o C C Minnesota 3 WCTS-FM Minneapolis Conservative Baptist X (P) 3 KTIS-AM-FM Minneapolis Northwestern Coll.Stns. X (P) 3 WCAL Northfield Evangelical Lutheran X 2 KNOF(FM) St. Paul Selby Gospel Mission (NC) (P) Mississippi 5 WSUH Oxford X (P) 1 AM appl Water Valley Rev. Dorsey McCay X Missouri 5 KBLR Bolivar Shepherd of the Hills X 1 AM appl Cabool Rev. Frank Macsuk(Bapt) X 4 KFUO-AM-FM Clayton Missouri Synod Luth. X (P) 3 KTSR(FM) Kansas City Nazarene Theol.Sem. X 3 KSOZ(FM) Pt Lookout Presbyterian Ch (US) X Montana 5 KGVW-AM-FM Belgrade Christian Enterprise Stns X 5 KURL-AM-FM Billings " " " X 5 KGLE Glendive " " " X 5 KGMY Missoula " " "(Added '65) (P) Nebraska 5 KJSK-AM-FM Columbus Anderson Stations X (P) 5 KJLT North Platte X New Jersey 3 WFMU(FM) East Orange Augustana Lutheran X 3 WNTI(FM) Hackettstown Methodist X 3 WSOU(FM) South Orange Roman Catholic (X) 2 WAWZ-AM—FM Zarephath Pillar of Fire stations X New Mexico 1 AM appl Albuquerque X New YOrk l WDCX(FM) Buffalo Crawford stations X 3 WJSL HOughton Free Methodist X (P) Call Letters WFUV(FM) WRVR(FM) FM appl. WPOW G r o u P. 3 2 5 5 3 WAER (FM) City New YOrk New York New YOrk 90 Owner Description Roman Catholic Riverside Church Family stations Staten Island Syracuse North Carolina WFGW WMIT(FM) WIST-AM-FM WPAQ WSYD WPNC WLLY WFDD-FM WKBX OIWU'IUIUIU'IO'IHH North Dakota 5 KBMR 3 KFNW-AM-FM Ohio WBWC(FM) WMGS WTOF(FM) WAKW(FM) WCRF(FM) WSLN(FM) WDUB(FM) WSRW(FM) WCMO(FM) WFCJ(FM) WMCO(FM) WOBC-FM WEEC(FM) WOBN(FM) wwwwwwuwwwmmmw Oklahoma 5 KBEK 5 KVLH 3 KWGS(FM) Oregon 5 KWIL 2 KRVC Black Mtn Black Mtn Charlotte Mt. Airy Mt. Airy Plymouth Wilson Billy Graham Billy Graham Belk stations Epperson stations Epperson stations Epperson stations Winston-Salem Missionary Baptist Winston-Salem Epperson stations Bismarck Fargo Berea (added 1965) Northwestern Coll. Stn Bowling Green Rev. Max Good Canton Cincinnati Cleveland Delaware Granville Hillsboro Marietta Miamisburg New Concord Oberlin Springfield Westerville Elk City Christian Bcstg Assn Pillar of Fire station Moody Bible Institute Methodist Episcopal Miami Valley Christian United Presbyterian World Evangelistic Entr Evang. United Brethren Paul's Valley Tulsa Albany Ashland United Presbyterian Faith Tabernacle Inc Response non— N N No Not C C Ret r-o C C X (P) X (P) X X (P) X X X (NC) (P) X (P) X (P) X (P) X (P) X (P) X (P) (P) X (P) X (NC) (P) X X X X X X (P) X X X X X X X (P) X X (NC) (P) X (P) G r o u Call p_Letters 5 KWFS-AM-FM 5 KWAY 5 KEX Pennsylvania WAVL WLOA-AM-FM WARO WSAJ WMSP(FM) WDAC-FM FM appl WPEL-AM—FM WJMJ-FM WPHB WDUQ(FM) WGCBPAM-FM Ulwl-‘NCJIUIUINWCRUIUI 91 South Carolina 3 WMUU-AM-FM 5 WGUS 5 WORD South Dakota 3 KNWC Tennessee 3 WSMC-FM 5 WENO 1 WSKT Texas 3 KHPC(FM) 5 KCTA 5 FM appl 5 KHCB—FM 3 KHBL(FM) 5 KPAC-AM-FM 5 KONO Utah 3 KBYU 4 KSL-AM-FM Response non- N N No Not C C City Owner Description Ret r-o C C Eugene (NC) (P) Forest Grove (was) Crawford station X (P) Portland X (P) Apollo X (P) Braddock X (P) Canonburg X (P) Grove City United Presbyterian X Harrisburg Market Sq Presby Ch X (P) Lancaster Crawford stations X (P) Lansdowne Family stations X Montrose X (P) Philadelphia (was) Crawford stns X (P) Philipsburg X Pittsburgh Roman Catholic X (P) Red Lion Rev. John Norris X Greenville Bob Jones University (NC) (P) North Augusta X (P) Spartanburg Belk station (was) (NC) (P) Sioux Falls Northwestern Coll. Stn X (P) Collegedale 7th Day Adventist X Madison X (P) Knoxville (added 1965) (P) Brownwood Southern Baptist X (P) Corpus Christi X (P) Dallas Family Stations X Houston Houston Christian Bcstrs X Plainview Southern Baptist X (P) Port Arthur (KPAC-TV) Methodist X (P) San Antonio X (P) Provo Mormon X Salt Lake City (KSL-TV) Mormon X 92 G Response r non- o N N u Call No Not C C p Letters City Owner Description Ret r-o C C Virginia (added 5 WCFV Clifton Forge Rev.James Reese '65) (P) 5 WABH Deerfield assoc. with Red Lion, Pa X 3 WEMC(FM) Harrisonburg Mennonite X 5 WLES Lawrenceville Epperson stations X (P) 5 WRAA Luray Epperson stations X (P) 5 WBRG Lynchburg Epperson stations X (P) l WXRI-FM Norfolk (WYAH-TV) Christian Bcstg Net X 5 WPVA Petersburg (was) Epperson station X (P) 5 WPMH Portsmouth X (P) 2 WBBL Richmond Presbyterian Ch (US) X 3 WRFK-FM Richmond Presbyterian Ch (US) X (P) 1 WAFC Staunton Amer Home Bcstg Corp X l WSGM(FM) Staunton Amer Home Bcstg Corp X 5 WKBA Vinton Epperson stations X (P) Washington 3 KGTS(FM) College Place 7th Day Adventist (NC) (P) 3 KGDN-KGFM(FM) Edmonds King's Garden Inc X (P) 2 KTW-AM-FM Seattle (was) lst Presbyterian X 4 KIRO-AM-FM Seattle (KIRO—TV) Mormon (added '65) (P) 5 KCFA Spokane Christian Services Inc (NC) (P) West Virginia 5 WJLS-WBKW(FM) Beckley X 5 WWNR Beckley (added X 1 AM appl Beckley Christian Bcstg Corp '65 ' (p) 5 WHJC Matewan X (P) 5 WPAR Parkersburg Rev. H. Max Good X (P) Wisconsin 3 WLFM(FM) Appleton X 3 WHBY Appleton Roman Catholic (X) 5 WATW Ashland X (P) 4 WBAYFAM-FM Green Bay Roman Catholic X 5 WRVB-FM Madison X 5 WWJC-AM-FM Superior Twin Ports Christian X (P) Bcstg Corp. APPENDIX C PROGRAM THEOLOGICAL POSITION QUESTIONNAIRE Appendix C 1416A Spartan Village East Lansing, Michigan Dear Sir: To facilitate the study of religiously-oriented radio stations in the U.S., that I am presently undertaking, could you please supply the following information? Please give your Opinion as to which ONE of the three major representative groups below (A. C. C., N. A. E., or N. C. C. ) AGREES MOST OFTEN and which ONE..-.DISAGREES MOST OFTEN with each of the program series listed. Place letter for appropriate group (a, b, or c) in each blank; if you do not recognize any given program, place an X in its two blanks. Major representative a. American Council of Churches groups: b. National Association of Evangelicals c. National Council of Churches Agrees Disagrees Most Most PROGRAM SPONSORING GROUP Often Often 1. Accent on YOuth Bible Institute of L.A. __- 2. Back to God Hour Christian Reform Church .__ 3. Back to Bible Hour Good News Bcstg. Assn. ___ ___ 4. Baptist Hour Southern Baptist Conv. ‘__ ___ 5. Children's Chapel Evangelical Lutheran .__ ___ 6. Christian Celebrity H.P.Sconce ___ Time __- 7. Christophers Christophers (Catholic) .__ ___ 8. Church at Work Evangelical Lutheran ___ ___ 9. Haven of Rest Paul Meyers ___ ___ 10. Heartbeat Theatre Salvation Army 11. Hour of Decision Billy Graham Evang. Assn.: : 12. Hymns from Harding Harding College .__ .__ 13. Life and Light HOur Free Methodist Church ___ ___ 14. Lutheran Hour Missouri Synod Lutheran ___ ___ 15. Layman's Hour American Baptist .__ ___ 16. Master Control Southern Baptist ___ ___ 17. Mennonite Hour Mennonite Church ___ ___ 18. National Radio Pulpit National Council ___ ___ 19. Old Fashioned Revival Charles Fuller Evang. ___ ___ 20. On Wings of Song ___ ___ 21. Patterns of Melody Moody Bible Institute .__ .__ 22. Pilgrimage National Council ____ ___ 23. Protestant Hour Protestant Radio-TV Cntr __ ___ 24. Psychology for Living Narramore Christian thn ___ ___ 25. Ranger Bill Moody Bible Institute ___ ___ 26. Revival Time Assembly of God ___ ___ 27. Showers of Blessing Nazarene Church 94 Appendix C, continued 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. PROGRAMS 95 SPONSORING GROUP Songs in the Night Stories of Great ths YOur Story Heur Temple Time Unshackled Voice of Prophecy YOung People's Church of the Air World Vision Village Church Moody Bible Institute Moody Bible Institute Reformed Church in Pacific Garden Missions Seventh Day Adventist YOung People's Church of the Air World Vision, Inc. Agrees Disagrees Most Most Often Often If you know the names of any of the "SPONSORING GROUPS," would you please fill in the names? AFTER THE FORM HAS BEEN FILLED OUT, PLEASE PLACE IN ENCLOSED AIRMAIL ENVELOPE AND MAIL PROMPTLY. Sincerely yours, Keith LeMay APPENDIX D RELIGIOUSLYrORIENTED STATION QUESTIONNAIRE RELI GI OUSLY-ORI EN TED STATION QUESTIONNAIRE u " 'o'l . . Pd .l’l‘ ‘ l . ,’ 3 a. o p‘ ' J-' O ‘ O "-‘< 2}" '~ 0" I // U .- \ I I '§ 1 0 ~ I u o, o‘ O ' I‘ IO '. '- ' ,; O v O Q a. . ‘ " I" .' .; -, t i 1' 97 ‘ I ' ‘1'.J.h I APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRE FOLLOW-UP LETTER Appendix E Questionnaire Follow-up Letter1 1416A Spartan Village East Lansing, Michigan April 12, 1962 Rev. E. B. Blaine Lawrence County Broadcasting Co. Box 242 Moulton, Alabama Dear Mr. Blaine: As the questionnaires have come in, station reactions have been most favorable to such a survey. However, your station's reactions would also be appreciated. Since the financing of this survey (and the reports to be mailed back to you) comes from our family budget, there has been some delay in sending out this reminder. Your answers are still as important for the study. An extra questionnaire and self-addressed, air- mail-stamped envelope have been enclosed. A deadline was not suggested to you infhe previous letter. Please fill out this slightly modified questionnaire and mail it by Wednesday, April 25th. Sincerely, Keith LeMay 1There was a printing error in the "future objectives" portion of Question C 4. This question was eliminated from the study. 99 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Parten, Mildred B. Surveys, Polls and Samples: Practical Procedures. New York: Harper & Bros., 1950. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics. New YOrk: McGraw Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956. Waller, Judith C. Radio The Fiith Estate. New YOrk: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1945. Articles and Periodicals "Church's New Voice," Outlook, May 28, 1924, 131-132. "Church Use of the Radio," Literary Digest, Oct. 13, 1928, 31-32 0 "Is Radio Hurting the Church," Literary Digest, Jan. 27, 1923, 35. . Ferber, R. "The Problem of Bias in Mail Surveys: A Solution," Public Qpinion Quarterly, Vol. 12 (1948—49) 669-676. "Radio Church, Portland, Maine," Literary Digest, May 15, 1926, 30. "Religion's Raid on Radio," Current Opinion, March 1925, 352-3. "Religion's Raid on Radio," Armstrong Perry, Popular Radio, January 1935, vol. 7, 3-10. "Religion's Tribute to Science," Literary Digest, Oct. 17, 1925, 35. "Tuning in on Religion," Literary Digest, July 30, 1927, 30. Reuss, C. F. "Differences between Persons Responding and Not Responding to Mailed Questionnaires," American Sociolo- gical Review, V01. 8 (1943), 433-438. Suchmann, E. A. and MCCandless, B. "Who Answers Questionnaires?" Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 24 (1940) 758-769. Theses Huber, Pau1.'An.Investigation of Some Problems Concerning Religious Radio and Television Programs." A thesis presented to the Department of Speech, University of Michigan, (MA) Jan. 12, 1953. 101 102 Weber, R. W. "A Study of Lutheran Radio Station, KFU ." Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Indiana, 1954. "Tfi ifififlflufiflifliflu fififlfljfififlflflfl 1111111)" 779