EUROVESION: HISTORY AND OPERATION Thesis {or {he Degree of M. A. MECHKGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Kay Eyde 1962 ABSTRACT EUROVISION: HISTORY AND OPERATION by Kay Eyde In 1954, Eurovision became a recognized European international-television network. At this time it came under the direction of the European Broadcasting Union, an organi- zation which assists broadcasting services primarily in Western Europe. This thesis explains the development of Eurovision from 1950, when Great Britain and France were attempting the first "live" international television exchanges, to 1962 when most Western European countries were included in Euro- vision activities. In the technical section of the thesis, particular attentionqis given to the problems encountered in standard conversion between countries (Europe has several line standards), problems with technical quality, and the high cost of leasing international circuits. Other sections of the thesis are concerned with: the types of programs evolved on Eurovision, which are essentially Sport and affairs of state presentations; the effect of language and cultural differences; the legal problems en- countered; methods of financing Eurovision. The structure 0f the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and the Council of Europe are described as well as their relationship with Eurovision. Although the European Television Community Kay Eyde (Eurovision) does not have the political and economic over— tones characteristic of the Coal and Steel Community and the Common Market, some consideration is given to its contri- bution as one of several European Movements, encouraging Western European cooperation. Its activities involving ex- changes with other television networks such as Intervision (representing Eastern European countries and others associ- ated with the Soviet Union) and the United States are also briefly described. In the latter part of the thesis, consideration is given to the possible future operation of Eurovision and some of its continuing problems. There are, in conclusion, suggestions for further research. EUROVISION: HISTORY AND OPERATION by Kay Eyde A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of TV and Radio COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATION ARTS 1962 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My appreciation to Fred S. Siebert, dean of the College of Communication Arts, who en- couraged me in my graduate studies and to Dr. Walter B. Emery, my teacher and thesis advisor. Dedicated to: Eva A. Eyde In Memory of Sam A. Eyde ii TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFINITION AND INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS Chapter 1. TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS Early Exchanges Line Standards Conversion Coronation Telecast Coronation TV Facilities Reactions . New TV Stations . The "Lille Experiment" Involvement of the EBU EBU Background . . Eurovision Under EBU EUROVISION PROGRAMMING . Program Types, 1954-1960 Language Problems Cultural Differences Sport Programs . . Public Affairs Programs Arts Programs . Working Party GTV/l (Film) International Festivals News Programming . . Eurovision- Intervision Exchanges EBU Meeting Plans COPYRIGHT AND OTHER LEGAL RIGHTS Copyright . . Ancillary Rights Civil Law Rights . . Rights in Musical Editions The Council of Europe The 1952 Stockholm Agreement and Plans iii Chapter Page IV. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF EUROVISION . . . . . . 77 EBU and Council of Europe Motives . . . . . 77 Other Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 V. A LOOK TO THE FUTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Accomplishments of Eurovision . . . . . . . 85 Continuing Problems . . . . . . . . . . 85 Other International Factors . . . . . . . . 86 The UN . . . . . . . . . . 86 Suggestions for Further Study . . . . . . . 88 APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 iv DEFINITION AND INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS ”EurOvision” is a term used by journalist George Campey to describe the European Television Community,1 the first European international television network.2 It was established to provide a greater exchange of programs be- tween European countries. Although a limited exchange of programs was possible through film and kinescopes befOre Eurovision,3 the linking of these European countries paved the way for a far greater exchange and, of prime importance, a simultaneous exchange. The development of the network was a major technical oper- ation and amounted to a study in international cooperation. Eurovision has been regarded by some as an instrument for international understanding. Others have limited its ef- fectiveness to better television fdr more Countries for less money per participant, sharing in the best of each country's productions. Some others see Eurovision as a force oper- ating to unify Europe. , The birthday of Eurovision is calendar-marked as June 6, 1954, when it was adopted by the European Broadcasting 1Jean D'Arcy, "Eurovision," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary 1959, p. 6. 2Donald'K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, "A Study in International Communication:' Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 101. 3Ibid. Union.4 Since Eurovision required extensive technical work, Chapter I of this thesis will trace the significant technical developments, Chapter II will be concerned with Eurovision programming, and Chapter III with the legal and philOSOphical aSpects. Chapter IV is concerned with the social impli- cations of Eurovision and Chapter V with the future of this international network. 4D'Arcy, p. 8. CHAPTER I TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS Early Exchanges Although June, 1954 is considered the birthday of Eurovision, the essential concept was tried in 1950. In August of that year, the BBC produced television broadcasts from Calais, France. This was the first time that a television link had been set up across an inter- national boundary.1 The occasion was the centenary cele- bration of the laying of the submarine cable between England and France.2 The programs, though originating in Calais, France, were seen only in the United Kingdom.3 There were two reasons for this: One was that France had not, as yet, started to develop its tele- vision network; its only transmitters were in Paris, and to link Calais to Paris as well as to London, would at that time, have been beyond the joint re- sources of RTF [Radiodiffusion Television Francaise] and BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation]. The second reason was that the French and British Tele- vision Services were operating--as they still are-— on different line standards, and there was at that lM. J. L. Pulling, "Eurovision_Technical Operations: A Survey," 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 28. 2Donald K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, "A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 102. 3Pulling, p. 28. time no known technical means of converting the vision signals from one standard to another.4 The telecast demonstrated the feasibility of crossing the English Channel by a series of point-to-point radio links between Calais and London.5 A large OB (Outside Broadcast) team and its equipment was sent to Calais, where a link (a frequency of 4.500 Mc/s.) was arranged between the Hotel de Ville at Calais and the cliffs at Swingate near Dover. Swingate to London required three links in tandem operating on 6.800 Mc/s.6 The experiment was considered successful and, in November of 1950, an Anglo—French Committee discussed a series of programs to be called "A Week in Paris," for telecast in July, 1951. It would have been another one-way presentation from France to the United Kingdom using basic— ally the same equipment. Eight tandem radio links would have been required. The project was considered ambitious and rescheduled for the summer of 1952. In the meantime, both France and the United Kingdom considered means of conversion from the French line stand- ards to the British and vice versa. RTF and the BBC worked on the same method of conversion.7 Line Standards Conversion Simultaneous television exchange between countries could not take place before 1952 because of the differing 41bid. 51bid. 6Ibid. 7Ibid., pp. 28-9. line standards. For example, the British use a 405-line system (405 referring to the number of scanning lines used to compose electronic.'TV images), while the French use an 819-5ystem. A number of countries in Europe use the 625- 8 The first conversion from the British to the line system. French line system, and vice versa, was developed by French and British engineers. It involved "diSplaying a picture on the original standard on a high—grade picture monitor, the tube of which was coated with a phOSphor having a relatively long decay time, and re-televising this picture through a camera working on the line standard to which a conversion was desired."9 In February, 1952, comparative tests which were carried out revealed that both French and British equipment were good enough to convey the programs planned for July of 1952.10 By April, 1952, a microwave relay link was set up between London and Paris.11 RTF opened an 819-1ine regional television station at Lille, France, which was fed by a permanent circuit from Paris. The links from Paris intended for England were routed by RTF through Villers-Onlterets and Peronne to Lille, a short distance from the Belgian border. RTF conducted the next link from Lille to Cassel, France, where the BBC in- stalled its standards converter and conveyed the 405-line 8Woods, p. 104. 9Pulling, pp. 28—9. loIbid. 11Woods, p. 102. signal to Alembon, France. From Alembon, a link carried the signal across the English Channel to Swingate, then to Wrotham and London.12 (See Appendix, p. 92.) The links extended 500 kilometers (800 miles), cOmpared with 150 kilometers (240 miles) from the Calais transmission. From July 8 to 14, 1952,13 a series of programs fea- turing speeches by Foreign Minister Schuman and Ambassador Sir Oliver Harvey and a variety of presentations from Paris comprised "the first exchange of live television programs between two nations with different television standards."14 Technically, the quality of the pictures broadcast in Britain ranged from good to poor. Both countries felt, however, that the imperfections could be overcome by techni- cal improvements and it was decided to attempt the next TV exchange during the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II.15 Coronation Telecast The countries which carried the coronation telecast on June 2, 1953, included the Netherlands, the German Federal Republic, the United Kingdom and France. Although Belgium had no television service at this time, their cooper- ation was required to convey the signals from Cassel or Lille, France, across Belgium to the Netherlands stations 12Pulling, p. 29. 131239. 14WOOdS, p. 102. 15Pulling, p. 29. 16 at Lopik and Eindhoven. Denmark was interested in the Coronation relay, but the temporary international television network could not be extended to this point.17 Although the reSponsibility for the total operation was shared by several countries, the initial sound and vision of the Coronation Ceremony were produced by the BBC. BBC Senior Superintendent Engineers,F. Williams and M. J. L. Pulling,considered the Coronation presentation "the most ambitious and elaborate single day operation" in BBC history.18 In addition to the cooperative international tele- vision operation, the BBC provided many services. Disc and audio tape recordings (of the BBC domestic program and of commentaries in thirty-nine languages) were made simultane- ously, in addition to those made for the Commonwealth, the U.S.A., and other English-Speaking countries. The BBC radio newsreel made recordings for places where there were time differences. A recording of the entire ceremony and sound along the route was recorded without commentary.19 The en- tire telecast was recorded on 35-mm film for the archives. léIbid. 17"The Relay of the Coronation Programs to Western Europe," EBU Documentary and Information Bulletin, Vol.4, 1953, p. 466. " 18F. Williams and M. J. L. Pulling, "Engineering Arrangements for Broadcasting on Sound and Television the Coronation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II," EBU Docu- mentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 1953, p.391. 191bid., p. 394. Excerpts were recorded and flown to the U.S. and Canada for use over their television systems. The BBC and its OB (outside broadcast) team had mobilized its equipment on other occasions. The relay from France the year before was a more ambitious project, cover- ing a broader area over a longer period of time. The relay of the Coronation, however, set new records in total dis- tance covered and the number of conversion stations operating to provide for simultaneous reception. Coronation TV Facilities Temporary radio circuits were used to carry the vision signal of the Coronation telecast. The plans for the relay were as follows: Vision From London the 405 vision signal was to be taken over three centimetric—wave links in tandem to Swingate near Dover, retransmitted across the Channel to the French coast, and carried on a fifth wave link to Mont Cassel, northern France. At Mont Cassel a direct link would carry the 405 signal to Lille to be relayed across Belgium via Flobecq and Brussels to Breda in the Netherlands where the 405 signal would be converted for use on the 625 standard. This signal traveled through the Netherlands via Eindhoven, Helenaveen and Suchteln to Wuppertal, Germany, to be broad- cast in Hamburg, Hannover, Langenberg and Kdln, and possibly West Berlin. In addition to relaying the signal to Lille for 625 conversion, the operation at Mont Cassel provided for a Paris relay to convert to the French 819 and 441 signals. The circuit from London to Mont Cassel was to be furnished by Standard Telephone and Cables, Limited, under contract to the BBC and the RTF. The French PTT (Post Office) would provide for links from Mont Cassel to Paris and Lille, and the Nederlandse Televisie Unie and the Belgian INR would arrange for the signal to be carried across Belgium to the Dutch station at Lopik. In Germany the relay was to be handled by the German Federal Post Office. These plans resulted in the carrying of the Coro- nation by twelve transmitters located in France, the Nether— lands, and West Germany, with the signal ending in West Berlin. The 405 signal was carried to Mont Cassel and was relayed to Paris for conversion into the French 819 and 441 standards. From Cassel a signal was also relayed to Breda in the Netherlands and converted to 625 lines for use by the other participants. 1921122 The sound signals were carried over the regular international telephone circuits. The BBC fed three sepa— rate sound signals to the continent: l. The sounds of the ceremonies and events with- out commentary, 2. commentary in English, 3. commentary in French provided by RTF personnel stationed at the site of the coronation. 10 3.20 It was not France used a mixture of signals 1 and possible for commentators from Germany and the Netherlands to be at the site of the coronation. They were, therefore, briefed in London and returned to their own countries to give off-the-tube commentaries, mixed locally with the back- ground sounds, fed direct from London on music circuits.21 Reactions Installation of equipment began in April, 1953 and trials were held at the end of the month. A relay from London was made on April 25. The Coronation relays took place daily from May 28 to June 4. Programming time varied from one hour and twenty minutes on May 28 to ten hours and twenty minutes on June 2, the day of the Coronation.22 In general, it is considered that the quality of the pictures rebroadcast for French viewers was good. Interruptions were rare and in every case due to mains failures. They were of short duration as standby generators had been provided in all stations. As for the distortion introduced in the long circuigs, this was largely compensated by Special equipment. Reactions in the various countries to the Coronation tele— cast were reported in the EBU Bulletin as follows: Belgium The INR, in conjunction with Belgian and foreign firms, [undertook to] convey the signal from Lille to 20M. J. L. Pulling and H. R., "Televising the Coro- nation," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 1953, p. 370. 2JPulling,”Eurovision Technical Operations," p. 30. 22”The Relay of the Coronation Programs to Western Europe," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 1953, p. 462. 23Ibid. ll Antwerp by way of intermediate stations at Flobecq and Brussels. . . . These stations were also provided with the monitoring equipment for 405 lines for the British Standards and [also] for transmissions not connected with the Coronation, for 819 lines for the French Standards. . . . In Brussels, a picture- distribution installation was set up which enabled about a hundred people to see the transmissions from start to finish. . . . The picture quality was con— sidered excellent except for occasional dark hori- zontal bands which drifted up or down the picture, probably due to frequency differences between the main supplies to the different stations. This fault was corrected by clamping circuits at thecoxverters.24 The Netherlands The 405-line signal was carried by the Dutch Post Office from Antwerp, Belgium to Breda (in the Netherlands) by radio-link where it was converted into a 625—line signal.25 The translated video-signal was sent from Breda to Helenaveen (in the Netherlands) where it was taken over by the German Federal Post Office and conveyed to Suchteln, 26 Germany. Reception quality was not reported in the EBU publication. In Germany German rebroadcasts were carried by transmitters in ”Berlin, Feldberg (near Frankfort-am-Main), Hamburg, Han- over, KOln (Cologne), Langenberg, Weinbiet, and by low—power temporary stations at Baden-Baden and Minden.27 The results of transmissions conducted from May 27 to June 6.in Germany were considered effective. Temporary 24Ibid., pp. 463-4. 25Ibid. 26Ibid. 27Ibid., p. 466. 12 installations were dismantled on June 6, the relay pronounced successful, and public interest in a permanent international television network was "clearly demonstrated."28 Denmark Although attempts to extend the network to Denmark failed, reports were received of reception from Hamburg in the southern part of the country. A receiving station at Copenhagen was useless on June 2, and conditions in other parts of the country were poor.29 Italy The television network was not extended to Italy, but Italian new5papers reported that a number of amateurs re- ceived a direct signal from England. Among them were a group of technicians in Rome who had studied the possibili- ties of long-distance propagation by way of the E-Layer and were able to get reasonably good pictures from the BBC.30 Conclusions Following the Coronation telecast, it was concluded in the EBU Bulletin that: 1. Technically, international television was possible,3 2. press reaction was POSitive,32 28Ibid. ngbid, solyig' 31121g., p. 467. 32Ibid. 3. 13 a much larger scale of international TV should be forthcoming, even U.S.-Europe exchanges,33 a variety of economic 32d technical problems remained to be solved, When one standard is adopted throughout Europe, "the technical and economic problems of TV program exchanges will be enormously facili- tated."35 New TV Stations In the few months following the Coronation relays a number of other countries in Europe began television services: 1. Switzerland--experimenta1 services in September, 1953, Belgium--separate services in French and Flemish on October 31, 1953, Italy-—eight interconnected transmitters on January 3, 1954.36 The "Lille Experiment" The ”Lille Experiment” in June and July of 1954, one of the most significant Eurovision operations, set a pattern for the future. In January, 1954, meetings were held in Paris to plan a series of daily program interchanges with eight national television organizations participating. It was decided that 33Wladimir Porche, ”Realizations et PerSpectives," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 1953, p. 761. 34"The Relay of the Coronation Programs to Western Europe," p. 467. 351bid., p. 467. 36Pulling, p. 30. 14 each of the countries should contribute one or more programs to be relayed by all the other countries. The Coronation telecast was carried in just One direction, from London to the receiving countries. With each of the eight countries contributing, international links joining adjacent countries would have to be capable of passing signals in either direction. This would require either two independent cir- cuits over these routes with one working in each direction, or a single circuit which could be reversed within twelve 37 hours or less. (See pages 35-7 for later developments.) Coordinating7Center It was also decided that a coordinating center with direct telephone connections to the technical and program headquarters of each participating service would be necessary.38 The RTF Television Service at Lille was selected as the coordinating center because it was possible to monitor the signals in the three definitions in use, 405-819-625.39 Tests conducted in April, 1954 showed a number of audio and video weaknesses. It was concluded that the Coordination Center at Lille could be expected to be responsible only for the vision network. Existing vision problems were regarded as the result of the connection in tandem of radio-—links of many different types and the large number of points that 37Ibid. 381bid. 391bid. 15 demodulation to video and remodulation took place.40 Difficulties with sound were considered the result of the large number of circuits required by each broadcast for the different languages and for technical and program con- trol circuits.41 A single branched music circuit was there— fore adopted to carry background sounds and was mixed in each country with the appropriate commentary received over another circuit from the country of origin or from a country using the required language. The program exchanges, now known as the "Lille Experi- ment,” took place from June 6 to July 4. The results of the experiment were considered in a report by M. J. L. Pulling, chairman of Working Party L of the Technical Committee, as "on the average, surprisingly good.”42 Within the month at least one transmission from different origins and under different conditions took place every day over the net work. It had served as a device for testing: 1. The procedure proposed for organizing and directing television relays, 2. for proving the testing methods and tolerances of performances, 3. .for training the staff of the participating services. The present organization of Eurovision is based essentially 4OIbid. 4llbid. 421bid., p. 31. 16 upon the ideas adopted at Lille.43 Involvement of the EBU Following the 1954 Lille Experiment, this international television network was known as Eurovision. It had been initiated and run by ad-hoc committees through international meetings. All eight of the participating organizations who were members of the European Broadcasting Union next asked the EBU to plan and supervise future exchanges. The proposal was approved by the Administrative Council of the Union.44 EBU Background The European Broadcasting Union is an international broadcasting organization composed of representatives of broadcasting services in the European Broadcasting Convention of the International Telecommunications Convention.45 (See Appendix, pages 93-4.) The EBU operates primarily in Western Europe and the Mediterranean area, and serves other countries which have EBU members.46 The EBU was founded in 1950,47 succeeding the Inter- national Broadcasting Union which began in 1924 in the 43George Hansen, "Some Technical ASpects of Euro- vision," Telecommunications Journal (July, 1961), p. 445. 44Pu111ng, p. 31. 45Russell B. Barber, "The European Broadcasting Union," Journal of Broadcasting, 1962, p. 111. 461bid., p. 112. 47N. Cherkezian, News from National Educational Tele- vision (June 4, 1962), (National Educational TelevisiOn and Radio Center), p. 2. 17 interest of radio.48 In 1929, the International Broadcasting Union, 1'Union International de Radiodiffusion, was renamed l'Union Internationale de Radiophonie (UIR). The UIR func- tioned as a clearing house for broadcasting for twenty-five years. In 1946, the Soviet bloc of nations withdrew from the UIR to form 1‘Organization Internationale de Radiodiffusion et Telivision (International Radio and Television Organization or OIRT).49 The OIRT is based in Prague, Czechoslovakia, serving members in eastern Europe and other countries allied with the Soviet Union.50 Four years later, in 1950, the need for reorganizing the UIR resulted in a broadcasting conference of twenty- three Western European countries, called by the BBC. The conference produced l'Union Europeenne de Radiodiffusion (The European Broadcasting Union or EBU).51 By its statutes it was an association of unlimited duration.52 The official languages of the EBU are French and English.53 Its major responsibility is to conduct research and an exchange of broadcastinginformation between the members, particularly on the cultural, administrative, legal, and engineering aSpects of radio and television.54 It is concerned with the development of broadcasting in all forms, 48Frank Iezzi and Juergen Becker, "Eurovision" (EBU's tv network analyzed), The NAEB Journal (July-August, 1961), p. 24. 49Barber, p. 112. 50Ibid. 511bid., p. 112. 52Ibid., p. 111. 53Ibid., p. 115. 54Hansen, p; 441. 18 and seeks solutions to differences that require its inter- national 1iason.55 The Administrative Office at Geneva, Switzerland, is reSponsible for the administrative, cultural, legal, and program activities while the Technical Center in Brussels, Belgium, deals with engineering aSpects.56 The development of Eurovision and the supervision of the exchange of live TV programs among European countries has been one of the main activities of the EBU.57 Organization The General Assembly and the Administrative Council are the major organs of the EBU. A president and two vice- presidents are elected by the General Assembly for a term of two consecutive years through nominations made by member, organizations holding seats in the Administrative Council. The General Assembly is the supreme body of the EBU and is composed of the total membership. Ordinary sessions are convened once a year by the president. Other meetings called by the president are termed extraordinary sessions.58 The Administrative Council, the EBUfs executive body, is composed of eleven administrators, elected from the active membership for terms of four consecutive years. One place on the Administrative Council is reserved for a representative from the country serving as the seat for the EBU. The SSBarber, p. 113. 56Hansen, p. 441. 57Barber, p. 117. 58Ibid., p. 115. 19 president's duties includes presiding at the two yearly meetings of the Council which take interim reSponsibility for the operation of the EBU, and executing Specific directives from the General Assembly.59 The president‘s reSponsibilities include the selection of items to be placed on the agenda, provisional approval of the minutes of the General Assembly and the Administrative Council and the selection of a working language in addition to French or English when required. The vice presidents are delegated subordinate duties. The older of the two vice presidents assumes the duties of the president in the case of his absence or incapacity unless other provisions are made by the Administrative Council or the General Assembly.60 Services The Administrative Office in Geneva, Switzerland and the Technical Center in Brussels, Belgium are each managed by a director. The director of the Administrative Office acts as secretary general at the meetings of the General Assembly and the Administrative Council. His reSponsibility includes carrying out the non-technical directives of the Adminis- trative Council, coordination of the responsibilities of the Administrative Office and the Technical Center and administer- ing the EBU staff, property, and funds. The director of the Technical Center carries out the directives from the Administrative Council of a technical 59Ibid. 6OIbid. 20 nature and administrates the EBU Technical Center staff, property, and funds.61 An important service of the EBU is the bimonthly pub- lication of its official periodical, The EBU Review, in both French and English. Part A of the Review is a separate technical section published in alternate months, beginning in February, by the Technical Center in Brussels. Part B is the General and Legal section published in alternate months, beginning in January, by the Administrative Office in Geneva. In 1962 there was an approximate circulation of 2,000 in each the French and English editions. Subscribers include broad- casting organizations, libraries, schools, and interested individuals. The magazine is supported through advertising, subscription fees, and EBU subsidy.62 Committees and Study Groups EBU committees and study groups may be initiated to investigate specific problems. They are advisory bodies and must make reports to the Administrative Council. The work of a committee concerns questions within the field it has been assigned to investigate. A study group inquires into a particular question referred to it and dissolves after making its final report. The formation and dissolution of such groups is exemplified in the following section on the Program Committee. The Program Committee, the Technical Committee, and the Legal Committee have existed throughout the history of 61Ibid,, p. 116. 62Ibid., pp. 120-1. 21 the European Broadcasting Union. Program Committee The Program Committee is concerned for the most part with Eurovision transmissions. It provides working channels for the use and evaluation of the Eurovision network for pro- grams. In 1954, two working parties were delegated the reSponsibility for Eurovision programs. They were GTV/l, in charge of programs on film, and GTV/2, responsible for live programs. In 1961, the Program Committee authorized a study group to investigate Eurovision exchanges in the areas of news, agricultural programs, children's programs, and edu- cational television.63 At the September 28 to October 3, 1961, meeting in Vienna, working parties GTV/l and GTV/2 were dissolved and replaced with study groups which could meet more current needs. The five study groups are: Planning Group Agriculture Programs News Exchange Teaching by Television Children's Programs The Program Committee's reSponsibility for radio pro- grams continues. At the Vienna meeting in September, 1961, consideration was given to setting up a study group concerned with.the problems of sound broadcasting.64 Many of the radio broadcasts have content relating to international movements, such as the Red Cross, World Health, and other United Nations projects. 63Ibid., p. 118. 6‘4"Tenth Plenary Session of the Programme Committee," EBU Review, No. 72b (March, 1962), p. 54. 22 The Program Committee coordinates EBU-sponsored edu— cational projects and international festivals. It cooperates with international organizations such as the United Nations to program in the public interest. The EBU, TV education projects include BBC courses for training television designers, RTF courses for training tele- vision producers, and the Swiss course for training tele- vision producers for school broadcasts. Annual international festival competitions in tele- vision sponsored by the EBU are the Eurovision Grand Prix of Television Films (for the best documentary film produced by a non-EBU member), the Golden Rose of Montreux Festival (for the best variety show), and the Eurovision Grand Prix Song Contest ( festival for Eurovision participants). The Prix Italia is an award given for the best broadcast programming by an EBU member.65 The Program Committee also solicits articles for pub- lication and review.66 Technical Committee The Technical Committee is reSponsible for coordinat- ing technical activities among EBU members and for conduct- ing research of a technical nature. Eurovision activities have occupied the major part of the resources and staff of the Technical Center in Brussels, which arranges circuits and lines for each Eurovision transmission. The staff makes judgments concerning the technical feasibility of proposed ésBarber, p. 119. 661bid. 23 programs. Research projects conducted by the Technical Com- mittee go beyond the problems of Eurovision, into the various aSpects of the total development of broadcasting.67 Legal Committee Legal problems associated with Eurovision have required work by the Legal Committee to standardize and simplify national codes which conflict when applied to international program exchanges. The Committee has been essentially in- volved in matters related to copyright. It gives advice anw assistance to EBU members in the preparation of national legislation and takes part in drafting interstate conventions under the auSpices of international agencies, such as UNESCO, the Berne Council, and the Council of Europe. In striving to consolidate international law affecting broadcasting, the EBU has urged its members to seek the advice of the Legal Committee before entering into, renewing, extending, or ter- minating any agreements affecting broadcast programming.68 Principles Three basic principles are incorporated in the organ- izational structure of the EBU. They are: 1. A non-governmental policy, 2. Voluntary consent by members, 3. reciprocity in EBU affairs. Operationally this means that the EBU is an international organization whose members willingly join and extend their services to each other, thereby receiving mutual benefit. 67lEiQ-: P- 118. 68Ibid., pp. 119—20. 24 Members are expected to abide by the EBU statutes and civil law; under certain circumstances, according to statute, they may be expelled. They vote on questions that come be- fore the organization and decide the degree to which they will become involved in EBU activities. The success of the association relies upon the ability of each member to realize the benefits of reciprocity. Member broadcasting services have been guaranteed that they would not lose their identity or autonomy.69 Membership The three requirements necessary for EBU membership are: l. A member must be a broadcasting organization from a country holding membership in the International Telecommunications Union (of the UN). 2. It must be authorized by its government to operate a broadcasting service. 3. Program production from the service must come from permanently established transmitters.7O Membership is divided into three classifications: active membership, supplementary active membership, and associate membership. Active members represent countries in the European Broadcasting Zone which provide a broadcasting service of national character and importance. Each country is limited to two active members. Countries which have more than two broadcasting organizations eligible for active membership may allow them to form an association and join as a single unit, or each additional member may join as 6912.12” pp. 121-3. 70Ibid., p. 113. 25 a supplementary active member. Associate membership is ex- tended to countries which fulfill the requirements for active membership, but which are located outside the European Broadcasting Zone.71 Only active members have the right to vote in the General Assembly.72 In 1961, the EBU was composed of the following twenty- seven active members from twenty-six countries (the United Kingdom has two separate active memberships, the BBC and the ITA): Austria Ireland Portugal Belgium Israel Spain Denmark Italy Sweden Finland Lebanon Switzerland France Luxembourg Tunisia German Federal Monaco Turkey Republic Morocco United Kingdom Greece Netherlands Vatican Iceland Norway Yugoslavia73 In 1961, EBU associate members came from eleven countries. The United States held six separate aSSOciate memberships. Australia United States Burma American Broadcasting Company Canada Columbia Broadcasting System Ceylon National Association of Congo Educational Broadcasters Ghana National Broadcasting Company Haiti National Educational Tele- Japan vision and Radio Center, New Zealand Broadcasting Foundation Union of South Africa of America United States Information Agency 4 (See Appendix for organizational structure, page 94) 711616., p. 114. 721bid., p. 115. 73Hansen, p. 443. 74Ibid. 26 In December, 1961, the radio broadcasting organiz- ations of Pakistan and Southern Rhodesia-Nyasaland, and the commercial television services of Japan and Austria were ad- mitted in principle to the EBU as associate members.75 Financing The annual EBU budget for the financial year, January 1 to December 31, 1962, was over one million Swiss francs (about $250,000), excluding the Eurovision budget (see "Financing Eurovision," page 41). Support of the Union comes primarily from paid memberships which are estimated in proportion to the number of receiving sets served by the members. Most European broadcasting services are state— supported by license fees paid annually by receiving set owners. Active members are rated according to the number of licenses per country on a proportionate financial unit basis. Where license fees or government subsidy for broad- casting services do not exist, ratings are based on the kind and size of the broadcasting service. Although there are presently no active supplementary members, their dues would be determined by the Administrative Council relative to those of active members from the same country. To determine the exact amount to be charged each mem- ber, the annual budget is divided by the total number of assigned units. The resulting figure is the cost per unit. The cost per unit is multiplied by the number of units as- signed each member and the final figure represents the 75Barber, p. 124. 27 amount of the dues. Associate members are assigned separate dues by the Administrative Council and charged at the end of the fiscal year for requested Special serVices. Other sources of income include receipts from EBU pub- lications and other activities, from gifts, legacies, do- nations, and subsidies.76 Eurovision Under EBU The results of the Coronation telecast, the Lille Experiment, and other Eurovision exchanges gave the EBU a background upon which to structure the future of Eurovision. In 1954, three working parties, one of them reporting to the Program Committee of the Union and two to the Technical Com- mittee, were set up. The Program Committee working party was soon after divided into two groups, GTV/l and GTV/Z.77 The organization, reSponsibilities, and activities of these working parties will be discussed later. Summary of Problems--1953 The problems that had to be solved when Eurovision was formed in 1953 fell into three categories: 1. Problems associated with relaying the vision signals from country to country, 2. problems associated with sound, 3. problems associated with the general organiz- ation of international operations, planning, and supervision. 761bid., pp. 116-7. 77Pulling, p. 31. 78Hansen, p. 442. 28 Vision In 1953, the few countries that had television oper- ated simple networks; in most cases, single-channel radio links joining studios and the transmitting stations. The 1952 Bastile Week telecasts and 1953 Coronation telecasts had prepared the way for the other countries to link their networks and for conversion from standard to standard. The established procedures worked well when pictures were not degraded by repeated demodulation and remodulation. After conversion, second-rate pictures became bad pictures and poor pictures became unusable.79 For the Coronation, vision junctions were set up be— tween Britain and France, France and Belgium, Belgium and the Netherlands, the Netherlands and Germany (see Appendix, page 95). Shortly afterwards these junctions could be extended between Germany and Denmark, Germany and Switzerland, and between Switzerland and Italy.80 One-Way Links The operational value of this chain depended upon each service's participation in every Eurovision transmission. Since national-domestic-networks constituted essential links of the chain, refusal of a Specific Eurovision program by any country in the chain isolated the service on the opposite Side of it.81 The network also lacked reserve circuits for use in case of breakdown. In many cases, the links were 79Ibid. 801bid. 81Iezzi, p. 26. 29 reversible (in contrast to simultaneous two~way links which could carry the signal in either direction without inter- ruption) and required Specific time intervals for reversals of transmission.82 Other Vision Problems Early Eurovision telecasts suffered in video quality (in addition to the demodulation and remodulation factor) because they were often remote-broadcasts, originating far from the permanent vision network and necessitating the use of several transporting radio-links in tandem. The use of proper equipment could have prevented many problems, but it was not always available. Poor weather conditions caused interference. For remote broadcasts, ideal camera install- ations and lighting were often lacking. Circuits were at times unreliable, subject to lighting damage or failure of public—electricity supply. Human error contributed when the Staff of a relay Station failed to arrive on time. More irritating faults included noise, hum, instability of the over-all gain, amplitude, non-linearity, and ”overshooting and ringing."83 19.222 Provisions for sound were complex. The nature of Eurovision's presentations has influenced the type of sound pattern frequently used. The presentations are often: 1. Remote telecasts (not in TV studios), 82Hansen, p. 444. 83Ibid., p. 446. 3O 2. outdoor telecasts, 3. Sportcasts or coverage of affairs of state. For such relays, sound comprises two parts: (1) the sound coming from the event, such as the cheering crowd or the hoof beats of horses, (2) the commentary or vocal de-- scription by an announcer. Because the commentary may be given in a number of places, for example, in the country of origin, in the country received, or in a country in between by a commentator Speaking a language understood by one or more receiving countries, the two sounds are relayed individu- ally and mixed at any of the points mentioned.84 During the first few years of Eurovision operation, more sound than video circuit failures occurred. Some have concluded that the reason for sound difficulties can be ex- plained organizationally; that, while vision circuits are controlled by the EBU technical centers, audio facilities 85 Others feel are leased from National Postal Authorities. that national telecommunications administrations "have provided broadcast-quality, program-transmission circuits in reasonable numbers between most of the more important centers in Western Europe, and it would be economically im- possible for them to provide more than a few to the less 86 important towns." It is often from these remote places, as previously mentioned, that Eurovision telecasts originate. 84Ibid., p. 444. 85W00d5, p. 115. 86Hansen, pp. 446-7. 31 Technicians looking for high-quality circuits for the Inter- national Sound (inherent sound) and for circuits to carry six to ten commentaries in different languages have found that they do not exist. They have had to accept telephone quality circuits.87 Level and Volume.--Leve1 and volume have also been con— tinuing audio-frequency problems because TeleVision Services taking part in Eurovision do not all use the same type of modulation indicators.88 Commentators using unfamiliar equipment furnished by the countries originating Eurovision programs have been con— fused by differing signals and equipment, which has resulted in the misuse of the equipment and a variety of sound errors .89 Administration Eurovision programs prior to and including the Lille Experiment were conducted cooperatively by participating television Services, which had among them.varying ideas on standards, different languages and cultural patterns, and different stages of organizational and technical develop- ment. Lack of uniformity existed in the type of adminis- trative organizations operating the television services. In some countries it was a Department of State; in others, 87Ibid., p. 447. 88Ibid- 89Ibid. 32 private companies or chartered corporations. Some of the television services owned and operated their own . . production centers, outside-broadcasting- units, the radio link or cable network and the transmitting stations while [for] others, these . . . were the direct reSponsibility of the Telecommunication Administrations. . . in no two countries [of the European Television Community were the administrations of the Television Services identical].90 These services developed independently of each other, purchasing different technical equipment, particularly radio- link chains ”which made it impossible to connect the differ- ent sections in tandem without demodulating to video or even to'optical."91 Administrative agencies, however, were unified in their desire to make Eurovision a successful operation. Competition and rivalry were not evidenced. Staff and equip— ment was made available to each other for Eurovision commit- ments.92 PTT Administrations The technical development of Eurovision was conducted essentially by the engineering staffs of the various broad- casting services and the Postal Telephone and Telegraph Administrations (PTT). The function of the PTT Administra- tions includes the supervision of radio and television technical procedures and the regulation of the costs of the circuits used for transmissions by broadcaSting services. 9O 91 Ibid., p. 442. Ibid. 921616. 33 As vision links were set up between countries for Eurovision, the PTT Administrations became responsible for them at vari— ous Stages: (1) from the beginning, (2) as they took part in a joint developmental effort, and (3) after vision links were established. The PTT Administration sets the price for the use of the international vision circuits. The CCITT (an inter- national regulatory organization for PTT Administrations) has provided some basic principles to simplify negotiations for ordering international vision circuits and has estab- lished costs.93 PTT engineers from many of the Eurovision countries have been members of Working Party L of the Technical Com— mittee. This form of representation is considered mutually beneficial.94 Technical Control Center (CICT) From the experience gained at Lille, the decision was made to establish a permanent Coordination Center. The site for this Center became Brussels, Belgium, the prewar lo- cation of the UIR and the postwar location of the Technical Center of the EBU. It is situated between the 819- and 625- line organizations and is just a short distance from the British 405—line network. The Coordination Center is located in the Palais de Justice, 93Pu11ing, p. 34. 94Ibid. 34 . . . a few hundred feet below the area at the top of the dome in which the I.N.R.[Institut Na- tiOnal Belge de Radiodiffusiod had set up television transmitters and where the centimetric—wave cir- cuits to and from France, the Netherlands and Ger- many were terminated. The Technical Committee recommended an expenditure of one million Belgian francs to equip the Coordination Center.96 The Technical Control Center in Brussels, Belgium, be- gan operation in January, 1956 for program exchanges involv- ing two or more countries. The Administrative Office in Geneva provides outlined program plans to the Coordination Center in Brussels, which works out the technical details and issues an over-all plan for each exchange to the services concerned. Each service then places its order for circuits and carries out its part in the operation.97 A number of the services in Eurovision countries have installed Special facilities to handle video and audio tests and other arrangements for Eurovision programs.98 Technical Committee, Working Parties L and M Two of the three Eurovision working parties appointed in January of 1955 were reSponsible to the Technical Com- mittee of the EBU. They are known as working parties L and M.99 The two working parties have a number of members in common who are nominated by the members of the EBU Technical Committee.100 95Pu11ing, p. 32. 96Ibid., p. 25. 97Ibid., p. 32. 981bid., p. 33. 991616., p. 31. lOOIbid. 35 Working party L, under the Chairmanship of M. J. L. Pulling of the BBC, is reSponsible for Eurovision Oper- ations:101 (l) promoting the development of the technical facilities, (2) collaborating with the Program Committee to provide for the proper use of the facilities, (3) standard— izing methods of planning and operation, (4) preparing rules for ordering circuits, and (5) sharing costs.102 Working party M is concerned with: (1) standards of performance, (2) measurement methods of vision circuits, and (3) performance of standards converters.103 Until 1954, rules were established as called for by Specific occasions, but by 1954 methods for scheduling pre- transmission tests and the use of equipment had been agreed upon. In January, 1955, action was taken at the first meet- ing of Working party L to purchase a document of these rules called the "Code of Practice." This document of approxi— mately 250 pages was later made available in French and English.104 Exchange Patterns Early Eurovision exchanges, eSpecially the Lille experiment, were characterized by relays from one country to all connected Services. In 1955 and 1956, members of the program working party asked for ”push button” facilities for "multi-source" programs which contained segments originating 1Ollbid. 102Ibid., p. 26. 103Ibid., p. 31. 104Ibid., p. 33. 36 in several different countries. The switching from one country to another would be done centrally in Brussels. This request required simultaneous two-way circuits over all the main routes, with separate contribution and distribution networks. In 1957, the multi—Source program became feasible and two such programs were telecast in 1957 and 1959. In 1962, during the transatlantic Telstar experiment, U.S. viewers were greeted by people in various parts of Europe through the Eurovision ”multi-source” facilities in Brussels. The multi-source type of programming has, however, become the exception and the trend has been toward exchanges between smaller groups of countries. One of the reasons is the commitment of broadcast services to fixed-time program schedules.105 Language Grogps Another reason for the trend away from total member- ship programming is a tendency for services to form common language groups. Typical exchange groups include the tele- vision services of Austria, the German Federal Republic, and the German-speaking part of the Swiss network. The Swiss-French language group joins with France, Luxembourg, Monaco, and the French-Language Belgian Service.106 Progress and Procedures Complex programs continue to require notice for ex- tensive planning taking weeks or months, but short notice transmissions are now possible. In 1954, two days were 1051bid., p. 34. 106Ibid., p. 34-5. 37 required for staff members to reach remote mountain stations. These stations are now better attended, or designed to be unattended, and remote transmissions can take place with as little as two hourS' notice. The procedure for a Eurovision transmission requiring time and planning starts with the Administrative Office, which contacts the Brussels Technical Center. At least ten days before the telecast, Brussels sends a synopsis con- taining requirements for circuits, preliminary tests and time schedules to each member and to the Telecommunication Ad- ministrations in Western Europe. It further informs members of their reSponsibilities in providing necessary facilities.107 The mechanics of operating a telecast can be handled either by the Program Coordination Center (CICP) and the Technical Coordination Center (CICT) in Brussels or by a member Service. The duties of the Program Coordination Center are generally handled by the service originating the program. Communi- cation between the originating service and other National Program Control Centers is carried over a connected network of telephone circuits. The reSponsibilities of the Technical Center are generally assigned to one of the affiliates in the network. A telephone communications system linking the CICT with National Technical Control Centers may be used for trans- mission operations, or provisions may be made by the Tele- communication Administration. More complex operations, such as the multiple-origin program, are conducted by both the 107Hansen, p. 445. 38 CICP and the CICT at the International Control Center in Brussels. Control of video quality is the joint reSponsibility of designated network services which must provide standards converters, and equip intermediate stations to supervise un- familiar incoming signals. The CMTT, a committee repre- senting the CCIR and the CCITT, Specifies the vision test signals required before a transmission.108 The United Nations has at least four agencies which work in cooperation with Eurovision as well as other inter- national radio and television organizations. They are the CCITT, the CCIR, the ITU, and UNESCO. In 1960, the CCITT (International Telegraph and Tele— phone Consultive Committee) organized "fourteen study groups covering transmission problems, operation and tariffs, radio relay links, maintenance, electromagnetic dangers, pro— tection of equipment, definitions, vocabulary and symbols, apparatus, local connecting lines, facsimile and photo- telegraphy, quality of transmission, Specifications, tele— graph and telex switching, telephone signalling and switch- ing and planning, and development of an international network. It has its own telephony lab.”109 The CCIR (International Radio Consultative Committee) had a "television study group working on: television re- cording, TV slides for black and white and colour 108Hansen, pp. 445-6. 109The Europa Year Booki 1962, Vol. 1 (London: Europa Publications, Ltd.), p. 106. 39 transmission, ratio of the wanted to the unwanted signal in TV, reduction of band width, conversion of a TV signal from one standard to another, estimates of quality of TV pictures, etc."1_1O . I Circuit failure due to lightning damage has been cut down through more effective lightning precautions. Failures of public electricity supply are supplemented by reserve lll supplies. Equipment has improved, as well as the technique of correction.112 Sound continues to be a problem due to a Shortage of high quality circuits for the International sound and the number of circuits required for commentary in different languages. One solution that has been considered is the reactivation of the temporary radio-link chain used previ- ously for Eurovision vision signals, as a multi- channel audio system.113 Level and volume are also continuing problems because participating services do not use the same type of modu- lation indicators. Standardization may be achieved through the use of a newly developed instrument which would be used for "supervising the sending-end volume," and for "comparing the volume at two points along the circuit.”114 Standardization has been achieved in the panel design and control devices on equipment used by commentators for Eurovision programs.115 110Ibid 111Hansen, p. 446. 1121bid. 113Ibid., p. 447. 114Ibid. 1151616. 40 The use of video-tape has been proposed for news re- lays. A permanently available vision and sound network are a requirement of the proposal which would allow individual television services to feed news items to a central tape recording unit. It has been suggested that news items could be transmitted to the Technical Control Center in Brussels daily, recorded, and reproduced over the networks at a standard time each day.116 Intercontinental Eurovision In 1958, the RTF fed the Eurovision network the first program from another continent. The country of origin was Algiers. The link across the Mediterranean was achieved by equipping an aircraft as a relay station. The airborne re- lay station flew 6,000 meters above the Balearic Islands about half-way between Algiers and Marseilles.117 Trans—Atlantic Eurovision Throughout the history of Eurovision consideration has been given to the extension of the network to other continents, especially in areas where the EBU has associate members. In trying to provide a trans-Atlantic tie-up with North America, the Cable Film Process has been used experi- mentally. The procedure involves the transmission of short film Sequences at slow Speed through a film scanner over the 118 trans-Atlantic telephone cable. ”At the arrival end, a 1.16Pu11ing, pp. 32-3. 117Pulling, p. 36. 118Iezzi, p. 28. 41 film recorder working to the same standards makes a new film, which can then be scanned at the normal rate for broadcasting." Through this method, a 30-Second news film takes fifty minutes to cross the Atlantic.119 A wide-band system capable of transmitting television signals from the tropOSpheric scatter has been tested. It has been stated that it appeared technically feasible to link Europe with North America through tropOSpheric scatter links.120 Airborne transmitting facilities have been considered for trans-Atlantic relays using more than one aircraft trans- mitting unit. Where the relay from France to Algiers traversed 500 miles across the Mediterranean, the trans- Atlantic relay would have to extend about 3,000 miles.121 On July 18, the United States orbited its first com- munications satellite. It was the result of the joint efforts of American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The U.S. sent the first television Signals from Andover, Maine to the Telstar satellite, where it was amplified ten billion times and relayed to Europe.122 France was the first to receive the Signals at Pleumer Bodau, followed by Great Britain at Goonhilly Down. France was the first to return 119Hansen, p. 448. 120Woods, p. 115. 121Iezzi, p. 29. 122Newsweek (July 23, 1962), P- 13- 42 signals to the United States on July 14, although a multi- source Eurovision program representing the joint efforts of its members had been scheduled to procede it.123 The meeting of the EBU, October 22 to 27, 1962, in the United States considered, among other things, the use of satellites in communications.124 Financing Eurovision Members of the Eurovision network do not charge each other for programs or other services connected with Euro- vision.125 The EBU, however, has developed a Scale to accommodate certain expenses incurred, such as the over-use of the resources of a particular member. For example, originally, each nation was responsible for all vision cir- cuit costs developed on its own territory. This system placed a burden upon countries like Switzerland. This country, near the center of the network and one of the poorer members, was frequently asked to provide transmitting facilities for programs which countries on either Side did not use for broadcast. A set of satisfactory rules taking such exchanges into consideration has since been estab— lished.126 Eurovision is considered an enterprise of the EBU as a whole, though only certain members participate actively. Ten per cent of the Technical Center's expenditure is pro- vided by the union and the remaining 90 per cent is shared by the members that take part. 123Ibid., p. 14. 124NET News, p. 1. 125Hansen, p. 442. 126Iezzi, p. 27. 43 The direct costs of relaying individual programs are Shared between the participants in those pro- grams according to a . . . series of formulafzthat have been evolved as a result of experience. Circuit costs have been considered an inhibitor in the growth of Eurovision. The major circuit cost is that of the vision circuit. The tariff on international vision cir- cuits was established by the PTT128 through the CCITT, an international organization which regulates matters of common interest to the PTT Administration. The recommendations of the CCITT were made in November, 1956, and Shortly after 129 came into force. The tariff was set up on an "assumed average amount of use” which in 1959 had scarcely been reached on the most frequently used circuits.130 In 1959, some felt that the PTT Administration had set the tariff low enough to encourage greater use of the cir- cuits, but broadcasters felt that an even lower tariff would stimulate more participation. The PTT Administration thought further decrease in tariffs out of the question and recom- mended that broadcasters promote the use of circuits to ex- ceed the stated average and apply for lower circuit charges on a new basis.131 The Union advocates a regular, even daily, exchange of programs. This would justify the use of the main inter- national circuits and provide opportunities for other more 127"Eurovision: An Idea Becomes a Reality," Euro- vision, 5th Anniversary, 1959, p. 26. 128Pulling, p. 35 129Ibid., p. 34. 13OIbid., p. 35. 1“fluid. 44 economical uses of the circuits, or at least prompt new negotiations with the PTT Administrations. The daily news exchange discussed in the chapter on programming might help to change the status quo since it could result in regular and frequent use of the circuits.l32 Permanent Network In 1959, the Permanent Network Mixed Committee recom- mended renting basic networks of sound and vision circuits on a long term basis for use by Eurovision participants. It was agreed that the recommendation could be put into effect by stages. January 1, 1962, was set as the date for inaugurating Stage I, the leasing of a permanent basic sound network. The network extends in star—Shape from the Technical Center in Brussels to London, Paris, Zurich, Milan, Hilversum, Cologne, and Copenhagen. These key points are the most frequently used international circuits. Each interconnection has two program-circuits, one for incoming and one for outgoing pro- grams. They must still be ordered and set up for each trans- mission and paid for by the minute. Additional provisions include a control telephone circuit to the terminal stations and private—wire telephone and conference facilities between the Technical Center in Brussels and the Administration Office in Geneva. These permanent circuits will provide the total sound of some transmissions (see Appendix, p. 96);morecfi1~ cuits must be ordered and paid for. To make better use of 132Ibid. 45 the permanent sound network, arrangements have been made for Eurovision members to use the circuits for their radio broad- casts. Permanent vision circuits have yet to be put into effect. The EBU has not been able to get definite infor- mation from the Administrations which supervise the inter- national vision circuits concerning the cost of leasing them for a year or more.133 The general news exchanges have been suspended until both the vision and sound networks are permanent. Italy, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, however, may now participate in news exchange using the permanent sound circuits, mainly becauSe they are contiguous to each other and do not have to pay for national vision circuits or international junctions by the minute.134 Total Facilities The total operating facilities of the EBU members, constituting the European Television Community on March 1, 1961, consisted of 1,052 television broadcasting stations. In January of 1961 they were linked by 43,000 kilometers of permanent network. The average program day of the services ranged from just under three hours to nearly twelve hours. In January, 1961, there were a total of 23,532,343 receiVers representing approximately one television receiver to ten persons.135 . 133"Eurovision Permanent Network Scheme," EBU Review, Part A-Technical, No. 71 (February, 1962), p. 46. - 134Ibid. . 135Hansen, pp. 448. CHAPTER II EUROVISION PROGRAMMING It has been mentioned earlier that a major challenge in the development of Eurovision was making the direct relay and exchange of "live” programs technically feasible. To do this, ways had to be devised to convert varying line stand- ards and engineers had to find suitable places, often situ- ated in mountain terrain, for circuit links to carry the best quality of signal. The international exchange of programs had already -begun on a film exchange basis. The chief contribution of Eurovision was to provide for the transmission of "live" programs which, in turn, would permit more frequent ex- changes, to greater numbers, at less cost to each. In this chapter a summary of the types of programs characteristic of Eurovision will be given, the ways that international cultural differences come into play will be related, and the work of the Program Committee's working parties, GTV/l and GTV/z, will be described. Program Type§J 1954-1960 Working party GTV/Z has carried the responsibility for the coordination of "live" programming. 46 47 Sport programs account for the greatest number of Eurovision exchanges. It is estimated that 63 per cent of the programs exchanged between 1954 through 1960 dealt with Sporting events, including: 1954—World Football Championship (Soccer) 1956-Olympic Winter Games and World Olympic Games . . 1 l958-World Football Championship The main exchanges between Eurovision and Intervision have also been Sport transmissions. Public affairs programs rank second in number at 13 per cent and include the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth, the Ranier-Kelly wedding, and the selection and accession of Pope John XXIII. Ten per cent of the programs were of a light variety type, such as the Eurovision Song Contest, and the Prix Italia awards for documentaries. Seven per cent were drama, music or ballet, and the remainder were religious programs, children's and cultural presentations.2 Language Problems The major reason given for the heavy emphasis of Sport programs has been the language problem.3 In 1961, fourteen languages were Spoken among the fifteen participating nations. The language problem was apparent even in the first few years of Eurovision. In 1954, six basic languages were represented among the eight participating services. #- 1Frank Iezzi and Juergen Becker, "Eurovision" (EBU's tv network analyzed), The NAEB Journal (July-August, 1961), pp. 27-8. 2Ibid. 31bid., p. 26. 48 Simultaneous commentaries in the different languages or language groups were necessary from the beginning.4 An early plan to provide commentary in French and English from the country of origin, for translation in the receiving countries, was tried briefly and found to be "too rigid, un- natural, and impersonal."5 This technique, however, is used occasionally as a measure of economy or when there is in- sufficient time to send a commentator. A commentator in the receiving country is given a guide commentary in French or English; he then explains the events as they occur on a monitor. This procedure is practical for the televising of public ceremonies.6 Due to the language difference, the Eurovision program that evolved did not rely upon dialogue for understanding. Thus, the Sport telecast and the ceremonial telecast, using a commentator who Speaks the language of the receiving country, has become the most popular type of program. Rules were instituted by the Program Committee which allowed no interviews and no programs in which dialogue forms a part of the action.7 4Jean D'Arcy, ”Eurovision,” 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 9. SIezzi, p. 26. 6George Hansen, "Some Technical ASpects of Euro- vision," Telecommunications Journal (July, 1961), pp. 444-5. 7D'Arcy, p. 9. 49 Cultural Differences Language differences are accompanied by more subtle cultural differences. In 1952, preparations for the first live exchanges between France and Britain (Bastille Week celebrations) provided for a British and a French director to satisfy the two national points of View.8 The experience of the EBU has been that pictures are not a universal langu- age in Eurovision presentations. Countries which form cultural communities or which have common cultural traditions do not use pictures to communicate ideas in the same way as another cultural group. Use of the television medium by pro- duction personnel from a Scandanavian country for a Scandanavian audience may not be satisfying to its Latin or Anglo-Saxon counterpart.9 For example, the type and number of pictures selected for a Specific program by a Swiss director might be too slow-moving for an Italian audience, 10 but too hectic for a British audience. What is considered appropriate treatment of a particular subject in one European country might be offensive in another.11 The use of language pools to conserve the number of commentators and sound circuits needed for Eurovision broad— casts are limited in their effectiveness by the length of time one country may wish to carry the event and by the 8Donald K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, "A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 102. 9D'Arcy, p. 10. 10Iezzi, p. 26. lllbid. 50 national orientation of the commentator. A man might be as- signed coverage of an athletic event between countries which Speak the same language but claim separate national cultural identities, such as Austria and Germany.12 Sport Programs Some of the Sport events carried by Eurovision have been major world events, such as the 1956 Winter Olympic Games and the 1960 Summer Olympic Games, both held in Italy. Fifty-four telecasts were made during the thirteen days of the Winter games. They included the arrival of the Olympic Torch, bobsledding, figure skating, ice hockey, Skiing, and the closing ceremonies. Eurovision participants could re- ceive network coverage of individual events, programs trans- mitted for a particular country, and daily film summaries.13 The World Football (Soccer) Championship in Switzer- land in 1954 and in Sweden in 1958 were also important to Eurovision audiences.14 The 1962 event was held in June in Chile, South America. A special work group of the Program Committee was set up to plan for Eurovision Coverage.15 Public Affairs Programs Public Affairs transmission have been among the earliest and most frequent types of Eurovision programs. 12Hansen, p. 444. l3Woods, p. lO7.~ 14Iezzi, pp. 27-8. 15Russell B. Barber, “The European Broadcasting Union," Journal of Broadcasting, 1962, pp. 118-9. 51 Although conversion was not a factor in the 1950 France—to- England telecast of the submarine cable centenary cele- bration, it is notable that the subject matter in this early relay was ceremonial in nature. The 1952 Bastille Week celebrations carried by both France and England provided the following television exchange material: speeches by Foreign Minister Robert Schuman and Ambassador Sir Oliver Harvey, views of Paris from the Eiffel Tower, a tour of the Louvre, jazz from St. Germain des Pres, Mass from the Church of St. Denis, a visit to a Paris zoo, a variety Show, and a French housewife's trip to a market, and Bastille Day festivities.16 The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II telecast brought viewers the "Queen's procession to the Abbey, the Coronation service, the return procession to Buckingham Palace, and the Queen's appearance on the balcony of the palace during the RAF review.”17 Other significant Eurovision ceremonial coverages in- clude the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, the selection and accession of Pope John XXIII,18 the 1956 wedding of Prince Ranier III to Grace Kelly,19 forty-nine programs dealing with the NATO Paris Conference between December 15 and 20, 1956, and in 1957, the first underwater telecast in Europe of divers exploring the Mediterranean floor near Marseilles.20 16Woods, pp. 102-3. 17Ibid., p. 103. 18Iezzi, p. 28. 19Woods, p. 107. 20Ibid., p. 108. 52 In 1958, the Brussels World Fair was also televised, bringing the Eurovision audience a tour of the major national pavilions and performances by many visiting artists.21 Arts Programs From 1954 to 1960, about 7 per cent of Eurovision's programs were devoted to the arts, music, drama, and ballet.22 Eurovision's Program Committee has questioned the ability of the Small screen to accommodate opera and sug- gested that while music is a universal language, it is better suited to radio than television.23 Drama is suited to television and desirable as an international presentation but limited by one of the basic problems of Eurovision's international dimension, the langu- age difference. One solution suggested was the use of a film »with subtitles electronically superimposed by the receiving country as the film is relayed "live" from the originating country.24 The number of first-rate television writers is also limited and the suggestion has been made that nations Share the writings of their better authors who write Specifically for television. The percentage of dramatic programs has been increasing deSpite the language problem.25 211bid., p. 109. zzlezzi, p. 28. 23Marcel Bezencon, ”Eurovision-A Simple Idea That Worked," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 5. . 25 . 24Ie221, p. 29. Ibid., p. 28. 53 Working Party GTV/l (Film) The Eurovision exchanges previously mentioned have been "live" presentations coordinated by Working Party GTV/2. Programs on film have also been exchanged. They are the con— cern of Working Party GTV/l. . The purposes of GTV/l are: to provide for the ex- change of film between the member broadcasting services, for the economical production of film through joint efforts, and to introduce standards which would encourage the use and circulation of the film.26 Film Magazine An early project of Working Party GTV/l was the compilation of a European magazine containing information on films, concerned with the social, political, and artistic life of the participating countries. The magazine was pro- duced monthly on a rotating basis by the member organizations. The editions of the magazine ended as individual participants developed their own news services.27 Children's Newsreels After the early demise of the magazine service, an International Children's Newsreel was developed for use by fifteen countries. The newsreel deals only with subjects concerning and of interest to children. This cooperative 26Sergio Pugliese, "The First Five Years of Working Party GTV/l," 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 12. 27Ibid., p. 13. 54 service has been apparently well received. Non—European countries, such as the United States, Australia, Canada, and Japan have participated in these filmed exchanges.28 Film Series Other GTV/l projects were a weekly newsreel on vari- ous aspects of agriculture on an international scale and several series of programs to which Specific broadcast organizations contribute one film in exchange for the whole series. The following series have been produced: "Great Rivers of Europe"—-nine programs illustrating civilizations, conquests, and activities which originated along great rivers in Europe. "Great European Cities”--the same theme as above, but based on cities, with seven in the series. "Small Towns"--a series of eleven programs on the communities which retain the characteristics of various European groups. Two other film series were reported underway in 1959. 'flfigh Places of the Mind,” highlights the places in Europe where significant stages of human thought developed. The other is a series on research, study, and experimentation of which the public knows little or nothing about. These two series were done by GTV/l and the International University of the Air. Contact between these two groups was made to consider the cultural programs intended for use on Euro- vision.29 28Ibid., p. 13. 291bid., p. 14. 55 Internationa1_FestivalS The EBU Sponsors a variety of International Festivals, some of which have become associated with Eurovision. Eurovision Song Festival In 1956 Eurovision initiated the Grand Prix d' Euro- vision Song Competition. For the contest, each nation entered a song. The winner of the first competition was the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation.30 In 1957, ten television services took part in the contest won by the Netherlands. Competition in this event continues. Other international festivals Sponsored by the EBU include: The Prix Italia - annual competition for the best broadcast programming by EBU members. The Eurovision Grand Prix of Television Films - annual competition for the best documentary film for television produced by a non-EBU member. The Golden Rose of Montreux Festival - annual competition for the best television variety Show. News Programming The exchange of news via Eurovision is important to the participants for several reasons. One reason is that international news quickly transmitted provides a service in public information.31 Another reason is related to the need 30Woods, pp. 108. 31J. W. Rengelink, "Operation Eurojournal,” 5th Anni- versary, EBU Publication, 1959,-p. 15. 56 for Eurovision to make sufficient use of the network cir- cuits to reduce the current high cost of use per hour. Early News Filmed news exchanges had been conducted between tele— vision organizations before 1957. However, due to time losses, tranSportation, customs regulations, and unfavorable weather conditions, the news value of the films often was greatly decreased. In September, 1952 the Program Committee, meeting in Sicily, decided to follow a proposal of the Netherlands Television Station recommending a meeting of the chief editors of television news services from member countries.33 A meeting was held in March of 1958 in Amsterdam, attended by representatives of fourteen organizations. It was decided that a study group should examine the technical, administrative, and financial aSpects of a daily news ex- change via the Eurovision network and that a service be instituted for experimental purposes.34 Experimental Service The first experimental service was Set up in October, 1958, for two weeks with six organizations participating, the BBC, NIR/INR, NTS, RAI, and RTF. They were later joined by the ARD, DSR, SRT, and ITN because the death of the Pope gave the news added significance. The experiment was considered satisfactory at the December, 1958 meeting of the 321bid., p. 17. 33Ibid., p. 15. 34Ibid. 57 study group in Rome. An accurate estimate of cost had not been made, but interest was expressed in another experiment with more countries participating.35 The next experiment was held from May 4 to 30, 1959, with the BBC, NIR/INRt ITN, NTS, RAI, and RTF participating. The ARD participated for one week. The 1959 experiment confirmed the technical and ad- ministrative feasibility of a daily news exchange and the study group recommended the institution of daily filmed news exchanges via the Eurovision network as soon as possible.36 The problems remaining to be solved at this point included: (1) lowering the high cost of lines for regular daily transmissions, (2) scheduling the telecasts to avoid conflict with scheduled national telecasts, (3) desig- nation of Specific use of films (not to be used for other purposes without consent of the originating agency), (4) sharing of costs by members not benefitting directly, (5) EBU staff accommodations and increase necessary for regular transmissions, and (6) the use of the network by organiz- ations wishing to receive important items from a news agency to which they subscribe.37 Subsequent developments have been reported in the technical section of the thesis. 35Ibid., p. 16. 36Ibid. 7 . 3 Ib1d., p. 17. *Now BRT/RTB 58 Eurovision-Intervision Exchanges The Intervision network is composed of television organizations of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, the German Democratic Republic, the Hungarian People's Republic, the Polish People's Republic, and the USSR network of stations. The People's Republic of Bulgaria and the Romanian People's Republic are considered potential network members.38 Provisions for Eurovision—Intervision exchanges were negoti- ated by the EBU and the OIRT (International Broadcasting and Television Organization).39 Visual junctions have been set up between Austria and Czechoslovakia, Austria and Hungary, West and East Germany, and more recently between Finland and Estonia which also makes possible transmission to and from Moscow.40 The first link between Eastern European countries (East Germany and Czechoslovakia) and the Eurovision network was made during the Eurovision transmissions of the 1956 Winter Olympics in Italy.41 On April 15, 1961, Eurovision, in cooperation with Intervision, carried the Moscow reception for Major Yuri Gagarin, following his inauguration of space travel. From, Helsinki, Finland, the program was beamed to Sweden into the Eurovision network. The 2,500-mi1e, Moscow to London tele- vision link consisted of a combination of coaxial cables and microwave stations. Line definitions and standards 38G. Rutkowski, "Television in the OIRT Countries," Telecommunications Journal (August, 1961), p. 523. 3916id 40Hansen, p. 447. 41Woods, p. 107. 59 conversion have not been a problem since all of the countries of Eastern Europe have adopted the 625-line standard.42 From February 1, 1960, to January 31, 1961, a number of programs were exchanged between the Intervision and Eurovision networks. Eurovision fed eighty-seven trans- missions into the Intervision system and returned thirty- four Intervision originations to the Eurovision network;43 82.4 per cent of the thirty-four programs received from Intervision were Sports programs and 17.6 per cent were cul- tural programs. The eighty—seven Eurovision to Intervision programs were 70.2 per cent Sport programs and 29.8 per cent news programs.44 Representatives of the Intervision network have ex— pressed an interest in exchanges that go beyond the concen- tration on Sports programs to include more cultural events, such as operas, ballets, etc., and current events.45 EBU Meeting Plans National Educational Television, one of the hosts for the EBU meeting in the United States, October, 1962 announced that consideration would be given to possibilities for a general exchange of programs, the problems connected with the 42Iezzi, p. 29; M. J. L. Pulling, "Eurovision Techni— cal Operations: A Survey,” 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 37. 43Rutkowski, p. 523. 44Ibid., p. 525. 45Ibid., p. 524. 60 exchange of video tapes, television news and coverage of important international events, children's programs, and satellites in communication.46 46N. Cherkezian, News from National Educational Tele- vision,~(June 4, l962)fiNational Educational Television and Radio Center), p. 1. CHAPTER III COPYRIGHT AND OTHER LEGAL RIGHTS .Since the legal aSpects of Eurovision programming are many and varied, it has been difficult for the EBU to formu- late a standard code for international exchanges. Laws and their enforcement regarding broadcasting rights vary from country to country. International agree- ments must be translated into the corresponding languages of the Eurovision countries. These agreements may lose something in the translation, and the EBU has found that even a good translation can suffer in the process of inter- pretation. The EBU has been confronted with extensive deal— ings with labor unions; the application of copyright laws; and the rights of performers, record manufacturers, authors, publishers, promoters, and the telecasting agencies as international constituents.1 The three main areas of legal involvement are Copyright, Ancillary Rights, and matters which are associated with Civil Law.2 Copyright The copyright law protects authors of literary, 1Frank Iezzi and Juergen Becker, "Eurovision" (EBU'S tv network analyzed), The NAEB Journal (July-August, 1961), pp. 26-7. . 2"Eurovision and Its Legal Problems,” Eurovision, 1959, pp. 18-21. 61 62 musical, and artistic works from having their works repro- duced without their consent.3 Producers generally must observe copyrights unless their productions contain no music, literature, films, photo- graphs, or other art works. Copyrights fall into four major categories: Small TRights,‘ Grand Rights, Mechanical Rights, and Cinemato— graphic Rights. "Small rights" concern musical compositions, literary works, motion pictures, and photographs. The "grand rights" are concerned with theatrical works, such as dramas, operas, operettas, and musical dramas. Mechanical Rights in filmed productions involve the use of copyrighted works reproduced in sound or visual recordings and Cinemato— graphic Rights protect the artistic elements incorporated in the process of making the film.4 Small Rights (Petifi DroitS) By 1959, Special arrangements had been made for organizations taking part in Eurovision programs to become parties to a lump sum contract with their national performing right Societies. A basic fee allowed them the use of the world-wide "small rights" repertoire. Although the plan is simply explained, operationally it has run into snags re— sulting from different interpretations on what does and does not constitute a work of the "small rights" category. 3Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 6 (Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1956), p. 425. 4"Eurovision and Its Legal Problems," pp. 19-20. 63 Problems have arisen when material classified under "small rights" in the country originating the telecast have another classification in the receiving country. Although each country realizes that certain works should be classified in "small rights" and others in ”grand rights,” there are borderline works which may be "small rights" in one country and "grand rights" in another. Countries carrying a tele- cast have assumed that a work, cleared by the originating country for "small rights” was included in their blanket "small rights” coverage and later found it was not. The previously mentioned problems have been minimized by the assistance of the Council of Europe, through whose cooperation the broadcasting organizations and the publishers have reached agreement on an international dividing line between the two areas of rights. Grand Rights (GrandSDroits) Problems which occurred in the area of the "grand rights" were Similar to those of the ”small rights." They were caused by irregularities in classification from country to country and by inconsistent fee returns from these countries to the composer or authorizing agency.5 To use works in the "grand rights” area, permission must usually be given by the publishers, or in French- Speaking countries by the SACD (Societeedes Auteurs et Compositeurs Dramatiques). To simplify the procedure of each organization applying for permission, the EBU, with the _L 51bid., p. 19. 64 cooperation of the publishers and the SACD, has processed standard contracts which grant authorization and Specify the charge for it.6 Mechanical Rights Mechanical rights are concerned with the clearance of recorded or reproduced sound and visual materials which have copyrights.7 These include audio tapes and filmed sequences. The EBU, through an international organization known as BIEM, has formulated a standard contract which allows the signing parties to use a clear international repertoire of sound and visual recordings. No distinction is made between ”small rights" and "grand rights” in the use of the recordings under contract. At present this agreement is not practical in Eastern European countries where the law and its administration on mechanical rights is not always the same as that of Western Europe. Cinematographic Rights When a television film process goes beyond simple electronic or electromagnetic techniques, utilizing esthetic techniques of film making, another type of copyright must be considered. The artistic work involved in film making is subject to copyright (not to be confused with the copyright of the work upon which the film is based, such as a novel or short story). In some countries this copyright is held by 6Ibid. 71bid. 65 the film maker, in others by the director, the writer, the composer, or any combination of these. Film legislation varies from country to country. Recognition of a particular person as the author of the film by the standards of a receiving country could give him Status he had previously not held in his own country or selected other countries. Such persons could then negotiate their own terms for showing the film. To simplify this situation, an agreement was reached through the Council of Europe. The broadcast organization originating the film was authorized to televise it in other countries which are parties to the agreement. This agree- ment is binding only when there is no contrary or Special stipulation concerning the film.8 Ancillary Rights Ancillary rights protect the work of performers, the programs of broadcasting organizations, and the products of record manufacturers. Performers' Rights From 1954 to 1957, Eurovision programs using musicians, actors, or variety artists were transmitted without the con- sent of the performers' union. Performers feared that con- centrated international exposure on television would limit their job opportunities. The union wanted to limit the 8Ibid., p. 20. 66 amount and type of program exchanges.9 An agreement between the EBU and the International Federation of Performers arranging for supplementary fees became effective February 1, 1957, for a period of not less than two years.10 The agreement defines the Eurovision telecast as a multilateral relay in which at least one originating station and two relay organizations participate. It is limited in coverage to EBU members in the European Broadcasting Zone and to performers engaged at a fee, and does not extend to performers on the permanent staff of television organizations.11 The union had hoped to include performers who were permanent television staff members. The supplementary fees are as follows: . for relaying organizations of 2 coun- tries 50%, for 3 countries 70%, 4 countries 90%, 5 countries 110%, 6 countries 130%, 7 countries or more 150%.12 Programs circulated on film for delayed use are not covered by this agreement if more than thirty days elapse before 1 they are used. Rights of BroadcastingiOrganizations The lack of protection for television broadcasts from 9Donald K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, "A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 108. 101bid. 11R. Leuzinger, "The Agreement Concerning Inter- national Television Relays," EBU Bulletin, Vol. 8, 1957, p. 114. 12 Ibid., p. 117. 13"Eurovisi0n and Its Legal Problems,” p. 20. 67 agencies not contracted to carry or otherwise use the television relay has affected the atmosphere for Eurovision program negotiations. For example, the promoter of a Sport- ing event may resist Eurovision coverage if his potential income is limited by non-contracted agencies whose trans- mitters pick up the event from Eurovision and relay it independently or if his cinema—rights, which he intends to sell, are photographed ”off the air” and used in picture theaters.14 The EBU feels that an international agreement is necessary and is working for it. By 1959 some countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, had passed national legislation to protect broadcasting organizations. Hope was expressed by the EBU at that time that an inter- national agreement would be reached in a few years. Civil Law Rights 3 Property or ”quasi-property" rights which are covered by civil law have been claimed by those who view Eurovision programming as a threat to their potential earnings. One of the major concerns stems from the nature of broadcasts of outside Sporting events. Sporting_EventS Rights Sporting events may be held on either public or closed premises. When held on public property, such as highways for cycle races, the resistance to televising or filming the event is lower than when held on closed premises 14Ibid. 68 where admissions are charged and promoters are reSponsible for making it a financial success. In presenting the "high audience interest” Sportcast on Eurovision, the Legal Committee has had to deal with pro— moters as well as protect themselves from legal snags. The Committee has been primarily concerned with the full-length presentation as compared to the news coverage type. The EBU Administrative Council requires negotiations for sporting events of international importance to be carried out by an EBU delegation, which includes representatives of the broad- casting organization in the country of origin and legal ad- visors who draw up the contract. The contract should con— form to the principles set up by the Administrative Council. Definition of the geographical scope, setting and the correSponding fee are a major concern. It is important to know which countries are carrying the relay as well as the number of countries that will not, since the fees for Euro- vision members are estimated accordingly. The contract must also provide indemnity against "third party" claims. This gives the promoter the reSponsibility for players or others who claim their ”right to one's picture” and related claims. The contract must further state the rights that have been purchased by other agencies. These may affect television rights and plans for delayed relay on kinescope or video tape, which may have to compete with picture theater showings. In 1959, it was hoped that a standard contract could be formulated which would simplify negotiations.15 15Ibid., p. 22. 69 Rights in Musical Editions16 Another area of concern is musical edition rights. This involves printing editions of musical or dramatico- musical works and is not related to copyright or performers' rights. These editions are available only on a rental basis and publishers have claimed a loss of earnings because carrying organizations are now less likely to rent for broadcasts of the same work. The EBU has set up two standard contracts in agreement with the international organization of music publishers, which provide for payments based on the number of relaying stations and the basic tariffs. Attached to the contract is a list of the countries to which the pro- gram may not be sent without the permission of the publisher. The stations on the list are those which the publishers feel do not afford sufficient safeguards against improper use of the programs they receive or against copyright infringements. Efforts are being made to reduce the number of stations on the list. The Council of Europe The European Broadcasting Union has worked with the Council of Europe in attempting to achieve international agreements, particularly in the area of rights discussed in the legal section. Since the organization gives advice and patronage, a brief description of its purpose and functions is given here. lélbid. 70 The Council of Europe was founded on May 5, 1949, at Strasbourg, France, also the seat of the Council.17 The Council works to achieve a greater unity between its members for the purpose of safeguarding and real- izing the ideals and principles which are their common heritage and facilitating their economic and social progress.1 Members of the Council of Europe in 1949 were Belgium, Den- mark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and Northern Ireland. Greece, Turkey, Iceland, and the German Federal Republic joined the same year, and the Saar joined in 1950.19 Austria subsequently joined. Each member finances its representatives to the Council. Common expenses are Shared by the members on a population basis.20 The principal organs of the Council of Europe are the Committee of Ministers and the Consultative Assembly.21 The Committee of Ministers . . is composed of one representative from each member country and . . acts on behalf of the Council and decides with binding effect all matters relating to the internal organization . . . of the Council of Europe. . The Consultative Assembly is . . . limited to the discussion and adoption of recommendations . [for consideration by the Committee of Ministers]. 22 Shortly after the Eurovision Coronation telecast in 1953, the Council of Europe began to consider the advantages 17Arthur Henry Robertson, Council of Europe Handbook (Strasbourg, 1954; New York, Praeger, 1961), pp. 14-5. 18Ibid., p. 13. 19Ibid., p. 14. 201bid., p. 17. 2llbid., p. 21. 221hid., pp. 21-2. 71 of using television to promote the "European Idea"23 which represents the essential aims of the Council.24 Several mem— bers of the Council pointed out the need for closer ties between European television organizations, tinromote a type of television exchange which would stimulate cooperation between the peoples of Europe.25 They will thqulearn to known each other better, they will acquire the feeling of belonging to a large community and they will become aware of the great variety of nations which make up this com- munity. ' A working party of communications specialists, ap- pointed to make recommendations to encourage cooperation between television organizations of member governments, met on September 23, 1953, at Strasbourg. Their report on the use of television to gain public support for the European Idea was given to the Committee on Cultural and Scientific Questions, which in turn reported to the Consultative Assembly. At its meeting on September 24, 1953, the Assembly unanimously recommended the following to the Council of Ministers:27 23"Television and the 'European Idea;‘” EBU Documen- tation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953, p; 550. 24Robertson, pp. 10-1. 25”Television and the 'European Idea,'” p. 550. 26123Q. 27"Use of Television to Support the European Idea," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953, p. 664. 72 a) to transmit to Member Governments the sugges- tions of the Committee on Cultural and Scientific Questions with regard to the reduction of costs in international transmission, and to the removal of legal and other obstacles to the production and ex— change of program material; b) to take all steps within its power to assist the rapid completion of the European TV network whi-ch is at present4being built up by the TV industry; and c) to take steps to arrive at a European Con- vention on copyright which will facilitate the ex- change Of programme material; . ‘ d) to request Member Governments to encourage the production by national TV systems of pro- grams designed to makeobetter known thetcultural, economic and political life of~other European‘ peoples and to foster the European idea. In 1954, following the summer exchanges on Eurovision, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe reso1ved (text abridged and Slightly reworded). a) to declare publicly . . . the Council's [interest in] . . questions related tno the use and development of television, b) to transmit to governments .‘. :*suggestions [of] the Consultative Assembly cdncerning . .‘. international relays and the reduction of their cost; and to encourage further study Of .'. .'[itS] technical and financial aSpects". . . by the EBU, and the ITU in consultation -with the Secretariat—: General of the Council of Europe with the intention of submitt-ing proposals to the Committee of Ministers; c) to request the Bureau of Industrial Property and of Literary and Artistic Works at Berne, -. . . to investigate the legal obstacles in the exchange of television programs and to make recommendations for their removal . . . while maintaining full pro- tection of author‘ Sarights and related rights; d) to encourage Member Governments to produce [programs] for national- and international use . . . designed to promote . . . [European] cultural, economic and political life . . . and to foster the European Idea; and . . H.,, e) to authorize the Committee of Cultural Ex- perts to establish, in liaison with the Brussels Treaty Organization, UNESCO and the European Broad- casting Union, a working party . . . to .I. . ex- amine . . . cultural problems posed by the development 73 of television; and to instruct the Secretariat— General to prepare a report of the results. The 1952 Stockholm Agreement and Plans Interest in international cooperation in the tele— vision industry was evidenced at the 1952 European Broad- casting Conference in Stockholm. The EBU considered the Stockholm Conference of value since it permitted partici— pants to share the knowledge of each other's technical plans and problems. It further provided ”a set of general rules, of agreed methods of calculation and acceptable orders of magnitude.”29 Representatives of the Brussels Technical Center attended by invitation of the International Tele— communications Center.30 In 1952, the only TV systems ad- vanced enough to attempt simultaneous program exchanges through different line standards were the British Broadcast- ing Corporation and Radiodiffusion Francaise.31 Some of the technical patterns of the future, however, had already taken shape in 1952 and the ramifications of operating on different line standards was a topic discussed at the Stockholm conference. 28"The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe Decides on Action to Promote the Development of European Television," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 5, 23-25, 1954, pp. 498-9. 29"The 1952 Stockholm Agreement and Plans,” EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 3, 14-16, 1952, p. 460. 301bid., p. 457. 31Woods, p. 101. 74 At the conference twenty-seven of the thirty-one Ad— ministrations in attendance officially reported the technical ‘characteristics of the television Systems they had adopted. Those not recorded included Greece, Iceland, Ireland, and Portugal. The report was as follows: <-— _— 47—1 —-_ Channel Line Width _Standard Countries 5 Mc/s 405 United Kingdom 7 Mc/s 625 Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany (Federal Republic), Italy, Luxem— bourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Vatican, Yugoslavia 8 Mc/s 625 Albania, Bielorussia, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, Soviet Union, Ukraine 7 Mc/s 819 Belgium 14 Mc/s 819 France, Monaco (the French delega- tion reported that Morocco and Tunisia would operate on 819, 14 Mc/s)32 [Attempts to establish uniform technical channel widths and line standards had proved unsuccessful prior to the conference. A report adopted in 1951 by the CCIR (the International Radio Consultative Committee of the United Nations), and submitted by its Study Group XI stated that unanimous agreement on television standards had not been reached. The report was a record of the technical character- istics of four existing systems for the information of 32”The 1952 Stockholm Agreement and Plans," pp. 465—6. 75 Administrations which may wish to use one of the included systems. After publication of the report, the Belgian Adminis- tration adopted its own 819 7 Mc/S and the Soviet Union its 625, 8 Mc/S standards, making a total of six systems. During the conference, the Danish delegation, acting as Spokesman for the fifteen administrations which have adopted the 625, 7 Mc/s, debated with the Soviet Union dele- gation which represented the nine Administrations favoring the 625, 8 Mc/s system. Each side presented technical argu— ments supporting their chosen systems and the advantages of 33 Mr. Pederson of the Danish delegation stated, "I unity. fear that the public in several European countries will have to pay for this lack of coordination, by having a less interference—free service than otherwise possible.” An opposite viewpoint expressed within one of the working parties during the conference suggested that the adoption of a single standard would not diminish the difficulties. The opinion of the EBU comes between the two: 1. A Single standard would have simplified the preparation of a plan for European television (one of the objects of the Stockholm confer- ence). 2. The greatest advantages in a Single standard would exist in simplified studies and prelim- inary technical work. 3. The difficulties encountered in the develop— ment of the frequency tables would not be appreciably lessened by a single standard.34 33Ibid., p. 464-5. 34Ibid. 76 The EBU reported that the multiple standard System did not seem to be a major problem during June 16 to 25, 1962, while Working Party C was evolving the Stockholm television plan. The only difficulties that arose were in connection with the German-Franco frontier and these were considered geographic and demographic in nature, making the problem of standards incidental. In the Opinion of the EBU, the nine Administrations who favored the 625-line, 8 Mc/S, refused to sign the Stock- holm agreement "for reasons other than the difficulties in- herent in the difference of standards.”35 35Ibid., p. 465. CHAPTER IV SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF EUROVISION Eurovision, the European Television Community, began in 1950 with Great Britain and France sharing their produc— tion resources. As standards conversion and technical con— nections between countries became possible, interest in participating developed in other Western European countries. In 1954, there was sufficient interest in the project to ask the European Broadcasting Union to administer the activities of Eurovision. The reasons given by member countries for their participation have varied. Most prominent among the reasons has been the opportunity for the various members to share their best program offerings and their production costs. Additional benefits, as seen by the EBU, include the opportunity for sharing reports on topical events, and a way to give Europeans a knowledge of their common heritage as well as an appreciation of their differences. EBU and Council of Europe Motives The Council of Europe, which is dedicated to the achievement of cooperation between its members and to facilitating their economic and social progress, has en- couraged the use of television to promote this "European 77 78 Idea.” It is believed that television could help Europeans to acquire a "feeling of belonging to a larger community" and to become aware of the "great variety of nations which make up the community.” In 1953, the Council of Europe offered to assist in the development of an international TV network. It encouraged the reduction of costs for inter— national transmissions, the removal of legal and copyright barriers, and the production of programs which would make European cultural, economic, and political life better known. The relationship of Eurovision to the Council of Europe has thus been a compatible one. As international organizations they have similar structures and procedures, but differ in nature and in social implication. Both, how- ever, appear to be part of a group of somewhat connected movements stimulating greater European unity. The Council of Europe claims to be supra national in character, but has stated that it considers European tele- vision exchange of prime importance in promoting social and economic cooperation. This trend toward social and economic cooperation developed simultaneously with Eurovision. .Some say it began following World War II, when the United States proposed the 1947 Marshall Plan aid to Europe. The accept- ance of the aid was followed in 1948 by the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). In 1951, the European Coal and Steel Community was established.1 1John A. Birch, The United States and the European Common Market, Department of State Publication 6878 (September{TI959), pp. 1—2. 79 One of the earliest international European exchanges between France and England began with a speech by Foreign Minister Robert Schuman during the week preceding Bastille Day in July of 1952.2 Minister Schuman is the author of the plan for the European Coal and Steel Community and one of the proponents of a United States of Europe. The EBU does not appear to have a political philosophy for the Eurovision operation. It has worked to promote international good will as well as good technical and pro- duction standards. Its interest in promoting the "European Idea” is difficult to pinpoint, but is evidenced in the film series produced by Working Party GTV/l which includes "Great Rivers of Europe," "Great European Cities," and "Small Towns," which emphasize the cultural heritage of Europe. The need for economic cooperation is one of the major factors in the movement to unite Europe and has been one of the uniting factors of Eurovision. When the costs for a single program are shared by a number of participating stations, the program reaches more people at less cost to individual stations. In theory, this method also benefits the viewer who receives a greater quantity of programs and, because of the compounded resources, better quality.3 ‘ A treaty was signed in 1957, founding the European Economic Community, better known as the Common Market. Its 2Dona1d K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, ”A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 102. 31bid., p. 110. 80 goals include the ”elimination of tariffs and quantitative restrictions on trade” among its members over a twelve-to- fifteen year period. A common tariff and unified commercial policy toward outside countries, free movement of labor and capital, and harmonized labor and social legislation are also goals.4 It is conceivable that the Spirit of cooperation which operated in the development of Eurovision is due, in part, to the social, economic, and political factors which have motivated these European movements. More countries belong to Eurovision than to the Common Market, but Common Market members are also Eurovision mem- bers. Both require cooperative efforts and are concerned with a type of exchange, one with programs and the other with merchandise. Both are European-centered, but may co- operate with others. Eurovision may cooperate with others with greater flexibility because competition is of less importance. It has expressed pride in its non-political orientation and its intention to keep Eurovision from becom- ing an instrument of propaganda. Other Factors The possibilities for the misuse of television as a prOpaganda device have been considered by members of the EBU program committee. They have stated that one of the deterring factors of undesirable propaganda is the option 4Birch, p. 1. 81 exercised by each country to take or leave the relays offered. To some, the advantage of program exchange is the op- portunity it offers television organizations of various countries to Share and at the same time preserve cultural differences and national identities.5 Marcel Bezencon, chairman of the EBU Program Committee, considers Eurovision important in the transmission of topical events, going beyond mere entertainment to diSpense direct information.6 In 1959 the Program Chairman commented concerning the pur— pose of Eurovision: I shall not go so far as to say that . nations will understand each other better, as used to be claimed.whenever a new medium of communica- tion was inaugurated. That old candle can be snuffed. But it is possible that a feeling for the human element may become more generalized, the frontiers of nationalism less wide, and the fresh air may circulate more freely. It is blowing up so nicely that some of the countries nearer the East would not object to leaving the door open to the draught. American too Shows signs of moving. The use of television to promote the European Idea as desired by the Council of Europe describes only a part of the social implication of Eurovision. The Stockholm Conference attempted to develop technical and mechanical standards. Some evidence of the importance of the proper climate for international cooperation are shown here. The 5 . . . Frank Ie221 and Juergen Becker, "EurOV1S1on," (EBU'S tv network analyzed), The NAEB Journal (July-August, 1961), p. 25. 6Marcel Bezencon, "Eurovision-A Simple Idea that Worked," 5th Anniversary, EBU Publication, 1959, p. 5. 7Ibid. 82 EBU has been operating in a favorable climate in its deal- ings with countries in Eastern Europe associated with the Soviet Union. The number of Eastern European countries participating in Eurovision-Intervision exchanges have in- creased in number and extent since the first two-country re— lay in 1956. In 1961, following the relay of Major Yuri Gargarin's reception in Moscow sent as far as London via a 2,500-mi1e television link, hope for greater international understanding was expressed by a representative of the OIRT. He said that broadening the programs to include cultural events and happenings of current interest would promote an exchange of cultural values as well as international cooper- ation.8 He further commented, ”May I conclude this report by expressing my confidence in that the cooperation among (television organizations of all countries will become closer in the future among the nations."9 The Council of Europe has expressed its hopes for a Eurovision capable of promoting a closer relationship be— tween European countries, and the EBU has attempted to pro- vide a variety of programs of interest to its audience. However, due to social differences such as language and culture, and financial limitations, a flexible use of Euro- vision has been hampered. 80. Rutkowski, "Television in the OIRT Countries," Telecommunications Journal (August, 1961), p. 523. 9Ibid., p. 526. 83 In 1954, the EBU Program Committee was in the early stages of developing its program philosophy. Surprise and Spectacle were considered principal requirements in a Show. Program producers were encouraged to avoid "padding," to provide quality programs of interest to the people of 10 Europe. Exchange for the sake of exchange was to be avoided.11 Sights and sounds of Europe, which were primarily scenic, were considered of limited value. Pageants Should be imposing and of universal interest, or unique and artistically presented to rate Eurovision coverage. Other— wise, exchange on films was preferable.12 Folklore presented in documentary style was not considered of sufficiently high interest or wideSpread appeal to be worthy of the efforts of international technicians. International Sport contests were considered important even in 1954, with international events having the most ap- peal. Lesser events were considered unworthy of international network'effort. The visit to the Vatican, containing elements of sur— prise and Spectacle, was successful by Program Committee standards. An exchange of the best programs from each station, such as theatrical works, ballets, and certain variety shows 13 was to be encouraged. In 1959, due to limitations in the 10Bezenqon, p. 572. 11Ibid., p. 573. 121239., p. 571—2. 131bid., p. 572. 84 linguistic Sphere, dramas began to be exchanged essentially by language groups. Music, generally thought of as a uni— versal language, was considered more suited to radio than television.14 In 1960, after Six years of program planning for Eurovision, the EBU Program Committee was called upon to de- fend the fact that Sportcasts totaled approximately 60 per cent of all relays. The defense was found in the popular acceptance and desire for Sportcasts by the viewer. The Program Committee, in emphasizing the validity of the Sport- cast, referred to the enthusiasm of the viewer during a game, its status as a universal language, and even suggested that it might possibly do more for international understand— ing than international conferences. In Spite of the language barrier, interest continues in informational and cultural exchange. Techniques used to overcome the language barrier include the use of subtitles, off-screen narration, instantaneous translation and lip synchronization.15 Thirteen per cent of the total programs exchanged are news films. EBU members have worked to develop systems of exchange through Eurpjournal to provide the news film while 16 it has news value. 14Bezencon, p. 5. 15Dona1d K. Pollock and David Lyndon Woods, "A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959), p. 113. 16Iezzi, p. 28. CHAPTER V A LOOK TO THE FUTURE Accomplishments of Eurovision As presented in the thesis, the twelve years of growth, from 1950 to 1962, Eurovision has: Overcome the barriers of varying line standards in Europe. Developed a system of push-button control for multi-source programs, providing instantaneous transfers from one country to another. Developed high quality video and good audio quality. Become experienced in the problems of inter- national program exchange, particularly those associated with cultural and language differ- ences. Cooperated with other international networks in an exchange of programs, namely, Intervision and United States networks in the Telstar relay. Developed a system whose history and operation may be studied by other countries interested in international television. Continuing Problems Eurovision members must continue to work with the cul- tural, legal, linguistic, and economic factors which still limit the number and type of programs exchanged. Continued concentration upon the development of a more closely knit European Community may help to break down some of these 85 86 barriers. Now there is a freer flow of labor between coun— tries, and steps taken by migrants to learn new languages and adjust to cultural differences may modify the problems faced by Eurovision program producers. Schools runvempha- size languages in the curriculum and a European working language may result. Progress made by Common Market coun- tries in decreasing tariffs, and work on social and labor legislation, may give added impetus to the Eurovision at- tempt to gain decreased circuit costs. Other International Factors Eurovision is located between Eastern and Western tele— vision networks. It has developed basic patterns of negoti- ating with each. Exchanges with Eastern European countries via Intervision have already been described. This, in a sense, was the re-establishment of an association which was severed after World War II when diverging interests led the Eastern European countries to leave the EBU to form the OIRT. Contact with North American networks occurred in July, 1962 when Eurovision provided a multi-source program beamed to the Telstar experimental satellite which relayed it to the United States and Canada.‘ Satellites may eventually provide a way for extending the Eurovision network to other EBU members in other parts of the world. The UN The future of international television could contain the development of international networks elsewhere. As they progress, they may need to rely on some of the experience 87 and advice of the EBU and Eurovision in dealing with cultural, legal, linguistic, and economic problems. If this happens, the ITU, the International Telecommunications Union of the United Nations, may become a more active clearing house as the amount of international television exchanges increases. The ITU succeeded the International Telegraph Union in 1934. It has three main purposes: to encourage world cooperation in the use of telecommunication, to promotethe development of technical facilities and their efficient oper- ation, and to harmonize the actions of nations in the attains ment of these common ends. UNESCO was established by the United Nations in 1945. It was to contribute peace and Security by promoting inter- national projects of an educational, scientific, and cul- tural nature; and to advance universal respect for justice, for the rule of law, for human rights and fundamental freedoms. One of its primary tasks is to further truth, freedom, and peace through the press, radio, and motion pictures. Increased international television exchange may“ also bring further involvement of UNESCO. It is not possible to evaluate the effectiveness of Eurovision as an international television service without more extensive study. The limited evidence found in re— search for this thesis would indicate that the intended use and effectiveness of Eurovision by the EBU and the Council of Europe is inhibited by a variety of soOial factors. 1The Europa Year Booki_1962, Vol. 1 (Publications, Ltd., 18 Bedford Square, W. C. 1), p. 105. 88 Perhaps a hypothesis can be stated that Eurovision will pro— gress beyond its present stage if other European movements become firmly established and progress. Eurovision progress will follow political and economic cooperation, and will answer the resulting need for international communication. Suggestions for Further Study There are a number of areas associated with Euro- vision which might be suggested for further study. The following suggestions are recommended to enlarge on material only briefly covered in the thesis. 1. There seems to be general support for Eurovision among member countries. More Specific data might be gathered concerning audience reaction to the types of programs offered on the network. Have there been indications that Eurovision is influencing cultural change or appreci- ation? Study might be made of the characteristics of the people in Europe who own TV sets and watch Euro- vision. 2. The program committee has set up a Study group for teach- ing by television. Teaching by radio is already an established service of the EBU. Studies might be made of the type of courses taught by radio, those considered for TV, and their value in promoting social, economic, and political cooperation. 3. A more careful study could be made of the relationship of the EBU to the Council of Europe. What is the work 89 of the Council committee on cultural and Scientific questions? Does it, or any European organization, have 'projects concerned with finding ways to meet language, cultural, and political barriers? The work of the Hague, Berne, and UNESCO conventions has influenced the legal standards of Eurovision. These and other legal conventions might be studied to deter- mine their purposes and effectiveness in establishing international broadcasting law. The EBU works regularly with national and international PTT (Poste Telegraphe et Telephone) administrations, Further study might be made of their organization and function as well as their association with the EBU in Eurovision development. Technical progress is a continual goal for Eurovision as it works on a permanent broadcast network and satellite transmissions. Early preparations for color television could be an opportunity for a change to uniform line standards. Progress reports could be made as these technical situations continue to develop. (EBU consider— ation of color TV factors began as early as 1954 with a report by H. A. d'Auriac, director, EBU Technical Center.) Intervision, a network serving Eastern European countries, has some of the characteristics of Eurovision. A study of its technical, legal, and program development could form the basis for a study comparing the two systems. 10. ll. 12. 13. 90 What are the comparative possibilities for communications from Eurovision and Intervision to Canada and the U. S. and Specific Latin American countries? (What interest would exist in a Sport program where success has been established?) Eurovision programs for audiences having language and cultural differences. What application can be made of Eurovision experience to international exchange in other parts of the world. Does it have value for a country like India which has within its boundaries many languages and cultural differences? The EBU Sponsors TV personnel instruction, such as the BBC course for training television designers, and the RTF course for training television producers for school broadcasts. Is there Special instruction for those who will be involved in Eurovision work? How does it differ from standard television instruction? Aside from the Specified training course, have any codes of practice evolved for Eurovision producers, to assist them in dealing with international cultural and language differences? A sociological study concerned with the impact of selected program types (Sport, public affairs, drama) upon the Eurovision viewer would help evaluate the effectiveness of this international network. What is the relationship of Yugoslavia with Eurovision; with Intervision? APPENDIX _- .---..——————~ — ~— -m. . ]F R. A N T E {Efren/re _ ——-‘ “L 1 ‘- ad 7) 10 20 30 43 50 Mtks n in.“ - maul- - 4‘ H 6 .9 .3 ’1 qQ/Jé '51563166rd3 ”M4” 4’ . C \ng .pans ”It F311“ 0: W “10‘1“ M :Gr' th. TRIKE/13.33. {10513119, July. 1952 B M131: 3:1 Teen nical n rat. 91'. A Darvoy. by J I. p]. .1 - 4 -_ t -o 0.4 - .. - 1.6 Lun)vm.;n 5th mvom. 1959. p. 29 Q . ‘ INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION AND CONVENTION Preamble While fully recognizing the sovereign right of each country to regulate its telecommunication, the pleni- potentiaries of the Contracting Governments, with the ob- ject of facilitating relations and cooperation between the peOples by means of efficient telecommunication services, have agreed to conclude the following Convention. The countries and groups of territories which become parties to the present Conventioq constitute the Inter- national Telecommunication Union. In December of 1960, the following countries were members of the International Telecommunication Union: Membership (105 members): Afghanistan, Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, the Byelorussian SSR, Cambodia, the Camer— oun, Canada, the Central African Republic, Ceylon, Chad, Chile, China (Nationalist), Colombia, Congo (capital: Brazzaville), Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dahomey, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Overseas States of the French Community and French Overseas Territories, Gabon, the Federal Republic of Ger- many, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, the Republic of Guinea, Haiti, Holy See, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, the Irish Republic, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, the Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Laos, the Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Luxembourg, the Federation of Malaya, Mali, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Nepal, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippine Republic, Poland, Portugal, the Portuguese Overseas Provinces, the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Roumania, Salvador, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, the Union of South Africa and South-West Africa, the USSR, Spain, the Spanish Provinces in Africa, the Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, the Ukrainian SSR, the United Arab Republic, the United Kingdom Overseas Territories for the international relations of which the Government of the United Kingdom is responsible, the United States, territories of the United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, the Yemen, Yugoslavia. 1 U. S. Department of State, U. S. Treaties and Other International Agreements, 12:2 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961). 93 94 Associate Members (five): British East Africa, British West Africa, Bermuda-Bthish Caribbean Group, Ruanda-Urundi, Singapore-British Borneo Group. The International Telecommunication Convention was signed at Geneva December 21, 1959; entered into force for the United States October 23, 1961.2 The 1959 telecommunication convention abrogates and replaces, as between contracting parties, the convention signed at Buenos Aires December 22, 1952 (TIAS 3266). The 1952 convention, in turn, abrogated and replaced the con- vention signed at Atlantic City, October 2, 1947 (63 Stat. 1399; TIAS 1901) as between contracting parties. The 1947 convention remains in force as regards relations between all parties to it (including the United States) and Ecuador and Honduras which have not become parties to either of the two later conventions. Three earlier conventions (Madrid, December 9, 1932 (49 Stat. 2391; TS 867; 151 LNTS 5), Washington, November 25, 1927 (45 Stat. 2760; TS767;94 LNTS 97), and London, July 5, 1912 (38 Stat. 1672; TS 581)) re- main in force as regards relations between all parties to them (including the United States) and Estonia (1932). Mongolian People's Republic (1932), and Yemen (1932), Latvia (1927), Lithuania (1912), and San Marino (1912) ghich have not become parties to any subsequent convention. 2Guide to International Organisations (London: Reference Division, Central Office of Information). 3U. S. Department of State, A List of Treaties and Other International Agreements of the UnitedTStates in Force on January lg 1962, Publication 7327. 95 someomou HdOflenoop Ho>qumomsamm meofima>onam a mpuonouo one canon HoeofimeSCo AmefinoocfimGOV mefleuoo momfl>nomsm mnflmwme neoo woe» mopou Humoa “acmmmmememnw HmOAenooH mo BWH>om ufi>fipoe and Hueomuoeuopefi eoflwfl>ousm ceawmapmflefl2p<.l 3mm wo.! naenoou 3mm- oNfleoeuon a condo 2mm 2 noaoomom cowoouflansm mowmewoaooo_ Opmxnoz moanewpuooo Amaomwsnmv mMHHHZEOO mmHHHz mmHHszOU mmfizmo qfipeupmHeMEU< a >HDEomm< Hanoeow Op Homoeow >uouonuow ma HanonflQ “muflom um< emumoum a .Hmmoq .HoHSuaoo mo :owpouu unweaep< a nouaomom Ad>oeowv MOHmmO MPHHwuopnmmoumou now po>uomou poem onuumo>Muoueomoumou popOOHm eo>oao mo mumfimeoov AHOZDOO m>.Hoo oflpdm a >H Hoeofipduapm Hmeofipuz "omz "mnopmoupooum peoaeow 3oz apoedo Hoeofiueozpm mo sowedfloomm< Homoepaz “mmo wom< fipfldm «Sham meadow popes: «anew owaonums< muoDEoz owowoomm< Ha mfi>namow=> dopozm - neowue> madam ounce: pedaouH oueuum sopwewm popflca Hamnuuom mHsOQSoan oeuHouH pednemm >oxuaH >e3noz cocoooq ouoouw xudeeoa mflmwesh mpeeaaoeuoz >Hovm Odannmom esmmaom; pedauouuwzm oooouoz HooumH Heuopom cashew oflnums< muoneoz o>euu< NM. n>nueaoo menses zoom scum o>wpdweomoumou oeo Mo mummmeoov wumEWmm< A m” ' 5 ‘ 0‘ KOLN \; ‘ J \ '5" ' H“ ”II 1 ~ \ PARIS i “M, \ | . I r' 1 ° .' |‘ J | ‘9 ~.,..a '. ,4...“ J ‘~‘ 1 ”fr—1 "‘ \.~ éfl’f‘ m‘x {_‘ '9 ’P Q‘- m Sketch-map shuwmg the termmals of the basic sound network now permanently avallable for the common use of the Members of the L'nzon that participate m Eurovmon. Each Inter- connectnun cons“: of a programme-sound drew: in each dlICCIIOD and a control-telephone exrcuxt, except in the case of the B'usselsteneva Innk, w'mch is for telephone traffic only. Extensaom to the bare netwOrk are rented by the minute for each transmtssion mdnnduaHy. ' Lurvnln 9’. rrmo 1'. but» :1: it: no, I gamer-.3331 n of saw 1- 5.1.1.. . Am”. 431% A . 11m.,1‘:.t.01. I“). 71’ _OJ:l-flr';r' 1/C32 7 M -,__ fl pr truth “it net-w :k v’ - v ,._7--‘\I"l ‘rl'i .“I rk'- ‘ ‘- _r_,:_u:lllrts;‘y I M [- (t ' a “\."‘L\ ‘\ ‘Y'-‘ Tt'iL‘VlSJUf‘ htth tn Furnpc - lunt, m'w I'll/r nut? Iridl'..r.’r' In ."t’lret Jrzlr‘rt?'“vrffle‘t.‘u/. ht! (fr/1' an; t/Mr‘ NH HAW/1' 1' Wu , A 1‘» .4"? .."": 'luroviaiom An Idea Bumm- A Reality”, by E.L.B. Pull-y, Rwandan, 5th Anniverat‘y, 1959, p. 27. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Enoyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 6. William Benton, Publisher. ' Chicago: Ehcyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 1960. The Europa Year Bock, 1962, Vol. 1. London: Europa Publications , Etd . Robertson, Arthur Henry. Council of Europe Handbook. New York: Council of Europe, 1961. Periodicals D'Arcy, Jean. “Eurovision," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary, 1959. Barber, Russell B. "The European Broadcasting Union," Journal of Broadcasting, 1962. Bezencon, Marcel. "Eurovision - A Simple Idea that Worked," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary, 1959. "Eurovision - The Pattern of the Future," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 3, 1954. Birch, John A. "The United States and European Common Market," Department of State Publication 6878 (Septem— ber, 1959). Cherkezian, N. "News from National Educational Television," June 4, 1962. "The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe Decides on Action to Promote the Development of European Tele- ,vision," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 5, 23-25, 1954. "Eurovision and Its Legal Problems,” Eurovision, 5th Anniver- sary, 1959. "Eurovision: An Idea Becomes a Reality," Eurovision, 5th lAnniversary, 1959. "Eurovision Permanent Network Scheme," EBU Review, Part A- Technical, No. 71 (February, 1962). 98 99 Hansen, George. "Some Technical ASpects of Eurovision," Telecommunications Journal, July, 1961. Iezzi, Frank, and Becker, Juergen. ,”Eurovision" (EBU'S tv network analyzed), The NAEB Journal (July—August, 1961). Leuzinger, R. "The Agreement Concerning International Tele- vision Relays," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol:.8, 41-43, 1957. "The 1952 Stockholm Agreement and Plans," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 3, 14-16, 1952. Pugliese, Sergio. "The First Five Years of Working Party GTV/l," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary, 1959. Pollock, Donald K. and Woods, David Lyndon. "A Study in International Communication: Eurovision," Journal of Broadcasting (Spring, 1959). Porche, Wladimir. ”Realizations et PerSpectives," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953. ' Pulling, M. J. L. "Eurovision Technical Operations: A Survey," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary, 1959. and H. R. "Televising the Coronation," EBU Docu- mentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17—19. 1953. "The Relay of the Coronation Programs to Western Europe," EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953. * Rengelink, J. W. ”Operation Eurojournal," Eurovision, 5th Anniversary,'1959. Rutkowski, G. "Television in the OIRT Countries,” Tele- communications Journal, August, 1961. "Television and the 'European Idea,'" EBU Documentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953. "Tenth Plenary Session of the Programme Committee," EBU Review, No. 72-B (March, 1962). "Use of Television to Support the EurOpean Idea," EBU Docu- mentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, 17-19, 1953. S Williams, P. and Pulling, M. J. L. "Engineering Arrangements for-Broadcasting on Sound and Television the Coro- nation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II," EBU Docu- mentation and Information Bulletin, Vol. 4, I7-IQ, 1953. ROOM USE ONLY. ' iu‘u ‘ tr V W 'E ‘ M77 ’ M5,; V“ ‘Y _' MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBR ARIES 7 I l 3 1293 13056 281