‘I
didn’t have time to have doubts’
WETA founder Elizabeth Campbell saw educational
potential in her own son's reaction to Howdy Doody
"Made possible by the Living Bra," may strike
you as an unlikely funding credit for an in-school ITV program called Time
for Science, but 30 years ago the underwriting deal was briefly considered.
Very briefly.
It did not fit into Elizabeth P. Campbell's vision for educational television.
Campbell, who soon founded WETA in Washington, D.C., had already had a long
career as an educator, as a college dean in the '30s and a school board activist
in the Washington suburb of Arlington, Va.
"Mrs. C," as she is known around WETA — a regal, modest, sparkling
90-year-old — looked back and forward in a recent interview with Current
Editorial Associate Marilyn Robinson.
Robinson: You were there at the very beginning of public broadcasting, particularly in Washington, D.C. Tell me what has impressed you most about its growth.
Campbell: The increase in the variety of the programs that we now put on the air. When we first began, we were on the air only five days a week from 9 until 3, and then we would go black and come on the air in the evening with a couple of programs.
Those we bought from the National Educational Television in New York. They were adult programs of different kinds, and we had to buy those or rent them, and they were sent to us either by plane — see, there was no interconnection then, so they came by plane or by train — and I have more than once driven over to the airport to pick up a tape that we had scheduled for that night. So we've come such a long, long way, you know.
Before the days of picking up the tape at the airport, you did only school programs. What brought the change to more sophisticated programming?
We had to give up our in-school programs because the state of Virginia had a broadcast station here, and so they were feeding programs to the Virginia schools. And Maryland had put up a big transmitter, so Maryland was feeding to those schools. The District of Columbia [schools] had never been willing to participate in any of our programs, so we were left without any support.
You see, all we did was produce the programs for the schools. They determined what they wanted. They provided the teachers. We helped the teachers to learn how to put their program on the air, but we were paid to produce, so we lost all of our production money and we had time then to do other things.
And so we reached out to add programs to our schedule that would fill the schedule. Now for the mornings, we said, "What is the population here that is not being served?" We said, "Preschool." And Sesame Street had just come on the air, and Mister Rogers. So we said, "We will serve the preschool audience." And so we put preschool programs where we had had our in-school programs, you see. And then we were able to do a lot more repeats than we had done before to fill the schedule.
You were saying earlier that you couldn't make copies of your educational shows. Video tape was a revolution ...
Oh, it was a great revolution and a great gift. And I think today we kind of take it for granted. When I want to see a program that I haven't had time to see on the air, I can just borrow a tape and take it home and see it at my leisure.
And this is happening. We have a regular service for that. People can write in and ask for a tape and it will be mailed to them, and they can keep it. And this is a great, great change. You know the number of times that we have repeated the Civil War series, of course. ... Every time we repeat it, we have a good audience. People want to see it again. And many people have bought the tapes so that they can have them in their own libraries. So, tape is one of the great things that's happened.
What else was responsible for the advances made by WETA?
Interconnection was the next big thing that came to us, you see. And of course, when we got satellite, that was even better because we could get more than we could get with the interconnection. And so our whole programming has been enlarged. This is what has happened, not just to us, but to all of public broadcasting.
And then, of course, came cable. And in the beginning, cable was a great help to us because many of the channels assigned were UHF, and many people couldn't get the signal without cable.
Now cable is becoming a competitor because there are educational programs on cable, of course ... interrupted by commercials. And I still think we don't make enough of the fact that we are not interrupted by commercials.
Some people think that in some cases underwriting in public broadcasting has begun to be too commercial. Do you?
It is at least understandable. Even if it approaches being a commercial. I can't tell (on commercial TV) after I've seen an ad what it advertised, often. It's so complicated and so noisy. You see, I do not like ugly sounds. In fact, I feel that one of the reasons why so many young people are unhappy and can't find their way ... is because they have no beauty in their lives.
We still have limitations that we have to meet. I would like for our funding credits to remain as simple as they can possibly be. We have to pay for our service and unfortunately we can't get enough money from our viewers. See, the theory of this is that everybody who can afford to be a member at any amount — $5, $10, $20 or what we really charge, $30 — ought to join and not be a freeloader, but people don't get it.
WETA went on the air on Oct. 2, 1961. That must have been a very exciting day for you. Do you remember how you felt? What you did?
Well, I did some of the same things I do every day. I did all the things I had to do around the house, and then I went into Washington to the place where we were going to view the program that night.
Where was that?
In a building on Vermont Avenue. It was on the second or third floor ... we had to share it with the Girl Scouts. They were in the back with all of their stuff. And we had the front. Pat Oliver, who was my secretary, but much more, had called up the National Arboretum to ask them if they would let us have some plants. So they sent in plants. And we had to borrow chairs.
One of the people whom we had invited was one of the [FCC] commissioners, Robert E. Lee. He was the one who had presented to me this paper ... our right to have a television station. And he said that we were the only station that had ever received this permit by hand from a member of the FCC with a seal and a ribbon on it. So Commissioner Lee was there standing beside me and the program was to begin at 6 o'clock.
We had a lot of people there — parents, members of our board, the place was filled. And 6 o'clock came, and the picture came in and Commissioner Lee said, "It's clear." That's one of the highest moments of my life — to see the picture come across the river and be clear. And I said, "Oh, Commissioner, didn't you think it would be?"
Do you have fond memories of other milestones like that?
Yes, when we found out that we had to move [from studios at an Arlington, Va., high school]. The population of Arlington was growing and they had originally built this school — I had helped to plan it — as an elementary school with the plans to enlarge it and make it a junior and senior high school.
American University had a small studio and they said, "You can camp here." So we moved the little bit of equipment we had. While we were there, the vice chairman of our board, who was also the vice president of Howard University, William Stuart Nelson, called me one day and said, "Could you come over to Howard?" When I came to his office he said, "Don't take off your hat and coat, Mrs.Campbell, because I have something I want to show you." He showed me the old gym that had just been abandoned — the smelliest, dirtiest place I think I have ever seen. And we stood at the door and he said, "Do you think you could use this?" And I said, "Well, Dr. Nelson, if it could be cleaned up, I think we could. But let me call our engineer and get him to come over and look at it."
And I can remember now [the engineer] standing there with me, and he said, "Mrs. Campbell, the space, we can clean it up. This can be your new home." So for seven years we were at Howard.
You have said that colleges haven't accepted the concept of educational TV. Could you elaborate on that?
Well, it is my experience. One of the reasons is that the college professors do not feel that they would be adequate in a television studio. Now I think that is beginning to change. Also, in the teachers' colleges, they've never really had courses in how to use television. ... They're beginning to do that now.
Do you feel that now people are really taking advantage of what WETA has to offer?
I think the colleges, the college students, the high schools, the high school students are not aware or have not been made aware of what is available to them. And that is our fault, I think, that we have not really tried to acquaint the people with what we have. And we have not presented it as a teaching tool.
What was the prevailing attitude towards educational TV when you were trying to establish WETA?
There was almost complete ignorance about it. That was our problem. The people in this area had never seen a program that could be called educational television. At that time there was a real need for an improvement in education which was recognized particularly at the elementary-school level, and so people were willing to try a new way of enriching the classrooms. And that was the way I presented educational television.
You came up with a pretty unique way to demonstrate what educational TV would look like. Would you talk about that?
It was very important to show people what educational television could be. The channel that had been assigned for educational television here was a UHF channel, and no television sets in the area could receive that channel without an additional gadget on the back called a converter [which very few people had].
We had to go to a commercial station [to broadcast the program] because only
the commercial stations in the area could be received on the television sets
that were owned by the people here. The PTAs [later] installed television
sets in all the elementary schools for the fifth and sixth grades because
those were the grades where the superintendents of these 11 schools to whom
I had spoken said they needed a science enrichment program.
Was it difficult to get the commercial station to help you?
It was very difficult. When we decided that we were going to have this science program, I went to Mrs. Agnes Meyer of the Meyer Foundation and she agreed with me that we would have to go on a commercial station. And she said, "Now when you have your program ready, just go and talk to the heads of the three commercial stations, and I'm sure that they will be glad to help you, because they know something about the problems in education, particularly in science today."
So when we had our program ready, I took it to each of the three commercial stations. And each program manager said it's a wonderful idea but we cannot give you the time. Then I brought that information back to the executive committee of our board of trustees, and Father Daniel Tower, who was the public relations head at Georgetown University and vice president of our board, said, "I know some of the people at Channel 5. Let me go and talk to them." And they said, "We will do it, Father Tower, but we can't do it unless you can pay the costs of production." So I went back to the Meyer Foundation and asked for the money for production.
And I was told: "This is the first time, Mrs. Campbell, that anybody who has received a grant from us to help with a program has come back to ask for another grant to make it possible."
Do you remember what it cost you to produce that program the first year?
Yes, it cost $30,000. We also had to have a commercial to introduce our program. And so the station manager consulted me and he said, "What would you think of the Living Bra?" And I said, "Oh dear, we can't have a Living Bra in the classroom. Don't you advertise milk?"
So Time for Science was introduced with an ad for milk. You see they had never dealt with a school program before. Remember, all of this was absolutely new. Today, I guess, a Living Bra wouldn't make much difference, but back in 1958 it did.
You mentioned that you thought that cable was helping make public television available to more people.
It is. It was. As long as we had a must-carry rule [that required cable companies to carry one or more PTV stations depending on the system's channel capacity.] Now the rules on cable may be changing, and we hope that we are not going to have to suffer for it.
What do you think about the cable industry's argument that a must-carry rule violates cable operators' free-press rights by choosing what they carry?
Well, you know, they just want to make their own decisions about what they carry, and they feel the audiences for public broadcasting are small. And they are a business, you see. And we are a service. Just as the public library is a service.
You said you became aware of the educational power of TV through your children. Tell me about that.
In 1941, when they were three years old they wanted to watch television with their neighbor — a little boy down the street who had a television set.
We did not have a television set. We couldn't afford it. So at 5 o'clock in the afternoon when ordinarily they had been reading with their grandmother, we compromised and they went down to watch Howdy Doody with Billy, and then Billy came up and joined them in the reading.
I found out from my experience that they wanted to buy everything that had been advertised around Howdy Doody and that they could recount for me the story.
The two things that are important in education are: first, information and second, motivation. Both of these they were getting from television.
How did your being an educator influence your outlook on public television? Obviously, you had to have some vision for it. I guess having the children helped, but how did your own background give you the insight?
Well, remember that I had been on the school board in Arlington County for eight years, and I knew the inadequacies in the schools. And I was looking for ways in which some of those inadequacies could be met. And that meant bringing additional books, art, music — everything. The world was growing, and knowledge was increasing. And we just needed what television could bring.
And all commercial television was not bad, you know. I mean, we were getting news and public affairs. In those days, commercial television brought many more interesting things than it does today. If you go back and look at some of the early programs, you will find that commercial television had art and music and many other things.
What do you think has happened?
Well, it's a business. And they want viewers. Also, this country has changed so much. There have been so many more people coming into it who represent other countries and are not ready for what we are trying to put on public broadcasting.
Can you give me an example of what you mean?
Well, all you have to do is just look at some of the programs. The young people today — no matter what language they speak — will respond to the violence and the sex off of television. But when they turn to public broadcasting, if they can't speak the language, they can't get the program. We're trying to change that, you know, with bilingual programs, that is at least for the children.
Did you ever have doubts that this would work?
No, I didn't because I believe that things that are important and need to be done will be done. I didn't have time to have doubts. You don't doubt if you're moving.
What do you attribute that to? That attitude that you have to keep moving?
Well, I think it belongs to my background. Belief in a plan, that God has a plan for my life and God has a plan for his world, and that we are instruments as a part of that plan.
Did you have any role models who inspired you?
My parents. My father was a bishop in our church — a Moravian church — which has always stood for education. And my mother was a professional musician as well as a minister's wife and a person who was always interested in education, particularly in the arts. And I had two younger sisters and three younger brothers, and we had a family orchestra. Music was our great love. And we just believed it was important for us to do what we could to make the world around us a little better. I played the viola. We had a string quartet and the other two members of our six children, one played the harp and the other played trumpet. And my father played the flute, and my mother played the piano and organ.
Do you think that public broadcasting brings a good musical mix to its audience?
We have to turn to radio for that. It's on radio, and of course the WETA Board of Trustees from the beginning said that we want to have a complete broadcasting service, we want radio. But we couldn't get radio until we had a tower for the antenna and until we could get a frequency. So we had started television in '61, and we started radio in '70.
Did you have a lot to do with how the radio operation was set up in terms of programming? What kinds of things did you want to hear?
Yes, of course. Well, I wanted what we have, which is classical music and art — reports on artistic things — and also enough news so that people didn't feel they were going to be cut out of news because they were listening to music. And of course NPR has developed so much in these years, and we have been able to work with them.
You said once that television had really fallen down in the area of arts. Would you elaborate on that?
Yes, I think that we should have art appreciation on television, with examples of the fine arts, with examples of architecture, with stories about artists, with something that will encourage the schools to continue to have programs in their schools for the training of children.
We just are not being very thoughtful when we move our music and art education programs out of the schools. Because with the increase in the number of foreign children, the one thing that reaches across all is the arts. Everybody can participate in music. Everybody can participate in drawing. We illustrate that here at WETA with our children's art festival, where we have children from every nationality contribute. And if I really had any influence with the public schools today, I would say, keep your arts and keep your sports — in the elementary schools and in the high schools — because they cross all boundaries.
Let's talk a little bit about programming for young people. You have said that teachers and maybe programming sometimes talks down to kids. Why do you think so?
Because I've taught. And I've talked to teachers.
So what do you think needs to happen?
Well, I can illustrate it this way. When I was on the school board and often went to PTA meetings, I would ask the PTA group: "How many of you including the teachers watch television?" And when I say that the first time, the teachers are afraid to put up their hands because they think I would not want them to watch television. And I say we should all watch television because, unless you do, you do not know what your children bring to school with them.
The children who watch television hours and hours and hours at a time have a great deal of information and no real understanding of what makes these things happen. And they're afraid to ask the questions of their parents and their teachers, and so they don't know the answers. And a lot of this has to do with sex.
Do you think that public broadcasting can do the job as far as giving information?
It is our responsibility to give as much information as we can on subjects that are just essential to life today in these United States. Now, I think one of our problems is that we don't always have the money to have the kinds of programs that we want to have, so we do the best we can.
What about some of the really controversial programs such as Tongues Untied?
Oh, I think we've gone overboard on some of that stuff. But if we're going to do it, then we should do it late at night ... let people know what it is, and as I say, if you don't like it, don't look at it.
So many of these people who complain about it have a curiosity that is kind of a mean curiosity.
CPB has been talking about ways to bring to bring "balance" to what's perceived as a liberal tilt among public broadcasters. Do you think that balance is a real problem?
I think that it's real enough for people to be honest in their evaluation. I mean, educated people can look at a program and determine whether the overall feeling is biased or not. And I think we have to try to be honest. There are two parties in this country, and it's not so much the party as the conservative element that is growing in some areas. I think one of the things that this election has made me conscious of is the difference between our states. It's a very, very interesting thing to note, the kind of topics that are important in certain states. Remember public broadcasting touches all the states.
And how do you think some of the programming balance problems could be addressed?
PBS, theoretically, says: No station has to run any program that it doesn't want to run. It's up to the station to determine whether it will or will not broadcast that program. There needs to be much more awareness of your audience — not just a general saying: "Well, this is an interesting program," period. It may be a very interesting program, but it has a lot of little things in it that are not going to be right for the audience that you're playing to.
You've seen a lot of presidents come and go. Do you think that there has been one particular administration under which public broadcasting really thrived?
Well, when it became public broadcasting under Johnson, it did. And of course when we first got on the air, President Kennedy was very strong for it.
There are many conservative people who are afraid to look very far because it disturbs what they want to believe. And I think you have to admit this and just recognize those people are never going to be in favor of public broadcasting.
Do you have a wish list for the Clinton Administration?
It helps the country to see that the president is interested in cultural things. [In the] European countries, music and art have always been so essential, and then you look at our country. We have to fight for it.
Mrs. Campbell, you come to work every day to your office as a volunteer. Could you describe your job as you see it now?
Well, it's difficult to describe. I would say that I try to look over what is going on and make suggestions that I think will make us more relevant both to what is going on in the world and what our audience is. I'm very conscious of the community. Every television station needs to be much more related to its community in order to serve it you see.
Did you ever encounter what you felt was discrimination because you were a woman?
No. Never did. I never made it a part of being a woman. I just had something to say, and I said it. I was one woman with four men on the Arlington school board. They didn't give me any problems. They were glad for what I could give.
I just never really thought of it that way. Now, a lot of people did. And when being a woman got me where I needed to be, I went. If I found that I could get into a group by saying that this is a woman's issue and so forth, I would do it. I used it when I needed it, and the rest of the time I forgot it.
Web page originally posted June 10, 1998
Current: the newspaper about public TV and radio
in the United States
Current Publishing Committee, Takoma Park, Md.