The cutting above is a reproduction of a personal advertisement on page one of The Times on October 10, 1921. The ambitious 17-year-old responsible had carefully picked his words to create the biggest impact from the 15s. [75p in decimal, £30 in today’s money allowing for inflation – Ed] investment in himself.

Today The Times prints – without charge – parts of the speeches made by the leader that youngster has grown into. The shrewd, successful, 55-year-old business and financial expert responsible for those speeches selects the ideas which his judgement tells him will succeed just as carefully as he picked the words for that advertisement. Today, however, the loss could be millions of pounds not 15s.

The advertiser in The Times in 1921 and the man quoted in that paper today is John Spencer Wills, president of the B.E.T. Federation Ltd, deputy chairman and managing director of the British Electric Traction Co. Ltd, chairman of Associated-Rediffusion Ltd, chairman and/or director of various omnibus companies in the B.E.T. group, past president of the Institute of Transport, deputy chairman of the Monotype Corporation Ltd, … an abbreviated list occupies three column inches in Who’s Who.

He did not waste his 15s. in 1921 nor has it been his habit to waste either words or money since then. He has used both to work for him better than most who were born in the early 1900’s.

During the First World War he attended first a preparatory school in Shropshire and then the Merchant Taylors’ School, London. John Spencer Wills played the usual games without distinguishing himself at any of them, although, significantly perhaps, he did like steeple-chasing more than other forms of exercise. He admits that he found rugger a little frightening. No doubt some of his contemporaries who played the game with gay abandon would today find his responsibilities positively petrifying.

The lanky youngster might have continued in this fashion had not fate intervened. He outgrew his heart and was ordered by the doctors to give up games. The academic side of his activities flourished. Mathematics and science were the subjects he enjoyed most and was, therefore, the best at. We shall see that later on in life he was to find another favourite subject – work.

Here at Merchant Taylors’ he came under the influence of the first of two outstanding men who were to make a great impact on his early years. This man was Dr J. A. Nairn, the headmaster at the time. The scholarly authority and penetrating judgement of this doctor of divinity, who had been appointed headmaster at 26, made a lasting impression on the schoolboy. Their friendship did not end when the youngster left school in 1921. Upon Dr Nairn’s retirement five years later the Lord Chancellor (an Old Merchant Taylor incidentally) appointed him to the living of Stubbings, near Maidenhead. There Dr Nairn christened the younger son of John Spencer Wills, 20 years after his pupil left the school.

The year 1921 was not a good one in which to start a career. Jobs were hard to find. People were beginning to talk about The Slump. The tall, slim youth decided to advertise in The Times and thereby established an important principle he has followed throughout his career. He believed that more satisfactory results could be achieved from people approaching him rather than the other wayround. He still does.

And his faith was justified for among the replies was one from a Mr Emile Garcke who wrote, in his own hand, saying he wanted ‘an educated young gentleman with a view to making him my private secretary’. It did not take John Spencer Wills long to find out that Mr Garcke was head of the executive of B.E.T. An interview resulted in the following letter from Mr Garcke:

Ditton House,
Near Maidenhead.
21st October 1921

Dear Sir,

Replying to your letter of 18th inst and call yesterday I write to say that you are appointed to the position of my personal confidential clerk at £50 p.a. [£2,100] payable monthly and in addition, you will have board and residence and washing hill at above address, free also a season ticket between Maidenhead and Paddington. The engagement will be terminable by one month’s notice on either side. When you are in London – about three days a week – you will provide your own luncheon.

I suggest you should commence your duties on November 1st and that if convenient you should go down to Maidenhead on Monday 31st, by train leaving Paddington at 6.33 p.m. I shall be on the same train and a motorcar will meet us at Maidenhead station. I enclose form of application for railway season ticket for you to fill in and return to me. I do not know whether you have a bicycle but you would find one useful as my house is 2 miles from the town.

Yours truly,

E. Garcke.

Fortunately John Spencer Wills did have a bicycle. He also had ambition and courage. Most youngsters would have accepted the offer without more thought than that it might be a useful entry to the B.E.T. But the 17-year-old boy who was about to take his first job was not satisfied with a possibility. He wanted a certainty, and so he made it a condition of his acceptance that he would be taken into the B.E.T. organisation proper after two years. Even before embarking upon his career he had laid down the first of many conditions to follow; already he had his eye on the main chance.

Mr Garcke was the second man to have a very big influence on the rapidly maturing youth. A tireless, painstaking worker, he had founded the B.E.T. empire and was responsible for building it up, company by company. Some of his qualities were undoubtedly passed on to his confidential clerk.

John Spencer Wills lived at Mr Garcke’s home in Maidenhead, travelling up to London most days. Much of his time was spent assisting Mr Garcke in his hobby – philosophy. For hour after hour he pored over books in the London Library, picking out extracts on philosophical subjects. More hard labour went into the compilation of a special file of triads needed for the book Mr Garcke was writing. Today this privately published book, Individual Understanding, is a treasured possession of John Spencer Wills.

But the young clerk acquired more than a knowledge of philosophy from Mr Garcke. He also learnt something about bee-keeping. The old man took it up as part of his philosophical study. And such was Mr Garcke’s ability to grasp a new subject that he was lecturing to the Beekeepers’ Association within a year.

John Spencer Wills learnt how to mount the tongues of bees on slides and how to file Mr Garcke’s investigations under a complicated system of classification of the sciences. He was shown the importance of attention to detail at an early stage in his career.

But possibly more important still was the fact that his position gave him a valuable insight into the work of a man at the peak of his power. This glimpse from the top right at the start must have acted as a considerable spur to his ambition.

Perhaps Mr. Garcke, too, realised that his clerk could not be held back for after one, not two, years, John Spencer Wills was transferred to the B.E.T.’s Secretaries office.

He worked at the headquarters in Kingsway as an assistant secretary to a number of bus companies and lived in the suburbs in a dingy, none-too-comfortable bed-sitting-room at Palmers Green. Such was the start for a man who now lives in a house in Kensington during the week and on his own Sussex farm at the weekends. He recalls those days with an amused shudder.

Already he was making sure that it would not be his lot for long. For two and a half years most of his spare time was occupied in study. He passed the Intermediate and then the Final examination of the Incorporated Secretaries Association (now merged with the Chartered Institute of Secretaries).

Soon he realised that acting as a company secretary was not going to result in quick promotion. So he decided to go into the field; to get a job working in the provinces with one of those bus companies.

At last a chance came; B.E.T. acquired a new company in Hull. John Spencer Wills applied to go there and was appointed its secretary and accountant at a salary of £260 a year [£12,500]. Now he had both a bedroom and a sitting-room in his digs.

But before he took up his new job he was sent to the Eastern Counties Road Car Co. Ltd, for a three-week course of intensive training.

And so he arrived in Hull armed with ambition, drive and a little book full of notes on how to run a bus company. And in Hull he had a big shock. There was no proper office, hardly any staff and not even a reliable ticket system. John Spencer Wills rolled up his sleeves.

The situation might have been designed for him to achieve the greatest possible impact. He created order from the chaos and within a very short time was appointed the company’s general manager. At 22 the young man from headquarters had made a very big mark.

It is difficult to estimate the importance of the effect the next four years had on him. His chairman left him to get on with running the company’s affairs. If he wanted to put up the fares or anything else he did it. For four years he laid a very solid foundation to the company which had become the East Yorkshire Motor Services Ltd. Today he chuckles as he recalls those years. It was great fun for a youngster to have such power.

But the slump had arrived and it was not so much fun to have married men with two or more children coming to him and begging to be taken on as a clerk at 35s. a week [£1.75 in decimal, £90].

Ask him why he stuck with buses and he will become slightly annoyed. In those days there was no chance to wander from pasture to pasture, finding the most tasteful grass. People were delighted to keep what they had got. As a man with the power to hire and fire their plight was brought home to him in no uncertain fashion. He interviewed a steady procession of working men, their elbows sticking out of their coats, their families lacking clothes and food. Despite this he liked bus work.

In Hull it resulted in his being involved in something else which must have had a big effect on the formation of his character. This was a running fight with Hull Corporation who operated a rival bus service.

The young general manager found himself far from the calm, well-mannered, orderliness of the Kingsway headquarters of B.E.T. He had wanted to go out into the field but he had not realised that it would be a battle-field.

He found himself in head-on conflict with the chairman of Hull’s watch committee which was then responsible for licensing bus services in the city. The educated, well-brought-up, man from the South was faced by a self-made stoker, a Socialist by conviction and a blunt, forthright Yorkshireman by birth. Any attempt at reasoned argument was met with a stoker’s sledgehammer vocabulary. John Spencer Wills did the only thing possible – he learnt to talk the same way back.

The only snag was that the watch committee’s chairman was deaf, relying on a hearing box with earphones to listen to the young man’s retorts. The stoker adopted the only effective counter he knew to his opponent’s cogent arguments – he switched the hearing box off.

The watch committee and its chairman soon made up their minds about their attitude to the rival company’s general manager. Without putting it too strongly, they hated his guts.

But already John Spencer Wills had attracted attention from those in London. At the age of 26 he was asked to return and become a director with B.E.T. Five days after he had accepted this invitation, the corporation, not knowing of the move, surrendered. They sent a deputation to ask him to take over the management of the corporation’s bus service. It is interesting to reflect what would have happened had that deputation arrived five days earlier.

Now, however, John Spencer Wills had his feet firmly on the B.E.T. ladder. He describes his progress up that ladder over the next 20-odd years as steady, progressive plodding. This plodding carried him through the chairmanship of more than half the bus companies in the group.

But it did not carry him either so high or so fast as another facet of his earlier life which has more than a little bearing on his character. For six years, from 1933 to 1939, he held a pilot’s licence.

He took up flying when he was 28 for two reasons. First, he wanted to prove to himself that he could do it. Secondly, he thought that B.E.T., with its vast public transport interests, would expand into aviation. Until 1942 he was in fact managing director of British and Foreign Aviation Ltd and chairman of a number of aviation companies. The war, however, knocked things sideways.

He might have been a good pilot but he was a very bad navigator. Once when flying back to London from the cast he became lost and landed in the middle of a housing estate to find out where he was. The only way out was to take off smack between two houses. Today he smiles when recalling the incident and admits that he might have been killed.

More of the dare-devil in his make-up is revealed when he recalls watching the Boat Race by flying round in circles a few hundred feet above it. He also remembers taking up a girl to show her the sights of London from the air. (There was no restriction on low-flying in those days.) She was sick into her handkerchief and tossed it overboard. The slipstream caught it and smacked it back across the pilot’s goggles. John Spencer Wills is probably the only man alive today to have flown blind a couple of hundred feet above London. The girl, grand-daughter of Mr Emile Garcke, is his wife.

That was a lighter incident in his career. A more important event, which demanded just as sure a grip on the controls, was the grim battle over the 1945 Labour Government’s bid to nationalise the bus companies. Already B.E.T. had lost its electricity and gas undertakings to nationalisation. Now it was threatened with the loss of its interest in public transport.

Two big companies – Tillings and the Scottish group – sold out to the Government. But B.E.T. stuck to its belief that nationalisation was against the interests of the public, its stockholders and its staff. The fight was strenuous. Perhaps it reminded John Spencer Wills of his earlier battle against Hull Corporation; perhaps he used some of the techniques he learnt then. Nobody will dispute that he played a very important role in the anti-nationalisation campaign.

It was around this time that he was approached by Mr Allan Miller, then the controller of Broadcast Relay Services (later to become Rediffusion), with offers for him to become the managing director of the company. Each offer was more attractive than its predecessor. Each was refused. Allan Miller was not the sort of man to take ‘no’ for an answer. Nor was John Spencer Wills the sort of man to shift from the position he had taken up. It looked like stalemate but eventually a solution was found. The B.E.T. group, faced with big losses from nationalisation, took over Rediffusion and John Spencer Wills became chairman of it as well as managing director. The belief of John Spencer Wills in people approaching him had again been borne out.

Meanwhile the threat to nationalise buses had been halted so B.E.T. was left with its bus companies and Rediffusion. A few years later it was only natural that Rediffusion, with its television systems in Bermuda and Montreal already operating, should be among those to apply for a contract when it was decided to set up Independent Television in this country.

Once more John Spencer Wills and his fellow directors were called upon to make a coolly calculated decision. After many hours of anxious thought and deliberation, in which he played no small part, the decision was taken. Associated-Rediffusion was formed.

The story of the company’s early days, with the losses growing and growing, is well known. Not so well known arc the talks, worries and decisions which bespattered those troublesome times. Associated Newspapers withdrew. B.E.T. and Rediffusion took over their interests.

Behind it all were men who had considered every factor and decided to stick it out. John Spencer Wills carried more than his share of the responsibility and worry.

Now Associated-Rediffusion is under attack for the amount of money it makes and some of the programmes it transmits. As chairman he has little time for these attacks. He is not ashamed of making a profit nor is he ashamed of the programmes transmitted. But he does get annoyed at what he describes as ‘high falutin’, carping criticism’.

He thinks that the desire for entertainment and escapism are not far separated and he is not afraid to admit that, in common with a great many other people, he likes Westerns. John Spencer Wills makes no bones about the fact that he is proud to be chairman of Associated-Rediffusion and has been heard to describe the staff at Television House and Wembley as ‘a damn good lot’.

He genuinely believes in alternative and not competitive programmes. While admitting that this would be in Associated-Rediffusion’s interest, he is convinced that it would also be in the interest of the public to have a real, alternative television service.

He is also adamant about the value of people talking things over round a table. John Spencer Wills does not aim to set himself up (or anybody else) as a dictator in Associated-Rediffusion or any other company. ‘We’ve not got any and we certainly are not going to have any either.’

His own policy is not to interfere unnecessarily. He describes his role at B.E.T. as that of ‘Cabinet maker’ – to appoint the chairman and directors of the many companies within the group.

Many characteristics have combined to help carry him up the B.E.T. ladder. You will have gained a good idea of some of them from the preceding pages.

Mr W. T. James, who has also climbed high in the B.E.T. organisation, has known and worked with him for 27 years. He sums these characteristics up as follows:

A tremendous capacity for work, backed by a keen, perceptive brain. A forceful, analytical mind, logical in argument and quick to find a weakness in a case or document. This makes him a tough man with whom to negotiate. A virile imagination takes him a jump ahead of most people. He has the ability to issue the right orders and to make sure they are carried out. While not tolerating fools gladly he is a fair-minded, not ruthless, man.

Today John Spencer Wills has a not inconsiderable private fortune. Like others in a similar position he would be much better off financially if he avoided our high taxation and went to live in Bermuda or the West Indies. Why doesn’t he? Ask him and you will get a simple answer which also accounts for a great deal of his success. ‘I enjoy my work.’

Much as he attributes his success simply to this enjoyment of his work, so his chief hobby is simple. It is complete idleness. Walking and shooting are other occupations. Most weekends will find him out walking around the 2,000 acres, largely woodland, he owns in Sussex. Each weekday he compromises by walking from his house, through Kensington Gardens, to his office at Stratton House.

Dairy farming interests him as well. He lives on one farm near Battle and lets another five farms to tenants. He enjoys novels, good or bad, and likes to go to the theatre to see a serious drama.

Happily married to a lady who is well-known in the B.E.T. organisation for her charm and frequent attendance at functions all over the country, he has two sons. Colin, aged 22, is articled to a chartered accountant. Nicholas, aged 18, is now in Australia acting as a jackaroo on a sheep station before going up to Cambridge in October.

John Spencer Wills has no need to use the advertisement columns of The Times today. If he did he would certainly require more than the 17 words in which he described his qualifications in 1921. Then he had ambitions but no influence. Today he has achieved many of his objectives and acquired a lot of influence in the process. But the impression remains that he has some ambitions still to fulfil.

Sir John Spencer Wills (10 August 1904–28 October 1991) was chairman of Associated-Rediffusion.

The post Profile of John Spencer Wills appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

‘I read in the national Press that Val Parnell and ATV are against Associated-Rediffusion’s suggestion to the ITA that the third network, if and when it comes off, be a cultural one.

‘The reason suggested for this was that AR-TV is frightened of opposition. How can it be when it made more money than any other commercial TV company last year? It has fought through and triumphed against the opposition to date. So why should a commendable suggestion to support a cultural network, sharing the costs with other companies, be interpreted as a case of “nerves”?’

Letter from a Swansea viewer.

‘Sir Ian Jacob, BBC Director-General, said in London yesterday any new television wave-band should be shared by the BBC and ITA. Both organizations should be allowed to transmit two services, giving viewers a choice of four programmes.

‘Each of us could start a new service, but it has to be something new and not a duplication of what is going on in the present services.’

Daily Telegraph – June 10, 1959

‘Both ITA and BBC should be provided with an additional service solely for educational programmes (I use the word “educational” in its broadest sense) and specialized programmes with minority appeal. Such services would make it possible to provide more programmes for minorities, covering for example opera, ballet, and classical music, apart from which there might well be distinct commercial advantages in helping to make these specialized activities financially more self-supporting. We should be willing to participate in such a service, notwithstanding that it would have to be subsidized by our existing service.’

John Spencer Wills, company chairman, Nov. 25, 1958.

‘The Age of Juliet’. . . was fascinating to watch and a great exercise for our wits.’

Nancy Spain, Daily Express.

‘Ones fears for ‘The Age of Juliet’ adapted from the French on Independent Television last night, were only too well founded.’

L.L., Daily Telegraph.

‘This is the first time I have ever commented publicly about a televised programme, but I feel I must tell you how much I appreciated, enjoyed and admired your initiative in flying over so promptly the filmed interview with Lord Montgomery by Morrow and Colinwood. In particular did I appreciate the value of this following the criticisms which appeared in the British Press by people who obviously had not seen the film, but quoted excerpts of the interview, which gave erroneous impressions.

‘It was really excellent, but if there is a next time with another interview with Lord Montgomery by two such first-class interviewers, please do try and make it earlier in the evening, as I feel many people probably missed this beneficial programme by going to bed. I like to think the advertisers would understand – !

My very sincere congratulations.’

Letter from a Beaconsfield viewer.

‘May I slap you on the back for “Motoring Club”? I do not drive, never owned a car, but you set me thinking. The whole fifteen minutes was fascinating and the script very understandable. More power to your elbow!’

Letter from a Twickenham viewer.

‘My little boy of five has been very ill since before Christmas. During his long stay home from school we bought a TV set. Believe me, the different programmes have done more to buck him up than any doctor ever could. He is not only interested in the programmes but asks no end of questions about the studios and cameras, etc. I feel that I would just like to thank you all for unknowingly giving my son a great deal of entertainment during his illness and convalescence.’

Letter from Chelmsford viewer.

‘My husband and I look forward to seeing Jim’s Inn. We both think that Jim’s Inn is the best Advertising Magazine on television. Let us hope we will be seeing Jim’s Inn for many more weeks to come.

Postcard from Fulham viewer.

The post They Say… November 1959 appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

THE SIXTH ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
of Associated-Rediffusion Limited was
held on September 19th 1961 in London, Mr.
John Spencer Wills, the Chairman, presiding.

Moving the adoption of the Report and Accounts for the year ended 30th April, 1961 the Chairman said:—

“You will have seen from the Accounts that the profit was just about the same as it was last year. It only appears to be more because we did not consider it necessary to repeat the £500,000 [£12m in today’s money, allowing for inflation] provision for obsolescence which we made last year and the year before that.

ADVERTISEMENT REVENUE

A gratifying feature of the year is the continued growth in advertisement revenue, which shows an increase of some 16% over that for the previous year. This must be accepted as a striking indication of the value of television advertising in the London area, which now has a potential audience of over nine million viewers. We have been glad to welcome many new advertisers.

In this year’s Budget, television advertising was singled out for special taxation in the form of Television Advertisement Duly. This was at the rate of 10% as from 1st May but was increased to 11% as from 26th July.

Any comment by me about this new impost would probably be regarded as wholly selfish, so I will content myself with quoting the well-known economist, Mr. Graham Hutton:—

The oddest net tax is that (ostensibly) on advertising by television. It is almost a classic offence against all of Adam Smith’s famous canons of taxation. Purporting to hit at the profits of the programme-contracting companies, it was admittedly expected to be passed on to advertisers. Since these people and their advertising agents work to budgets of their own, and TV has the biggest impact on their markets, its effect will be completely to bypass TV advertising, and come to rest on all other forms of advertising. It would have been far better (as Lord Hinchingbrooke and many others in all three parties in the Commons pointed out) to come out into the open with a straight tax on all advertising.

We took special steps to assist those advertisers whose budgets could not immediately be adjusted to meet the Duty. In the case of bookings which, under our General Terms and Conditions of Contract, were subject to eight weeks’ notice of cancellation, we reduced the cancellation period to one week for bookings within the eight-week period following the imposition of the Duty. In cases where advertisers had entered into non-cancellable contracts for guaranteed expenditure before the imposition of the Duty, we agreed that the advertisers concerned could, if they so desired, include the appropriate Duty in their guaranteed expenditure, the rate of discount remaining unchanged and continuing to be payable on guaranteed expenditure excluding Duty.

In 1960, over £134 million [£3.5bn] was spent on advertising in the United Kingdom Press. This is 17½% more than the £114 million [£2.8bn] spent in 1959 and is the highest annual expenditure ever recorded by The Statistical Review of Press Advertising. Expenditure on TV advertising also reached a record figure, the total for 1960 being just under £77 million [£2bn].

Television still has a considerable distance to go to catch up. Any tax upon advertising is a burden upon the export trade. But this new tax burden is more a matter for complaint by the advertisers than by the advertising medium.

OPERATING COSTS

Our operating costs have continued to rise and show an increase of some 14% over the previous year’s figure. There will be a further substantial increase in the current year. The production of television programmes is indeed an expensive business.

Our new million pound [£25m] Studio 5 at Wembley, now in continuous use, has proved its worth: the additional space and improved facilities which it provides have, I think, been reflected in improvement in the range and in the artistic and technical quality of our programmes.

It is not wholly surprising that an industry which earns large profits should be a target for the Trades Unions concerned. Very large increases in pay have been negotiated and it is inevitable that our friendly rivals, the B.B.C., should also have been affected. There is one application, however, which shocks even me, who has been closely concerned in wage negotiations in different industries, for a large number of years. And that has been lodged by The British Actors Equity Association, commonly called ‘Equity’.

When Independent Television started, the minimum fee payable to an actor in a B.B.C production was 6 guineas [£180]: this sum was ‘earned’ by an actor who walked on and said, ‘My Lord, the carriage awaits’. By negotiation, this minimum for a national appearance on Independent-Television was, from the start in 1955, increased to 7 guineas [£210] and, in 1958, was raised again to 10 guineas [£260]. Equity have now demanded, for a comparable actor, a minimum fee of 36 guineas [£900], an increase of 260%. They have also demanded, for the national appearance on Independent Television of an actor speaking more than ten words a minimum payment of 44 guineas [£1,100], an increase of 340%.

It is not normally considered good practice to discuss Trade Union negotiations whilst they are in progress but, in this case, Equity have publicly announced the calling of a strike. They have issued an instruction to their members not to accept any engagement in any ITV programme (except commercials) which involves any work on or after the 1st November.

The demands in support of which the strike has been called are so fantastic that negotiations are at an end. We, in television, need actors; we, in television, have given them very considerable support in many directions. We are not, however, prepared to accede to ridiculous demands.

It is not surprising that, in their latest instruction to their members, the Council of Equity said, ‘Our original proposals were made with full knowledge that we might well not achieve a new deal in Independent Television as a result of discussions over the negotiating table…’

PROGRAMMES

It has always been the Board’s policy to give the maximum possible responsibility and freedom of action to our programme planning and production staff and I think the staff are again to be congratulated upon the results of their work.

Although size of audience is not the sole criterion of success, it is pleasing to note that Associated-Rediffusion productions continue to figure prominently in the weekly lists of top-rating programmes. It seems to me that the test of success for any public service — particularly where an alternative is available — must, in large measure, be the extent to which the public use that service.

An outstanding event during the year was the production last March of ‘Laudes Evangelii’, a presentation of episodes in the life of Christ told in music, mime and ballet. This programme, which was transmitted at peak viewing time on Good Friday and seen by some four and a quarter million viewers, received unqualified praise from leaders of the main branches of the Christian religion in this country. This was, in every way, a most challenging production and, apart from the public and press response to it, the spirit in which the challenge was accepted by the very large number of staff concerned made the occasion memorable. The critic who accuses Independent Television of programme parsimony may be interested to learn that the cost of ‘Laudes Evangelii’ was £28,000 [£670,000].

I mentioned last year the recent establishment of an International Division. Measured in terms of revenue, it cannot yet be described as a major activity but you will be interested to know that Associated-Rediffusion programmes, including plays and drama series, documentary feature programmes and schools programmes, have been sold in thirty-three different countries. Some of our schools programmes have been sold in such remote and differing places as Ethiopia, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, Nicaragua, Southern Rhodesia and Australia, and America and a number of European countries may shortly be added to the list. Whilst these developments are not yet of great financial significance, you will, I am sure, be glad to know that an international reputation is gradually being established; the sort of reputation that could be of great value if, during the next few years, the international exchange of programmes by satellites were to become practicable.

Increasing use is being made of television programmes for schools, which Associated-Rediffusion pioneered four years ago. The number of schools taking the programmes has risen from eighty to fifteen hundred and may well exceed two thousand during the fifth year just commenced. We are grateful to Sir Ifor Evans, Provost of University College, for having taken over the Chairmanship of our Educational Advisory Council in succession to Sir Sydney Caine, whose resignation, on his appointment as a member of the Independent Television Authority, I mentioned last year.

At our meeting four years ago, I suggested that if you had not seen our schools programmes, you should take an opportunity of doing so. They are well worth viewing by adults and I repeat the suggestion now our French language series, ‘Chez les Dupré’, has, in fact, been transmitted in evening programmes and seen by audiences of over two million in the London area. The fact that close on 45,000 explanatory booklets were sold to viewers indicates the interest which was taken in this experiment in adult education. Another of our schools’ programmes, ’London, Capital City’ is now being transmitted in evening programme time.

THE FUTURE

To the Pilkington Committee of Inquiry which was appointed last year to consider and make recommendations on the future of broadcasting services in this country, we have submitted our views and evidence. The Committee’s Report is expected some time next year.

The facts that the Independent Television Authority is to cease to exist in 1964; that the contracts of programme contractors terminate in the same year; that there has been a great deal of publicity given to an enormous number of irreconcilable recommendations made to the Pilkington Committee — all these facts have caused, and are bound to have caused, some unrest and uneasiness among our staff. Are their jobs safe? Are they reasonably certain of continued employment? Is there any risk that they may have wasted their time? In my opinion there is no cause for alarm, no justification even for misgiving

The main shareholders in Associated-Rediffusion have been engaged in the provision and management of public services for two-thirds of a century — ever since 1896. I myself have been so engaged for forty years. Railways, tramways, trackless trolleys, radio stations, television stations, the generation and distribution of electricity, the manufacture and distribution of coal-gas, airlines, wired radio, wired television, motor omnibus services, road goods transport — all these activities, not only in the United Kingdom, but in countries all over the world, have been our life. The bus interests alone embrace 13,000 public service vehicles. Is it surprising that are should have been entrusted with the task of furnishing television programmes to the largest city in the western hemisphere? Sixty-six years of public service and, let it be said, of successful public service, on a large scale, cannot lightly be disregarded.

Railways, tramways, electricity undertakings and gas undertakings were mostly operated under individual Statutes. The air services were operated under short term licences granted by a Statutory Authority. The wired radio and television undertakings are currently operated under long term licences from the Post Office but, for many years, could have been stopped at short notice. The omnibus services have, for the last thirty years, been operated under short term licences. But always it has been the practice, provided that the operators properly discharged their responsibilities to the public they served, for the licences to be renewed without question.

My personal belief is that our staff have no reason to fear any departure from the licensing practice established over so many decades.

Our shares are widely held. The British Electric Traction Co. Ltd. have 37,500 shareholders, Rediffusion Ltd. have 12,000 shareholders and they, between them, are the virtual owners of Associated-Rediffusion Ltd.: that is to say, we are owned by nearly 50,000 individuals.

Why should any Government wish to shatter the existing scheme of things?

The main criticism hurled against us is that the State does not take a sufficient share of our profits. Let us examine the figures during the year under review. The Associated-Rediffusion Group’s gross revenue was in excess of £21,000,000 [£500m]. From this the State takes (including a substantial part of our payment to the Independent Television Authority) £5,000,000 [£12.5m] and our 50,000 shareholders will, if you accept your Board’s recommendation, receive £2,250,000 [£55m]. Had the Television Advertisement Duty been in operation during the year, the State would have taken another £1,470,000 [£36m].

Our shareholders took the risk of losing all their investment. At one stage, in 1956, they had, in fact lost the enormous sum of £3,250,000 [£90m]. The State took no risk at all. If the Company had gone into liquidation, the State would not have lost one penny.

As it is, out of the profits which have succeeded the losses, the State will receive nearly three times as much as the shareholders.

It seems to me that, if there is cause for complaint, the shareholders have more right to complain than anyone else!

The main criticism of the Independent Television Authority is that a large part of their work is done behind the scenes, that they do not publicly admonish their programme contractors if anything goes wrong. Those of us in the business know that the Authority keeps an eagle eye and a firm hand upon all that goes on. In my submission it is in the interest of all concerned — the public, the Government, the advertisers, the employees — that control should continue to be exercised quietly and tactfully. To me, personally involved in the settlement of an enormous number of problems during the formative years and since, it has been a matter of surprise and of considerable admiration that there has not been more friction between the Authority on the one hand and the Contractors on the other. No Government can possibly afford to throw over a body which has so happily and successfully carried out its difficult task.

My conviction is that whatever the Pilkington Committee may recommend about alternative or competitive programmes or any other of the many subjects to which they are devoting so much lime and attention, two steps are certain:—

1. The Independent Television Authority will be given a new lease of life.
2. The existing programme contractors will continue to provide television programmes.

SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

The subsidiary companies this year have made a considerably increased contribution to the group profit and we are confident that this trend will continue.

The TV Times, owned by our subsidiary TV Publications Ltd., now publishes a Border Edition containing the programmes of Border Television Ltd., the new Independent Television programme company which commenced transmissions at the beginning of this month. Arrangements have also been made for the publication of a Grampian Edition to cover the programmes of Grampian Television Ltd., which is to commence transmissions very shortly.

We now hold all the ordinary capital, and all but an insignificant amount of the preference capital, of Wembley Stadium Ltd. The Board of that company has, during the past year, given very considerable thought to future development with a view to enhancing the world-wide reputation of the Stadium and Pool as first-class sporting and entertainment centres.

Plans for a 48-lane bowling alley, with the most modern restaurant and other necessary amenities, are now far advanced, and the project will be proceeded with as soon as possible.

Another interesting development is the recent acquisition by Wembley Stadium Ltd. of a 25% interest in Wembley Trust, Ltd., similar interests having been acquired by Allnatt (London) Ltd., Central and District Properties Ltd. and Warnford Investments Ltd. The Wembley Trust Company owns valuable properties on some 15 acres of land adjoining the Stadium grounds. It is too early for me at this stage to do more than report the acquisition.

MANAGEMENT AND STAFF

I have already paid tribute to our programme planning and production staff. You will, I know, wish me to express grateful thanks to all those who work for you, for their enormous contribution to the success of Associated-Rediffusion.”

The Report and Accounts were unanimously adopted.

The post What is the future of ASSOCIATED-REDIFFUSION? appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

“A result of the developments in Independent Television since we last met is that this will be our last Annual General Meeting as an independent television programme company. In February of this year the Independent Television Authority invited applications for new programme contracts to take effect after the expiry of the existing contracts on 29th July, 1968. The Authority had decided to make certain changes in the general pattern of the contracts for the three major independent television areas known as the London, Midland and Northern areas, each of which has since the beginning been served by two contractors, one on the five weekdays and one at the weekends. Under the new pattern, only the London area will be served by two contractors, with the weekday contractor’s responsibility ending at 7 p.m. on Fridays, when the weekend contractor will take over.

The London weekday contract has been held by your company and its predecessor, Associated-Rediffusion, since the inception of independent television and we confidently applied for renewal. The Authority decided against us, however, and offered the new contract conditionally to a new programme company to be formed jointly by your company and ABC Television Limited, currently the weekend contractor for the Midland and Northern areas. The Authority’s decision not to renew our contract was a great shock and wholly unexpected. It affected not only you as shareholders but some 1,350 of your employees, whose lives and careers were sadly and cruelly upset.

We had assumed that a statement by the Postmaster General, made when the Television Bill, now embodied in the Television Act, 1964, was being debated in the House of Commons, meant what it said. The Postmaster General’s precise words as recorded in Hansard were as follows: —

‘Meanwhile, I hope that the House will remember that the risk of non-renewal of a contract is very slight unless the company has completely failed to make the grade.’

Your Board took the view that we had not ‘completely failed’ and would not ‘completely fail to make the grade’ and I must add that we had not at any time been given any indication that the Authority took a different view; accordingly we proceeded to prepare for the future by increasing the staff and undertaking large scale capital expenditure commitments to convert our operation for colour and the new 625 line standard. As shareholders, however, you will naturally ask the question ‘have we completely failed to make the grade?’ This question is, I think, best answered, not by an expression of my own opinion, but by facts and by tributes from outside the Company.

The facts may be briefly summarised as follows. Rediffusion, in company with Associated Television and with the valued support of Sir Kenneth Clark, the first Chairman of the I.T.A., and Sir Robert Fraser, the I.T.A. Director-General, was responsible for building up independent television from nothing, through serious initial trials and tribulations, into a first class public service. Rediffusion, in the difficult pioneering days, introduced the first regular television service for schools in this country and has since been the leader in that field. Rediffusion took the initiative in forming the International Television Federation, an association of major television organisations in the English speaking world for the production, exchange and distribution throughout the world of high class documentary programmes on world problems. Rediffusion has always played a leading part in the independent television network, providing the central production services and key staff for state occasions and other national events and its general programme contribution to the network has not been surpassed by any other company. Rediffusion has won over 40 awards in international and national competitions for its programmes and publications in every field of broadcasting activity. The list of ITV Awards in the I.T.A. 1968 Year Book, covering the years 1956 to 1967, records that Rediffusion has won more awards than any other programme company. This surely cannot be a company which has ‘completely failed to make the grade.’

But let me now offer you a selection of tributes from outside on the Company generally and on its programmes, including some from the I.T.A. itself.

From ‘The Observer’ –

‘Rediffusion is the most BBC-like of the companies, full of people who really know and care about TV.’

From the ‘Television Mail’ –

‘But – though perhaps it’s a bit early for tributes and similar goo – it does seem appropriate at this time just to say how much, in our opinion, A-R, together with the other pioneers, has contributed to this vast industry. It took some courage, in those days, to hang on and keep a brave face while watching all those millions of pounds pouring out of the window; A-R at one stage not only lost nearly £4 million, as well as its original partner. Associated Newspapers. But the original management’s faith in commercial television eventually paid off, and many of the later entrants into ITV were able to take advantage of the spadework -and the risks – undertaken by A-R in the very early days.

And since that time the company’s record has been pretty impressive. It has been associated with Intertel, ‘This Week’, Studio 5 at Wembley, E-Cam, and many other advances in the technical and creative fields. Sure, it’s had its failures, too; but at least it’s been man enough to admit them; last year’s balance sheet includes some thousands of pounds written off in untransmitted programmes (some people would have transmitted them).

On the sales side, too, A-R has done a great deal for the advertising world. At the time of the announcement of the new contracts, it was installing a computer timebooking system; and many initiatives in the time sales field have been taken by the company.’

On the occasion of the tenth anniversary of Rediffusion’s ‘This Week’, the then Chairman of the I.T.A., Lord Hill of Luton, wrote –

‘For a decade ‘This Week’ has been a regular illustration of Independent Television’s determination to provide a well-balanced service. ‘This Week’ has faithfully provided information, educational and not seldom entertaining material about the contemporary world with unfailing skill and imagination. Its ingenious methods of presentation have consistently made sense of complex current issues without distortion, over-simplification or playing down to the audience.’

On the same occasion, the Prime Minister wrote –

‘A pioneer in this field has been ‘This Week’. Its integrity is undoubted, its professionalism obvious. I congratulate its producers and all who play a part in its presentation.’

The Leader of the Opposition wrote –

‘Television has been largely responsible for stimulating the public appetite in this respect. During the past 10 years, ‘This Week’ has played a notable part in providing commentary news headlines.’

I have already referred to our initiative in the formation of The International Television Federation and I think our standing in the principal English-speaking countries overseas is well illustrated by the following extract from a citation recently presented to us by our fellow-members of the Federation. It is as follows:—

‘Intertel, at the eighth annual meeting, accepts with profound regret the resignation of Rediffusion Television Limited and gratefully acknowledges its wise leadership and generous contributions to the common effort.

(Signed) T. S. Duckmanton, The Australian Broadcasting Commission
Eugene S. Hallman, The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
John F. White, National Educational Television (USA)
MALTA, September 30th, 1967.’

May I now give you a few extracts from the I.T.A’s own Year Books about Rediffusion programmes?

1963 ‘If this gradual and intelligible introduction to television on behalf of children could be achieved, no better start could be made than with ‘Small Time’, a short programme appearing from Monday to Friday between 4.45 p.m. and 5 p.m. on most stations of Independent Television.’

‘In the winter of 1960-61, Associated-Rediffusion transmitted a French language series ‘Chez les Dupre’ in the early evening and found an immediate and substantial response among viewers in the London area.’

‘The play should speak to the condition of a television service. In so far as it does so, in the case of Independent Television, it reveals it to be in good heart. Each of the four largest companies (A-R, ATV, Granada and ABC) has made and continues to make, serious contributions to television drama . . .’

1964 ‘Nevertheless, the serials have been very good in recent months . .. ‘Sierra Nine’ and ‘Smuggler’s Cove’ from Associated-Rediffusion, all accurately described as adventure serials, with children taking the major parts.’

‘Melodrama, which may cover all other kinds of fictional series, is entertaining enough to deserve its considerable place in television. Lively who-done-its such as ‘No Hiding Place’ … are the essence of quick-moving, intelligently planned entertainment.’

1965 ‘To take one example alone, the much acclaimed production by Rediffusion of Shakespeare’s ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’ in June, 1964 was seen by almost 4,000,000 viewers.’

‘Rediffusion has launched ‘Towards 2000’ a major series on the development of technology . . .’ ‘These are essentially action stories rather than plays of ideas, and they include some very popular programmes such as ‘No Hiding Place’ and ‘Crane’ (Rediffusion) . . .’

“‘Double Your Money’ and ‘Take Your Pick’ (Rediffusion) have been running as long as Independent Television itself and continue to be enjoyed by vast audiences.’

1966 ‘A notable programme seen throughout the country was ‘The Music Man’ (Rediffusion) . . .’

1967 ‘Although it was first felt that television’s chief contribution would be to the work of the secondary school, its potential value to primary schools was recognised as early as 1959 when Rediffusion produced ‘The World Around Us’.’

Finally, a selection of press comments on individual programmes:—

‘Laudes Evangelii’ (two quotes from the American press)

‘A magnificent harbinger of the many productions on religious themes that this season of the year will be bringing to our television screens. Some may be as good as this one but I hardly see how any could be better.’

‘Leonide Massine’s Laudes Evangelii surely will stand as one of television’s lasting accomplishments, a work of breathtaking reverence and beauty that has enriched the home screen as much as any single programme in recent years.’

‘Design for Living’

‘. . . beautifully simple, it revives one’s faith in the use of television.’

‘This Week’

‘. . . report on South Vietnam and the round-up of the modern Israeli Army were both prize-winning pieces of TV journalism.’

‘Children of Revolution’

‘. . . television at its best.’

‘No Hiding Place’ – ‘A Bottle Full of Sixpences’

‘Lord Hill of ITA must be plaintively asking himself why the rest of the boys can’t make programmes as wholesome and morally sound as the sentimental homily we got last night in London.’

‘One In Every Hundred’

‘A compulsive and socially valuable use of the television screen.’

‘Dare I Weep, Dare I Mourn’

‘It is clearly obvious that ITV is capable of producing such first-class material as Rediffusion’s James Mason Film ‘Dare I Weep, Dare I Mourn.’

‘Seven Deadly Virtues’ – ‘The Good and Faithful Servant’

‘This was a play that put some life back into my loss of faith in ITV drama.’

‘This Week’ – ‘The World of Nigel Hunt’

‘This kind of television, lightening superstitious corners of human prejudice, is high among TV’s most worthwhile achievements.’

It is common knowledge that not all comments about the Company and its programmes have been in the same vein as those I have quoted to you. But whatever adverse comment there may have been, such comments as I have quoted surely could not apply to a company which had ‘completely failed to make the grade.’

Small wonder is it, therefore, that your directors, management and staff are at a loss to understand the Authority’s decision. Even that decision cannot destroy our pride in our achievements over the past 12 years.

The Authority did, however, offer us an opportunity, on the conditions that we completely sacrifice our identity and any control over the development of independent television, to acquire a 50 per cent financial stake, but no effective say, in a new company, to be formed in partnership with ABC Television, to serve the population of the London area for a little over four days a week instead of the five days for which we shall alone have been responsible for the 13 years up to 29th July, 1968.

You will have seen from the Directors’ Report that arrangements for the formation of a new company have been agreed between the Company and ABC Television and approved by the Authority. The establishment of a joint company in such circumstances is a very complex matter; when all the necessary matters of detail have been settled, you will be informed of the overall position.

We shall in future have a 50 per cent stake (but a minority of the voting shares) in an operation covering four days plus part of a day in place of our present exclusive five day operation. In effect, we shall have been reduced from five day operation to marginally more than two day operation. Nevertheless, we have always had the most friendly relations with ABC Television and we shall certainly do everything we can, as I am sure will ABC Television also, to make the new company an outstanding success.

Whatever reasons Lord Hill of Luton (whose appointment to the Chairmanship of our competitors, the B.B.C., had, according to press reports, been decided months earlier) and his part-time colleagues of the I.T.A. may have had for crossing our name off the list of effective contributors to independent television, I and my colleagues on the Board will remain forever grateful to the men and women who built up Rediffusion Television with so much devoted skill, energy and enthusiasm. We believe they have done a magnificent job of work. Although the Company is under sentence of death, every valiant effort is being made, in spite of the obvious difficulties, to keep our flag flying right up to the end.”

The post Sentenced to death appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

The year 1966 started with political praise being heaped on the head of ‘This Week’ when the programme celebrated its 10th anniversary on January 6. A publication to mark the event carried messages of goodwill from the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the Liberals. Later that night a programme title ventured into the realm of the astrologer with what at that time seemed an amazingly rash prediction… The World Cup – England to Win?’ Then on January 31 the first of a new series called ‘The Rat Catchers’ started to win predictably high ratings.

In between, however, had come the death of a member of the board of directors – Sir Bracewell Smith, a former Lord Mayor of London, chairman of Wembley Stadium and an honorary vice-president of the Football Association. February brought yet another award to the company when ‘Children of Revolution’, the Intertel production on young people growing up in Czechoslovakia, won a Silver Dove from the International Catholic Organisation for Radio and Television (UNDA) at the sixth Monte Carlo International Television Festival. Another award came the next month when Hughie Green and Michael Miles received a joint special award from the Variety Club of Great Britain at the Show Business lunch on March 8 for the continuing popularity of their programmes.

March 31 once again saw Studio 9 as the hub of the ITV network when everybody went into action to cover the General Election.

Mr Wilson was given ‘A View from the Bridge’ shortly after on April 4 with the transmission of Arthur Miller’s play. Meanwhile the ITA announced that its present three-year contracts with the programme companies would be extended until the end of July, 1968, as no decision had been taken on whether to extend the ITV service.

A flurry which was to extend for quite a few weeks hit the Wembley studios when the first of the colour ‘Hippodrome’ series went on the floor on April 19.

In the business world, company chairman John Spencer Wills became the chairman of The British Electric Traction Co. Ltd, on April 21, following the death of Harley Drayton.

On May 9 the first of the ‘Seven Deadly Sins’ series was transmitted. Pride, gluttony, sloth, avarice, lust, envy and wrath subsequently achieved the distinction of all getting into TAM’s Top Ten.

Three days later the first of the adult education series ‘Royalist and Roundhead’ was screened. While not hitting the Top Ten, it rose high in the opinion of educationalists.

May also saw the drama section of the club take over Studio 9 to stage ‘Ring Round the Moon’ and achieve high audience ratings. Meanwhile Fusion made its own dent in the award stakes by receiving a certificate of merit in the British Association of Industrial Editors’ contest, a top award of excellence in the International Council of Industrial Editors’ competition and the Block and Anderson Cup from the British Direct Mail and Advertising Association.

The International Television Federation – Intertel – reached the fifth anniversary of its foundation on June 14. Behind it were 34 programmes and a coveted 1965 Peabody Award for making ‘the first continuing contribution towards international understanding through television.’

Also in June came an award for ‘Stage One Contest – Caroline’. This children’s programme won the Munich Prix Jeunesse.

The Mountbatten series also made news in June when it was announced that this exclusive story of the life and times of Lord Mount-batten would be made in colour.

July started with the news that the first episode of the ‘Hippodrome’ series on July 5 had gone straight to the top of Neilsen coast-to-coast ratings when screened by CBS in colour.

This was the month of the World Cup which England won on July 30 and which stretched the joint resources of BBC and ITV in providing coverage for the world. Rediffusion contributed its share of equipment and executives.

The day after the final at Wembley historians gathered at Television House for a conference with ‘History on TV’ as its theme.

August 1 brought the first programme in ‘The Informer’ series which regularly knocked on the doors of the Top Ten during its run.

The month was shadowed by the death of Bernard Rickatson-Hatt on August 7. He had been on the board of the company since July, 1958. A former Guards officer, he had been editor-in-chief of Reuters, adviser to the governor of the Bank of England and to the Bank of London and South America on public relations.

In September came two club events. On the 10th there was the annual sunlit sports day for the children of club members at Shepperton and on the 17th the football team took part in the TV Cup knock-out competition. For the second year running the Rediffusion XI lost to Scottish, the eventual winners.

On September 21 it was announced that Sir Richard Thompson was joining the board. A former M.P., he has held various government appointments.

A conference for educationalists was held at Wembley on September 22 at which, for the first time, teachers were allowed to produce their own programmes in a television studio. September 26 saw the start of the new autumn schedules with 15 new programme presentations, the sequel being six out of TAM’s Top Ten for the week. As part of this schedule the first production of the new Rediffusion Films Ltd was transmitted on September 28 – ‘Dare I Weep, Dare I Mourn’ with James Mason and Jill Bennett. The Frost Programme’ series also started later that night.

Appointments in features came in October. First there was the announcement of the appointment of Barry Westwood as producer of the networked Thursday edition of ‘This Week’. Then, on October 27, it was announced that James Butler had been appointed head of features from November 1.

During October and November, three joint Rediffusion/Talent Association productions under David Susskind passed through Wembley to be recorded in black-and-white and colour for America.

On November 8, it was announced that the present series of ‘Ready, Steady, Go!’ would end on December 23.

On November 11, the announcement came that managing director Paul Adorian had been appointed managing director of Rediffusion Ltd. John Spencer Wills, chairman of both companies, relinquished his managing directorship following his appointment as chairman of The British Electric Traction Co. Ltd upon the death of Harley Drayton.

The annual general meeting of the company was held at Wembley on November 28 and at it, the winners of the 1965-66 Golden Stars were presented with their awards. Independent Television presented ‘A Royal Gala’ before the Duke of Edinburgh at the Palladium on November 29 in aid of the CTBF and the Bowles Rocks Trust.

From December 7-16, an exhibition of the work of graphic designers was held at the Upper Grosvenor Galleries.

Finally – and still to come – is ‘The Royal Palaces of Britain’, the joint Independent Television and BBC production on December 25.

The post Tele marks of 1966 appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

At the time, Rediffusion had got into the habit of inviting all the companies in turn to lunch and, in spite of the row going on, it came round to Southern’s turn. When Rediffusion asked how many of our board would be turning up, they were rather horrified to find the number of members we’d be bringing, because it meant they’d have to elongate their reproduction Regency dining-room table. However, they got their scenery department to make an extra leaf to go in and managed to accommodate us all.

The table was superbly laid when we arrived, with beautiful candelabra and heavy glasses, heavy everything, but the lunch was not a happy occasion – lots of acrimony developing and sparks flying. Over coffee, our Graham Dowson and a member of the Rediffusion board were having one hell of an argument on their own. Both of them were big heavy men and they were sitting opposite each other, leaning hard on the table.

By chance it happened to be at the place where the new leaf had been inserted and suddenly there was a tremendous crash. The new leaf split right the way across and a large candelabra went through the gaping hole onto the floor. Whereupon, the rest of the tablecloth from both sides was pulled in by the weight, and everybody’s glasses, coffee-cups and plates disappeared down it, leaving an empty table.

There was a stunned silence. Then, purple with rage, their Chairman, John Spencer Wills, looked across at our Chairman, John Davis, and said, “You not only won’t pay for our programmes, but you come here and smash up our furniture!”

At which, I leapt to my feet in defence and said, “This example of Rediffusion workmanship is why we won’t pay for your programmes.”

The post Turning under a new leaf appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.

From Fusion 41, the house magazine of Rediffusion, published at Christmas 1965

The board made the following £1,000 Golden Star Awards for outstanding creative contributions to the TV programmes of Rediffusion, London during the previous 12 months:

Basil Rootes and Freddie Slade jointly (they received £500 each) for their work on the sound recording for the documentary ‘The Grafters’ which dealt with street traders;

Cyril Coke for his work on ‘Crime and Punishment’ and the ‘Four of Hearts’ series;

Robert Kee for his script for the ‘Children of Revolution’ Intertel documentary about young people growing up in Czechoslovakia and for his script contributions to ‘This Week’;

Philippa Gail for her part in ‘Summertime Ends Tonight’, the last play in the ‘Four of Hearts’ series.

Each were presented with their cheque and their Golden Star trophy by chairman John Spencer Wills at the company’s annual meeting.

The Guild of Television Producers and Directors made their awards on November 11. Rediffusion, London received more than all the other ITV companies combined.

Craft Awards for production went to:

Peter Morley, outside broadcasts, for his work on ITV’s coverage of the State Funeral of Sir Winston Churchill and for his documentary ‘L.S.O. – the music men’;

Charles Squires, documentary, for his work on ‘The Grafters’ and ‘Paradise Street’;

Jeremy Issacs, factual, and the production team of ‘This Week’;

Cyril Coke, drama, for his work on ‘Crime and Punishment’, ‘The Rules of the Game’ and ‘Four of Hearts – Tilt’.

In addition the actress of the year, Gwen Watford, and the actor of the year, Alan Badel, had also worked on Rediffusion, London productions. Gwen Watford was in ‘Take Care of Madam’ and ‘The Rules of the Game’ while Alan Badel had appeared in ‘A Couple of Dry Martinis’.

(Joe McGrath who worked in graphic design some years ago won a Craft Award for light entertainment for his work on ‘Not Only… But Also’ and ‘The Big Noise’.)

The post Prize people appeared first on THIS IS REDIFFUSION from Transdiffusion.