Abstract
The Television Code is a critical history of regulation in the early days of commercial television in the United States. It is a strong intellectual contribution to debates about what television is and who it serves which will no doubt become a staple in reading lists of television history and regulation.
The book focuses on the period leading up to the introduction of the television Code, 1943 to 1952, providing a map of events, key players, and their clashes and negotiations. Along the way, Jaramillo develops a poignant argument about regulation and its ties to conflicting notions about the purpose of television, specifically linking the Code to an effort to naturalise television as a commercial entity. The book stands on careful archival work, interpreted through a combined approach of political economy and critical policy studies. Jaramillo cites Thomas Streeter and Jennifer Holt as inspirations for The Television Code’s ambition of combining history with legal frameworks that produce specific models of media ownership. This is an approach that serves the study particularly well since the document it explores is itself the product of combined forces: industry, government, audiences, regulation, production, commerce and culture. Though Jaramillo points out the significance of each of these forces, the study’s primary perspective is that of trade associations which, she argues, were the principal players in the Code’s development. This perspective allows Jaramillo to dislodge some common assumptions about the history of regulation, not just by bringing to light the details of the negotiations behind the Code’s introduction but also by revealing the influence of local rather than national agents in this history.
As the book’s analysis explores, the Code document was tangled with the many struggles involving the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), its latter incarnation as National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters (NARTB) and its short-lived rival, the Television Broadcasters Association (TBA). This emphasis shapes the book’s structure, with the first three chapters dedicated to framing the story with trade associations as protagonist: chapter one establishes the background of radio policies and their influence on the Code while also outlining some of the issues with distinguishing television as a medium within the NAB; chapter two outlines the struggles and reasons for the short lifespan of the TBA, linking it to the history of commercial television; and chapter three examines restrictions on content from the different perspective of the NBA and the TBA.
The remaining three chapters shift focus slightly to the other players in the Code’s history. Chapter four examines audience responses to television regulation and censorship while chapters five and six focus on government participation, first in the form of the Federal Communications Commission which Jaramillo presents as both regulator and mediator between the NAB and Congress, and then through Senator William Benton, a reformer who championed subscription and educational television and therefore posed a threat to the NAB’s aims to establish television as a commercial entity.
As Jaramillo puts it, the Code is a ‘fascinating yet dull’ document (p. 1). The Television Code is never dull but we sometimes glimpse a struggle between Jaramillo’s obvious enthusiasm for the topic and the perceived heftiness of regulation and legislation as a subject matter. This conflict is especially noticeable in the way the book’s topic is presented in the introduction. While Jaramillo clearly explains the Code, its period, and its key participants (as well as their many acronyms), this is done in separate sections interspersed with the intellectual framework of the book and its arguments, a decision which breaks up the exposition of the ‘dull’ parts of the topic but which also fragments Jaramillo’s framing of the book’s scholarship. This is not a problem in terms of asserting the study’s originality or significance, as these are evident throughout, but it could pose an early obstacle for readers less familiar with this side of television and media studies, since those unacquainted with the Code and its historical context might have benefitted from a more concise explanation of the document. Readers interested in the history of television but not familiar with the debates around regulation (legal, industrial, etc.), on the other hand, might have enjoyed a more clearly signposted case for the significance of these debates, particularly since, as Jaramillo points out, the struggles behind regulation are often a forgotten element in media histories.
This assumption of familiarity on the reader’s part is ultimately a minor complaint as it is clear that The Television Code’s detailed preoccupation with legislation and industry politics is likely to appeal most immediately to a niche readership, specifically those with an interest in general regulation and in the media politics of the 1940s and early 1950s in the United States. For these scholars and students, The Television Code is an essential book, stimulating from cover to cover. At the same time, however, censorship and the historical relationship between commerce and television are topics of wide interest, so The Television Code has plenty to offer to a larger readership. For those interested in regulation beyond the US context, there are insights here about the links between medium identity and regulation systems which should provide a useful theoretical framework as well as practical comparison points to other national contexts. For readers in different areas of television and media studies who are less familiar with the legal side of regulation, chapter four might be a good point of entry as it develops many of the book’s arguments by drawing on audience perspectives (particularly their calls for censorship) rather than on extensive industrial background. Overall, The Television Code is an engaging, well-written, and thought-provoking study on the key role played by regulation in the early negotiations about television’s identity.