|
THE
REVIEW OF
COMMUNICATION Sponsorship and Corporate Politicking in
the Early Years of Radio and Television
A. Cheree CarlsonWilliam L. Bird.
Better Living: Advertising, Media, and the New Vocabulary of
Business Leadership, 1935-1955.
Evanston, IL: Northwestern
University Press, 1999. 192 pages. $30.00. Today, it is a truism that corporate advertising
permeates the American entertainment industry. From the discrete
announcements leading into an episode of Masterpiece Theatre to
the electronic Nike swoosh that replaces the team logo on the face of a
televised scoreboard, we are constantly reminded that if it were not for
the kindness of major businesses, most entertainment programming would
not exist. What is less clear is the sub-text that reifies the economic
and political structure that makes such sponsorship possible: if it were
not for capitalism, after all, these businesses would not have the money
to fund such programming. Granted,
an episode of The Hallmark Hall of Fame probably never
single-handedly turned a viewer into a dedicated consumer, but sponsors
can dream, can’t they? The birth of that particular dream, and the
early years of its development, is the core story of William L. Bird’s
Better Living: Advertising, Media, and the New Vocabulary of Business
Leadership, 1935-1955. Bird’s narrative documents the long process by which business leaders finally came to accept sponsoring entertainment as a legitimate and effective means to their social, political, and economic ends. Instead of forming an attractive frame for advertisements, these programs served as persuasive appeals in themselves. Instead of a product, they sold a corporate image. Given the extremes of sponsorship the modern corporation will pursue today, it may come as a surprise to learn that corporate America had to be coaxed into joining forces with the radio and film industries by a cadre of dedicated advertising executives and public relations experts. The substance of their arguments is reproduced in the book, along with copious examples of the fruits of their labors, from Cavalcade of America to General Electric Theater. This story is related in a direct, matter-of-fact tone. Bird presents the events in a roughly chronological fashion, from the era of radio to the development of television. The descriptions of program content are detailed, and contextualized within the social goals of the industry sponsors. There are also a number of high quality illustrations to add interest to the overall account. The book is targeted toward the advertising and public relations aficionado. It is by no means a critical account. Even though Bird is detailing the use of entertainment as a form of political propaganda, he accepts, even celebrates, this form of “social leadership” without question. The focus instead is on the programming, and the determined advertising pioneers, such as Bruce Barton, who made it possible. Related issues, such as period politics and social mores, are mentioned but rarely discussed at any length. For example, Bird grounds his discussion of the 1930s by framing corporate radio programming as a negative reaction to Roosevelt’s New Deal policies. If the reader is not already familiar with 1930s politics, the relationship between Roosevelt’s rhetoric and the response is not as clear as it could be. But since textual analysis is clearly not the point here, the narrative does not suffer too much. Overall, Bird has created an interesting account
of the development of a popular venue for corporate image making.
It could also serve as a springboard for future media criticism.
The detailed discussion of programs, as well as a thorough bibliography,
makes it a valuable research tool for the critic seeking meaningful
texts for analysis. A. Cheree Carlson is Professor of Communication at Arizona State University, Tempe.
|