Session: 1234567891011121314151617         Page 676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706 of 755

As far as programming is concerned, I'm not sure that I can point to any great advances made on the basis of the technology. It could be there and I don't know about it.

Why?

Certainly if you're searching for information as a writer for a script and you want to relate China, let's say, and Kissinger, you can go to a computer system and punch those two things in and get all the references very quickly that you would spend days getting if you went to the library and started looking through the old card catalog. Whether the scripts are any better as a result--they should be but I'm not sure that they are.

In the programming side itself the technology has made an enormous amount of difference in the way material is delivered and the way it's stored. The content still depends upon the individual, and I don't think there's been that kind of a change in terms of content that there has been in terms of delivery.

The morgue, for example, that we had at CBS--and may still have, I don't know--but if you wanted to get all of the pictures of [Dwight D.] Eisenhower and [Omar] Bradley, for example, you can call on it very quickly and if you're doing a broadcast that night you can get that stuff out of the morgue. Twenty years ago you'd start going through it and if somebody remembered an occasion when they had pictures of the two of them that would be helpful, but you had no way of pulling them out of the file very quickly. Now that's all improved.

But in terms of increasing the predictive value of market research, would you still say that it has the same limitations it did in the beginning?