I take exception to your statement that "it seems lost on me." I think that's too condescending. :-(
It wasn't my intention to be condescending, but the impression I got from what you wrote was that you didn't really comprehend just how much Ruth had to have going for her to program in New York City, much less have that be her first programming job and how well-educated and prepared in programming theory she was from three years of working as Todd's assistant.
Mentoring and networking will only get you so far. You have to deliver once you have the gig. And Ruth Meyer was one of the greatest Top 40 PDs ever.
Rollye James says that female copywriters and female music librarians were fairly common in those days. Rollye describes them as being "chick jobs." ( Her own words on tape). But Rollye also says that female program directors were virtually unheard of, back in those days. ( mid to late 1950's).
She's right about that last part, and that's why she had Ruth Meyer on her show (which I've heard).
But the "chick job" remark isn't Rollye downplaying the importance of the job---it's a frustration (which she and I discussed once at a common friend's wedding) that Alene McKinney and Tess Russell were never promoted from MD to PD at KMPC, or Rosalie Trombley at CKLW, or Carol Archer or Rollye herself at KFRC (Rollye succeeded Carol), or Betty Brenneman or Shaune McNamara at KHJ. And she's right there, too.
Every one of those women would have made a stellar Program Director and should have had those jobs.
So it was not easy for Ruth Meyer. If you are telling me that it was easy for women to get jobs in broadcasting in the 50's - 60's, all you had to do was be brilliant, then I disagree.
Daryl, our entire interaction on this topic has been about my regard for these women (some of whom I've had the honor of meeting and a couple of whom I have the great fortune of being friends with) and their abilities. Something that seemed necessary after I listed most of the women above as examples of women with major-market MD jobs a couple of weeks ago and you responded with this:
I'm sure you're right, but KMPC was hugely successful and would have no need to hire Alene McKinney ( unless she was attractive and was a girlfriend of someone in management).
So, if I've been a little over-zealous in emphasizing the abilities, talent and credentials of those women, I come by it honestly.
You work in broadcast journalism, and you're very particular about detailed minutiae. That's a great quality to have in journalism. But we're not doing journalism here. We're just chatting back and forth, sometimes about our impressions and opinions. This board is more subjective, because it's more like social conversation.
This board is used as source material for students of broadcasting, for journalists writing about the field and for filmmakers trying to re-create eras. Several of us here, myself included, answered questions and provided archival material for Quentin Tarantino's company when they were in pre-production research on "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" (a good portion of the soundtrack is from airchecks of KHJ and there was a scene shot with an actor playing Humble Harve that wound up on the cutting room floor).
They found us through this site.
There is at least one documentary currently being filmed about AM radio that some of us here have provided research and interviews for. One of the first things we did was suggest the writer/producer read this board.
So, when someone posts something in error, we correct the error. David and Frank and several dozen other contributors here are as committed to accuracy on this board as I am. That's been part of what happens here for more than 20 years. If my corrections or additions are a bit more detailed than others, it's because I look them up and confirm what's real versus what someone wrote wrong the first time years before.
Nonetheless, you are on many threads, sternly correcting people who don't show the proper command of minutiae honed to military precision.
For example, if someone says that Grant Hudson must have been between age 24-27 at such and such a time, then you correct them. NO - he was between age 27-29, because of the news open theme at CKLW at the time. (Good grief. - Isn't this a first world problem? The news open 60 years ago at CKLW?
Well, lesseee here....Radio 128, replying to the CKLW newscast I posted, said:
Grant Hudson was a lot younger than he sounded. Research shows he passed away in 2021 at the age of 76. I didn't see the date of this aircheck but I'm guessing 1973-75 so he would have been in the 27-29 age range.
----------------------------------------
My reply:
"There's no date on the aircheck, but that news open was used from 1969-72, so he'd have been a bit younger---24-27."
I provided information Radio 128 noted was missing, and that not only supported but enhanced his point that Grant Hudson was a lot younger than he sounded. That wasn't a stern correction, it was an agreement.
For example, if someone opines that Bill Drake might have wanted to hide the news by scheduling it at 20 - 20, you say NO. because here is detailed proof of something Drake said about RKO news at least half a century ago.
Here's what Tomas Estefan said:
Just my guess but I've always assumed that the 20-20 news idea was a way of "hiding the news". Most stations back in the day had news at the top of the hour just after the legal ID, or at :55 until the legal ID. It served as a method of drawing listeners away from everybody else. KNX and KFWB used the inverse of the concept when BOTH stations scheduled sports at :15 and :45 so that if you didn't want or need a sports update at that time you wouldn't bother to push the other stations button or preset because you're still going to have to sit through 2 minutes of sports news.
-----------------------------------
And here's what I actually said:
Top and bottom of the hour was traditional. In L.A., Chuck Blore was the first to try alternate news times, with a newscast at :55 and a news feature called "L.A. Today" at :15.
KRLA, which went Top 40 a year later, chose to avoid clutter by putting one big nine-minute newscast on at :50 that would run to a countdown to the ID at :59.
So when Bill Drake launched KHJ, he had to choose. In San Diego, at KGB, which he consulted, the newscasts were at :15 and :45---which would overlap KFWB's :15 and part of KRLA's :50. Not optimal. Top and bottom destroys the staging of the legal ID at the top and bottom of the hour.
So he went with :20 and :40 (though the :20s were very infrequent---and usually in morning drive only). KHJ would be in a newscast from :40 to :50 and anyone tuning out would run into a newscast on KRLA immediately and on KFWB five minutes later. Meantime, KHJ would often be in a music sweep all the way to :06.
By the way, Drake would not have considered "hiding" a newscast. While he wasn't a fan of being forced to do news, he's quoted as saying "If we have to do news---it's gonna be the best news." And the RKO Top 40 stations had tremendous news organizations.
-------------------------------
Worth noting---Tomas Estefan "liked" my reply and the conversation continued for several rounds about the news staffs at KHJ and KRLA, drawing David in, who brought up CKLW's approach to news, which led to my posting an aircheck for those who'd never heard it and....we're back to Radio 128.