The dilemma about which the author writes is the lack of self-definition on the part of television and the fragmenting influences of government, Madison Avenue, the public and the critics which prevent resolution of that dilemma. Contradictory forces are now, however, the sole properly of the medium: Mr. Yale Roe, an executive of the American Broadcasting Company, the worst offender of all, has a couple going for him all the time. He brush as the critics off by pointing to the divergence of opinion among them and uses Robert W. Sarnaff as an authority. He discusses the deep rooted American fear of censorship but skirts sponsor control entirely. He proposes a stringent ethical code which would preclude the presentation of ""entertainment, that debilitates basic family and social ties of respect, authority and regard"". Roe would have all this, one gathers, and significant drama too...Or would the story of Job really be forbidden network fruit? He railles to the defense of all that is holy and American by contending that television is ""an economic enterprise...intricately a part of the capitalistic system"". At the same time there is at least some recognition that the station licensees are squatting on public domain. Part of Yale Roe's radical solution to the situation in which television finds itself is the formation of an Executive Committee consisting of station executives. This group would function in the area of ""general guidance"". What, pray tell, are the executives doing now? The author is too much the diplomat to resolve anybody's dilemma.