5 ms·

Mystery of BBC radio's first broadcasts revealed 100 years on

63 points by iam-TJ 4y ago

iam-TJ 4y ago
Interesting little-known fact: "The BBC that began broadcasting at 6pm on 14 November 1922 was not the British Broadcasting Corporation of today. It was in fact the British Broadcasting Company and was made up of separate stations around the country operated by different companies."
- 2b3a51 4y ago
  Yes, that era is fascinating. In my understanding of the complex history of wireless/radio G Marconi's own business model was point to point communication disrupting the telegraph companies with the new and remarkable feature of being able to communicate with ships at sea. Remember that Marconi was Italian-Irish and his mum happened to be a millionairess with access to the highest levels of the British establishment (this is all 1900s, so before the Irish Free State). So immense investment in long wave point to point transmission by spark transmitters turning over to thermionic valves in 1920s or so. Broadcasting was a sideshow for him but was central to the electronics startup scene in the US and UK. You go from homemade components in the immediate post war period to manufactured radios and then to consolidated electronics combines in about 15 years. The early period was full of mavericks and slightly quixotic people. Later into the 30s you get the David Sarnoff's and consolidation.
hunglee2 4y ago
Has there been a more powerful vehicle for projection of 'soft power' than the BBC? 100 years of programming, pulsing out the British perspective for a world that was hungry for new sources of media. Leaked documents from the CISA recently revealed operations to shape the 'cognitive infrastructure', by planting agents into moderation and product roles in online platforms - they have nothing on Brits, who have been showing the US how it is done for decades
- themikesanto 4y ago
  Leaked documents from the CISA recently revealed operations to shape the 'cognitive infrastructure' Source?
- nolongerbanntd 4y ago
  I get what you're saying, but I'm thinking that from such a global perspective, it's more accurate to focus on the whole of English language and culture; rather than on the government institutions from places which take it as a 1st language. This way it's possible to realize that it's a later version of what Latin once was, and even french got to be for a bit. It's the state-of-the art in natural language expressiveness. It has a uncommon relation to writing (literal) that is somehow different from most other oral-first languages. It's the language of trade (of commerce, of merchants), and it has an "ergonomic" (so to say) way to allow expressing complex thoughts. I still wish to better understand what is it about english orally (spoken) and english literally (written) that's somehow different from other cultures|languages. It is almost certainly one of the easiest languages to learn as a 2nd (i.e. not 1st) language; and I mean this is a GOOD THING.
  - lazide 4y ago
    I think you’re likely reversing cause and effect - English is so widespread because the English ruled over the majority of the world for quite awhile. When you speak the language or starve for generations , the language has to be pretty bad to lose it’s power. Notably, the same was true for Latin for a very long time. Pax Romana and all.
- imdsm 4y ago
  We're just a small island nation. Nobody needs to concern themselves with us. They have nothing to fear. What could we do? We're so small.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- someotherperson 4y ago
Supernaut 4y ago
Should the title not read, "BBC marks centenary of its first radio broadcast"? Other entities had been broadcasting for many years before the BBC's services began.
- iam-TJ 4y ago
  The title came from the BBC News front-page link to the article that I copy-pasted since the article's own title is so vague! See the current (2022-11-15) Features and Analysis sub-section at https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment_and_arts https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment_and_arts Being as the article is on the BBC I suppose they expect the context to be understood :)
  - teh_klev 4y ago
    The article's own title isn't that vague and fits well enough with the content, i.e. what is traditionally thought of as the first BBC broadcast may well have been preceded by broadcasts from the north of England.
    - iam-TJ 4y ago
      Yes, I agree having revisited it! I'm almost sure it was much more wordy when it was first published which was why I used the shorter headline. I've changed the submission title to the article title "Mystery of BBC radio's first broadcasts revealed 100 years on".
- teh_klev 4y ago
  And this is why editorialising the title is discouraged, and especially so in this case because the article isn't really directly about that.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- james-bcn 4y ago
  I don't think this is correct. The Marconi Company started broadcasting a couple of years earlier, but I don't know of any others. The BBC was one of the first, and I certainly don't think that there had been any "broadcasting for many years before".
helsinkiandrew 4y ago
Some interesting background about the start of the BBC here: https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/2lo-calling-birth-british-public-radio https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/2lo-cal...
rmason 4y ago
I regard it as a blessing that gives me some perspective remembering a time before both the Internet and cell phones. But my late father remembered a time before radio. He was four when WWJ launched in Detroit. But when he was six a second station WJR came on the air and his father brought home a radio. It was a source of endless fascination to the entire family whether they were listening to their beloved Detroit Tigers, a concert or the news. Before radio there was no concept of news in real time. People had both a morning and an evening newspaper if they were news junkies. But radio could broadcast news as it happened. Then there was television. My father was leaving a sales call in Ann Arbor and spied a crowd gathered around a storefront. As he got closer there was a TV in the window and there were the Detroit Tigers playing the Milwaukee Brewers. He told me it was radio with pictures. He couldn't afford a television but when I was born a few years later they went out and purchased a TV so that I could grow up with it just like they grew up with radio. Just like the Internet they had such high hopes for the medium, more high brow than radio but it wasn't to be.

63 points by iam-TJ 4y ago

Interesting little-known fact: "The BBC that began broadcasting at 6pm on 14 November 1922 was not the British Broadcasting Corporation of today. It was in fact the British Broadcasting Company and was made up of separate stations around the country operated by different companies."

2b3a51 4y ago
Yes, that era is fascinating. In my understanding of the complex history of wireless/radio G Marconi's own business model was point to point communication disrupting the telegraph companies with the new and remarkable feature of being able to communicate with ships at sea. Remember that Marconi was Italian-Irish and his mum happened to be a millionairess with access to the highest levels of the British establishment (this is all 1900s, so before the Irish Free State). So immense investment in long wave point to point transmission by spark transmitters turning over to thermionic valves in 1920s or so. Broadcasting was a sideshow for him but was central to the electronics startup scene in the US and UK. You go from homemade components in the immediate post war period to manufactured radios and then to consolidated electronics combines in about 15 years. The early period was full of mavericks and slightly quixotic people. Later into the 30s you get the David Sarnoff's and consolidation.

hunglee2 4y ago

Has there been a more powerful vehicle for projection of 'soft power' than the BBC? 100 years of programming, pulsing out the British perspective for a world that was hungry for new sources of media. Leaked documents from the CISA recently revealed operations to shape the 'cognitive infrastructure', by planting agents into moderation and product roles in online platforms - they have nothing on Brits, who have been showing the US how it is done for decades

themikesanto 4y ago
Leaked documents from the CISA recently revealed operations to shape the 'cognitive infrastructure' Source?
nolongerbanntd 4y ago
I get what you're saying, but I'm thinking that from such a global perspective, it's more accurate to focus on the whole of English language and culture; rather than on the government institutions from places which take it as a 1st language. This way it's possible to realize that it's a later version of what Latin once was, and even french got to be for a bit. It's the state-of-the art in natural language expressiveness. It has a uncommon relation to writing (literal) that is somehow different from most other oral-first languages. It's the language of trade (of commerce, of merchants), and it has an "ergonomic" (so to say) way to allow expressing complex thoughts. I still wish to better understand what is it about english orally (spoken) and english literally (written) that's somehow different from other cultures|languages. It is almost certainly one of the easiest languages to learn as a 2nd (i.e. not 1st) language; and I mean this is a GOOD THING.
- lazide 4y ago
  I think you’re likely reversing cause and effect - English is so widespread because the English ruled over the majority of the world for quite awhile. When you speak the language or starve for generations , the language has to be pretty bad to lose it’s power. Notably, the same was true for Latin for a very long time. Pax Romana and all.
imdsm 4y ago
We're just a small island nation. Nobody needs to concern themselves with us. They have nothing to fear. What could we do? We're so small.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
someotherperson 4y ago

Supernaut 4y ago

Should the title not read, "BBC marks centenary of its first radio broadcast"? Other entities had been broadcasting for many years before the BBC's services began.

iam-TJ 4y ago
The title came from the BBC News front-page link to the article that I copy-pasted since the article's own title is so vague! See the current (2022-11-15) Features and Analysis sub-section at https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment_and_arts https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment_and_arts Being as the article is on the BBC I suppose they expect the context to be understood :)
- teh_klev 4y ago
  The article's own title isn't that vague and fits well enough with the content, i.e. what is traditionally thought of as the first BBC broadcast may well have been preceded by broadcasts from the north of England.
  - iam-TJ 4y ago
    Yes, I agree having revisited it! I'm almost sure it was much more wordy when it was first published which was why I used the shorter headline. I've changed the submission title to the article title "Mystery of BBC radio's first broadcasts revealed 100 years on".
teh_klev 4y ago
And this is why editorialising the title is discouraged, and especially so in this case because the article isn't really directly about that.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
james-bcn 4y ago
I don't think this is correct. The Marconi Company started broadcasting a couple of years earlier, but I don't know of any others. The BBC was one of the first, and I certainly don't think that there had been any "broadcasting for many years before".

helsinkiandrew 4y ago

Some interesting background about the start of the BBC here: https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/2lo-calling-birth-british-public-radio https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/2lo-cal...

rmason 4y ago

I regard it as a blessing that gives me some perspective remembering a time before both the Internet and cell phones. But my late father remembered a time before radio. He was four when WWJ launched in Detroit. But when he was six a second station WJR came on the air and his father brought home a radio. It was a source of endless fascination to the entire family whether they were listening to their beloved Detroit Tigers, a concert or the news. Before radio there was no concept of news in real time. People had both a morning and an evening newspaper if they were news junkies. But radio could broadcast news as it happened. Then there was television. My father was leaving a sales call in Ann Arbor and spied a crowd gathered around a storefront. As he got closer there was a TV in the window and there were the Detroit Tigers playing the Milwaukee Brewers. He told me it was radio with pictures. He couldn't afford a television but when I was born a few years later they went out and purchased a TV so that I could grow up with it just like they grew up with radio. Just like the Internet they had such high hopes for the medium, more high brow than radio but it wasn't to be.