DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of the Federal Communications Commission

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role of the Federal Communications Commission THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, CONGRESS AND THE COURTS IN THE BATTLE BETWEEN COMMERCIAL BROADCASTERS AND CABLE TELEVISION OPERATORS: MUST-CARRY, THE DIGITAL TRANSITION AND BEYOND By DAVID JOSEPH DEELEY A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010 1 © 2010 David Joseph Deeley 2 To my parents, Thomas and Jo-Ann Deeley— Without your love, support and encouragement this would not have been possible. 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation caps a lengthy yet successful journey of rediscovery and would not have been possible without the patience, support and understanding of many people. The author would first like to acknowledge the guidance and direction provided by his advisor and dissertation chair, Dr. David H. Ostroff. He also expresses sincere thanks to his committee members: Dr. John W. Wright, Dr. Justin Brown and Professor Lyrissa Lidsky for their incredible patience and guidance over these many years. The author also wishes to offer is heartfelt thanks to his family and friends. This endeavor has proven more challenging than imagined and without the love and support of family, friends, classmates the successful completion of this dissertation would not have been possible. A final thanks to Dr. David Goff and my colleagues at the University of North Florida for their encouragement, understanding and support during the completion of this study. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4 ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 10 Purpose .................................................................................................................. 19 Literature Review .................................................................................................... 20 Broadcast and Cable History ............................................................................ 21 First Amendment .............................................................................................. 33 Public Interest ................................................................................................... 36 Must-Carry ........................................................................................................ 38 Research Questions ............................................................................................... 44 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 44 Primary Sources ............................................................................................... 45 Secondary Sources .......................................................................................... 45 Dissertation Outline................................................................................................. 46 2 THE BIRTH OF BROADCASTING ......................................................................... 48 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 48 Congress Cuts the Cord: The Early Regulation of Wireless ................................... 49 The Hoover Years: Conferences, Courts and ―Chaos‖ ........................................... 52 The First National Radio Conference (1922) .................................................... 54 The Second National Radio Conference (1923) ............................................... 55 The Third National Radio Conference (1924) ................................................... 57 The Fourth National Radio Conference (1925) ................................................. 58 The End of Hoover‘s Rule of Radio – Intercity Radio and Zenith ..................... 61 Congressional Regulation ....................................................................................... 63 The Radio Act of 1927 ...................................................................................... 64 The Communications Act of 1934 .................................................................... 66 Broadcasting with Pictures: The Technology of Television ..................................... 68 Reeling in Network Power ................................................................................ 68 Regulating the ‗Chain‘: NBC v. United States ................................................... 72 The Early Development of Television ............................................................... 75 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 82 3 BROADCASTING BLOSSOMS AND CABLE COMES OF AGE ............................ 84 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 84 Community Antenna Television (CATV) Fills the Broadcast Gap ........................... 86 Growing Pains: Cable Extends its Reach and Broadcasters Push Back ................ 89 5 The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) ............................................. 91 The National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) ..................... 92 Modeling the Broadcast/Cable Regulatory Process ......................................... 93 The FCC places Cable on the Road to Regulation ........................................... 95 1959 Report and Order..................................................................................... 96 Carroll Broadcasting v. FCC (1958) ................................................................. 99 Carter Mountain v. FCC (1963) ...................................................................... 100 The FCC Regulates Cable and Makes the Move to Must-Carry ........................... 101 FCC‘s First Report and Order ......................................................................... 102 FCC‘s Second Report and Order ................................................................... 106 U.S. v. Southwestern Cable Co. (1968).......................................................... 108 Fortnightly Corporation v. United Artists Television, Inc. (1968) ..................... 110 Cable‘s Slow Rise and Reinvention (1970-84) ...................................................... 111 Commission Proposals for Regulation of Cable Television (1971) ................. 112 Cable Television Report and Order (1972) ..................................................... 113 HBO, Satellites and Copyright ........................................................................ 115 Cable Act of 1984 ........................................................................................... 117 Must-Carry Goes to Court ..................................................................................... 119 Quincy Cable TV, Inc. v. FCC (1983) ............................................................. 120 FCC Report and Order (1986) ........................................................................ 122 Century Communications Corporation v. FCC (1987) .................................... 123 1992 Cable Act ............................................................................................... 124 Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 129 4 TURNER AND THE TEST OF TIME AND TECHNOLOGY .................................. 132 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 132 Must-Carry Becomes Law ..................................................................................... 134 Turner v. Federal Communications Commission (1997) ................................ 136 The Majority Plus Breyer ................................................................................ 138 Justice O‘Connor‘s Dissent ............................................................................ 140 Must-Carry and Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) ........................................... 143 The Digitalization of Broadcast Television ............................................................ 144 The Promise of DTV ....................................................................................... 145 Telecommunications Act of 1996 ................................................................... 147 DTV Implementation ....................................................................................... 147 Must-Carry Goes Digital ........................................................................................ 151 DTV Must-Carry Order ................................................................................... 152 Petitions for Reconsideration .......................................................................... 154 CATV and Public Television Reach Agreement ............................................. 156 The FCC‘s Digital Evolution .................................................................................. 159 The Martin Era (2005 – 2009) ........................................................................ 159 The Genachowski Era (2009 – Present)......................................................... 163
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Privalomo Skaitmeninės Televizijos Retransliavimo Elektroninių Ryšių Tinklais Teisinis Reguliavimas
    MYKOLO ROMERIO UNIVERSITETAS SOCIALINĖS INFORMATIKOS FAKULTETAS ELEKTRONINIO VERSLO KATEDRA DONATAS VITKUS Naujųjų technologijų teisė, NTTmns0-01 PRIVALOMO SKAITMENINĖS TELEVIZIJOS RETRANSLIAVIMO ELEKTRONINIŲ RYŠIŲ TINKLAIS TEISINIS REGULIAVIMAS Magistro baigiamasis darbas Darbo vadovas – Doc. dr. Darius Štitilis Vilnius, 2011 TURINYS ĮVADAS .............................................................................................................................................. 3 1 PRIVALOMO TELEVIZIJOS RETRANSLIAVIMO INSTITUTAS IR JO SVARBA ... 9 1.1 Televizijos techniniai aspektai ir rūšys ........................................................................ 9 1.2 Retransliavimo sąvokos identifikavimas .................................................................... 13 1.3 Privalomas paketas ir jo reikšmė ................................................................................ 15 2 PRIVALOMO SKAITMENINĖS TELEVIZIJOS RETRANSLIAVIMO TEISINIS REGULIAVIMAS ES ŠALYSE ..................................................................................................... 19 2.1 Bendrasis „must carry“ reguliavimas ES ................................................................... 19 2.2 Austrija ....................................................................................................................... 21 2.3 Vokietija ..................................................................................................................... 22 2.4 Jungtinė Karalystė .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Media Ownership Rules
    05-Sadler.qxd 2/3/2005 12:47 PM Page 101 5 MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES It is the purpose of this Act, among other things, to maintain control of the United States over all the channels of interstate and foreign radio transmission, and to provide for the use of such channels, but not the ownership thereof, by persons for limited periods of time, under licenses granted by Federal author- ity, and no such license shall be construed to create any right, beyond the terms, conditions, and periods of the license. —Section 301, Communications Act of 1934 he Communications Act of 1934 reestablished the point that the public airwaves were “scarce.” They were considered a limited and precious resource and T therefore would be subject to government rules and regulations. As the Supreme Court would state in 1943,“The radio spectrum simply is not large enough to accommodate everybody. There is a fixed natural limitation upon the number of stations that can operate without interfering with one another.”1 In reality, the airwaves are infinite, but the govern- ment has made a limited number of positions available for use. In the 1930s, the broadcast industry grew steadily, and the FCC had to grapple with the issue of broadcast station ownership. The FCC felt that a diversity of viewpoints on the airwaves served the public interest and was best achieved through diversity in station ownership. Therefore, to prevent individuals or companies from controlling too many broadcast stations in one area or across the country, the FCC eventually instituted ownership rules. These rules limit how many broadcast stations a person can own in a single market or nationwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction It was the first week of 1980. Twelve months before, the University of Colorado Interdisciplinary Telecommunications Program (ITP) had suspended me for letting my grade point average drop below a 3.0. The ITP had admitted me with a provision that my grade point aver- age not fall below a 3.0. If not for a 750 score on the Graduate Record Exam and solid references from my sales manager, some of my previ- ous customers, and the training manager of Belden Corporation, the electronic cable manufacturing company that employed me, my appli- cation in 1977 to enter graduate school in the ITP probably wouldn’t even have been accepted. I’d previously been a factory sales representative for Belden in New York City in the 1970s. My sales territory predominantly served the national headquarters offices of broadcasters ABC, NBC, and CBS, the national headquarters offices of cable television industry multi- ple system operators (MSOs) Teleprompter Corporation and Warner Cable Corporation, and the two local cable television systems on xxix xxx INTrodUCTION Manhattan Island, Manhattan Cable Company (owned by Time Life Corporation) and Teleprompter Manhattan Corporation (owned by Teleprompter Corporation). In November 1975, I originated and arranged a meeting between Belden’s Vice President of Marketing, Jack McCarthy, and the President of Teleprompter Corporation’s Cable-TV Division, William Bresnan, to discuss a partnership to deploy light-wave technology via fiber-optic glass strands in cable television. On July 9, 1976, the New York Times reported, “TV Begins to Use Fiber Technology,”1 and the Wall Street Journal reported, “Tele- prompter Adds Light-Wave System to Cable-TV Unit.”2 The cable television industry obtained rights to pole attachment in public right- of-way from the FCC in 1978.3 After a summer session and the fall term in 1978 my grade point average slipped below a 3.0 due to a statistics class.
    [Show full text]
  • Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage
    Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage Aaron Joseph Johnson Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Aaron Joseph Johnson All rights reserved ABSTRACT Jazz and Radio in the United States: Mediation, Genre, and Patronage Aaron Joseph Johnson This dissertation is a study of jazz on American radio. The dissertation's meta-subjects are mediation, classification, and patronage in the presentation of music via distribution channels capable of reaching widespread audiences. The dissertation also addresses questions of race in the representation of jazz on radio. A central claim of the dissertation is that a given direction in jazz radio programming reflects the ideological, aesthetic, and political imperatives of a given broadcasting entity. I further argue that this ideological deployment of jazz can appear as conservative or progressive programming philosophies, and that these tendencies reflect discursive struggles over the identity of jazz. The first chapter, "Jazz on Noncommercial Radio," describes in some detail the current (circa 2013) taxonomy of American jazz radio. The remaining chapters are case studies of different aspects of jazz radio in the United States. Chapter 2, "Jazz is on the Left End of the Dial," presents considerable detail to the way the music is positioned on specific noncommercial stations. Chapter 3, "Duke Ellington and Radio," uses Ellington's multifaceted radio career (1925-1953) as radio bandleader, radio celebrity, and celebrity DJ to examine the medium's shifting relationship with jazz and black American creative ambition.
    [Show full text]
  • Medicaid Member Handbook
    Healthy Blue Member Handbook: Integrated Health Services For Physical and Behavioral Health Services 844-521-6941 (TTY 711) myhealthybluela.com 1007662LAMMLHBL 02/21 Healthy Blue Member Handbook: Integrated Health Services For Physical and Behavioral Health Services 844-521-6941 (TTY 711) 10000 Perkins Rowe, Suite G-510 Baton Rouge, LA 70810 myhealthybluela.com Revised: February 10, 2021 1007662LAMENHBL 02/21 HEALTHY BLUE QUICK GUIDE Read this quick guide to find out about: How to see a doctor and get medicines Choosing a primary care provider (PCP) The difference between routine medical care and an emergency Important phone numbers Renewing your benefits Seeing the doctor With Healthy Blue, you get a primary care provider (PCP). Your PCP is the family doctor or provider you’ll go to for routine and urgent care. When you enrolled you were given a PCP. To find or change a PCP, physical or behavioral health provider: Visit us online at myhealthybluela.com. Create a secure account by clicking “Register.” You’ll need your member ID number. Once you create an account, you’ll be able to choose your PCP online. Call Member Services at 844-521-6941 (TTY 711) Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. To see the doctor, you can call his or her office directly and make an appointment. Don’t forget to bring your Healthy Blue member ID card with you. Medicines When you go to your PCP or another provider, you might get a prescription for medicine. You have pharmacy benefits as part of your Medicaid plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Children’s Television Programming Rules ) MB Docket No. 18-202 ) Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative ) MB Docket No. 17-105 To: The Commission COMMENTS OF LITTON ENTERTAINMENT LITTON ENTERTAINMENT James E. Dunstan Mobius Legal Group, PLLC P.O. Box 6104 Springfield, VA 22150 Telephone: (703) 851-2843 Counsel to Litton Entertainment Dated: September 24, 2018 SUMMARY The Children’s Television Act (“CTA”) has worked well for nearly 30 years. Adopted and implemented on a completely bipartisan basis, broadcasters and the FCC have met the goals set forth in the CTA to provide the youth of this country with substantial educational and information (“E/I”) content. While the media landscape may have changed since 1990, over-the- air (“OTA”) broadcasting remains the dominant platform for consuming media. Litton has created nearly 3,340 original half-hour E/I programs since the inception of the CTA, and now provides three hours each to ABC, CBS, NBC, CW, and Telemundo stations. Litton used the roadmap created by Congress and the FCC to use advertising and sponsorship dollars to underwrite the production costs of high quality E/I programs. Litton provides its programming to stations free of charge – offered in exchange for Litton being able to sell the advertising slots with the programming. All of the financial risk of producing the programming falls on Litton. Litton’s programming has garnered 50 Emmy nominations and 15 Emmy awards, 46 Parents’ Choice Awards, 108 Telly Awards, and a variety of other accolades. And Litton’s programming is being watched – 1.5 billion views in the last year.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast Television (1945, 1952) ………………………
    Transformative Choices: A Review of 70 Years of FCC Decisions Sherille Ismail FCC Staff Working Paper 1 Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 October, 2010 FCC Staff Working Papers are intended to stimulate discussion and critical comment within the FCC, as well as outside the agency, on issues that may affect communications policy. The analyses and conclusions set forth are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the FCC, other Commission staff members, or any Commissioner. Given the preliminary character of some titles, it is advisable to check with the authors before quoting or referencing these working papers in other publications. Recent titles are listed at the end of this paper and all titles are available on the FCC website at http://www.fcc.gov/papers/. Abstract This paper presents a historical review of a series of pivotal FCC decisions that helped shape today’s communications landscape. These decisions generally involve the appearance of a new technology, communications device, or service. In many cases, they involve spectrum allocation or usage. Policymakers no doubt will draw their own conclusions, and may even disagree, about the lessons to be learned from studying the past decisions. From an academic perspective, however, a review of these decisions offers an opportunity to examine a commonly-asserted view that U.S. regulatory policies — particularly in aviation, trucking, and telecommunications — underwent a major change in the 1970s, from protecting incumbents to promoting competition. The paper therefore examines whether that general view is reflected in FCC policies. It finds that there have been several successful efforts by the FCC, before and after the 1970s, to promote new entrants, especially in the markets for commercial radio, cable television, telephone equipment, and direct broadcast satellites.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the NORTHERN DISTRICT of ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION in RE: BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD ) Ma
    Case 2:12-cv-02532-RDP Document 263 Filed 11/25/14 Page 1 of 162 FILED 2014 Nov-25 PM 03:40 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION IN RE: BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD ) Master File No. 2:13-CV-20000-RDP ANTITRUST LITIGATION ) (MDL No. 2406) ) This document relates to: ) THE PROVIDER TRACK _________________________________________ ) Jerry L. Conway, D.C., ) CORRECTED CONSOLIDATED Corey Musselman, M.D., ) SECOND AMENDED PROVIDER The San Antonio Orthopaedic Group, L.L.P., ) COMPLAINT Orthopaedic Surgery Center of San ) Antonio, L.P., ) Charles H. Clark III, M.D., ) Crenshaw Community Hospital, ) Bullock County Hospital, ) Fairhope Cosmetic Dentistry and Fresh ) Breath Center, P.C., ) Sports and Ortho, P.C., ) Kathleen Cain, M.D., ) Northwest Florida Surgery Center, L.L.C., ) Wini Hamilton, D.C., ) North Jackson Pharmacy, Inc., ) Neuromonitoring Services of America, Inc. ) Cason T. Hund, D.M.D., ) ProRehab, P.C., ) Texas Physical Therapy Specialists, L.L.C., ) BreakThrough Physical Therapy, Inc., ) Dunn Physical Therapy, Inc., ) Gaspar Physical Therapy, P.C., ) Timothy H. Hendlin, D.C., ) Greater Brunswick Physical Therapy, P.A., ) Charles Barnwell, D.C., ) Brain and Spine, L.L.C., ) Heritage Medical Partners, L.L.C., ) Judith Kanzic, D.C., ) Brian Roadhouse, D.C., ) Julie McCormick, M.D., L.L.C., ) Harbir Makin, M.D., ) Saket K. Ambasht, M.D., ) John M. Nolte, M.D., ) Bauman Chiropractic Clinic of Northwest ) Florida, P.A., ) Joseph S. Ferezy, D.C. d/b/a Ferezy Clinic of ) Case 2:12-cv-02532-RDP Document 263 Filed 11/25/14 Page 2 of 162 Chiropractic and Neurology, ) Snowden Olwan Psychological Services, ) Ear, Nose & Throat Consultants and Hearing ) Services, P.L.C., ) and ) U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • LINEAR TV in the NON-LINEAR WORLD the Value of Linear
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Drexel Libraries E-Repository and Archives LINEAR TV IN THE NON-LINEAR WORLD The Value of Linear Scheduling Amidst the Proliferation of Non-Linear Platforms A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Carlo Angelo Mandala Hernandez in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Television Management March 2017 © Copyright 2017 Carlo Angelo Mandala Hernandez. All Rights Reserved. ii Acknowledgments I would like to acknowledge and express my appreciation for the individuals and groups who helped to make this thesis a possibility, and who encouraged me to get this done. To my thesis adviser Phil Salas and program director Albert Tedesco, thank you for your guidance and for all the good words. To all the participants in this thesis, Jeff Bader, Dan Harrison, Kelly Kahl, Andy Kubitz, and Dennis Goggin, thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience. Without you, this research study would lack substance or would not have materialized at all. I would also like to extend my appreciation to those who helped me to reach out to network executives and set up interview schedules: Nancy Robinson, Anthony Maglio, Omar Litton, Mary Clark, Tamara Sobel and Elle Berry Johnson. I would like to thank the following for their insights, comments and suggestions: Elizabeth Allan-Harrington, Preston Beckman, Yvette Buono, Eric Cardinal, Perry Casciato, Michelle DeVylder, Larry Epstein, Kevin Levy, Kimberly Luce, Jim
    [Show full text]
  • Television and the Cold War in the German Democratic Republic
    0/-*/&4637&: *ODPMMBCPSBUJPOXJUI6OHMVFJU XFIBWFTFUVQBTVSWFZ POMZUFORVFTUJPOT UP MFBSONPSFBCPVUIPXPQFOBDDFTTFCPPLTBSFEJTDPWFSFEBOEVTFE 8FSFBMMZWBMVFZPVSQBSUJDJQBUJPOQMFBTFUBLFQBSU $-*$,)&3& "OFMFDUSPOJDWFSTJPOPGUIJTCPPLJTGSFFMZBWBJMBCMF UIBOLTUP UIFTVQQPSUPGMJCSBSJFTXPSLJOHXJUI,OPXMFEHF6OMBUDIFE ,6JTBDPMMBCPSBUJWFJOJUJBUJWFEFTJHOFEUPNBLFIJHIRVBMJUZ CPPLT0QFO"DDFTTGPSUIFQVCMJDHPPE Revised Pages Envisioning Socialism Revised Pages Revised Pages Envisioning Socialism Television and the Cold War in the German Democratic Republic Heather L. Gumbert The University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor Revised Pages Copyright © by Heather L. Gumbert 2014 All rights reserved This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (be- yond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publisher. Published in the United States of America by The University of Michigan Press Manufactured in the United States of America c Printed on acid- free paper 2017 2016 2015 2014 5 4 3 2 A CIP catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 978– 0- 472– 11919– 6 (cloth : alk. paper) ISBN 978– 0- 472– 12002– 4 (e- book) Revised Pages For my parents Revised Pages Revised Pages Contents Acknowledgments ix Abbreviations xi Introduction 1 1 Cold War Signals: Television Technology in the GDR 14 2 Inventing Television Programming in the GDR 36 3 The Revolution Wasn’t Televised: Political Discipline Confronts Live Television in 1956 60 4 Mediating the Berlin Wall: Television in August 1961 81 5 Coercion and Consent in Television Broadcasting: The Consequences of August 1961 105 6 Reaching Consensus on Television 135 Conclusion 158 Notes 165 Bibliography 217 Index 231 Revised Pages Revised Pages Acknowledgments This work is the product of more years than I would like to admit.
    [Show full text]
  • The Technology of Television
    TheThe TechnologyTechnology ofof TelevisionTelevision Highlights, Timeline, and Where to Find More Information Summer 2003 THE FCC: SEVENTY-SIX TV TIMELINE YEARS OF WATCHING TV Paul Nipkow shows 1884 how to send From the Federal Radio images over wires. Commission’s issuance of the first television Campbell Swinton and 1907 license in 1928 to Boris Rosing suggest today’s transition using cathode ray tubes to digital tv, the to transmit images. Federal Vladimir Zworkin 1923 patents his iconscope - the camera tube many call the cornerstone of Communications modern tv—based on Swinton’s idea. Commission has been an integral player in the Charles Jenkins in the 1925 technology of television. U.S. and John Baird in England demonstrate the mechanical trans- One of the fundamental mission of pictures over wire circuits. technology standards that the FCC issued in Bell Telephone and the 1927 May 1941, which still Commerce Department stands today, is the conduct the 1st long NTSC standard for distance demonstration programming to be 525 of tv between New York and Washington, DC. lines per frame, 30 frames per second. Philo Farnsworth files 1927 a patent for the 1st complete electronic When this standard was and hue of red, green, and television system. first affirmed it was called Today the FCC continues to blue on the color chart. The Federal Radio 1928 “high-definition television” play a key role in defining the technology standards that must Commission issues the because it replaced 1st tv license (W3XK) be met as the United States programming being broadcast to Charles Jenkins. at 343 lines or less.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventing Television: Transnational Networks of Co-Operation and Rivalry, 1870-1936
    Inventing Television: Transnational Networks of Co-operation and Rivalry, 1870-1936 A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the faculty of Life Sciences 2011 Paul Marshall Table of contents List of figures .............................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 2 .............................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 3 .............................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 4 .............................................................................................................. 8 Chapter 5 .............................................................................................................. 8 Chapter 6 .............................................................................................................. 9 List of tables ................................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 1 .............................................................................................................. 9 Chapter 2 .............................................................................................................. 9 Chapter 6 .............................................................................................................. 9 Abstract ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]