Yesterday I took part in a pub quiz where one of the questions (really it was the answer) did not seem believable.It maybe trivia but, I spent this this morning researching it and thought I's share the result
The question: What event in the UK was the first where the TV audience exceeded the Radio audience?
The answer: The coronation of Queen Elizabeth II
.bmp)
This "fact" is on several websites all with the same figures. Which makes me think there is a single source, which is always questionable.
The given wisdom is, that 20-million people watch it on TV and only 10-million listened on the radio (wireless).
The breakdown for the TV figure is 7.8-million watched it in their own home. 10.4-million watched it in other peoples homes and a further 1.5-million watched it in cinemas, halls and pubs. (19.7-million)
The BBC estimates that there were 2-million TV sets in the UK. Manufacturer figures show there were 2.957-million sets. By the end of 1935 BBC estimates there were 3.1-million set.
The population was 51-million so 21-million (40%) didn't watch or listen (according to the figures above) to this once in a lifetime national/patriotic event? It was a public holiday so what were they doing?
An estimated 3-million lined the streets. so down to 18-million unaccounted for.
.bmp)
Some town halls and churches had TV sets with around 30 people watching. (from the photos I can find) . It would have been difficult to have more as the screen size was so small (around 14") plus you had to sit relatively close as the image lacked contrast and definition. As can be seen from the picture in the church below. The people at the back were effectively listening to radio, or am I biased.
.bmp)
Apparently neighbours went into each others house to watch TV.
.bmp)
You also had to be relatively well off to own a TV. These people have even got books on a shelf! A TV would cost over £100 which was more than 12 time the average weekly wage and 40 times the most common weekly wage. So most working class people couldn't afford TV.
In 1953 there were only 4 transmitters Alexander Palace (London), Sutton Coldfield (Birmingham), Holm Mose (Manchester), Kirk O'Shotts (Edinburgh and Glasgow) and Wenvo (Cardiff and Bristol) these had the potential for 11-million homes.
Many villages and even houses in large towns didn't have electricity. They couldn't power a TV. they would get batteries recharged regularly (usually a swap out of the discharged battery for a charged battery) regularly to power their radios.
The TV coverage was undoubtedly a great success as by the end of 1953 their were 3.2-million sets. I started out to disprove the TV audience size based on a lack of infrastructure but, all the other infrastructure was in place to make the TV audience the size claimed.
The question: What event in the UK was the first where the TV audience exceeded the Radio audience?
The answer: The coronation of Queen Elizabeth II
This "fact" is on several websites all with the same figures. Which makes me think there is a single source, which is always questionable.
The given wisdom is, that 20-million people watch it on TV and only 10-million listened on the radio (wireless).
The breakdown for the TV figure is 7.8-million watched it in their own home. 10.4-million watched it in other peoples homes and a further 1.5-million watched it in cinemas, halls and pubs. (19.7-million)
The case against
The BBC estimates that there were 2-million TV sets in the UK. Manufacturer figures show there were 2.957-million sets. By the end of 1935 BBC estimates there were 3.1-million set.
The population was 51-million so 21-million (40%) didn't watch or listen (according to the figures above) to this once in a lifetime national/patriotic event? It was a public holiday so what were they doing?
An estimated 3-million lined the streets. so down to 18-million unaccounted for.
Some town halls and churches had TV sets with around 30 people watching. (from the photos I can find) . It would have been difficult to have more as the screen size was so small (around 14") plus you had to sit relatively close as the image lacked contrast and definition. As can be seen from the picture in the church below. The people at the back were effectively listening to radio, or am I biased.
Apparently neighbours went into each others house to watch TV.
.bmp) |
| I think this photo is not just posed but is a fake. The image on the screen is two contrasty, is at the wrong angle and given that this was taken with a flash and the curved nature of the screen there would have been at least one reflection. Finally the TV sets looks post WWII and maybe even American. |
You also had to be relatively well off to own a TV. These people have even got books on a shelf! A TV would cost over £100 which was more than 12 time the average weekly wage and 40 times the most common weekly wage. So most working class people couldn't afford TV.
In 1953 there were only 4 transmitters Alexander Palace (London), Sutton Coldfield (Birmingham), Holm Mose (Manchester), Kirk O'Shotts (Edinburgh and Glasgow) and Wenvo (Cardiff and Bristol) these had the potential for 11-million homes.
Many villages and even houses in large towns didn't have electricity. They couldn't power a TV. they would get batteries recharged regularly (usually a swap out of the discharged battery for a charged battery) regularly to power their radios.
The TV coverage was undoubtedly a great success as by the end of 1953 their were 3.2-million sets. I started out to disprove the TV audience size based on a lack of infrastructure but, all the other infrastructure was in place to make the TV audience the size claimed.
No comments:
Post a Comment