100 years ago, on January 26, 1926, Scottish engineer John Logie Baird gave the first public demonstration of a working, mechanical television transmission system.
It was the first demonstration of television that we know was practically viable. It took a few more decades for TV to become mainstream, but Baird is generally considered a pioneer in the field. A century later, as we mark this milestone, we asked Annenberg experts about how the medium has evolved over the last century.
Elizabeth Ware Packard Professor at the Annenberg School for Communication and Director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, examined the ways television influenced politics in her 1988 book Eloquence in an Electronic Age: The Transformation of Political Speechmaking, which won the National Communication Association’s 1989 Winans-Wichelns Award. In it, she wrote: "Politicians view exposure on television as a testament to their accomplishments and a warning to their potential opponents.
Since drama is to television what honey is to bears, skilled dramatists find themselves on network news more often than skilled speakers who lack dramatic flair. And since television will at most abstract a clip, why bother building a carefully crafted case to a convincing conclusion?
Because television is a visual medium whose natural grammar is associative, a person adept at visualizing claims in dramatic capsules will be able to use television to short-circuit the audience’s demand that those claims be dignified with evidence. …
The limited amount of time available for network news coverage has exacerbated a second negative tendency in political discourse. While hyperbole has always been with us, until recently nothing in the system has invited it as a norm. Now 435 members of the House and 100 members of the Senate compete for the crumbs of network time left after the president has gotten his share. By dramatizing, kernalizing, and shouting wolf, they bid against each other for that time. In the process, complex ideas are transformed into parodies of their former selves and the capacity of language to express outrage is exhausted."
Professor Emeritus of Communication Joseph Turow's work lies at the intersection of marketing, digital media, and society. His writings explore the power dynamics that shape cultural materials (e.g. ads, supermarket aisles, voice assistants) through which people learn about the world. In this video, he reflects on the history of cable television.
Professor of Communication at the Annenberg School for Communication. He studies media and cultural change in postcolonial and diasporic contexts, with a focus on media industries and institutions, formations of audiences and publics, and cultural identity and politics. He also directs the Center for Advanced Research in Global Communication (CARGC).
“Over the past century, television has evolved from a contested technological experiment into a defining medium of modernity. Early television - whether conceived as an extension of the telephone, radio, or cinema - struggled with fundamental questions about its identity and audience. Yet this very instability proved generative.
The medium's trajectory over the past century also reveals how local contexts shape global technologies. While Western broadcasting histories often emphasize state-sponsored and commercial models, the emergence of television indifferent contexts reveals how the medium accommodates diverse visions of modernization, public culture, and national identity. Across the world, developmental broadcasting gave way to vibrant multi-channel ecosystems that reshaped public and private spheres in distinctly postcolonial ways.
Today, television exists in a fundamentally different landscape - distributed across multiple devices, screens, and platforms.
Rather than treating earlier forms as obsolete, we have come to recognize how televisual logics, aesthetics, and practices persist within contemporary media cultures - from informal video circulation and local cable channels to documentaries and TikTok reels - our digital world is a televisual one.
As we mark television's centennial, the medium's history suggests not linear progress but ongoing negotiations between technology, culture, and imagination - negotiations that continue shaping how we experience the world.”
Associate Professor at the Annenberg School for Communication. Her work integrates critical theories of the public sphere, race, media, and social movements. She is also co-director of the Media, Inequality & Change Center, which explores the intersections between media, democracy, technology, policy, and social justice. In 2020, she was awarded an Andrew Carnegie Fellowship to support her forthcoming book, A Second Sight (Mariner 2026), which traces the power and innovation of African American mediamakers. She is currently a member at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.
“Over the past century, the portrayal of race on television has evolved from rigid stereotypes and near-total exclusion to more complex, though still contested, representations. Early broadcast television largely erased Black voices, reflecting both the racial politics of ownership—white-controlled networks—and regulatory structures that reinforced segregationist norms. The Civil Rights era brought incremental change, with shows like Julia and Roots challenging dominant narratives, yet these breakthroughs unfolded within an industry still governed by gatekeepers who limited the range of stories told.
By the late 20th century, cable expansion, upstart networks, and advocacy for diversity opened space for more nuanced portrayals, but ownership remained concentrated, and racialized labor hierarchies persisted behind the scenes. Television featuring Asian Americans and Latinos remained the exception even as African Americans gained some traction in the industry. Today, digital platforms have disrupted traditional models, enabling creators of color to bypass legacy institutions and speak directly to audiences. Yet this shift introduces new challenges: algorithmic bias, platform monetization, and the precariousness of independent production.
Across these transformations, representation has never been just about who appears on screen—it is inseparable from questions of power: who owns the means of production, who sets the rules, and how economic and technological structures shape racial inclusion. Television’s racial politics remain dynamic, revealing both progress and enduring inequities.”
Research Associate and lecturer at the Annenberg School for Communication. His teaching and research interests center on the history of communication research, social media and identity, and scholarly communication. Pooley co-edits History of Media Studies and History of Social Science, and is co-founder and co-lead of MediArXiv, the open archive for media and communication studies.
“Television is dead. Long live television! One hundred years after the medium’s stillborn birth, and 70 years after TVs became a fixture in American family rooms, the big broadcast networks are in sharp decline.
So-called “linear” television—defined by a fixed schedule, real-time viewing, and huge audiences—is basically down to big-time sports. Families no loner gather around their electronic hearth. Watching is now a private activity, with AirPods and an iPhone. Television—linear television—is dead.
Yet, as The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson recently noted, everything is television. In the wake of TikTok’s 2018 capture of youth attention around the world, we are still watching lots of TV—produced programs, yes, but also a flood of short-form video. Even the podcast, born as an audio format, is now just as often “cast” in video. So-called “social” media like Facebook and Instagram are no longer about keeping up with friends as much as they are Reels-delivery platforms. Some of that video, even on dedicated app like Sora, is generated by AI.
The old TV experience was famously described by British cultural studies scholar Raymond Williams as “flow”—a programmed flow, as it was. Today it’s an algorithmic flow, propelled by scrolling and up-next recommendations. We are still watching TV—still watching ads—but now we are on our own.”
Research Director of the Annenberg Extended Reality Lab Katerina Girginova focuses on global media, audiences, and technologies. Her work has been published in journals like the International Journal of Communication, Social Media+Society, Digital Creativity, and Communication & Sport. In this video, she reflects on the history and future of sports broadcasting.
C. Edwin Baker Professor of Media Policy and Political Economy at the Annenberg School for Communication, where he co-directs the Media, Inequality & Change (MIC) Center. His work is particularly concerned about the future of journalism and the role of media in a democratic society.
"Many had high hopes that American television could help educate, promote peace, and bring global societies together. However, much of television's democratic potential was compromised early on by extreme commercialism, creating what Federal Communications Commission Newt Minow termed a "vast wasteland."
Like radio before it, the medium was dominated by several media corporations focused on producing low-cost, low-quality programming that aimed to reach large audiences to generate profits from excessive advertising.”
