The aim of this book has been to consider the BBC's engagement with television in the early years as it moved from a primarily laboratory-based experiment to a regular public service. We may consider that television developments today move at a fast pace, and we may find it difficult to keep up with the pace of change. Yet, in reflecting on the 1920s and 1930s, we can observe that for a number of years seeing at distance was a pipe dream. Then, in 1926, it became a reality, albeit in laboratory conditions. Within ten years it had become a publicly-funded service in television studios, with a vast range of televisual output, demonstrating the potential to be a game-changer in communication. The pace of change was incredible, and that provides a useful context for thinking about the way in which the BBC perceived television and dealt with television as it evolved over the ten-year period and beyond.

If I had to highlight some of the key issues that stand out for me in the period I have considered, they would be: firstly, that the early years of television show that broadcasting was – and still is – bound up in politics, economics, culture, society. As the historian Asa Briggs once argued, trying to write broadcasting history is like trying to write the history of everything else. Secondly, we need to move away from the narrative that John Reith was the stumbling block in the development of television in Britain. He did have major concerns, but he also took the advice of his senior technical and engineering staff who, in his opinion, were better placed to pass judgement. We now know that Reith did engage with television and did watch television. We also know that he felt guilty about not offering more support to Gerald Cock as the first Director of Television. But we know that deep down, he still considered television to be a menace to society. Following on from this, we can perhaps understand the reluctance of the BBC not to fully embrace television at the outset. I have outlined the reasons and so shall not repeat them here, but they were numerous and were both internal and external to the BBC. Fourthly, was it inevitable that the BBC should be given the responsibility to develop a television service? I would say that it was.