1998

20.3

Michael Brown and Corley Dennison
Integrating Radio into the Home, 1923-1929

The story told by broadcast historians leaves no doubt about the tremendous growth of radio in the American home. In 1921 there were approximately 60,000 radio receivers serving an audience of 75,000, and by 1930 radio receivers were in 12,000,000 homes. Americans spent $60 million on radios in 1922 and nearly $850 million by 1929. Over 3.4 billion dollars were spent in eight years. In spite of this tremendous growth, broadcast historian George Douglas noted that the radio industry did not take the lead in promoting radio as a home appliance and concluded, "there is a certain sense in which we have to admit that the radio sold itself to the American public" (80).1

Certainly the radio set could not have "sold itself." The development of radio as a desirable and appropriate object for the home did not occur at the institutional level of the radio industry but at the popular level where the technology was used. In his study, "The Box on the Dresser," Shawn Moores reminds us that the introduction of radio into the home was not inevitable; radio was an "unruly guest" that developed into a good home companion after radio enthusiasts struggled to find an appropriate place for radio in the home. The technological displays that characterized the early radio sets were unsightly additions to the home, many times hidden in closets and cupboards, and represented the transition of radio from its traditional institutional use to broadcasting. Moores found that the introduction of radio into homes in Great Britain disturbed the interior space of the home, disrupted everyday life, and changed family relationships. He concluded that "Broadcasting’s position in the domestic sphere was not assured in advance—it had to be won" (39).2 As in Great Britain, there was no unified effort by the radio industry in the United States to set standards for using radio in the home. The aesthetic and social meaning of the radio receiver developed as those who brought it into the interior space of the home sought to overcome resistance. Once it was clear that people wanted radios in their homes, manufacturers began to use the emerging standards as a way to design and market radio sets specifically for home use.

In the United States there has been considerable attention paid to the introduction of broadcasting content into the American home. According to H. P. Davis, president of Westinghouse in the 1920s, content was a primary concern because radio provided a "latch key to nearly every home in the United States" (quoted in Czitrom 77). However, little research has explored the introduction of the radio receiver, a new and popular technological object, into the home. In the 1920s the radio receiver was evolving to meet the aesthetic and social needs of the home. As the radio became an important part of daily life, technological developments made the sets easier to use at home and aesthetic changes allowed the sets to appeal to different aesthetic tastes. This essay examines the development of early home radio receiving sets and their accessories as a way to identify the strategies that were used to promote the radio receiver as an appropriate object for the American home. Many of the early strategies were shared in popular magazines, such as House and Garden, Popular Mechanics, Radio Broadcast, and Radio News,3 as various individuals and articles offered advice about what to do with a radio receiver and how it could be successfully and satisfactorily integrated into the home. An examination of radio sets and their accessories and the discussions in popular magazines tells us how radio was successfully integrated into the home as a new and desirable object.

A general technological invasion into the home occurred during the 1920s. Hot water, washing machines, electricity, and a great number of small appliances were used increasingly in American homes.4 Radio receiving sets were among the many new technologies and, like other technologies, were changing the interior landscape of the home. Early radio receivers were both a technological and an aesthetic challenge. Most of the earliest radios were built by enthusiasts who purchased the parts and assembled the receivers themselves, and the earliest "consumer ready" radios required knowledge and skill to construct and operate. The 1923 Atwater Kent required the listener to purchase a breadboard—literally a board for slicing bread—and mount the audio components on the board with the technology openly exposed and visible. By 1924 the RCA "Radiola 20" enclosed the radio components out of sight in a plain rectangular box, but the listener was still required to hook up an array of accessories, including the headphones or a speaker, an antenna, and a number of batteries, all supplied by a booming accessory business. For example, the January 1925 issue of Radio Broadcast included 130 pages of advertising for radios and their accessories (compared to 89 pages of text). Accessories were an important part of the early use of radio. Most early radios were powered by three "B+" batteries, six general purpose batteries, and one "C" battery. The combination of batteries required approximately two square feet of space. If the batteries were not wired to the unit in a specific sequence, the tubes would burn out and expensive replacements would have to be purchased. Because battery replacement was expensive, many radio listeners used rechargeable "wet cell" batteries to power the early radios. These were the size of a small car battery and used sulfuric acid to generate a current. The batteries often left acid burns where they were placed and they occasionally needed additional acid. According to Zane Parsons, Curator of the Huntington Museum of Radio Technology in Huntington, West Virginia, the acid was marketed under the name "battery oil" to disguise its dangerous nature and make it easier to get past the resisting housewife and into the home.

An external antenna was needed to operate early receivers. The antenna, or "loop," was usually a wooden frame on a stand with wire coiled around it. The loop antenna was moved around the room until the best location and position for the antenna was found. Then the antenna wire was strung between the antenna and the radio. Most people simply placed the loop on top of the radio.

Listening to the early receivers required the use of headphones. Even with multiple headphone outputs, listening was limited to two or three family members. According to Zane Parsons, some announcers of the period, while reading news or important community messages, would pause in between paragraphs to give headphone listeners a chance to repeat the story to other members of the household. Attempts were made to amplify the sound. In one early experiment the headphones were placed in a zinc bucket with a large, rolled-up sheet of paper in the shape of a megaphone. This primitive speaker required family members to sit very close in order to hear the broadcasts. Early attempts to use the radio at home were less than satisfactory because the equipment was complicated, difficult to use, and unsightly.

Two accessories were developed that enhanced listening to broadcasts, the amplifier and the speaker. As early as 1923 RCA introduced the "Radiola" amplifier. The amplifier was attached to a headphone jack and a ceramic horn speaker; the signal from the headphone output activated a magnetic driver, amplifying the sound through a long ceramic horn. The volume was increased but the sound quality was poor. The horn speaker also had limited aesthetic possibilities because of its length and shape. Attempts were made to improve its appearance. An advertisement in Radio News (March 1925) for the Frank R. Porter Co. offered horn speakers in a variety of forms "combining beauty, tone and utility" (110), including speakers disguised as books (complete with solid brass bookends), floral vases, and lamps. Many accessory companies marketed the speaker as a functioning lamp so it "may be used to read by at all times during reception" (110). The natural shape of the horn made it easy to disguise as a lamp. According to a review of lamp speakers published in Radio Broadcast (May 1924), "the signals travel up through the cast shaft and are reflected by the parchment shade. This gives a very mellow reproduction of the received sound" (25). As long as the battery power remained strong, the horn speaker allowed the whole family to sit comfortably in the living room or parlor and conveniently listen to their favorite programs.

Other technological innovations increased radio’s desirability in the home. One development, first marketed in 1926 by the Motorola and Crosley companies, was the cone speaker, which used paper instead of the stiff horn driver of earlier speakers. It had improved volume and fidelity, provided a "mellower" sound, required less power to operate, and could easily be used with existing sets. The cone speaker was not limited by the shape of the horn, allowing audio engineers more flexibility in the design of speaker housings. The housings were offered in a variety of forms, including round, square, and many other shapes that were deemed attractive. Some housings had decorative cloth screenings and others had ornate wooden scrimshaw patterns that covered the speaker. The new cone speakers gave homeowners a variety of options when choosing a speaker model to fit the decor of their home.

Another important technological innovation was the AC powered radio, which began appearing around 1925. The use of AC (household electrical current) eliminated the need for batteries and the possibility of hooking up batteries incorrectly and burning out tubes or leaving acid burns on furniture and floors. AC made the receiver easier to use. As described in "Servants of Your Light Socket" (Radio Broadcast, October 1927), "The radio receiver powered directly from the light socket is like the automobile with a self-starter—pushing the button starts the machine" (356). In 1928 Kiel Radio marketed a radio that folded into a small table. It was a piece of fine furniture and was designed to operate exclusively on AC current. The designers wanted the radio to be unobtrusive so the AC cord was disguised inside one of the table legs, exposing only as much cord as was needed to reach the AC receptacle.

A popular accessory sold along with the AC radio was the "light socket radio switch." Although many homes were wired with electricity, there was often only one receptacle in a room. The radio switch, when screwed into a light bulb socket, provided an additional receptacle. It was shaped like a "Y," with one side of the switch serving as the light bulb socket and the other side as the electrical outlet. By the late 1920s, many housewives were listening to afternoon soap operas at home using "light socket radios."

Early technological developments made radio easier to use in the home, but the radio and its accessories still littered the room, interconnected by a trail of wires, creating an unattractive technological display that took up valuable space (see Figure 1). Golda Goldman, in Radio News (December 1926), described the display as "something which made the living room look like the garage just after the Ford has been taken apart" (634). Retailers, recognizing the importance of integrating the radio receiver into the home, attempted to demonstrate radio’s aesthetic possibilities. "Making Radio Attractive to Women," an article in Radio Broadcast in 1924 (February), described a unique radio store that was furnished like a parlor or drawing room. The radio receivers and their accessories were displayed as part of the room. The intent of the display was to demonstrate that radio and its components could be "harmonized with the furnishings of the room" (221). The room provided an aesthetic model so that prospective buyers, "especially women, do not have to draw entirely upon their imaginations" (221).

The evidence of the gender tension that occurred with radio’s introduction into the home can be found in many popular magazines of the 'twenties. The covers of several early issues of Radio News reflect this tension. The cover art of one issue depicts a newlywed couple in a hotel room; the groom is busy setting up his receiver while the bride sits crying on the bed (July 1926). Another cover depicts a woman with a loaf of bread confronting her husband; he has stolen her bread box to provide a housing for his radio (January 1927). Fiction articles, such as "Gentlemen Prefer Broadcasts" (Radio News, April 1927), suggested that radio was taking away valuable time that men would otherwise spend with their wives and girlfriends. "A Stormy P.M. at Alice’s" (Radio Broadcast, June 1923) described the "tempest" that occurred when a young man failed to call on his girlfriend for a week. "‘I just got a new radio see,’ I explained carefully. She nodded her head viciously. . . . But I went on patiently describing the weary hours I had spent tuning and experimenting—I tried to make it all sound very important. . . . I became aware that she was not sharing my jubilation" (112-113). The article "Radio Is Expensive for the Married Man" (Radio Broadcast, June 1923) described the amount of time required to construct and prepare a radio receiver and offered advice for dealing with a spouse: "Say something like this: ‘I’ve been thinking, my dear, that you really need a rest. I can’t get away myself, but how would a trip to California strike you?’ . . . [T]here are advantages about a trip to California for the wife which should not be overlooked—by the fan who wants a little time to himself" (204).

The work of constructing and operating early radio equipment had a distinctly male character and history. Prior to the rise of broadcasting, the use of radio was characterized by a level of training and technical sophistication. A good technological display and the knowledge to use it signified a radio operator’s place in the radio community, and amateur ham operators, commercial operators, and military operators were primarily male. As long as radio remained a technological apparatus used to connect various governmental and commercial interests, women were largely excluded even though there were a number of active amateur operators who were women. Broadcasting created a new group of fans who were interested simply in receiving the various broadcasts, and these people wanted to listen at home. The early attempts to listen at home required a family member with technical skill, usually male, and the early displays in the home retained much of the technological focus that characterized a predominantly male use.

Broadcasting was a new use of radio technology. For broadcasting to be successful, it was vital that the radio receiver be placed in the home. To do this the radio needed to appeal to women as well as men. Much of the initial discussion about successfully integrating radio receivers into the home concerned transforming the masculine technological display into an aesthetically pleasing form that appealed to women. An article in Radio Broadcast (October 1927) summarized the emerging dual appeal required of the modern radio receivers:

Often it is said that a radio receiver, to be fully appreciated by the feminine half of the domestic republic, must be encased in housings which are esthetically as well as technically satisfactory . . . women have had an increasing voice in the selection of the radio receiver. . . . Her ideas of the necessary limitations of her domestic decorative scheme should blend with her husband’s technical opinions (352).

The reason is that the lady of the house must be pleased first. She demands a certain piece of furniture that will harmonize with other furniture in the room. Hence radio sets are assuming more and more the look of a beautiful piece of furniture rather than keeping with the old orthodox idea of just a panel with a box and a lot of knobs, the whole to be put on any old table. (1373)

Golda Goldman’s article in Radio News, "The Place of Radio in Home Decoration," reminded readers that radio was no longer a "plaything, with which men of the family regale their leisure hours." Radio had become "a paramount factor in home decoration. This means that the ladies have decided the apparatus, which has become so definitely a part of their household equipment, must also be an attractive part of their furnishings" (634). As radio was becoming an integral part of the home, it needed to be coded, or given meaning, for both genders. The cabinet provided one way to do this. Women could participate in the emerging broadcasting culture by selecting the appropriate style of radio receiver for their home.

Identifying the metaphorical relationships that are used to talk about objects provides insights into their position in our culture. Furniture was the dominant metaphor used to talk about the radio receiver. A transition in the role of furniture in American homes was occurring in the 1920s as the function and formal social ceremony associated with particular rooms yielded to a more private, family-oriented use. The value of furniture as an object shifted from its traditional and formal function to its aesthetic quality. Appearance was becoming more important than use. The focus of furniture design was on the commodification of household interiors rather than continuity with previous use.

This changing role of furniture provided an opportunity for radio. The radio receiver could be commodified for the home as an attractive piece of furniture while providing the family with the technology to access broadcasting. Presenting radio sets as furniture dominated the development of home radios during the 1920s. "Decorating the Radio Room," published in House and Garden in 1923, was one of the earliest articles to review the use of a radio receiving set as furniture, stating that "So closely does the design of furniture follow the demand of the hour" (51). The article described a local furniture manufacturer who built specially designed desk cabinets for radios that suggested "new ideas" for the use of radio in the home. "With the new radio desk cabinets as a departure point it is not difficult to imagine a special radio room, developed in an attic wing, and furnished in a manner befitting its purpose . . . a room of masculine character" (51). The article presented a plan for decorating a radio room that was part of the home but separate from existing rooms. The radio room was similar to a traditional den. Radio was being given a permanent place in the home but was not yet completely and comfortably integrated into the main living areas. The transition into the home was just beginning.

Cabinets became the primary factor in radio’s physical appeal and were designed to be beautiful objects. In March 1925 House and Garden said the new cabinets were "distinguished in line and workmanship, designed especially to hold a receiving set," and appropriate for the living room, library, sun room, sitting room, and other rooms in the house. The cabinet, "in addition to solving the problem of where to put the radio, adds materially to the aspect of a room" (62). Radio Broadcast (October 1927) described modern radio sets as a collaboration of engineer, artist, and interior decorator, "successfully harmonizing technical receiver design with the decorative demands of the home" (351). In December 1927 Radio Broadcast claimed that beauty was the "keynote" of radio design and the industry had made "great strides . . . toward making radio a truly domestic bit of furniture" (111).

The diversity of technical and aesthetic options available in radio sets in the last half of the 1920s reflected the varied tastes of listeners. A pictorial that accompanied Radio News’ "ideal radio set contest" in March 1926 (1258) featured a sample of 12 radios that represented the vast diversity available. There were elaborate and simple designs in consoles and table models with single and multiple controls.

The first annual radio set directory, published by Radio News in March 1925, listed over 200 radios (1649). They ranged from simple crystal receivers like the "Concert Junior" that sold for $3.50 to the elaborate Zenith "Super 10" that sold for $550. The "Super 10" was housed in a console cabinet, included a built-in speaker, and was one of the first sets to use household AC current rather than batteries. Radio News published updates of the directory in October, November, and December 1925. Over 600 radios were listed in the updates and the Zenith models continued to be the most expensive. Zenith’s series of Spanish, Chinese, and Italian-design models were elaborate massive pieces of furniture that sold for $1200 to $2000 each. Radio Broadcast (February 1928) noted that much of the technology was the same in various models; the difference in cost was "due to the refinements of cabinet work" (302). One of the most massive all-in-one radio sets was the "Automatic Electrola-Radiola No. 955." The radio was an ornately carved lowboy that was 4 1/2 feet tall and 5 1/2 feet wide. It had a phonograph that automatically played and turned over 12 records. Radio Broadcast (December 1927) described it as "an 8-tube super-heterodyne with the enclosed loop operating entirely from the light socket through the power supply for the vacuum tube amplifier and the cone speaker used alike for phonograph and radio reproduction. . . . price, $1550" (113).

The more expensive sets were typically self-contained with no additional accessories needed, and the cabinet included a set of doors that completely hid the technology. When these radios were not in use there was no evidence of the technology, only an elaborate piece of furniture (see Figure 2). The radio cabinets were designed to be permanent display pieces. According to Radio Retailing (March 1928), the cost was justified because the receiver itself could be replaced with new equipment as the technology improved while the cabinet would remain a permanent part of the home. In addition to aesthetic qualities, the new cabinets offered a measure of stability for a rapidly changing technology. For those individuals who wished to create an attractive display at a reduced cost, there were smaller and less expensive self-contained radio sets. The smallest self-contained radios were slightly larger than a breadbox and cost about $100. Between 1925 and 1929 over 20 articles in Popular Mechanics and Industrial Education Magazine presented plans for building radio cabinets to resemble a variety of household furnishings, including benches, desks, chairs, dining tables, and period furniture. The articles also included suggestions for converting antique furniture into radio cabinets.

The varied radio set designs reflected the diversity of technical and aesthetic options available and revealed how the radio receiver was coded for a homeowner’s status. Broadcasting was a democratic medium. Anyone with a radio heard the same program regardless of the cost and technological sophistication of the receiver. There was nothing inherent in broadcasting that included or excluded certain classes of people except the presence of a radio receiver. The massive, elaborate radio sets allowed wealthy listeners to purchase a radio set that reflected their status. These sets required a lot of space, were very heavy, and required a stable and permanent place in the home. Owners of these sets shared a common technology, but their radios were housed in cabinets that set them apart and identified their status. These cabinets completely hid the receiver when closed. The technology was out of sight when it was not being used, easily blending into the elaborate Victorian parlors and living rooms of affluent listeners. The less affluent had small, simple sets that were attractive but were generally more mobile and less expensive. Their sets were never meant to be a central feature of a home. Instead they were meant to blend with simpler surroundings, reflecting the simpler tastes and the more modest economic status of their owners. The diversity of sets and styles available allowed homeowners to display their status through the choice of a radio receiver, and it afforded all levels of society the opportunity to bring radio into their homes.

As furniture, the radio fit comfortably into the aesthetic structure of the home without the disruption created by the earlier technological displays. The furniture metaphor became a powerful way for manufacturers to add an element of "style" that could be used to encourage listeners to update receivers, boosting the need for replacement sets. Furniture already had an established place in the home; it was familiar and belonged there. As furniture, the radio receiver could fit into the existing aesthetic and social structures of home life.

By 1930 the large, elaborate consoles began to disappear as the new "midget" or cathedral radios became popular and affordable. The new radio sets had single dial tuning with the speaker and antenna built into the unit, and they were powered by AC current. The accessory business had largely disappeared as self-contained units became common. In addition, by 1930 there was less desire to completely hide the radio because it had become an accepted and popular technology in the home. Some store displays were beginning to place new radios next to old ones to demonstrate the technological and aesthetic progress of modern radios. An article in the Canadian Magazine (September 1930) described the substantial aesthetic progress radio had made on its way to becoming a well-established piece of furniture: "‘Do you remember,’ a dealer asked me, ‘the plain boxes that passed as radio cabinets six or seven years ago. Imagine what people would think if they were asked to purchase such boxes now.’ But that was something I couldn’t imagine" (31). Associating radio sets with furniture created an important metaphorical relationship that was used to convince the listening public that the radio set was appropriate for the home. The metaphor provided familiar guidelines, eased some of the gender tension associated with the technology, and allowed the status of the household to be displayed.

Another significant metaphor that was used to frame the value of radio as a useful combination of technical competence and aesthetic worth was the automobile. Because the automobile was an example of a technology that had gone from a novelty to an integral part of people’s lives, it served as an effective metaphor for those who wished the same of radio receivers. The automobile had evolved from a rather unsightly technological marvel into a machine that characterized the successful blend of aesthetic form and technical function. Radio receivers were thought of in similar terms, and so the automobile served as an example of success that could be used to guide the development of radio receiving sets.

Radio had its common Ford "Lizzies" in the small, inexpensive sets like the Crosley "Pup" as well as its Rolls Royce in sets like Zenith’s "Chinese" model (Radio News, January 1926, 955). In March 1925 Hugo Gernsback, the editor of Radio News, told his readers that buying a radio set was like buying a car: "A Ford will take you practically the same distance as a Rolls Royce. In other words, the more you pay for a set, the more refinements and luxury you get" (1649). He believed the physical attributes of the early radios were like the early parts of the automobile. According to Gernsback in a July 1926 edition of the magazine:

[early radios were] in the same class as the old "exposed" auto with its dash cluttered by many highly-polished knobs, levers, etc. The use of such a machine was more for novelty and show than for practical utility. Now we jump in our auto . . . with scarcely a thought that we are being moved by mechanical mechanism. So our modern radio must be enclosed, foolproof . . . [and] bring us what we want to hear. (4)

Marketers found that the automobile served as an example of consumption based on style rather than technical competence. An article in Radio Broadcast (March 1929) discussed trends in cabinet design and claimed, "We seem to take for granted that all sets are alike in performance . . . beyond this it is almost entirely a question of cabinet design" (70). The development of radio cabinets was similar to the development of automobiles. The body of a modern automobile was "beautiful beyond the richest dreams of the old coach builders," and was perfectly adapted for its mechanical purpose. Radio was entitled to the same beauty and distinction of design by creating "types as different as the automobile" (70). The booming sale of radio sets during the 1920s led some to believe the market would become saturated and the sale of replacement receiving sets would drop, particularly as technological improvements slowed. Radio Broadcast (June 1929) said the remedy was to promote radio as a "style product": "The style factor has become the main reliance for maintaining turnover in the automobile market. . . . It is the pride appeal of modernity rather than real improvement in performance which stimulates the replacement trade of the automobile market" (72).

As the technical differences between radios became less pronounced, the automobile metaphor provided the radio industry with a way to promote and stimulate sales based on aesthetics rather than technical superiority. If the radio receiver could be promoted as a symbol of economic and social status like the automobile, the replacement of sets would become a matter of individual pride. The problem for radio was that "the pride appeal is much more difficult for the radio industry than for the automobile trade, because wear is not an aiding factor and the radio receiver does not advertise its owner’s financial status as effectively as does the automobile" (72).

By the end of the 1920s, style was an integral part of radio’s physical appeal, just as it was with other functioning aesthetic objects like furniture and the automobile. Together, the two dominant metaphors used to frame the popular understanding of radio sets—furniture and the automobile—provided Americans a way to think of the radio as an attractive, useful, and necessary technology that could be easily integrated into their daily lives.

Integrating the radio receiving set into the home was an important public concern during the mid-1920s for those people who wished to listen in the comfort of their own homes, and the radio cabinet offered an aesthetically pleasing object that would fit in the home. The early focus was on the technological, not the aesthetic, quality of the set. Public discussion of radio sets became more prevalent after it was clear that radio in the home was inevitable. By 1925 radio sets were more reliable, there were fewer unscrupulous dealers, and more attention was paid to the appearance of the set. The number of articles that discussed the aesthetic value of radio receivers increased dramatically beginning in 1925, indicating radios were no longer viewed as disruptive technological displays but as an integral part of the home. The number and variety of magazine articles also indicate that the early discussions about radio’s place in the home were spread across domestic culture, supporting George Douglas’s observation that the radio industry did not take the lead in developing an aesthetic strategy for home radio receivers. Instead the radio industry followed the suggestions that emerged from popular culture.

Because radio was an aural medium and had no inherent visual limitations, it could take on a vast number of material forms. The diversity of forms allowed it to be coded for both gender and status to satisfy a variety of aesthetic tastes, which in turn allowed radio to gain entry into homes at all levels of American culture. In addition, the varied aesthetic options created a way for advertisers to successfully sell radios at a time when the technology was no longer the primary concern. You could not hear a radio in an advertisement, but you could see it as an attractive addition to your home.
 
 

Michael Brown  Communication and Mass Media University of Wyoming  Laramie, WY 82071-3904

Corley Dennison III W. Page Pitt School of Journalism and Mass Comm Marshall University Huntington, WV 25755

1The information about radio history comes from Susan Smulyan, Selling Radio (Washington: Smithsonian Institution press, 1994); George Douglas, The Early Days of Radio Broadcasting (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., Inc., 1987); Susan Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987); Daniel Czitrom, Media and the American Mind (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982).

2Two articles directly addressed the radio as a physical object: Shawn Moores, "The Box on the Dresser," Media, Culture and Society 10 (1988), 23; and L. Page, "The Nature of the Broadcast Receiver and Its Market in the United States from 1922 to 1927," Journal of Broadcasting 14 (1960) 178.

3 The magazines of the 1920s were used by the emerging broadcast community to express and develop a shared interest in radio broadcasting. The radio magazines used for this study were found at Colorado State University. The CSU library was severely damaged by flooding in the spring of 1997, however, the majority of the radio magazine collection was undamaged. For a discussion of the significance of magazines in the development of broadcasting see Michael Brown, "Radio Magazines and the Development of Broadcasting: Radio Broadcast and Radio News, 1922-1930," Journal of Radio Studies 5 (February 1998).

4Ruth Cowan, "The ‘Industrial Revolution’ in the Home: Household Technology and Social Change in the Twentieth Century," Material Culture Studies in America, ed. T. Schlereth (Nashville: American Association for State and Local History, 1982).

5 J. Prown, "On the ‘Art’ in Artifact," Living in a Material World, ed. G. Pocius (St. Johns: University of Newfoundland Press, 1991).

6M. Gottdiener, Postmodern Semiotics: Material Culture and the Forms of Post Modern Life (Cambridge: Blackwell Publishing Co., 1995); and M. Ettema, "The Fashion System in American Furniture," Living in a Material World, ed. G. Pocius, (St. Johns: University of Newfoundland Press, 1991) 189.