The Development of Two-Way Cable Television: Applications for the Community

  • Mitchell L. Moss
Part of the Nato Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 6)


Public uses of cable television have been one of the most widely-heralded applications of new communications technologies. Yet the promise of cable television, as a service delivery mechanism, has far exceeded its performance. In part, this is due to the regulatory environment which, until recently, has inhibited the growth of cable systems in the United States. In addition, the allocation of responsibility for developing public uses of cable television has not been considered as an explicit function of either public officials, citizens groups, or cable operators.


Public Service Public Official Senior Citizen Food Stamp Cable System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Les Brown, “Cable TV, After Lagging for Four Years, is on the Move Again in Area,” New York Times, October 24, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. Douglas Davis, “Let’s Hear It for the Cable,” Newsweek, November 21, 1977.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Peg Kay, Social Services and Cable TV (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, NSF/RA- 760161, July, 1976).Google Scholar
  4. Richard D. Bingham, The Adoption of Innovation by Local Government (Massachusetts: Lexington Books, D.C. Heath and Company, 1976).Google Scholar
  5. Irwin Feller, “Diffusion Milieus as a Focus of Research on Innovation in the Public Sector,” Policy Sciences, vol. 8, no. 1, (March 1977).Google Scholar
  6. David J. Roessner, “Incentives to Innovate in Public and Private Organizations: Implications for Public Policy,” in Admini stration and Society (Forthcoming, 1977).Google Scholar
  7. Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations (New York: The Free Press, 1962).Google Scholar
  8. Lloyd A. Rowe and William B. Boise, “Organizational Innovation: Current Research and Evolving Concepts,” Public Administration Review, vol. no. 3, (May/June, 1974).Google Scholar
  9. 4.
    George W. Downs, Jr. and Lawrence. B. Möhr, “Conceptual Issues in the Study of Innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 4, (1976).Google Scholar
  10. The Urban Institute, ed.. The Struggle to Bring Technology to Cities (Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1971).Google Scholar
  11. Gerald Zaltman, Robert Duncan, and Jonny Holbek, eds.. Innovations and Organizations (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1973.Google Scholar
  12. Robert K. Yin, Karen A. Heald, Mary E. Vogel, Patricia D. Fleischaver, and Bruce C. Viadeck, A Review of Case Studies of Technological Innovations in State and Local Services (Santa Monica: California: The Rand Corporation, R-I8TO-NSF, February 1976).Google Scholar
  13. 5.
    Robert L. Bish and Robert Warren, “Scale and Monopoly Problems in Urban Government Services,” Urban Affairs Quarterly, vol. 8 (September 1972).Google Scholar
  14. Robert L. Bish and Vincent Ostrom, Understanding Urban Government (Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1973).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mitchell L. Moss
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Public AdministrationNew York UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations