{"title":"早期贝尔系统/独立关系","authors":"Richard Bellaver","doi":"10.1109/ISTAS.2001.937737","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Through years of teaching the history of the information and communication industry I have been confounded by what appears to be a specific reversal of attitude of AT and T in dealings with Independent Telephone Companies (Independents). I am referring to corporate policy between the years 1907 and 1913. Before Theodore Vail returned to AT and T in 1907, the corporation was regarded as a most predatory monopoly. Policy seemed to be buy or force the independents out of business and don't let them connect to AT and T interstate circuits. That policy was closely followed until the 1913 Kingsbury Commitment reversed it completely. Something happened to the company, or Vail, during this time period to cause a profound change in business focus. Did Vail have a non-predatory philosophy all along but lack authority to enforce it. Did religion impact his mindset or did some other profound experience help change his mind? Was it the pressure of the \"trust busters\" in Washington that forced the change? Or were the changes just a result of good business sense? I think J.P. Morgan really was the robber baron, and Vail was the white knight that set AT and T on the right path for the next 70 years.","PeriodicalId":394055,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings International Symposium on Technology and Society","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early Bell system/independents relationships\",\"authors\":\"Richard Bellaver\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISTAS.2001.937737\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Through years of teaching the history of the information and communication industry I have been confounded by what appears to be a specific reversal of attitude of AT and T in dealings with Independent Telephone Companies (Independents). I am referring to corporate policy between the years 1907 and 1913. Before Theodore Vail returned to AT and T in 1907, the corporation was regarded as a most predatory monopoly. Policy seemed to be buy or force the independents out of business and don't let them connect to AT and T interstate circuits. That policy was closely followed until the 1913 Kingsbury Commitment reversed it completely. Something happened to the company, or Vail, during this time period to cause a profound change in business focus. Did Vail have a non-predatory philosophy all along but lack authority to enforce it. Did religion impact his mindset or did some other profound experience help change his mind? Was it the pressure of the \\\"trust busters\\\" in Washington that forced the change? Or were the changes just a result of good business sense? I think J.P. Morgan really was the robber baron, and Vail was the white knight that set AT and T on the right path for the next 70 years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":394055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings International Symposium on Technology and Society\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings International Symposium on Technology and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS.2001.937737\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings International Symposium on Technology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS.2001.937737","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在教授信息和通信行业历史的多年中,我一直对AT和T在与独立电话公司(独立电话公司)打交道时态度的明显逆转感到困惑。我指的是1907年至1913年间的公司政策。在西奥多•韦尔(Theodore Vail)于1907年重返AT and T之前,该公司被认为是最具掠夺性的垄断企业。政策似乎是购买或迫使独立公司退出业务,不让他们连接AT和T州际电路。这一政策一直被严格执行,直到1913年金斯伯里承诺完全推翻了这一政策。在此期间,公司或Vail发生了一些事情,导致业务重点发生了深刻的变化。韦尔是否一直有一种非掠夺性的哲学,但缺乏执行它的权力?是宗教影响了他的心态,还是其他一些深刻的经历帮助他改变了想法?是来自华盛顿“反托拉斯者”的压力迫使他们做出了改变吗?或者这些变化仅仅是良好的商业意识的结果?我认为j·p·摩根确实是强盗大亨,而韦尔则是在接下来的70年里带领at&t走上正确道路的白衣骑士。
Through years of teaching the history of the information and communication industry I have been confounded by what appears to be a specific reversal of attitude of AT and T in dealings with Independent Telephone Companies (Independents). I am referring to corporate policy between the years 1907 and 1913. Before Theodore Vail returned to AT and T in 1907, the corporation was regarded as a most predatory monopoly. Policy seemed to be buy or force the independents out of business and don't let them connect to AT and T interstate circuits. That policy was closely followed until the 1913 Kingsbury Commitment reversed it completely. Something happened to the company, or Vail, during this time period to cause a profound change in business focus. Did Vail have a non-predatory philosophy all along but lack authority to enforce it. Did religion impact his mindset or did some other profound experience help change his mind? Was it the pressure of the "trust busters" in Washington that forced the change? Or were the changes just a result of good business sense? I think J.P. Morgan really was the robber baron, and Vail was the white knight that set AT and T on the right path for the next 70 years.