In the article " The Social Construction of Fluorescent Lighting " Weibe Bijker attempts to identify and demonstrate the roles of relevant social groups in the introduction of the fluorescent lamp as a technological artifact. The two main social groups emerge as ' The Mazda Companies (comprising of General Electric and Westinghouse) and the electricity producing central stations or (utilities). The Mazda companies' main goal was to sell lamps, where as the utilities' interests lay in the sale of electricity. The utilities pictured themselves as teachers of the public and thus an important goal, was to increase the public confidence in lighting technology. This was accomplished by promoting their own versions of various technologies in line with the new technological way of life.
The new electrical industry could only emerge in the few nations with advanced capitalist societies. General electric owned stocks in almost all European lamp-producing firms, giving them a global sphere of influence. All groups shared this capitalist technological culture. Technology in the U. S. represented a symbol--a fundamental part of modernism. It was everywhere, its impact beyond physical, challenging perceptions of the self and the world. Electrical technology became part of popular language, used in metaphors of power, for example, "the human dynamo" and "electrifying performance." Technologists possessed enormous power, and further advancement was seen as a good thing for everyone. This was a trait deeply imbedded in American culture, modernity was the American way of life, and the frames of the Mazda companies and utilities mirrored that culture.
Now I will try to briefly summarize the development of today's fluorescent light, outlining the emerging controversy between the two major social groups and its resolution with the social construction of a new technical artifact. In 1910, George Glaude, through a series of technical innovations, made the first neon gas lamps (neon tubes). These were a commercial success, particularly in outdoor lighting and advertising. When an atom is brought into a state of higher energy by collision with an electron, it becomes unstable, and while returning to its stable state, it emits light. The energy difference between the two states determines the light color--different gasses were used to produce different colors. These successes stimulated research for a daylight discharge lamp. The color of electric lighting had been of particular interest. Focus was placed upon fluorescent materials, specifically phosphorescence, which is fluorescence that continues for a while after the exciting external radiation has ceased. Fluorescent powder was used to coat neon tubes and create a wider spectrum of more distinctive colors. From 1936 it was possible to obtain white light from a single tube.
Before 1934, only scattered attention was given to the possibility of a fluorescent lamp, one problem being to find suitable phosphors. Once these were found, there was a marked improvement in the efficiency of the fluorescent mechanism. A pilot plant was installed, and in April of 1938, G. E. announced the commercial availability of the new, low-voltage fluorescent lamp. It was explicitly aimed at "tint lighting". It could provide brighter and deeper colors of a wider variety than was possible with incandescent lights. The utilities knowledge of these lamps was rather limited and based almost exclusively on information provided by the mazda companies. Within half a year of the introduction of tint lighting, another artifact emerged: the high-efficiency daylight fluorescent lamp. These lamps were created with a combination of phosphors that produced almost natural daylight. The utilities started to fear that the high efficiency of the fluorescent light might reduce their electricity sales, and therefore tried to keep the other artifact, the tint-lighting lamp, in the forefront. Long and detailed arguments were given to point out that the high-efficiency lamp really did not exist, but was mistaken for the fluorescent tinting lamp. The utilities were also worried that the application of fluorescent lighting would take up large parts of the distribution system, not enabling them to sell as much electricity as would otherwise been possible.
The Mazda Companies were also worried about the high-efficiency lamp, as its life capacity was not known. Therefore, the first sale could be the last. It is important also to recognize the general public as a relevant social group, as they were buying fluorescent lighting faster than it could be supplied, without any real advertising. Women, in particular, can be singled out, as acceptance of fluorescent lighting in the home would depend on the housewife.
So the stage is set. The two main groups had obvious problems with the new technology. During a conference referred to as "the Fluorescent Council of War," a third fluorescent light was designed. This lamp was supposed to give light of daylight color with hitherto uncommonly high-intensity. The high-intensity daylight lamp came into being. It did not physically exist, but it solved the controversy between the two main groups. It was decided that use of fluorescent lamps for general lighting would not be emphasized until this new socially-constructed artifact came into being. Fear of loss of revenue, rather than a desire to help customers, prompted the construction of a new and less efficient form of lighting. The fluorescent light was developed in the midst of power games, whose closure resulted in the construction of the specific artifact that we have today, which is the high-intensity fluorescent lamp.