Broadcast TECH PLAYOUT MAKING SECOND SCREEN PAY


With the second screen a hot topic, Steve Plunkett asks where is the value in it for broadcasters?


T he second


screen presents both chal- lenges and opportuni-


ties for broadcasters. The oppor- tunities stem from the many analyst reports that suggest view- ers are increasingly using a second screen while watching TV – smartphones, tablets and lap- tops are at hand, offering an extra piece of screen real estate to better engage the audience. But do they compete with or enhance the viewing experience?


‘The challenge is in deciding how best to use this new model’


The answer depends on what the broadcaster offers the viewer. Unlike most TVs today, these second screens are connected, personal and have sophisticated user interfaces. They provide a means to deliver levels of inter- action, personalisation and expe- rience that the TV set alone can- not. But when coupled with TV programming, the combination offers significant potential. Television content and the social behaviour it encourages can be enhanced through this partnership. Broadcasters can create a more direct relationship with the individual, keep them more engaged with their chan- nels or programmes and, in doing so, better measure and improve their offering.


www.broadcastnow.co.uk/techfacils The challenge is in deciding


how best to use this new model and how best to implement those ideas. Should it be used to support audience research, enhance pro- gramming, as a marketing vehicle, a monetisation tool or to increase and retain viewers? Depending upon the nature of the broadcaster and its content, it should probably apply to all those areas. But should it be applied at the channel or pro- gramme level? On flagship shows or across all programming? This is where the implementa- tion challenges come in. There are many technological choices available to couple the primary and second screen. These include different forms of content recog- nition such as audio watermark- ing, audio or video fingerprinting and IP-based synchronisation. Each brings different constraints in terms of cost, device support, reliability, latency and viewing type (live or on-demand). Scalability is a difficult chal-


lenge in terms of editorial and cre- ative effort and technology limita- tions, particularly as the number of programmes, the level of user interaction and the number of viewers increases. All this comes with associated costs that chal- lenge the commercial value and payback of a second-screen effort. The first step is to increase your


understanding about what the second screen can offer and how this might be applied to different areas of the business, and to begin to cost and measure the value it might return. Do this holistically across the various interest groups rather than in isolation, develop a strategy and experiment. ➤ Steve Plunkett is chief technology officer at Red Bee Media


POST-PRODUCTION AUTOMATION IS THE ANSWER


Lesley Marr says there’s only one way for post firms and others about to make money from metadata


rose-col- oured specs who remi- nisce about the ease and


I


simplicity of tape. Businesses like ITFC would receive a master tape and, depending on the final deliv- ery spec, duplicate it, edit it, trans- late it, standards convert it, restore it, up-res it or simply put it on the shelf in the library with a note of the title and duration, and leave it there until it was repeated or sold to another broadcaster. When we moved to the brave new world of file-based work- flows, the term ‘metadata’ entered our vocabularies and we duly started to categorise and record not only the tech spec but also the visual content of the material. Clients began to see the value in accessing clips, end credit infor- mation or break patterns. So far, so good, but as the demand for deep, meaningful, rich metadata continues to grow, what was once an appropriate level of informa- tion no longer cuts the mustard. The Digital Production Part- nership (DPP) is endeavouring to solve the problem by creating a common metadata standard for programme-makers delivering content to the major UK broad- casters. There is software to tell you if your files are DPP compli- ant and the inclusion of metadata during the creative process will be an essential element of every programme-maker’s workflow. This will combine to create a


path for maximum commercial opportunity for new content to be discovered by viewers on an ever increasing number of platforms.


t’s not just those with


This will be a wonderful for-


ward step, but how do we, as the service provider at the end of the chain, address the challenge of creating meaningful, rich and future-proofed metadata for existing materials? Programmes shot just a few years ago still have a long tail for monetisation, but how do you extract the gold from an archive when 90% of the value of a library is likely to come from 10% of the collection? The answer must come from


an increased level of automation. File-based metadata needs to be created as a background task using automated tools that only at


‘Appetite and cost benefit can’t be fulfilled without automation tools’


the final stage require finessing by metadata experts. We need to marry a client’s needs and reliance on our technical abilities with their budgets and timescales. The windows are shrinking, and the appetite and cost benefit for meta- data cannot be fulfilled without automation tools. Metadata isn’t going away; it


is getting more complex and we must continue to move forward to offer a level of service and expertise that is scalable and makes the best use of technical expertise. These tools won’t replace the human ability to interpret and recognise subtlety and nuance, but they will take us closer to the finish line. ➤ Lesley Marr is senior operations director at ITFC


September/October 2012 | Broadcast TECH | 15


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52