Tag Archive for 'broadcast'

05
May

We need to stop calling the internet - the internet

By Joshua Nard 0 Comments
Categories: Internet, New Media and advertising

We internet as we knew it, is dead.  The idea of sending bytes of data back and forth for what it was originally intended for, has passed.  Today it has evolved into many different forms.  The definition of what it was, metaphysically, no longer applies.  We certainly don’t say “answer the television” when we get a phone call.  Although some congressmen insist on juvenilely describing it as “pipes,” today it could be described as dynamic channels with networking crossover.  While it’s potential form is still shaking out, it continues to evolve before anything is truly established.

Although it appears unformulated, there really is no confusion as to what it is.  What is familiar within the web as we view it, is various forms of television, radio, telephone and print.  As much as we want to spin the once-formerly-known-as-internet as a new model, it is still very much the same in micro blocks of content through associations that we are easily familiar with.  While youtube and video podcasts appear on the surface to be a craze considered a by some as a revolution, it is still very much television with more channels than your cable tv.  It is a viable medium.  Both advertisers and futurists have struggled for a long while to figure out what the net is to consumers and how it can be formulated into a diplomatic sentence.  In reality, it is nothing more than another channel for us to view or communicate.  A communication tool that is very much apart of the average consumers lives.  It’s television. It’s radio. It’s a telephone.  It’s a newspaper.  Therein lies the identity to advertisers today.  Whether it is Nielsen ratings or CPM’s, advertising is very much a viable driving force for monetary support for content providers.  It’s important that advertisers understand.  Advertising is just as powerful online as it is in traditional media.  Some studies suggest it’s even more captive online - but that’s for another blog entry.

As much as we have improved and attempted to re-invent a “car of the future,” it still has four wheels, an engine and a steering wheel very much akin to the Model-T.  We still call it a car.  Just like a car, whether on a back road or super highway, we, as consumers still drive it.

28
Apr

Some broadcasters still don’t get streaming media.

By Joshua Nard 2 Comments
Categories: Broadcast, Internet, News and Streaming Media

Local news in Chicago is a very competitive environment.  With the promotional clamor to be one step ahead of the other, especially in superior picture quality, you would think broadcasters would understand the importance of streaming media on the internet.  Unfortunately, I still wonder if they really do.  With some video screens either smaller than youtube sizes, pushed to the side of visibility, or in some cases, difficult to find all together.  Other broadcasting sites have a full screen mode, but the frame rate has been lowered to where it causes discomfort or nausea in less than a minute.  Nearly all the sites read more akin to a newspaper site than a television station.  Only one station appears to get it:  ABC 7 Chicago.  Interestingly, they also happen to be the number one station in Chicago as well.  The site is laid out with video at the forefront and center of the homepage, large and easy to navigate.  They also have a great zoom feature that scales the video to a larger size and dims the rest of the page for easier viewing.  Something happens during the viewing: You actually feel like you are experiencing the television news on your computer.  Although the video has compression artifacts, which is expected in today’s high bandwidth costs, the compression is manageable to where you can read the titles to the on-air graphics and map details that are a struggle to read on smaller screens.  There is a greater user experience that draws viewers in - and even more important - does not frustrate your existing viewers who have certain expectations.  Especially when many viewers are so accustomed to full screen video on television as it has been for decades.  It is important to understand what your product is and it’s relation to your consumers and maintain it at all costs.  When you visit a newspaper site, you expect them to have current articles for reading.  When you turn to a television channel, you expect your news in a full screen video format.  Your association to any other associated product, in any form, should be as close to that product as possible.  When you can hardly find even a video stream without clicking a link, or the video is too small as in the case of some affiliates, you won’t find an audience either.  (Disclaimer:  author was a former employee of CBS 2 Chicago)

17
Apr

Will networked distribution break capsulized media?

By Joshua Nard 0 Comments
Categories: Broadcast, Internet and New Media

There is a convergence in media today that happening but has not quite taken a polished form.  You might have heard about internet citizen journalism growing in popularity.  The problem is that these streams can be easily lost in the endless world of RSS feeds within the internet.  Consumers have to know where to look in order to find the media.  Podcasts for example, which use RSS feeds are great but again, you need to subscribe to the feed in order to get updates.  If I could imagine the greater use of the future internet is the ability to move within clouds of data with user voted page ranks and trusted source ranking.  Have I lost you?  Let’s imagine there is a breaking news story where a fire breaks out at a nearby factory.  The media breaks the story with a reporter on the way to the scene.  Meanwhile, a person near the scene begins a streaming video from their cell phone with a cloud tag of: breaking news, factory, fire, Chicago, north-side, Broadway & Addison, Date, Time.  The media could immediately be alerted to the stream and start feeding the source.  A bulletin would be broadcasted: is this a trusted source? - with a page rank alerting the status of user submissions.  News media uses phone call-ins frequently for this but a connection needs to happen between the two parties.  Another video stream opens covering the scene with a higher trusted rank and now you can have more coverage.  While you’re listening to the broadcast, you click on the history of the factory with articles on prior news that extends to that area’s neighborhood history.  The user has more control of how much or how little they want to learn.

Let’s takes that same concept and apply to a network where an aspiring journalist or even a concerned citizen records their own account, and after editing the media could submit it to multiple feeds within the internet and broadcast channels for them to review and publish in parallel.  If the network decides not to broadcast it, you still have he option to float to the other media articles for more information.  All of this comes from recent media management software that opens the accessibility of information.  Although the big networks may at first shy away, the need to stay competitive in today’s market may lead to this adoption.  The benefit for the larger networks is that they could also get a higher visibility from the smaller social media as well.

When I worked in broadcast news, we had thousands of archived news stories on tapes with a database to source that information.  Now with new media management tools and a tapeless workflow, there is greater access to a larger network of media for better information.  The next step is opening that access further into the internet pool of relevant, user submitted experiences for greater insight into our world.  A tapeless world is just the first step.  Capsulized media is on the brink of non-existence, as we once experience it.  When we get there will be determined by both the consumer and the networks.

This is just one example of the de-regulation of media and can even apply to consumer generated advertising and social consumer shopping as well.  It’s going to be an interesting future when you stand back and look at the larger picture.  Will the larger players sit back and wait for it to happen without their support or will they embrace it with open standards?  Let’s hope for everyone involved, it makes for a greater knowledge and user experiences.

11
Apr

Has Broadcast growth lost to the Internet?

By Joshua Nard 1 Comment
Categories: Broadcast, Internet and New Media

For ten years, I have devoted my career to the profession of content creation in television and new media.  New media, to clarify how I am defining it, is spot media on a non-traditional network of remote public displays: digital signage, DCNs (Digital Content Networks) or kiosk displays are terms thrown around today.  Today, I am looking for the next big opportunity in my career after a recent merger regrettably did not come together as promised.  This recent opportunity has allowed me to create Flash interactive media for clients.  Seven years ago when I was freelancing and 56K modems were king, I worked on a few HTML projects with limited flash components.  Although there was endless opportunity for dynamic content, the lack of default browser adoption and limited internet transmission held the industry back.  Recent broadband adoption has enabled the viability of the medium.  Not surpisingly, the job boards are full of senior creative jobs that require internet knowledge.  It is an exciting time for dynamic media and the industry in general.  It’s been seven years, and it’s quite possible my job hunting search term skills may be lacking.  What is surprising is the minute or absolutely vacant postings for art or creative directors with broadcast/spot production skills.  I am beginning to wonder after three months if the internet is not just the growing trend, but the only developing norm.  Has broadcast as we know it has reached an industry growth plateau or is it just a temporary flux?  It’s far to early to tell, after all my search has only covered the last three months of the Chicago market.  I have done my best to kept my career experience open to a more holistic approach to media, from broadcast production, new media and interactive.  I believe spot production, telling a good compelling story, is very relevant even in today’s dynamic and streaming media.   I am enthusiastic as I re-engage myself back into dynamic, interactive content or broadcast.  I am just a bit surprised, perhaps befuddled, and even a bit concerned, at the early thought that there is potentially a growth omission in a medium that has ruled the industry for decades.  My hope is that both mediums, that are not too far akin in my belief, will continue to be healthy and show growth in parallel.  I guess we can only wait and see.

08
Apr

Is NAB becoming NABT? (Not Applicable Beyond Today)

By Joshua Nard 0 Comments
Categories: Broadcast, Internet and New Media

I’ve been going to NAB for years now.  I started attending in 1998 just before my graduation to start networking as a junior artist.  Much has advanced over the years, especially eliminating the need to bus between the Sands and the unexpanded LVCC.  For many years NAB has been the place to attend for Broadcasting.   You can spend four days and still not see everything, something I don’t recommend.  I swear I’m an inch shorter after two days and have never been into sensory overload on slot machines.  Regardless, I have usually taken something away that was interesting.  Although NAB will continue to serve the broadcast medium for years to come, I found myself disappointed with the convention speaker engagements last year.  There was a clear disregard and lack of recognition in new media including podcast and streaming media.  I was baffled by the ridiculous display of egotism by a NAB lawyer during a keynote presented by Sling Media CEO Blake Krikorian.  After years of never having to fight for technology dominance in media delivery (i.e. a viewing screen), now more than ever, broadcasters are losing viewers that are turning to laptops and cell phones for content.  NAB should be using their clout, while they still have it, to position themselves as the door front to the revolution that is happening now.  Think about it this way, which came first: the Apple, or the AppleTV?  I find myself disappointed about today’s announcements that the focus, once again, will be about DTV.  Last time I checked, I have two HDTVs in my house, one that I’ve had for five years.  I just can’t seem to justify flying out to NAB this year as much as I would like.  The senior members of NAB should be working endlessly on positioning the television as the center piece of the living room for the foreseeable future.  The committee should be harvesting the current, unconventional media platforms.  Why?  Advertising funds every show produced.  As consumer interest continues to grow rapidly into new media, there may come a time when the balance shifts to a computer.    Consumers are using computers today to surf the internet, play games, send email, video chat, view family photos and video, watch youtube and get news from around the world - oh yeah, and they can even view OTA and unencrypted QAM stuff too (with the proper equipment).  Television, by itself as most people use it provides cable, OTA and satellite programming.  So where is the future going?  Will the future of the living room look like today’s current setup of a computer table and television or will the TV get the boot?  What will happen when consumers realize they are enjoying their favorite youtube and podcasts more than the television?  NAB appears to bloster that the future will be HD.  HD is already here.  The future is appears to be more about convergence.  I see nothing in today’s press release that positions NAB as the leader of innovation, a role it has had in the past.  I believe that standards are necessary for obvious reasons, so long as they don’t cloud one’s openness to new ideas.  It was the idea that life could be transmitted and projected onto phosphors, beyond the radio standard, in the first place that created the industry as it is today.  That same openness allowed color frequency to be piggybacked onto the B&W signal so people could watch MASH and Johnny in technicolor.   No one knows the future.  Here’s what I do know:  Growing up, we bought a B&W television on the dinner table to watch our favorite show at dinner.  Eventually, our habits changed as we started using T.V. trays to watch our color television in the living room.  Will the computer desk become the next T.V. tray in a unforeseen form?  Of course for most NAB members, they can write always off as the future, just like some of them did with HD.