A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

BBC is constipated



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old April 20th 17, 09:58 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Roderick Stewart[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,966
Default BBC is constipated

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 19:40:06 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:

Went to stream Guardians of the Galaxy on iPlayer through browser, but
get message to say 'For legal reasons we can't play this programme
here', but you can watch it by switching your TV to BBC one: alas I have
no TV

Sometimes they do the opposite and show the first episode on 'proper' TV
with the rest just online.


There's been a lot of this recently. The reason the broadcasters like
doing it is plain enough - they have the means to know who is watching
what without sending people out with clipboards to ask them.


I assume it's cheaper to put stuff online instead of broadcasting - why
BBC Three went online. Especially true if few watch the programme(s).


Last year there was a multi-episode drama that the BBC broadcast over
several weeks in the usual way, and also online, not instead of the
broadcast, as well as. They couldn't possibly be saving any money by
putting it out on two systems instead of one, so I don't think money
had anything to do with it. What was different was that they made all
episodes available online at the same time as the conventional
broadcast of the first one, so if anyone was so gripped as to want to
binge-watch the whole thing, they could do this before those who only
had Freeview had even seen the second episode. I think this exercise
was entirely to do with discovery of viewing habits and nothing to do
with saving money. The streaming service would be capable of returning
viewing figures straight away, whereas viewer research for
conventional broadcasting would still depend on people roaming the
streets with clipboards.

About the same time, one of the Channel 4 outlets did what looked to
me like their version of the same experiment. They made all episodes
of a drama simultaneously available on their streaming service, but
*only* the first episode by conventional broadcasting, so there was no
way a Freeview viewer would ever see the whole thing. They would have
to use internet streaming to see the remaining episodes.

Meanwhile, Amazon usually puts all episodes of its multi-episode
dramas online at the same time, but for a few of them it's one at a
time. They add a new one each week as if they were a broadcaster, so
that keen viewers have to wait, and thereafter all episodes are left
up permanently for anyone to watch as they wish. It all seems geared
to discovering what viewers like and how they like to watch it, how
many will stick with something and how many will give up if they have
to wait a week to see what comes next. I'm sure there's a method
behind all this. Amazon are not stupid.

It's not just the programmes that are being played - we are.

Rod.
  #22  
Old April 20th 17, 05:20 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,186
Default BBC is constipated

On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:58:59 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 19:40:06 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:

Went to stream Guardians of the Galaxy on iPlayer through browser, but
get message to say 'For legal reasons we can't play this programme
here', but you can watch it by switching your TV to BBC one: alas I have
no TV

Sometimes they do the opposite and show the first episode on 'proper' TV
with the rest just online.

There's been a lot of this recently. The reason the broadcasters like
doing it is plain enough - they have the means to know who is watching
what without sending people out with clipboards to ask them.


I assume it's cheaper to put stuff online instead of broadcasting - why
BBC Three went online. Especially true if few watch the programme(s).


Last year there was a multi-episode drama that the BBC broadcast over
several weeks in the usual way, and also online, not instead of the
broadcast, as well as. They couldn't possibly be saving any money by
putting it out on two systems instead of one, so I don't think money
had anything to do with it. What was different was that they made all
episodes available online at the same time as the conventional
broadcast of the first one, so if anyone was so gripped as to want to
binge-watch the whole thing, they could do this before those who only
had Freeview had even seen the second episode. I think this exercise
was entirely to do with discovery of viewing habits and nothing to do
with saving money. The streaming service would be capable of returning
viewing figures straight away, whereas viewer research for
conventional broadcasting would still depend on people roaming the
streets with clipboards.

Are there still people roaming the streets with clipboards?

BARB (the British Audience Research Bureau) selects households so as to
get demographics representative of the viewing population as a whole
and:

(extract)
http://www.barb.co.uk/about-us/how-we-do-what-we-do/

In order to estimate viewing patterns across all TV households, a
carefully selected panel of private homes is recruited. The
Establishment Survey is carried out continuously by Ipsos MORI in
order to track changes in UK household characteristics. From this we
can ascertain the types of households we need on our panel to make
sure it is representative of the whole of the UK. We then recruit
households to be on the panel that suit the necessary demographics,
TV platforms and geography, as well as other variables. The BARB
panel consists of 5100 households, which each represent about 5000
other households across the UK.

Once a household has been recruited to the BARB panel, Kantar Media
fits every TV set in the home with a meter. Software meters are also
installed on laptop and desktop computers, and tablets. In order for
the meter to know who is watching, each member of the household over
the age of four is assigned a button on a special remote control. If
they enter a room while the television is on they must press their
designated button to register their presence and press it again when
they leave to show they are no longer watching.

We know what panel members are watching through an audio matching
process. The meters take an audio sample of the programme, which is
then turned into a digital fingerprint and matched to a reference
library of programmes. It takes 15 seconds for the audio to be
recognised and therefore matched but we report viewing on a
minute-by-minute basis.

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

We have an additional technique for homes that use Sky, which
involves accessing service information codes from the set-top box.
We have also started working with metadata tags, which are embedded
by broadcasters into online television content.

About the same time, one of the Channel 4 outlets did what looked to
me like their version of the same experiment. They made all episodes
of a drama simultaneously available on their streaming service, but
*only* the first episode by conventional broadcasting, so there was no
way a Freeview viewer would ever see the whole thing. They would have
to use internet streaming to see the remaining episodes.

Meanwhile, Amazon usually puts all episodes of its multi-episode
dramas online at the same time, but for a few of them it's one at a
time. They add a new one each week as if they were a broadcaster, so
that keen viewers have to wait, and thereafter all episodes are left
up permanently for anyone to watch as they wish. It all seems geared
to discovering what viewers like and how they like to watch it, how
many will stick with something and how many will give up if they have
to wait a week to see what comes next. I'm sure there's a method
behind all this. Amazon are not stupid.

It's not just the programmes that are being played - we are.

Rod.


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
  #23  
Old April 20th 17, 11:29 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Dave W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 229
Default BBC is constipated

"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

Oo-er! How's that done?
--
Dav W


  #24  
Old April 21st 17, 10:27 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Adrian Caspersz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 249
Default BBC is constipated

On 21/04/17 00:29, Dave W wrote:
"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

Oo-er! How's that done?


Will it harm the children?

--
Adrian C
  #25  
Old April 21st 17, 11:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
David Woolley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 514
Default BBC is constipated

On 21/04/17 00:29, Dave W wrote:
"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

Oo-er! How's that done?

The difficulty I can see in doing this is that MP3, and similar, are
designed to suppress sounds that humans wouldn't be expected to hear.

With an analogue system, you could send a pure tone at a very low
amplitude, or even pseudo-random noise. If you average the former for
long enough, an instrument can pull it out of the noise, and a matched
filter could do the same sort of thing to the noise.
  #26  
Old April 21st 17, 01:42 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Dave W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 229
Default BBC is constipated


"David Woolley" wrote in message
news
On 21/04/17 00:29, Dave W wrote:
"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

Oo-er! How's that done?

The difficulty I can see in doing this is that MP3, and similar, are
designed to suppress sounds that humans wouldn't be expected to hear.

With an analogue system, you could send a pure tone at a very low
amplitude, or even pseudo-random noise. If you average the former for
long enough, an instrument can pull it out of the noise, and a matched
filter could do the same sort of thing to the noise.


Yes indeed, but the system has to work through crappy unknown speakers in
the TV's.
Surely humans could hear the watermark if they knew what to listen for?
--
Dave W


  #27  
Old April 21st 17, 04:21 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,186
Default BBC is constipated

On 21 Apr 2017 13:49:43 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2017-04-21, Dave W wrote:

"David Woolley" wrote in message
news
On 21/04/17 00:29, Dave W wrote:
"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...

When two channels are playing the same content, for example one in
standard and one in high definition, the broadcaster applies an
audio watermark. This is inaudible to the human ear but can be
picked up by the meter, allowing it to allocate the data correctly.

Oo-er! How's that done?

The difficulty I can see in doing this is that MP3, and similar, are
designed to suppress sounds that humans wouldn't be expected to hear.

With an analogue system, you could send a pure tone at a very low
amplitude, or even pseudo-random noise. If you average the former for
long enough, an instrument can pull it out of the noise, and a matched
filter could do the same sort of thing to the noise.


Yes indeed, but the system has to work through crappy unknown speakers in
the TV's.
Surely humans could hear the watermark if they knew what to listen for?


Obvious conclusion; there is no such thing. Obvious corollary; "Peter
Duncanson" is an idiot.


I see! I was simply quoting from the website of BARB which is the
organisation that collects the viewing figures used by the TV companies
and advertisers.

The meters would not need to work through "crappy unknown speakers" if
they were connected to one of the TV's audio output sockets.


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.