With FAST, Consumer Education and Experience Has to Come First

NAB

The industry may be abuzz with the growth of free ad-supported TV (FAST) channels, but most viewers don’t have a clue.

article here

There’s no reason why they should know the jargon, of course, but stakeholders say they have a responsibility to nurture the market.

“A lot of people don’t even know that it exists yet,” said Adam Wiener, founder of Continuous Media and a former EVP/GM at ViacomCBS, and the moderator of an NAB Show Streaming Summit session.

“It’s a little bit like ATSC 3.0 — people don’t even know that it exists. But you can never underestimate the value of free,” Wiener said.

“We’re at a really unique inflection point where things are happening much faster than they have historically,” agreed Joe Lerner, executive director of advertising partnerships at Xumo.

“We got to a point where it all comes down to the consumer. The consumer wants to access content and the way in which they access that content whether it comes through a cable an IP address, a FAST channel or a subscription-based model doesn’t matter. It’s really about making sure that the consumer can access what they want and they don’t get frustrated.”

Lerner added, “We all need to think about it from the end user perspective. Our responsibility is to put a product in the market that customers can get what they want from.”

Also on the panel was TV vendor and FAST platform operator Samsung. Takashi Nakano, head of content & business development at Samsung TV Plus, agreed: “The most important part of this entire equation is getting users into the ecosystem so they’re not making the distinction between streaming versus over the air broadcast or cable. Users just want content.”

Nakano said that while the industry might create “fractures” between streaming and linear everything boils down to the user consuming content.

“Samsung is the largest manufacturer of a glass that’s either in your pocket, or [giant LED screen] The Wall. That’s not going to change,” he said. “People are still buying hardware devices to consume content on so whether it’s a box that Xumo creates, a plug in for a TV, or it’s native to our operating system, getting users accustomed to that ecosystem is critical.”

Since FAST has only emerged in the last few years “most people don’t even know that it actually exists” Nakano said, adding, “There’s this entire educational experience that we need to do to the user, so they get accustomed to it.

“Broadcast TV has been around for 100 years, cable 50+ years so it’s gonna take a while for users to get accustomed to the FAST and VOD ecosystem so they just consume it like TV.”

Even though the viewer might ideally segue from broadcast linear TV to internet-delivered FAST, the digital delivery of FAST channels opens up a lot of opportunities for curation, personalization and niche content offers.

Samsung’s Nakano explained, “Because you can you can measure and target every stream, every stream is addressable. You can customize. So the opportunities are endless around the digital ecosystem. But for the user, it’s very much broadcast live, it very much feels like TV. That’s what’s made adoption so quick.”

To grow the business, Samsung is looking for content partners but no longer will it just launch any content or channel. There has to be a value-add.

“We are questioning ‘is this really pushing the content envelope forward? Do we believe in what the content is intending to do? We are excited about the evolution but also asking how we step into the next phases of content.”

Nakano indicated that Samsung has a quality control criteria when it comes to content partners.

“If a content partner comes to us and says, ‘Here’s my library, I’m going to stitch it together into a channel and you should carry it’ we’re not interested. I’m interested in what the value proposition is to the user for this content? How does the content partner evolve this channel or this on demand experience?”

Bethany Atchison, VP of distribution partnerships at music video brand Vevo, agreed. “We have [around] a million pieces of content that we’re working with and we can’t just give our library away and hope that people are going to engage with it in a way that will keep them coming back [for more].

“We have to present it to them in a way that’s digestible, that’s memorable, that’s fun. It’s finding ways to bring the content to users in ways that are relevant and timely. That has been core to our success in the past.”

Atchison added, “It’s not just us dictating what’s going on. It’s a conversation with the platform. We need to understand that audience and what’s going to resonate there.

“There are nuances in the audiences on different platforms and the way that they’re engaging with content. So it’s important for us to get as much information as we can at the start and publish the best channels, but also to be agile and [change] if it isn’t the best fit,” she said.

“We’re in constant conversations with our distribution partners to make sure that we have the right lineups, that the programming blocks that we’re surfacing are resonating, that they’re scheduled at the right time throughout the day. Really just trying to understand the best way to engage that specific audience.”

For instance, Vevo will carefully consider if a genre of programming in its library is worth an entire 24/7 channel to itself or better served as a block on an existing channel or in VOD playlists.

Then there’s the whole FAST business outside of the US, which is different again. “Internationally, we have a really long runway in terms of channels that we can launch. We’re still growing that business, learning each of the different markets and what’s resonating there,” Atchison said.

Much of the information that content owners need to be able to curate, program and target audiences is from metadata and this is something that Nielsen-owned Gracenote has a lot of.

“We’re probably the largest collector of program data out there,” said Jeremy Justice, VP of product management at Gracenote. “We work with every large platform in US, Europe and Latin America.

“Data really helps supplement and enrich content whether by helping ‘sell’ what you actually see on the screen using imagery and descriptive data, but also the underlying data that goes into recommendation systems.

“Every platform, has their own secret sauce to this, but they’re all trying to do the same thing, which is to give content some sort of velocity towards an audience.”

From Atchison’s point of view, Vevo wants to work with FAST platform providers “to share data and do tests together and try something new. Maybe it’s not going to work towards the goal that we’re hoping for but we’re going to try it [because] maybe it will be wonderful.

“I think like that partnership between the platform and the content provider is key to really figuring out success here.”

UK commits to DTT for next decade, eyes managed transition for IPTV future

Streaming TV Insider

The UK is looking towards an eventual all-internet delivered broadcast future, provided universal and free access is maintained, but digital terrestrial TV (DTT) transmissions are still part of the picture for at least the next 10 years.

article here

Last week the UK government responded to a report by the country’s communications regulator Ofcom by declaring its commitment to the delivery of OTA TV services for the next decade.

Beyond that though and its future is uncertain. A managed and gradual transition to broadband delivery over several decades seems most likely if every household in the UK is to retain the ability to watch the biggest free-to-air broadcasters BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5.

DTT (Digital Terrestrial Television) refers to the TV transmission infrastructure used to deliver broadcast TV OTA. In the U.S the specification for delivery is defined by ATSC with version 3.0 currently being rolled out. In the UK (and most of Europe) the specifications are defined by Digital Video Broadcasting with DVB-T2, published in 2009, the current generation.

The service using DVB-T2 in the UK is called Freeview and as the name suggests it is free to view. It launched in 2002 as a joint venture of the main broadcasters (BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky) and is operated by holding company Everyone TV.

The UK also has a free digital TV satellite platform from the BBC and ITV called Freesat, serving about 1 million homes, again operated by Everyone TV.

It is these free DTT and satellite delivered services which are under threat with broadcasters citing the rising cost of the older deliver method versus that of streaming. In part the cost is rising because pay TV operator Sky is also moving away from using satellite and DTT to stream its content to platforms like Sky Glass and Sky Stream.

The background to Ofcom’s report is the changing nature of the TV ecosystem where audiences in the UK as elsewhere are shifting from linear to digital services streamed to smart TVs.

On average, individuals spent 25% fewer minutes per day watching broadcast TV in 2023 compared to 2018. Projections in the report suggest a continued decline in scheduled TV channel viewing through DTT and satellite, dropping from 67% in 2022 to 27% by 2040.

In a speech to the Digital Television Group last week, government minister Julia Lopez said that with an estimated 99% of TVs sold in the UK next year being internet-enabled, it was clear that IPTV was going to be a big part of TV’s future.

Cable TV player Virgin has also launched a subscription-based IP proposition –joined by Connected TV services like LG Channels, Samsung TV Plus, and – most recently – Freely.

Backed by BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5, Freely is a free streaming service that allows users to watch live TV via the internet. It launched last month as an intended replacement for Freeview.

Lopez said the government wants to encourage the sector to keep embracing innovation and technological development, “but we’re not going to pull the rug from under the devoted audiences of Freeview channels.

“That’s why we’ve committed to the future of DTT until 2034.”

She said the government would now assess evidence, of which Ofcom’s report was a part, over a ten year timeframe.

“It’s not just a simple dichotomy between DTT and IPTV – but the potential to enable audiences to choose between multiple competing platforms, just as they can now,” Lopez said.

The government has commissioned independent research on this topic. To be published soon, Lopez said that this research estimates that by 2040, 99% of homes in the UK will have an IP enabled TV.

“On current trends, the number of homes without access to IPTV will fall to one and a half million by 2035 – but this still represents 7% of homes,” she said. “But we also have a responsibility to audiences to ensure they continue to have access to reliable, free to view television in a format that’s familiar to them.

“And the further and faster the transformation, the stronger this responsibility becomes.”

Ofcom’s report found that so far “significant migration of audiences online has been organic” but that whether migration is gradual or managed, there will be increased reliance on the UK’s networks for video streaming in the future.

It cautioned that an ‘unmanaged transition’ – without either investment in DTT, 5G or fixed broadband infrastructure - would mean that the audiences who rely on DTT “could face a decline in the range and quality of choice.”

It stated: “Without a clear vision and careful planning for the long term that includes all audience groups, these decisions could cumulatively weaken the level of provision, and threaten the universality of public service TV.”

One option is to upgrade the current DTT platform “to deliver greater efficiency and quality” though broadcasters are reluctant to do this, citing the cost relative to the declining number of DTT audiences.

Alternatively, it could manage a reduced or slimmed down DTT network in a gradual phase out until all homes in the UK are served with some form of fixed or wireless IP connectivity.

The final long-term approach would be a complete switch-off of the DTT infrastructure and a managed transition to IP-only distribution.  

A managed transition to IP-only distribution would require “ongoing investment” in internet infrastructures to manage the load on networks and higher peaks from linear TV viewing. 

Ofcom concludes that switching off DTT entirely would save considerable costs for larger broadcasters by reducing the need to fund distribution of their services across all current platforms simultaneously.

 

SMPTE: Transparency and education the keys to managing AI

IBC

article here 

SMPTE president Renard T. Jenkins calls on artists, law makers and the tech community to educate themselves about AI and to do so in synch with each other or fear and misuse will fill the gap

 

The discourse around AI in media and entertainment has centred around the hot button topics of preventing bias and ensuring artists are paid fairly for their work.

The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) is taking a stand on both. Its president Renard T. Jenkins is concerned that the proliferation and sophistication of large language models are being embedded with bias, unconscious or otherwise.  

“All of us in media and entertainment should be cognisant of what we are developing with AI tools. We should not be building models and then thinking about how we’re going to responsibly use them as an afterthought.”

That said, bias is not inherently a bad thing, he suggests, because certain forms of bias are there for our protection.

“I want to be very clear that I'm speaking about bias that is exclusive, that there are certain things that you would like to exclude out of a large language model,” Jenkins says.

“You want to exclude misogynism and racism and homophobia. You want to exclude anything that is harmful to a particular group or to a particular person. That is what you should be working towards.”

He uses the example of a child putting their hand on a hot stove and learning very quickly through that experience that a hot stove can burn. “So having a bias against something that is bad for you is not a bad thing. We need to think about the issue that way instead of just trying to blanket our thought process in that regard.”

However, the commercial pressure to monetise the technology means some AI tools developers are rushing to release without forensic testing or not giving ethical concerns due weight. Not even new AI regulation in Europe or the U.S may be sufficient to stop the genie once out in the wild.

“You can write as many laws and policies as you want but regulation is not going to change the hearts or minds of the individuals who are developing AI tools,” Jenkins says. “But you have to start with Big Tech. Start with the developers and make sure that the product is being designed and tested with ethics in mind. It is necessary because the power of AI tools that we have available to us today are exponentially more powerful than anything we've ever seen in our lifetime. AI is not going to stop.”

Putting pressure on Big Tech to ensure it is training AI tools on ethically sourced data may not be sufficient. Jenkins also sits on the board of the Hollywood Professionals Association having served as Warner Bros. SVP, Production Integration & Creative Technology Services until December. He calls on standards bodies and policy makers to educate themselves “at the same rate” as AI tools are being developed.

“The education of those making policies about AI and the understanding of the tech community needs to be happening in parallel,” he urges. “We have to make sure that we include content creators as a part of that conversation. All of that has to happen in tandem. It can't be out of sync with one another because that’s where you leave gaps for things that could be harmful.”

His worry is that if different parts of industry and society operate on different tracks then when the inevitable moment arrives and Big Tech births an AGI (Artificial General Intelligence, which can perform at least as well if not better than humans) then it may truly harmful.

One way that developers can help ensure that they're not building bias into their product is by staffing a diverse workforce. 

At SMPTE, Jenkins helped start the Global Inclusion Working Group with plans to connect with technical organisations, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities, and historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs).

SMPTE’s work espouses the concept of inclusive innovation, pertaining to the development of a product or service intended to serve a multicultural audience.

Jenkins explains, “The tech world and media and entertainment has not always been inclusive in the way that it operates, especially at the higher levels of decision making.

“I do see change but not enough.  I think that we need to move beyond performative actions and to get into truly transformative processes and practices. We have to think about the fact that we represent a global audience and a global user base. Whatever you are designing, whatever you are creating should not be exclusive to a single group unless it is something that is specific to that group and it is only necessary for that group. Things that would fit into that category are finite.”

The other area where development is outpacing legislation is copyright. Although OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT, declines to divulge what data its products are trained on, the New York Times revealed that this includes millions of YouTube videos, none of whose creators were apparently notified let alone recompensed.

A new bill being introduced in the US Congress intends to force AI companies to reveal the copyrighted material they use to make their generative AI models. 

Jenkins believes transparency, whether legally enforced or not, is the only way for the industry to move forward.

“Transparency is the only way that we can truly protect content creators and to be honest protect developers and the innovators who are building the tools as well. No one wants to be accused of utilising someone's intellectual property without either compensation or acknowledgment.  Transparency is the base foundational thing that we can do.

“I also know that in a competitive landscape, transparency can often lead to a negative outcome for developers. We have to come to some sort of balance where developers retain their ‘secret sauce’, if you like, of their algorithms but which inculcates a level of trust between them and artists.  

“That’s not going to come unless intellectual property is valued. Today, your IP is your data. So if someone is going to use your IP, they need to compensate you. They need to acknowledge that it's yours. That is the only way that we can do this in a fair, responsible and ethical manner.”

Jenkins is a sound engineer by trade and one wonders what he would tell creators about how AI might impact their jobs today. He says that people shouldn’t fear the tool itself.

“I believe that the fear really stems from those individuals who have control over the tool and how they plan to implement it. AI is not an entity. AI is simply a tool that can assist in the work that we do and, if utilised properly, there will be new jobs and new opportunities created.

“This technology is going to continue to iterate and we all have to do the same thing. It is necessary that you educate yourself about that. Do your homework.” 

SMPTE recently published an AI document which emphasises the importance of standards development, interoperability and authentication as key components to adoption which need to be integrated into the development and deployment process of the technology.

“The industry needs in-depth analysis and unbiased research in regards to the development of AI’s advancement while keeping time to market expectations, performance constraints, and security concerns in mind,” Jenkins says. “Secondly, artists need to protect their art. Historically, a lot of artists have had their IP stolen and have had to fight to regain control of what they created. That is part of the fear.

“One thing I’d say is always read the fine print before using any of these tools. Read the licensing agreement. Don't just click your terms of agreement. Question whether or not that is something that you want to actually engage with

“That is not anti-business. That is simply making sure that any deal that you make protects your art. That is the same way that we need to approach artificial intelligence. If you're going to use these tools, make sure that you are protecting your IP.”

 

Measurement and perceived cost impeding CTV growth in the UK

StreamTV Insider

With Connected TV (CTV) viewing on the rise in the UK as elsewhere it seems that marketers are failing to capitalize on the advertising opportunity.

article here

A new report from Teads, a digital advertising platform, found that half (49%) of marketing decision-makers don’t understand CTV’s key advantages, whilst over a third (31%) don’t understand its disadvantages as a marketing channel. Further, six in 10 UK marketers never include CTV advertising in their strategy.

“Clients and agencies are trying to understand the value proposition of the CTV space,” explained Dan Black, Head of CTV at Teads UK.

One issue common to the UK as the US is the fragmentation of the market due to the proliferation of FAST channels

“Globally CTV is still relatively under invested versus the number of eyeballs that have switched over from linear,” Black said.

In Europe and the UK there’s an additional wrinkle where the CTV market remains dominated by Broadcast Video on Demand (BVOD) such as ITVX and the newly launched free streaming service Freely from the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5. BVOD in the UK is measured by traditional TV audience currency Barb which helps support planning of campaigns across a range of channels.

“As more FAST channels come to market marketers want to know more about the content proposition, what audience is it reaching and how this can be measured in order to extract value,” Black said.

Comparative to the US, the CTV market in the UK is still relatively nascent “and is not likely to reach maturity for a number of years,” said Teads MD Justin Taylor.

“As such, there is a certain degree of hesitancy over the value of ad-supported CTV driven mainly by their limited awareness of the benefits of CTV and perceived high cost in comparison to some other marketing channels.”

Over a third of marketing decision-makers in the report cited cost as a barrier - underlining the lack of knowledge, given that the cost of premium CTV is much lower than that of prime-time linear TV.

Measurement and attribution challenges were cited by 17% of respondents.

The research revealed somewhat contradictory consumer behavior. On the one hand over a third (34%) of viewers are happy to view CTV ads provided these ads are “funny”, or relevant to their tastes (31%) and placed within apps with affordable price tags.

However, the new data also found a sizeable 37% of UK viewers currently opting for ad-free plans despite the growing availability of cheaper ad-supported alternatives such as from Amazon Prime, Disney or Netflix. It also showed that two in five (40%) consumers say they try to ignore ads when they can.

According to Black this means marketers need to adopt a more creative approach to advertising to engage these audiences.

New technologies, such as QR Codes, AR (Augmented Reality) and data-driven targeting capabilities can help to create “tailored and memorable” ad experiences, he said.

Teads used the study to spotlight its ‘CTV Native’ ad unit which is inventory positioned on the home page of smart TV platforms. It partnered with operating system VIDAA earlier this year to extend the reach of its CTV Native inventory on Hisense smart TVs.

“Given that 37% of people in the UK opt for ad-free streaming subscription plans, CTV Native advertising on a home screen is one of the best ways to effectively reach this audience via a big screen, as well as those who like to watch broadcaster content online (BVOD),” Black said.

eMarketer estimates that by 2026 there will be 47.9 million CTV users in the UK, a statistic quoted by in the Teads report.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) expects CTV spend in the UK to reach £2.31bn ($2.92bn) by 2026.

 

“Fall Guy” Editor Elisabet Ronaldsdottir Is In It for the Action (and Maybe a Little Bit for the Romance)

NAB

“My whole career is based on stunts,” says editor Elisabet Ronaldsdottir, ACE. “Every movie I’ve worked on at least for the past 12 years has been stunt-based. We wouldn’t have those movies if it wasn’t for the stunts. We wouldn’t have John Wick or Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings or Bullet Train. They’re all based on stunts.”

article here

Nor would we have The Fall Guy, the recent action-comedy starring Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt, which she edited for director David Leitch.

Ronaldsdottir was also in the editing chair for Leitch’s Bullet Train, Deadpool 2 and Atomic Blonde, as well as the first John Wick, which laid the template for balletic stunt action.

“Those [stunt] guys and girls are a powerhouse,” she explained to Steve Hullfish on the Art of the Cut podcast. “They just throw out stunt-vis all the time and it’s amazing. Sometimes it ends up much better than what we end up with, because when you start shooting it, you can run into all kinds of issues. It can be the location, it can be all kinds of stuff. I love that both [producer] Kelly McCormick and David and [production company] 87 North are so focused on making stunts story-based.”

She is underselling herself, of course. Editing is never simple no matter how good the performances, the VFX, coverage or direction.

“On a practical level, a lot of that is about communicating with the stunt team early on and collaborating with them — which Elisabet does and which I haven’t seen other editors do in the same degree of intimacy,” said The Fall Guy’s first assistant editor, Matt Absher. “They can practice their stunts and storyboard and previs, all day long, but they quickly bring what they have to Elisabet before they execute it to make sure it’ll actually work.”

The core of The Fall Guy is not in fact the stunts, it’s the romance between the lead characters.

“We wanted to showcase stunts but, at the same time, we don’t want to lose the love affair between Jody and Colt. So that was kind of the focus we had: the stunts, and how can we keep that love affair going through that sequence?” she said.

“The film was a tricky tone because it’s a love story within an action extravaganza, but it’s also amurder mystery. It’s two movies. There’s a lot happening, so finding that tone took us some time.”

There are a number of scenes which are intercut, showing parallel storylines. One such involves a karaoke scene with Blunt while Gosling is engaged in a garbage truck fight with Ryan. “Every time we intercut it’s to not lose sight of the lovebirds, because they are so amazing together. So if we would have stayed with the garbage truck sequence for the whole time, we would have lost Jody. And vice versa — if we stayed in the bar with the karaoke, we would lose Colt. So it was an effort to keep them together basically, and also amp up the excitement of it.”

She reveals the craft behind one scripted shot in the sequence: When Gosling drives past the karaoke bar and Blunt is singing. “That was shot specifically for that moment. It was tricky because we had to get to that moment, but we also had to keep the song in sync. And it’s an epic song. You can’t cut it to pieces. So we had to keep that moment going long enough for the drive by to hit at the right moment in the song.”

It’s like carving out something. You just keep going. And once I have the scene assembled, I start going through every single shot for certain moments — what’s going to work best.” The Iceland-born editor also has a background in dance, which informs some of her visual sensibility.

“For me, it’s such an emotional thing but it’s extremely important that I get that feeling of the flow that one cut leads to the other. I use different techniques. It’s the movement of people. You can use a movement to have it flow into the next cut — or use the characters eyes, to help you flow into the next shot,” she said. “I like the flowing of cuts. That doesn’t mean that sometimes you just wanna cut, because we’re always thinking how we can manipulate the audience into certain emotions or intrigues or keeping the story going. But in general, I like the flow until we need something else because of the story.”

The Real Deepfake Problem Is That Nobody Believes Anything Anymore

NAB

article here 

Concern about deepfakes is rising worldwide, particularly around political messaging, but attempts to divorce fiction from fact may be doomed. A new study from online security provider McAfee reveals a 66% increase in concerns about deepfakes over the past year and that 43% of Americans list influencing elections as one of the AI-generated technology’s most concerning uses.

The actual number of people exposed to political and other deepfakes is expected to be much higher given that many Americans are not able to decipher what is real versus fake, thanks to the sophistication of AI technologies, according to study author McAfee.

“In many ways, democracy is on the ballot this year thanks to AI,” McAfee CTO Steve Grobman stated. “It’s not only adversarial governments creating deepfakes this election season, it is now something anyone can do in an afternoon. The ease with which AI can manipulate voices and visuals raises critical questions about the authenticity of content.”

In another finding from the research, the vast majority (72%) of American social media users find it difficult to spot AI generated content and that the public is most concerned that deepfakes will influence elections and undermine trust in media.

Tech is fighting back with several schemes already in play to flag fake content – or authenticate its veracity. Tech reporter Gerrit De Vynck details these efforts in an article in the Washington Post.

They include watermarking AI images baked into the image itself. Google has such a system it calls SynthID. “They’re not visible to the human eye but could be detected by a social media platform, which would then label them before viewers see them,” De Vynck explains.

But such solutions are not rock solid, “because anything that’s digitally pieced together can be hacked or spoofed or altered,” Nico Dekens, director of intelligence at cybersecurity company ShadowDragon, tells De Vynck.

Parallel approaches for video and stills include layering data into each pixel right from the moment it is taken by a camera. Companies doing this include Nikon and Leica, whose metadata imprints are being adopted by organizations like C2PA and CAI, which are set up and run by publishers, broadcasters and technology vendors to provide a record of “provenance.”

It’s a case of whack-a-mole here, too. De Vynck points out that hackers could still figure out how camera companies apply the metadata to the image and add it to fake images, which would then get a pass on social media because of the fake metadata.

“It’s dangerous to believe there are actual solutions against malignant attackers,” Vivien Chappelier, head of R&D at watermarking company Imatag told De Vynck.

Going further, Reality Defender and Deep Media have turned GenAI on itself by building tools that detect deepfakes based on the foundational technology used by AI image generators.

As De Vynck explains, by showing tens of millions of images labeled as fake or real to an AI algorithm, the model begins to be able to distinguish between the two, building an internal “understanding” of what elements might give away an image as fake and can then identify it.

Just as the media industry has had to continually invent, adapt, and apply multiple technologies over the years to combat piracy (with the courts being a backstop), so it will have to do the same vigilance and investment in a bid to detect and prevent deepfake domination.

Adobe’s general counsel Dana Rao is right when he says that AI images are here to stay, and different methods will have to be combined to try to control them.

There are some who believe this will be successful and that scanning and filtering deepfakes from authenticated media will become as commonplace as email applications like Hotmail automatically filtering out spam.

Others think the tech battle against AI deepfake detection is lost before we start.

“If the problem is hard today, it will be much harder next year,” a researcher into the topic tells De Vynck. “It will be almost impossible in five years.”

The consequence will be lack of trust in all media. Even McAfee, which has its own audio deepfake detection, calls on the public to “maintain a healthy sense of skepticism” and to adopt a policy of always questioning the source of content.

If seeing is no longer believing, where does that leave the truth and the bias disseminated by CNN, Fox, CNBC, BBC, ITV and other broadcasters in election year?

“Assume nothing, believe no one and nothing, and doubt everything,” said Dekens. “If you’re in doubt, just assume it’s fake.”

UK commits to DTT for next decade, eyes managed transition for IPTV future

Stream TV Insider 

article here

The UK is looking towards an eventual all-internet delivered broadcast future, provided universal and free access is maintained, but digital terrestrial TV (DTT) transmissions are still part of the picture for at least the next 10 years.

Last week the UK government responded to a report by the country’s communications regulator Ofcom by declaring its commitment to the delivery of broadcast OTA TV services for the next decade.

Beyond that though and its future is uncertain. A managed and gradual transition to broadband delivery over several decades seems most likely if every household in the UK is to retain the ability to watch the biggest free-to-air broadcasters BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5.

DTT (Digital Terrestrial Television) refers to the TV transmission infrastructure used to deliver TV over-the-air (OTA). In the U.S the specification for delivery is defined by ATSC with version 3.0 currently being rolled out. In the UK (and most of Europe) the specifications are defined by Digital Video Broadcasting with DVB-T2, published in 2009, the current generation.

The service using DVB-T2 in the UK is called Freeview and as the name suggests it is free to view. It launched in 2002 as a joint venture of the main broadcasters (BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky) and is operated by holding company Everyone TV.

The UK also has a free digital TV satellite platform from the BBC and ITV called Freesat, serving about 1 million homes, again operated by Everyone TV.

It is these free DTT and satellite delivered services which are under threat, with broadcasters citing the rising cost of the older deliver method versus that of streaming. Pay TV operator Sky is also moving away from using satellite and DTT to stream its content to platforms like Sky Glass and Sky Stream.

The background to Ofcom’s report is the changing nature of the TV ecosystem where audiences in the UK as elsewhere are shifting from linear to digital services streamed to smart TVs.

On average, individuals in the UK spent 25% fewer minutes per day watching broadcast TV in 2023 compared to 2018. Projections in the report suggest a continued decline in scheduled TV channel viewing through DTT and satellite, dropping from 67% in 2022 to 27% by 2040.

In a speech to the Digital Television Group last week, UK government media, data and digital infrastructure Minister Julia Lopez said that with an estimated 99% of TVs sold in the UK next year being internet-enabled, it was clear that IPTV was going to be a big part of TV’s future.

Cable TV player Virgin has also launched a subscription-based IP proposition, alongside free linear streaming services offered by and embedded in OEM’s smart TV interfaces such as LG Channels, Samsung TV Plus (known in the US as free ad-supported streaming TV aka FAST services) and – most recently – Freely.

Backed by BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5, Freely is a free streaming service that allows users to watch live TV via the internet. It launched last month as an intended replacement for Freeview.

Lopez said the government wants to encourage the sector to keep embracing innovation and technological development, “but we’re not going to pull the rug from under the devoted audiences of Freeview channels.

“That’s why we’ve committed to the future of DTT until 2034.”

She said the government would now assess evidence, of which Ofcom’s report was a part, over a ten-year timeframe.

“It’s not just a simple dichotomy between DTT and IPTV – but the potential to enable audiences to choose between multiple competing platforms, just as they can now,” Lopez said.

The government has commissioned independent research on this topic. To be published soon, Lopez said that this research estimates that by 2040, 99% of homes in the UK will have an IP-enabled TV.

“On current trends, the number of homes without access to IPTV will fall to one and a half million by 2035 – but this still represents 7% of homes,” she said. “But we also have a responsibility to audiences to ensure they continue to have access to reliable, free to view television in a format that’s familiar to them.

“And the further and faster the transformation, the stronger this responsibility becomes.”

Ofcom’s report found that so far “significant migration of audiences online has been organic” but that whether migration is gradual or managed, there will be increased reliance on the UK’s networks for video streaming in the future.

It cautioned that an ‘unmanaged transition’ – without either investment in DTT, 5G or fixed broadband infrastructure - would mean that the audiences who rely on DTT “could face a decline in the range and quality of choice.”

It stated: “Without a clear vision and careful planning for the long term that includes all audience groups, these decisions could cumulatively weaken the level of provision, and threaten the universality of public service TV.”

One option is to upgrade the current DTT platform “to deliver greater efficiency and quality” though broadcasters are reluctant to do this, citing the cost relative to the declining number of DTT audiences.

Alternatively, it could manage a reduced or slimmed down DTT network in a gradual phase out until all homes in the UK are served with some form of fixed or wireless IP connectivity.

The final long-term approach would be a complete switch-off of the DTT infrastructure and a managed transition to IP-only distribution.  

A managed transition to IP-only delivery would require “ongoing investment” in internet infrastructures to manage the load on networks and higher peaks from linear TV viewing. 

Ofcom concluded that switching off DTT entirely would save considerable costs for larger broadcasters by reducing the need to fund distribution of their services across all current platforms simultaneously.