Go to Windows 7 Insider Guide
Speakeasy: A Digital TV Question
A Digital TV Question
by AdelaideJohn1967 - 1/11/06 5:00 AMCould the use of full digital TV lead to direct manipulation of the content?
For example: If they ran a news story and the content was a bit too hot for the public or too sensitive could the story be edited on the fly because its all digital and no longer reliant on the old analogue TV network?
Any thoughts on this?
I don't think analog vs. digital delivery to the home
by Dave Konkel [Moderator]
- 1/11/06 6:16 AM
In reply to: A Digital TV Question by AdelaideJohn1967
makes any difference at all, AJ. The key issue is what happens in the studio, nt how the product comes from the studio to the home.
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
Read My Post Again
by AdelaideJohn1967 - 1/11/06 4:43 PM In reply to: I don't think analog vs. digital delivery to the home by Dave Konkel [Moderator]
That is what I was talking about.
Digital TV might if the technology allows it lend itself to live editing.
As I suggested say a news item were to go on the air that was considered too controversial or bad for the government. They could edit that story during broadcast to spin it a certain way and thus cover the truth of a particular issue.
That is the kind of thing I was talking about because with digital it could be done. You may not have been able to do this in the current analog system, at least that I know of.
It could be done...
by J. Vega - 1/11/06 7:28 PM In reply to: Read My Post Again by AdelaideJohn1967Sorry, but I just can't figure what you're driving at. Once the story goes thru the Master Control switcher and goes to the satelite uplink or local broadcast transmitter it's "off to mars" at the industry saying goes and is impossible to recall. Messing with that complex signal in "real time" would cause big problems in my opinion, be that signal analog or digital. It seems to me by observation that a digital signal is more sensitive to errors when "messed with".
Perhaps I don't understand what you mean by "live editing", could you illustrate with a proposed senario?
It sounds like she's talking about real time editing and
by Kiddpeat - 1/11/06 7:36 PM In reply to: It could be done... by J. Vegarendering. Someone would have to work at light speed to do that.
Or at least...
by J. Vega - 1/11/06 7:40 PM In reply to: It sounds like she's talking about real time editing and by KiddpeatOr at least about 30 frames a second.
(NT) No.
by Kiddpeat - 1/11/06 7:34 PM In reply to: A Digital TV Question by AdelaideJohn1967Been done for years with analog on radio
by Marv99 - 6/15/06 12:00 AM In reply to: A Digital TV Question by AdelaideJohn1967Most live feeds on radio have a built in delay allowing them to edit out things that would cause the FCC to hit them with money fines or even loosing the right to broadcast. I've heard some really fast DJs do some really fun things with that. The problem is they only have so much time delay starting out. And each time they edit and insert something else they loose that amount of time. I think they manage to gain it back during comercials but I'm not sure. I believe live TV, with the public on it, does this as well.
I don't think digital makes this any easier or harder.
It might be easier to with a slight delay change one word to another automaticly. That might be even more fun than a o/`beep o/`
The easiest way...
by J. Vega - 6/15/06 9:53 AM In reply to: Been done for years with analog on radio by Marv99The easiest (and cheapest) way to do it in radio is to use two tape recorders. The first one is put into record. Right next to it you put the second one into play.
Now for the trick. Take off the takeup reel from the record machine and run the tape over to the heads of the "play" machine and into a takeup reel on the second machine. Feed the playback head on the second machine to air. Depending on the space between the record head on the 1st machine and the read head on the second machine the result is a time delay between when something is said and recorded and when the playback hits air. You monitor the record machine and when a "no-no" hits you quick like a bunny clip the playback that is going to air.
Note: this clip does not prevent it's being recorded, just it's being played a few seconds later. A wise audio man rolls a 3rd machine which records what actually went out on air so that in a pinch he can later show exactly what improper was said and that it was cut out on air.
Over Hear In Australia
by AdelaideJohn1967 - 6/15/06 7:15 PM In reply to: The easiest way... by J. VegaOver here in Australia radio has a built in
delay of 7 seconds so that announcers can take
care of things like the occasional swear word
and then dump a caller if they swear before it
gets to air.
However the strangest thing is ringing the station
and having the radio on in the background and hearing
the delay. It's like living in your own personal time
warp 
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
