DA
Yes I believe that's what we're talking about, and I'm absolutely sure that News 24 has done it in the past. All that's happened with these Editorial Guidelines is that several principles that have been followed for years (e.g. "accuracy is more important than speed") have been put in writing in a way they weren't in the old Producers' Guidelines.
Dan
Founding member
chromakey123 posted:
None of the news channels "delay live footage"... ... if by that you mean somehow digitally add a few seconds between a feed coming in to the building before being tx'ed....
Yes I believe that's what we're talking about, and I'm absolutely sure that News 24 has done it in the past. All that's happened with these Editorial Guidelines is that several principles that have been followed for years (e.g. "accuracy is more important than speed") have been put in writing in a way they weren't in the old Producers' Guidelines.
WE
Not that this channel is the best example, but I have seen this time delay used on Fox News.
It was during one of these "infamous" California car chases. When, as per usual, the car was stopped, the police surrounded the car with drawn guns. The feed was cut to the studio, the presenter talked for a few seconds, paused, the transmission was then delayed by a few seconds.
He even explained what they had just done, and stated the obvious reason that, the police would shoot to kill and that pictures would be cut.
Very Fox; but I did not really want to see a man be shot dead live on my TV
Si!
It was during one of these "infamous" California car chases. When, as per usual, the car was stopped, the police surrounded the car with drawn guns. The feed was cut to the studio, the presenter talked for a few seconds, paused, the transmission was then delayed by a few seconds.
He even explained what they had just done, and stated the obvious reason that, the police would shoot to kill and that pictures would be cut.
Very Fox; but I did not really want to see a man be shot dead live on my TV
Si!
NG
Every news channel has had the ability to delay live footage for years, and they have been.
Delaying live footage is nothing new. BBC, Sky, ITV, CNN, etc etc. They all do it, and none of you are none the wiser.
THIS IS COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE
No it's not. Why do you think it is? Did you read Timmy's post?
Because I work in television news...
None of the news channels "delay live footage"... ... if by that you mean somehow digitally add a few seconds between a feed coming in to the building before being tx'ed....
Yes of course sometimes we record footage, view it as it comes in, then play it out as fast as possible...
But that it just recording, then replaying... NOT quite the same as delaying live footage.
What the BBC is proposing to do is crazy... It won't work in practice... and instead will just mean inexperienced or junior staff at N24 being too scared to broadcast what they fear MIGHT be sensitive footage until it has been approved... thereby handing a small victory to Sky and ITVNC.
Err - it isn't nonsense and has been done on numerous occasions in the past 7 or 8 years. I'd be careful when you say "NONE OF THE NEWS CHANNELS"...
News 24 launched with the ability to delay incoming feeds by seconds, minutes and even hours, as a result of their use of Profiles in 1997. Pretty much since the start of News 24 the ability to time shift feeds has been used.
Most of the time this is used to time-shift one of two live events that are happening simultaneously - and often to good effect (meaning a news conference that has been going on for a minute or two is joined without missing an important early bit) However it has certainly also been used to allow rushes to be played out unedited from links vehicles, and agency pictures to be delayed before being cut to air, to ensure :
1.You get out before the feed ends (by far the most common use)
2. You can get out before disturbing - or inappropriate (say the appearance of a local anchor from a foreign TV station you are cutting to air) - pictures are broadcast.
ISTR that BBC World had to delay the Clinton / Lewinsky stuff to ensure they complied with ITC legislation (as BBC World was an ITC regulated channel - unlike BBC domestic outlets at the time) - and there was a danger that explicit material could have put the BBC in breach of their licence.
Delaying feeds certainly isn't anything new. Any event that you see played out on a news channel WITHOUT a LIVE bug may well be being delayed - and the BBC proposal is merely formalising (and I guess probably increasing the use of) a technique which is already not exactly unusual.
In the days of digital transmission - which can often introduce a delay of a number of seconds - the question of when something ceases to be live is an interesting one...
noggin
Founding member
chromakey123 posted:
Dan posted:
chromakey123 posted:
Dog posted:
Every news channel has had the ability to delay live footage for years, and they have been.
Delaying live footage is nothing new. BBC, Sky, ITV, CNN, etc etc. They all do it, and none of you are none the wiser.
THIS IS COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE
No it's not. Why do you think it is? Did you read Timmy's post?
Because I work in television news...
None of the news channels "delay live footage"... ... if by that you mean somehow digitally add a few seconds between a feed coming in to the building before being tx'ed....
Yes of course sometimes we record footage, view it as it comes in, then play it out as fast as possible...
But that it just recording, then replaying... NOT quite the same as delaying live footage.
What the BBC is proposing to do is crazy... It won't work in practice... and instead will just mean inexperienced or junior staff at N24 being too scared to broadcast what they fear MIGHT be sensitive footage until it has been approved... thereby handing a small victory to Sky and ITVNC.
Err - it isn't nonsense and has been done on numerous occasions in the past 7 or 8 years. I'd be careful when you say "NONE OF THE NEWS CHANNELS"...
News 24 launched with the ability to delay incoming feeds by seconds, minutes and even hours, as a result of their use of Profiles in 1997. Pretty much since the start of News 24 the ability to time shift feeds has been used.
Most of the time this is used to time-shift one of two live events that are happening simultaneously - and often to good effect (meaning a news conference that has been going on for a minute or two is joined without missing an important early bit) However it has certainly also been used to allow rushes to be played out unedited from links vehicles, and agency pictures to be delayed before being cut to air, to ensure :
1.You get out before the feed ends (by far the most common use)
2. You can get out before disturbing - or inappropriate (say the appearance of a local anchor from a foreign TV station you are cutting to air) - pictures are broadcast.
ISTR that BBC World had to delay the Clinton / Lewinsky stuff to ensure they complied with ITC legislation (as BBC World was an ITC regulated channel - unlike BBC domestic outlets at the time) - and there was a danger that explicit material could have put the BBC in breach of their licence.
Delaying feeds certainly isn't anything new. Any event that you see played out on a news channel WITHOUT a LIVE bug may well be being delayed - and the BBC proposal is merely formalising (and I guess probably increasing the use of) a technique which is already not exactly unusual.
In the days of digital transmission - which can often introduce a delay of a number of seconds - the question of when something ceases to be live is an interesting one...
MA
Marcus
Founding member
Compliance is an important point. TV stations could be breaking the law by broadcasting an image which is offensive. It's why E4 put in a time delay on their so called live coverage of Big Brother.
News24 and World have certainly used delays on picture feeds before. One example I can think of was the Hatfield Train crash where pictures were delayed by a few seconds to prevent identifiable bodies being shown.
News24 and World have certainly used delays on picture feeds before. One example I can think of was the Hatfield Train crash where pictures were delayed by a few seconds to prevent identifiable bodies being shown.