June | 2015 | Broadcast Blog

Media Monitoring with Big Data: Opportunities and Challenges

June 29, 2015 / Tariq Islam / No Comments

What would marketing strategists do if every second of all broadcast television, broadcast radio, and social media posts were available in real time for analysis? How would advertisers react if the transcripts of all the TV and radio broadcast information were available in addition to video and audio for every second anywhere in the nation in real time? Big Data analytics provides a means to digest this copious amount of information and to make ad buying decisions on the fly.

Big Data analytics means not only processing very large amounts of data but also attempting to coherently connect the unstructured nature of the data. For example, the data could be a combination of radio and TV transmissions converted into speech by a speech coder, closed caption text of TV programs, Twitter and Facebook posts, financial data and spreadsheets, and news articles. Another advantage of Big Data analytics is that the system is self-learning; once the initial analytical model has been created, additional new data and information can be easily integrated into the knowledge base. Big Data analytics has been creating a buzz in the industry for a number of years, and many companies are already offering tools and services to reap the benefits.

An example of a company that archives broadcast content for media monitoring is Critical Mention. Critical Mention captures and indexes 40 hours of broadcast content every 60 seconds from more than 2,000 unique broadcast sources. The users thus have access to a database of more than 16 million searchable segments, all available in broadcast quality and near-real time. The users can search TV/radio/online news, watch video, edit and share coverage, receive real-time alerts, and create reports. The system also offers analytic tools to gain insight into the data, to benchmark against competitors, to analyze viewer sentiment, and to visualize density of coverage on maps. The following picture is an example of the analysis tool output.

Figure: Critical Mention Analytics

Integration of Big Data analytics with archived media information would open up many new possibilities in the future. For example, the single string-based search provided by Critical Mention can be augmented to perform searches based on different combinations of groups of words. Grouping of related words and inclusion/exclusion combinations of many different groups are known as dictionaries and rules in Big Data jargon, and these well known techniques are used to isolate relevant information and validate hypotheses. The natural language processing (NLP) capabilities of big data can also help make inference about the context in which the key words are used, making the results more reliable and relevant. Yet one can envision that image processing and pattern matching algorithms could be used to detect and quantify product placement in broadcast video. For example, the Coke logo can be identified in time-stamped video frames across all the broadcasters of all the DMAs in real time. These capabilities are computationally intensive, but the algorithms are fairly well understood. Cloud services, which offer scalable computational resources, can make this kind of analysis available in the future.

Recognizing some of these potential business opportunities, broadcasters and consumer electronics manufacturers are developing a next-generation television system with dynamic ad insertion and targeted advertising capabilities. If ad buyers can identify a need – in real-time if they wish – to maintain their brands’ share of voice (SOV) in certain geographically segmented markets, broadcasters will have the technical means to deliver the ads to the intended audience in the future. As a consequence, programmatic advertising and ad exchange might become more dynamic in terms of balancing demand and supply.

This kind of individualized targeting might also raise challenges to traditional advertising models in the broadcast industry. With access to all the real-time and personalized information of the audience, an ad buyer will have the option to use different means to reach the audience, even when the audience is consuming broadcast content. For example, armed with the knowledge of a consumer’s state of mind at a certain location at a certain instant, the ad buyer might reach the targeted customer through a smartphone, thus totally bypassing the broadcasters. Proliferation of the Internet of Things (IoT) will provide more outlets for targeted advertising, and the situation might become even more challenging for the traditional broadcasting model.

Media monitoring along with Big Data analytics has tremendous potential for targeted and contextual advertising. The advertising industry is changing rapidly, revealing both opportunities and challenges for broadcasters. Broadcasters will need to be vigilant of this fundamental paradigm shift in advertising and adapt to new market challenges.

RDS2 Demonstrated at 2015 RDS Forum Meeting

June 15, 2015 / David Layer / No Comments

For nearly three decades the Radio Data System (RDS) digital FM subcarrier has been providing FM broadcasters the ability to transmit a digital data stream to listeners. Developed in Europe, RDS was slow to take hold in the U.S. at first, but the introduction of digital radio services in the early 2000’s also heralded a significant uptake in the use of RDS to provide song title and artist and traffic-related information to RDS-equipped receivers. It is estimated that there are currently over 5 billion RDS-equipped radios worldwide.

While extremely useful, the RDS signal is severely limited in data capacity, and the RDS Standards (IEC 62106 and NRSC-4-B) include a number of features that have become out-of-date and are no longer needed. Given these factors, the RDS Forum, a European-based standards-development group responsible for the initial development and on-going maintenance of the IEC version of the Standard, agreed at its annual meeting in July 2014 to begin considering an update to RDS that would address these issues. A follow-on meeting to discuss a proposed enhancement called “RDS2” was held in Budapest in November 2014 which resulted in a “feasibility document” describing the proposed RDS2 system.

Last week, the RDS Forum held its 2015 annual meeting, and a prototype RDS2 system was demonstrated. Further, after deliberating the potential benefits afforded by this new system, the RDS Forum created a Working Group with the goal of updating the RDS Standard to include RDS2. A brief description of RDS2 is given here:

RDS2 offers the ability to transmit one, two or three additional subcarriers along with, and identical in structure to, the legacy RDS subcarrier. While the legacy subcarrier is centered at 57 kHz (within the FM baseband), the three new subcarriers are centered at 66.5, 71.25 and 76 kHz (as with the legacy 57 kHz subcarrier, these new subcarriers are each derivable from the 19 kHz pilot). Shown in the figure below is a spectral plot of the RDS and RDS2 subcarriers and the 19 kHz pilot tone (this plot is from the prototype system demonstrated to the RDS Forum);

The proposed RDS2 system design was developed by Attilla Ladanyi, T&C Holdings (Germany) and Peter Jako, Hungarian Radio. The demo transmission hardware operated and on display at this year’s Forum was developed by Allen Hartle and Seth Stroh, Jump2Go (USA), and is based upon Jump2Go’s “JumpGate3” platform; the demo reception hardware was developed by Hendrik van der Ploeg, Catena and Joop Beunders, MacBe (Netherlands). A photo of the demo setup is shown below. Note that this was an actual low-power “over-the-air” transmission.

It is proposed that the new RDS2 subcarriers will be used exclusively to transmit “Open Data Application” (ODA) information. Previously established as part of the legacy RDS format, ODAs are used to support a variety of data services, and are the principal way that new services utilize RDS. Since the new subcarriers will be freed from transmitting the various “overhead” types of RDS data such as the Program Information (PI) and Program Service (PS) codes, the overall data capacity of the RDS2 signal (for “payload”) is on the order of 10 to 20 times (or more) of that available with the legacy RDS subcarrier alone.

A comparison of data capacity is given in the table below, where three cases are compared: Case 0 illustrates the capacity (in effective bit rate) of a legacy RDS subcarrier where 10% of the payload is used for transmitting ODA data (this is a typical scenario in use today); Case 1 again represents a legacy RDS subcarrier but this time with a 70% ODA payload, showing essentially the maximum ODA payload throughput using the legacy RDS signal; and finally, Case 3 shows a 30-fold improvement in ODA payload capacity when all three RDS2 subcarriers are used to carry 100% ODA data (assuming no ODA data on the legacy subcarrier; this is the proposed use case for RDS2). For this table, “STREAM 0” refers to the data stream used to modulate the legacy RDS subcarrier while “STREAMS_1-3” refers to the data streams modulating the three RDS2 subcarriers.

Some of the new applications that are proposed for and would be supportable by RDS2 include the ability to transmit a station logo and the use of the UTF-8 character set to support longer Radio Text and Program Service text strings. Currently, these applications are not supportable with RDS because of the limited capacity of the existing system as illustrated by the cases shown in the above table.

With the completion of the successful prototype demonstration and the RDS Forum members in agreement that RDS2 should be incorporated into the Standard, it is now the task of the newly formed RDS Forum Working Group to develop the detailed specification for RDS2, and in addition to identify the obsolete sections of the existing Standards that can be eliminated. NAB Senior Director, Advanced Engineering David Layer, who participated in this year’s RDS Forum meeting as a liaison for the National Radio Systems Committee (NRSC, co-sponsored by NAB and the Consumer Electronics Association), will be participating in the RDS Forum Working Group, and will work to ensure compatibility of the updated European Standard with the NRSC’s version of the RDS Standard (NRSC-4-B, United States RBDS Standard).

In parallel with the Standards development work, the RDS Forum intends to work on identifying “killer applications” for RDS2, and identifying chip and receiver manufacturer partners interested in developing hardware that will support these upgrades to the RDS system. Outreach is also planned to broadcasters to inform them of this work, and to seek out their input and participation in the Standards-setting and applications development processes.

Visit the RDS Forum and NRSC websites for additional information on these organizations. For additional information on the RDS2 project or to find out how to get involved in this work, at NAB.

Low-power FM Proponents Seek Power Increase

June 1, 2015 / David Layer / No Comments

Low-power FM (LPFM) stations are increasing in number as a result of the FCC’s October 2013 filing window for new LPFM applications. The most recent “ Broadcast Totals” published by the FCC (dated March 31, 2015) show 1,029 licensed LPFM stations which is an increase of 255 from one year earlier, and many more can be expected since, according to the Media Bureau, 2,826 new LPFM applications were filed in 2013.

Currently, LPFM stations are authorized for 100 watts ERP (“LP-100”), but on May 15, 2015 the FCC released for comment a Petition for Rulemaking seeking to increase this to a maximum of 250 watts (“LP-250”). REC Networks, an LPFM advocacy group which also provides broadcast engineering services to LPFM broadcasters, submitted this petition which in addition to asking for a power increase, also requests that the FCC make additional rule changes favorable to the LPFM service at the expense of additional potential interference to full-power FM stations and a reduction in future availability of FM translators. REC’s primary justification for the Petition is to better enable LPFM signals to penetrate inside buildings and automobiles. Comments on this Petition are being accepted by the FCC until June 15, 2015.

The figure above, taken from Appendix A of the Petition, shows an example of the impact of increasing the LPFM power from 100 to 250 watts for station WDFC-LP, Greensboro, NC. Also shown in the figure is the 88.4 dBu contour of 2nd-adjacent full-power station WJMH, Reidsville, NC (class C0, 102.1 MHz). Here are some of the details of the proposed rule changes (page numbers refer to the Petition document):

(Page 11) REC proposes a new class of service for LPFM. This service will be allowed to operate at a maximum of 250 watts at 30 meters height above average terrain (“HAAT”) which will result in a service contour of 7.1 kilometers. Under the new LP-250 class of service, LPFM stations may operate at a minimum of 101 watts at 30 meters HAAT with a service contour exceeding 5.6 kilometers and up to 7.1 kilometers;
(Page 13) REC proposes that if a short-spaced LP-100 station wishes to upgrade to LP-250, they will need to make a technical showing that the interfering contour of the proposed upgraded LPFM facility will not overlap the service contour of the full-service contour;
(Page 14) REC proposes that all requests for an upgrade to LP-250 that already has or will result in a new second-adjacent channel short spacing must be accompanied by a request for a waiver of §73.807 of the Commission’s Rules in respect to the short-spaced second adjacent channel station(s). The waiver request would need to include a technical study that either shows that the second-adjacent channel interfering contour of the upgraded LPFM station would not overlap the service contour of the shortspaced station or a demonstration of no interference which can include such items as a map of the proposed interference area, a tower diagram, a satellite or aerial photograph, the antenna manufacturer’s vertical radiation pattern and/or any details about any nearby structures or major roadways. This will mean that LP-100 stations already on a waiver would have to ask for a new waiver to upgrade to LP- 250;
(Page 26) To help expedite the process to allow for LP-100 stations to be permitted to upgrade to LP-250, REC proposes that an automatic upgrade authority (“AUA”) be given to LPFM stations that meet specific criteria. Under AUA, LP-100 stations would be given a period of time (such as 180 days) to voluntarily upgrade their stations to LP-250;
(Page 32) Currently, FM translators are only required to protect LPFM stations on co-channel and first adjacent channels while LPFM stations are required to protect FM translators on co-channel, first adjacent and second-adjacent channel. REC proposes that FM translators now be required to protect LPFM stations on second adjacent channels as well.

Also included in the Petition is a table which estimates the number of LPFM stations that would likely be eligible for upgrading to the LP-250 service:

Comments on this Petition (due June 15, 2015) may be filed electronically:Visit the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) web page at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display;

Visit the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) web page at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display;
Enter Proceeding Number RM-11749;
Provide the requested contact information, note that comments may be filed by anyone and an attorney is not required (if no attorney then simply leave this information blank);
Under “Details” the only information required is Type of Filing: COMMENT;
Provide the requested address information;
Under “Documents” choose the file containing your prepared comments – it is best to submit this in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format;
Click on CONTINUE which brings up a page for review;
Click on CONFIRM to submit your Comments.