Re-Classifying Broadcast: A New Era of Media

This is part 2 of a 2 part series covering how the industry classifies its services.
Read part 1, Is Misclassification Really a Problem.

Merging Two Worlds Into One

The industry is still adamant on there being two separate broadcasting worlds – traditional linear TV and streaming. Terms like ‘digital TV’, ‘IP TV’, ‘paid TV’ and ‘FAST’ are just confusing and a clear example of why the broadcast industry needs a solid refocus on the classification of its services, particularly as they are often treated as different formats when in fact most are a blend. We need to stop, have a plan, and reclassify to get our terminology right. Then we can make the right business decisions on how we manage our future. We need to reframe our thinking to see broadcast as a single, multifaceted tech stack in terms of customer access.

Figure 1: The way the industry currently reports itself is as two separate broadcasting worlds leading to confusion and misclassification.

This plan for unification allows us to integrate traditional TV and streaming platforms, optimizing resources and creating a cohesive strategy that enhances both short-term gains and long-term user engagement. This shift in mindset could lead to more innovative solutions and a more adaptable, resilient business model that better serves a diverse audience.

If we look at Sky Glass, for example they are in the process of moving their stack from satellite distribution to "over IP" – a glimpse of how the future can look.

This unified approach is exactly the kind of change the broadcast industry needs to survive and thrive in the future. By streamlining operations and making better use of new technologies, such as VVC, JPEG-XS, ST2110 standards, we can create a more efficient and effective broadcasting ecosystem.

There is More Work to Do

Moving to over-IP solutions is a step in the right direction. Personally, I know that Sky Glass still relies on the 30-year-old rights management platform BSS, more commonly recognized through its offspring, IBMS. Rights management CRMs have historically struggled to support streaming because concepts like VOD consumption methods and device-level rights were foreign to them. The problem was that the required data didn't fit into the existing databases or frontends, preventing it from propagating downstream to end-user platforms. Initially, in the beginning of the industry’s development, traditional broadcast systems never required this level of data until digital services became dominant, which they have become in 2024. Now, content metadata enrichment is vital to the end-user experience, ensuring accurate, detailed information that enhances content discovery, personalisation and engagement.

So, how do we get past this? First things first, we need to stop worrying about how many users are in traditional cable contracts versus monthly streaming platforms or FAST channels. Instead, let's build an improved stack that allows us to be agile and responsive to market needs, reaching all our users effectively. This may require rethinking the Glass-to-Glass workflows – from rights management in old CRMs to handling images for content and other metadata enrichment.

Most importantly, this change involves reconsidering how we shoot, record, ingest, archive, and broadcast content. This means ensuring efficient management throughout the flow and ultimately delivering a seamless experience across a multi-channel offering to viewers. We should be looking at how we merge the technical aspects to offer customers what they need and work out what’s best in terms of how we choose to deliver that. If we start making these simple changes to our approach today, implementing re-classification across our workflows will be a piece of cake in a few years. However, it’s these simple things that need to be done first.

Driving Reclassification 

One thing I have already started to see is the FAST stack classification falling away and rolling back to a simplified language as in reality there is little to differentiate FAST tech stacks to small footprint linear and VOD channels anymore. So, despite their growth, how do we really define FAST in the future, as it’s not really a real thing, it’s a buzz word like ‘channel in a box’ was. Instead, they are using new tech to stand up a channel and pay for it/grow revenue by delivering targeted ads. It’s more a business model than a physical thing, I feel.

Figure 2: The industry needs to reframe its thinking and see broadcast as a single, multifaceted tech stack in terms of customer access.

It’s officially time to shift our mindset and consider all our customers across every proposition to build the offerings of tomorrow. It’s no longer enough to continue with the old, but rather the new needs to be welcomed in and given a permanent place on the shores of broadcast. The industry is not two separate worlds, but rather one big one, one that is unfortunately misunderstood right now. This approach will guide us in reconstructing our glass-to-glass enterprise, managing video from camera to encoder, desk to storage, CRM to editing, vendors to distribution, and ultimately to improving broadcast. As an industry, our goal should be to delight viewers time and again with the best quality and lowest latency, on any device, anywhere.

At MainConcept, we believe positive change is on the horizon for broadcast, and now is the time for a reclassification. It is essential that we take the steps to defining our industry correctly to better reach the customers of tomorrow.

This is part 2 of a 2 part series covering how the industry classifies its services. Read part 1, Is Misclassification Really a Problem.