| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| Loud Commercials.... https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9478 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | TheRiov [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Loud Commercials.... |
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/13/showbiz/t ... ?hpt=hp_c3 Washington (CNN) -- Say goodbye to one of the greatest irritants of modern life: television commercials that are MUCH LOUDER THAN THE SHOW YOU ARE WATCHING! Beginning Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission is barring broadcasters and pay TV providers from airing excessively loud commercials, saying ads must maintain the "same average volume" as the programs they accompany. The move -- which undoubtedly will make many TV viewers happier, and save countless marriages -- addresses a problem that, regulators say, is almost as old as television itself. Loud commercials have been a leading source of complaints to the FCC since its consumer call center began reporting top complaints in 2002. Since January 2008, the FCC has received about 1,000 complaints and about 5,000 inquiries, the commission said. Congress mandated the change in the aptly named Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation, or CALM, Act in 2010. Last year, the FCC set a December 13, 2012, deadline for full compliance. Until now, the FCC says it didn't regulate the "loudness" of commercials mainly because it was difficult to craft rules. For one thing, loudness is subjective. So, for years, the commission advised customers to mute their TVs or lower the volume. The CALM Act bill had wide bipartisan support, passing the Senate unanimously and the House by a voice vote. Bill supporters Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-California, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, and industry representatives plan an event in Washington on Thursday to mark the full implementation of the law. The FCC says it has granted two temporary waivers to the law: one to South Georgia Governmental Services Authority, a municipal cable system, because of financial hardship; and to WPFO in Waterville, Maine, which asked for a grant because it is relocating its facilities. Non-commercial television stations are exempt from the act. Political ads, however, must comply. The FCC will not monitor compliance, but instead will rely on consumer complaints to assist the commission to enforce the rule. Complaints can be filed by using the online complaint form, 2000G, at http://www.fcc.gov/complaints. |
|
| Author: | Kaffis Mark V [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I find it amusing that this measure will probably break several of the market solutions that skip commercials automatically, since they often rely on sudden changes in volume as one of their reference cues. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Useless **** bullshit. |
|
| Author: | Stathol [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
I eagerly await commercials front-loaded with very loud, startling noises followed by a minute of slightly-lower-than-average volume, thus ensuring the same average volume. |
|
| Author: | Numbuk [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Interesting news for many. Less a factor for me since I'm a pure cord cutter. Hopefully it will relieve a bit of headache for many, though. |
|
| Author: | Lonedar [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Maybe I'll finally get a nap. |
|
| Author: | Müs [ Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I am thankful for this legislation. It needs to extend to radio as well. I hate having to turn up the sound to hear what people are saying, and then scramble for the remote WHEN THE ADS COME ON YELLING ABOUT SOMETHING I DON'T CARE ABOUT |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Sat Dec 15, 2012 7:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? A lot. It's a gigantic pain in the ***, too. Most outlets already made a serious effort to normalize the audio...the onerous proof and "legitimization" of it is ridiculously burdensome. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
That's what bites me about this. Yeah its "a good thing" on the surface, but it's really another fairly pointless and burdensome government regulation when you get down to the brass tacks. |
|
| Author: | Aizle [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 1:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
FarSky wrote: Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? A lot. It's a gigantic pain in the ***, too. Most outlets already made a serious effort to normalize the audio...the onerous proof and "legitimization" of it is ridiculously burdensome. As a consumer, I really couldn't **** care less about that. This legislation is completely and totally the industry's own fault for being assholes and not regulating themselves. And I call bullshit on the "serious effort" part. That has not been my experience watching TV in many markets all around the country on all of the major broadcast stations. |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
I've done plenty of video editing. It's not hard to establish an audio baseline. |
|
| Author: | Micheal [ Sun Dec 16, 2012 7:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Rorinthas wrote: That's what bites me about this. Yeah its "a good thing" on the surface, but it's really another fairly pointless and burdensome government regulation when you get down to the brass tacks. And the ubiquitous +1 |
|
| Author: | DFK! [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Aizle wrote: FarSky wrote: Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? A lot. It's a gigantic pain in the ***, too. Most outlets already made a serious effort to normalize the audio...the onerous proof and "legitimization" of it is ridiculously burdensome. As a consumer, I really couldn't **** care less about that. This legislation is completely and totally the industry's own fault for being assholes and not regulating themselves. And I call bullshit on the "serious effort" part. That has not been my experience watching TV in many markets all around the country on all of the major broadcast stations. You say this until the unintended consequences start to creep up. Then you might care. |
|
| Author: | Aizle [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
DFK! wrote: Aizle wrote: FarSky wrote: Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? A lot. It's a gigantic pain in the ***, too. Most outlets already made a serious effort to normalize the audio...the onerous proof and "legitimization" of it is ridiculously burdensome. As a consumer, I really couldn't **** care less about that. This legislation is completely and totally the industry's own fault for being assholes and not regulating themselves. And I call bullshit on the "serious effort" part. That has not been my experience watching TV in many markets all around the country on all of the major broadcast stations. You say this until the unintended consequences start to creep up. Then you might care. Actually since I stopped watching TV about a year ago, I doubt it. |
|
| Author: | DFK! [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Aizle wrote: DFK! wrote: Aizle wrote: FarSky wrote: Rorinthas wrote: I wonder what training and compliance is costing some of the local outlets with this? A lot. It's a gigantic pain in the ***, too. Most outlets already made a serious effort to normalize the audio...the onerous proof and "legitimization" of it is ridiculously burdensome. As a consumer, I really couldn't **** care less about that. This legislation is completely and totally the industry's own fault for being assholes and not regulating themselves. And I call bullshit on the "serious effort" part. That has not been my experience watching TV in many markets all around the country on all of the major broadcast stations. You say this until the unintended consequences start to creep up. Then you might care. Actually since I stopped watching TV about a year ago, I doubt it. I take this to mean you're unable to foresee the economic impact of this. |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
There will be no economic impact of commercial editors needing to lower their volume. |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oh that's not true at all. How does the legal agency know that commercial editors are really lowering their volume? Viewers are going to complain regardless simply because they don't like commercials. Not every complaint is indicative of non-compliance, but will still be investigated. That requires money, which is wasted. Government regulation doesn't magically wishes and ponies all of our problems away. That requires man-hours, which gets abstracted as money in our current cultural paradigm. |
|
| Author: | DFK! [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: Government regulation doesn't magically wishes and ponies all of our problems away. That requires man-hours, which gets abstracted as money in our current cultural paradigm. Yep. And if the man-hour requirement is high enough, that means reductions in jobs, broadcast content, or increasing advertising rates. Change rates enough, and revenues may drop, OR price inflation of the advertised goods. Everything is connected. |
|
| Author: | Müs [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Loud Commercials.... |
Lenas wrote: There will be no economic impact of commercial editors needing to lower their volume. Actually, I would bet that the impact is a cost savings to not have to pay a commercial editor the extra time and whatnot to not pump the total loudness to ridiculous levels whilst staying within the current regulations. Loudness /= Volume.  This is in relation to music and what not, but the same technique is used in loudening commercials. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
also there is a difference between "lowering your volume/loudness" and "complying with a complex FCC regulation." even if it does serve those greedy capitalist pigs right for trying to make a living off your minor discomfort of having to turn the tv down. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oooooookay. So...yeah. There seems to be a lot of misinformation and confusion in this thread. I say "misinformation" because it's more polite than "ignorant belligerence." First of all...TV stations (aka affiliates) aren't the issue. TV stations don't make commercials (well, they do, but not usually the ones that warrant these "loudness" complaints). Those come from third-party vendors (advertisers). Those advertisers control the content of their advertisements. Many of them (particularly direct response and per inquiry spots [the "But wait...there's more!"-type junk]) utilize compression to make everything seem louder, hoping to get your attention, make you come back in from the kitchen to turn down the TV...whatever they can do to grab your attention. The old saying about there not being any bad publicity holds true; so long as they get your attention, they've got a chance at a sale. Occasionally you'll get a loud spot from locally-produced stuff (i.e. spots created by the station or by a local-to-the-area production house)...but that's a matter of production incompetence, not any particular desire to jolt people awake. Television stations are run with absolutely no overriding workflow. Each station has its own way of doing things, and correspondingly, some stations are better (that is, they put out a better quality product) than others. Note that I'm talking about television stations, not television networks. Networks assemble content and centralcast it from one point. Television stations are the businesses in your local area that take in that content and rebrand and rebroadcast it ("ABC 32," for instance, or "Fox 13," or "News Channel 9" or whatever your local stations call themselves). These local affiliates, being the endpoint of the broadcast chain, take in several different kinds of content: they take the network feed (which includes all of the commercials sold and run by the network), their own local or regional commercials (spots sold and run by the affiliate itself), its own syndicated programming (each affiliate has its own agreements for this, which is why one of your local channels runs something like Everybody Loves Raymond or some other bullshit you can watch reruns of on TBS 24/7) and the bartered commercials that come built into those syndicated show feeds, and local programming (if any). That is a great number of disparate sources to manage, and local affiliates, with the exception of the largest markets, generally aren't making anyone rich. They live in a constant state of break-even (for the most part), and don't put a high priority on master control or creative/production staffing. Depending on the workflow of the station itself, a master control technician or a production person will take in the content and level the audio. This is easier said than done; there is no standard level to which content is created, the content comes in on a bajillion different forms of media (digital file FTP, Betacam, DVD, DVCPro, miniDV, DG Fastchannel...the list goes ever on), and the producers of the content often don't know what they're doing (even if you know nothing of audio editing, you should be able to tell simply by looking that there's no saving a waveform like this). Loud files occasionally slip through. Going back to the issue of compression (refer to the video Müs linked), there are two "kinds" of volume: actual decibels measured, and what the human ear feels like it's hearing. Compressed audio sounds louder than it "technically" is. I hate to link anyone to TVTropes because goodbye evening, but read up on the Loudness War. It's both illuminating and depressing. The root problem with legislation of this type is that it hits the networks and affiliates, not the content creators (who are left unscathed), and thus it's the TV stations and networks that bear the culpability (and cost) of compliance. The seven networks I oversee now just had over $25,000 in equipment outlay alone only for compliance. That's not even effecting any change; that's just so that we can be "certified" compliant with the CALM Act. And that's not including the countless man-hours already spent on the initial attempts, as well as time that's going to be spent having to re-transcode every piece of content through a new process in order to come out with the exact same result we currently have. The solution to this issue is purely free market: if a TV station is playing a loud commercial (be it truly loud or simply perceived as loud), call and complain. Enough complaints, and it'll be fixed (reprocessed with the station lowering the audio). Legislating against this is ridiculous and detrimental to everyone. |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
FarSky wrote: The solution to this issue is purely free market: if a TV station is playing a loud commercial (be it truly loud or simply perceived as loud), call and complain. Enough complaints, and it'll be fixed (reprocessed with the station lowering the audio). Legislating against this is ridiculous and detrimental to everyone. Sounds more like the solution should instead punish the ******* content creators, not distributors. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I still disagree that a minor annoyance warrants legislative action, but if that point is conceded, then it should, yes. Current legislation imposes onto the content creators no culpability, and thus no cost. |
|
| Author: | Stathol [ Wed Dec 19, 2012 12:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
An object lesson in the inherent subjectivity of loudness: http://gladerebooted.org/~stathol/audio/loudness-frequency.ogg This is a simple, continuous sine wave of constant amplitude. It starts at 200 Hz and linearly increases to 1000Hz. Even if you're listening to it over a playback device that has a nice, constant frequency response curve, your ears are going to tell you that some parts are louder than others because your ears are dirty, filthy liars. Perhaps more interestingly: http://gladerebooted.org/~stathol/audio/loudness-modulation.ogg  The tones you hear are all amplitude modulations of the same 440Hz base tone, and have been adjusted to have equal average power over a 1/30s window (or greater). Peak power is slightly higher (by a factor of sqrt(2)) for tones 2-4. And yet at least to my ears, tone 2 seems slightly quieter than tone 1, while tones 3 and 4 are significantly louder. Bottom line, there is no objective way to measure "loud". In the end, it all must boil down to subjective psychoacoustic models. The best solution to the problem, then, is a subjective one. A one-size-fits-all regulatory standard is seriously misplaced regardless of the **** of certification, etc., etc. which I don't doubt is being foisted on station management to no actual measurable good. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
