How automation is changing the television industry as we know it

Theory versus reality

For example, as a director, it can be extremely daunting when things change quickly and you look down at your equipment – often a computer keyboard – and have to know which button to hit to change what is currently on air to what needs to go next. And remember, once you press it, it will be on people’s TVs whether it’s right or not! This can certainly be learnt, but it takes years to refine – and really is the difference between high-end production and something amateur. While I appreciate that anyone can operate these systems, it still isn’t quite there yet – at least not when things start to go wrong.

On the editorial side, automation has created a new type of producer, one who has to be more technically savvy than ever before. Depending on the setup, they can now configure everything – from camera moves, to lighting, audio and graphics. They’re now, for example, responsible for adding all the words and timings on graphics so they appear and disappear with the correct information at the correct time.

Producers know the story and can see the pictures they are editing, so rather than tell a graphics operator when to play it, they tell the system. Seems more efficient right? But it comes with caveats – timing and accuracy of spelling both have to be good for this to look perfect. It appears automatically however it’s been saved – without the second pair of eyes a graphics operator brings. 

We’ve all seen this on TV. Something like ‘John Smith’ being spelt ‘John Smiht’. The software does show everything that’s been saved, so a director can amend, skip, remove or add anything if required. But it means that the now one-man crew must check everything before it goes on air, as they’re ultimately responsible for quality control. A tough job!  

A new generation of producers and directors

While the systems are often removing traditional roles of cameramen, audio engineers and graphics operators, what’s being created is a new evolution of specialist technical directors and producers. They need to not just understand their new role as director and all the technical roles that have been removed, but have an in-depth understanding of what the story actually is. They’re now not just responsible for showing this as accurately as possible, but using the tools around them in the most creative and engaging way so that viewers understand the story.

Automation is currently still an unfinished product. It does work, just not as well as it could. In fact, it’s at the most technically advanced it has ever been; it can control more equipment and is more powerful than ever. Automation systems certainly provide the ability to do many things well and accurately, but are currently only as good as the team that has installed the system as wel as those who operate it.

Working with automation in practice

With both Euronews NBC and the recently launched digital network NBC Signal, the technical team, manufacturers and I had to work on solutions to production scenarios that the ‘out the box’ product could not cater for. During both projects we managed to successfully utilise automation in a different capacity. This is never as easy as it seems due to the different needs from the production teams, facilities and resources available.

Euronews was a brand new studio with new technical facilities. It meant we had the opportunity to build new workflows based around the production goals. NBC Signal already had all the TV facilities and studios in place, so this project was about exploring technical ideas and using the most advanced infrastructure solutions available without compromising what the production teams wanted.

Each project is really different on a micro level. The people working on them choose the amount of automation they want to include, and find different solutions that suit the production. But on a macro level, project results are often very similar; they’re now two very efficient setups that can scale with production and business needs – but only because people have come up with creative solutions and not just followed what the software dictates. 

Looking to the future from a staffing perspective, the lines between editorial and technical production will continue to blur. We are entering a time where a technically savvy producer or an editorially savvy technician could balance both sides, and achieve an editorially strong and technically accurate programme. This will only continue to evolve.  

An area that would be exciting to explore is voice control. This really would change everything. We see more and more of it in our everyday lives, and as machines continue to get smarter and AI continues to develop, it seems perfect to apply it to live TV. This will further break down the editorial-technical barrier, and let producers and directors act truly in the moment. Rather than having your head down looking at a computer screen to make a change, a director on the fly can say “take camera one,” and the system will know what that means. This applies the efficient nature of automation and the flexibility of a traditional crew setup to any scenario.

Whether people agree or disagree with the idea of automation, it’s clear that it’s here to stay. While it’s not a one-size-fits-all model, it does have ability to improve the majority of productions – but only if set up the right way.