Audio visual (AV) content is typically distributed from one or more central locations to local markets over relatively complex networks spanning large geographical areas. This AV content is typically supported by advertisements. However, while the AV content is typically generated for wide distribution, e.g., to national or international markets, advertisements are often intended for comparatively narrow distribution, such as for regional or local audiences. Advertisements are thus often spliced into the AV content at the regional or local level. To accommodate this splicing, the originator of the AV content, e.g., the television network, typically supplies the content with embedded markers, such as those commonly referred to as “avails” and/or SCTE-35 advertisement cue signals. Local content providers, such as network affiliate television stations and/or cable television (CATV) operators may use these avails to properly insert these local advertisements. A typical hour of AV content, for example, may be provided with four avails each corresponding to a 30 second time slot, or two avails each corresponding to a one minute time slot. These time slots are thus available for insertion of local advertisements.
Automated equipment is typically used to detect the avails and to splice in the local advertising content to minimize errors. However, errors may occur due to many factors, including bottlenecks or other traffic issues within the content distribution network, by errors in placement or detection of the avails, or simply by poor quality of the advertisements being supplied to the local insertion point. Local advertisements may thus be spliced in too early or too late, at audio levels that may be too high or too low, or in generally poor condition. This may result in the advertisements overrunning portions of the program, the advertisements being cut off, and/or the advertisements simply being of generally poor quality. These errors are not only problematic from a Quality of Experience (QoE), but may also result in substantial refunds being due to advertisers who typically pay sizable fees for the airing of each 30 or 60 second advertisement.
A related problem pertains to verification of correct advertisement insertion. In this regard, it is often difficult for a local television station or CATV company to refute refund claims by advertisers who complain that their advertisements were improperly inserted, or were otherwise of poor quality at particular locations within the distribution network. Even in the event the quality of the program and advertisement are monitored by the television station or CATV company at the central insertion location, there is no guarantee that the quality of the content was satisfactory as experienced by the end user.
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds