IRI Live Coverage
 

I'd like to start a wide-open discussion. Topic: Get IRI covered, with commentators, live on Television. Why IRI specifically? IRI has a staggeringly higher-quality entertainment value than Champs, plain and simple.

But I'll get some selfish reasons out of the way pretty quick.

1. I wasn't able to follow IRI due to work :(
2. The videos are hard to piece together from YouTube
3. I don't like most live stream sites since they force random commercials at (sometimes) the worst possible times
4. Then there's also a ToS for the live stream sites that states you can't rip the live streams to save off for later

I remember seeing, somewhere, there used to be live ESPN 2 coverage of the FRC World Championships way back when it was in Orlando. Perhaps I saw old coverage of 67 HoT back before the 3v3 format; I don't remember exactly. How hard would it be for the IRI organizers to arrange <insert major broadcaster> support for next year? Qualification matches where a sub-100 score is out of the norm? Sign me up!

Well, then I could at least DVR IRI (ha!).

We [the collective of FIRST] could also work on the 'make it loud' part when there's actually time to do so - during the offseason. It also seems to me that there's a lull in live sports action during late July?

However:

• Who are all of the stakeholders involved in this type of thing? FIRST HQ, The Group Which Makes IRI Happen, The Venue, The Volunteers, The Teams ... anyone else?
• Are there licensing issues that FIRST HQ would bring up?
• A broadcaster, at the end of the day, speaks in the language of dollars. How can we address this with research and our own proposals?
• What were the previous issues with ESPN 2 coverage of Championships, and could any sports or broadcast networks overcome them?
• If this has been discussed before, is anything different (with respect to barriers or benefits) when considering IRI?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

I think it's a big step to go from no TV coverage(ie. public access-type channels) to full coverage on a major national channel...

And while I don't believe there are any major sporting events during IRI-time, it's a lot to ask to have a huge network devote an ENTIRE day to covering something new that markets to such a niche community(speaking realistically; obviously a goal is for FIRST to not be a niche community). Also advertisers probably would not have much confidence in putting money towards advertising during a HS robotics competition.
Also, I believe/assume that the reason there was ESPN2 coverage was because it was when championship took place at Disney; owned by the same conglomerate ESPN is apart of.

I think the first step towards getting coverage of an event like this would be something similar to MSC, broadcast by a local network, streamed online, and the ability to play it back. IMO until FIRST reaches the huge level of full day, live broadcasts on cable TV channels, MSC-type coverage was perfect.

For the next year or two, I think the most coverage of an event would be similar to the i.am.FIRST special on ABC two years ago...

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

A lot of things have to fall into place correctly for that to work. Aside from just getting a network to even entertain the idea, you would still have to get people that know what they're doing to do things like camera work, commentary, and sound mixing. Not to mention there would be a lot of cooperation from the teams required, such as sending in various sized team logos, and CGI-laden graphics of the robots for use when going to commercial or team introductions.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

(Links to the 1996 ESPN Coverage)
(Links to the MSC broadcast)
(The RoboShow: Orlando)

A few examples of media coverage of regional events as sports broadcasts provided for reference.

I think online is the best place for FIRST coverage to live right now. It's easily share-able, it's accessible at any time to anyone with internet access, and it would not rely on advertising to keep it available.

The niche market that FIRST broadcasts would appeal too is not ideal for television but niche markets are what YouTube channels thrive on (just look at the success of channels like 'Geek and Sundry' and 'Nerdist').

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

While I agree that online is best for live coverage, I think there is a real opportunity for an MSC style "Special". I also like the Roboshow that Orlando has going.
If done as a special, I think it would make for a nice trio of shows. I would show final QFs in the first episode with highlights of the previous 1-2 matches, thus showing 4 full matches/intro with highlights


During a boradcast, there is frequently 2 minute "lulls" between end of match and score anouncements. What would the community like to see in that timeframe?
Some options would be:
Instant replays
Commentary
Human/Robot interest stories
Chairman's Award-Videos
People dancing...

************************************************** ****
As a scouter/fan, I personally think I would like to watch teh matches wide angle, full screen. Then immediately re-watch the match with wide angle or dual screen for auto, followed by close-ups. This to me would feel like getting an instant replay, without the expense/hassle of having instant replay/slowmo/rewind on the fly.

Thoughts?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

There's some great stuff here already, so let's focus the discussion a little. That MSC Local coverage is pretty nice. The ESPN coverage is what I had in mind. Unless FIRST begins a campaign to spread FRC to people who weren't already looking for it, online coverage may have a great level of success yet I doubt it will ever push FRC to the scale of impact we all claim to desire.

Ike definitely nailed it - it's the downtime filler which keeps the audience drawn in. If we consider 6 minute match cycles, 2 minutes would be commercials, ~2 minutes live non-field coverage (and Ike's list), 2:15 of match footage. The time appropriation is very similar to typical TV (you're being sold to for 1/3 of the time), and also happens to match the Football format - 60 minutes of football plays take ~3 hours to watch.

Perhaps we should focus on IRI specifically and show how it may be able to overcome problems that may have more to do with the typical FRC regional's format rather than the quality of matches. IRI itself isn't constrained by the FRC Regional time constraints. It also brings together the best brains & minds from FRC in the world with the main purpose of being competitive, so I feel confident there would be plenty of story to tell. MSC is very localized (though the entertainment value of the competitiveness is definitely just as high) so it may not ever work for a national stage.

Coverage wouldn't be constrained to several days in a row of the same robots - that may be a bad idea for Television. What if a crew spent the last day of IRI coming up with the filler in the morning, then used it during Elims? Would FIRST be willing to advertise (or solicit for advertising) for that? Would we? This year's IRI had 16 matches in Elims, which (roughly) translates into 2 hours of on-air time. For a pilot year, perhaps that's ideal - but what could we do to extend that to 3 hours while upping the ante entertainment-wise?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

At the Brownsburg Precision Robotics Competition last year, Team 3176 used school video equipment to do interviews with teams after matches, before matches and in the pit area. The footage was pretty raw, but for a first year event, it was really cool! I believe the plan is to do the same thing this year.

The entire footage of the event (matches and all interviews) were put on repeat in the school Media Center FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR. At any time, you could walk into the Media Center and see students sitting in chairs, studying or reading, or just hanging out, with Rebound Rumble on a television next to the local news, and school updates. It was pretty neat.

(The event this year is on November 9th...the last weekend of off-season competition. Email team3176@gmail.com if you're interested.)

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

At offseason events, how critical are team introductions? I realize sometimes they're good to fill the time while waiting for the Green Light, but do we really need to spend 1-2 minutes each round for this? We can all see the bumper numbers, and a good game announcer can provide team information during the match. Perhaps we can tighten the dead-time between matches as well as fill the time.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

If the broadcast just included eliminations (which I think is the best plan) then while you might be able to get some time back during quarter finals. During semi's and finals the match reset time is also necessary for robots to get reset.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

Man, I go on vacation and the whole conversation fizzles.

While I'm happy than an entire Youtube channel exists for IRI, I still challenge the notion that FRC belongs solely on the internet.

Would anyone really concede that a market which supports combat juggling could not also support FRC at it's most prestigious event?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

NSFW(ish)

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

I feel that this is an unfair example. Combat Juggling has a novelty appeal to it, which justifies its television exposure. It brings people in because they have never heard of anything like it and want to see it for giggles. FRC unfortunately lacks both the novelty appeal and the "crazy ape" factor. People think that they have seen robots on TV (battlebots anyone?) and high level play is only really "crazy" to those who understand the game.

Maybe we should take a page out of the book of the MLG. Hire a small group of dedicated, knowledgeable, and trained commentators to be the hosts of a central live stream online that covers the elimination matches of regionals, worlds and IRI. It would create a preview for local networks that is very professional in appearance. Statistical analysis of viewership (and yes, advertising effectiveness) garnered from the live stream events would be the proof that you need to give that showing FRC events is a viable way to make money.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

The FRC championship event was on ESPN longer (1996-98) than Combat Juggling's championship event (2011-2012).

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

If you guys have TWC in your area, I encourage you to contact them! TWC's KC Metro Sportsnet did a FANTASTIC job at the KC regional this year broadcasting elims! Here's a bit of it they posted on YouTube! Now if every regional could have something going like this for them, it would be FANTASTIC! They broadcasted the game as their "Game of the Week" several times the week after the regional, and they also sell a DVD, which I bought :)

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

So nothing's changed in 15 years for FRC? The robots don't perform better, look better, and play better-designed games?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

The indirect effects of being on ESPN would be huge I imagine.

I watched the 98 champs as a kid, and had no idea what it was, but I knew at that moment I would do that someday. Also, being a 9 year old kid I said that I would be GREAT at it (what 9 year old wouldn't?).

My mom loved repeating that story after our 2011 season.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

None of that has anything to do with my point or addresses the challenges faced by FRC on live television.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

What was your point then?

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

Specifically? The "market" already "supported" FRC on ESPN for as long as ESPN was interested.

More broadly, FRC is not well suited for live broadcast for a number of reasons, many of which have been covered in this thread. A non-live, condensed broadcast is more doable, but still heavily limited and not likely for a nationwide broadcast on a major network.

Even broader still. This is a competition based on technology and ingenuity. Let's be forward thinking about how to present and broadcast the content. Internet streaming and video-on-demand are increasingly taking bites out of live television broadcasts. Embrace it, don't fight it.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

As a growing technology company I think Twitch might be really into supporting FIRST, but I think it would have to be communications from a higher level than just team members.

Twitch is only going to get bigger, since it will now be on XBox 1 and PS4.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

That was 17 years ago; what about now? How can we get other networks interested?

I still can't find the comment in this thread that said FRC is not well-suited for live broadcast and why - are there other threads?

Several have claimed internet is better for them, but haven't explained why it is better for the target audience - kids (and their parents) who need some inspiration to move forward with STEM degrees - who (by definition of 'needing inspiration') aren't searching the internet for robotics. Wooly hit on some challenges for live TV, but they're not necessarily barriers to entry if the IRI committee wants to put in requests to teams who attend.

I agree that internet-based tech is a great way moving forward. Yet I think we're asking the wrong questions with respect to broadcasting for target audiences. The question should be: how do current families with young children watch their entertainment? What if they're poor? What if they can afford every entertainment option? If they're already using Twitch, how do we get FRC robotics onto their Xboxes without them having to already desire it?

I have a moment to breath this weekend. Maybe I'll pull together some research.

Re: IRI Live Coverage
 

Here is a good place to start: http://techcrunch.com/2012/02/09/100...n-watch-video/

"Americans streamed 43.5 billion videos in December 2011, up 44% since December 2010"

"The average viewer watches 239 videos per month"

"The study also showed that 105.1 million Americans now watch videos online each day, up 43% from 73.7 million in 2010."


FRC is as well suited to live broadcast as soccer or hockey or curling is, but we lack the infrastructure to make the broadcast easily digestible to a mainstream audience.

For instance we don't have a centralized way of tracking stats, or an easily recognizable progress meter (e.g. the yellow first down line in football,) add to that the difficulty of creating a sense of drama that non-FIRSTers can understand (for example it's easy to hype Yankees v. Red Sox or UF v. FSU, but not as easy to explain why 1114, 217, and 148 v. 67, 469, and 33 is a big match) all while trying to explain a complex competition culture and game dynamic that plays out over a very short period of time.

A television broadcast would be great if we knew everyone watching already had fundamental understanding of FIRST and that particular years game because then the broadcast could focus on crafting the narrative necessary for good TV.

I believe the internet is the better option for the moment because it can better facilitate the steady growth of a niche audience, and I think it can be argued that FIRSTers are still a niche audience. I would also argue that if quality broadcasts of FIRST competitions live on the internet where they can be accessed for weeks and months after they are posted, they are more likely to be found by the crowd 'needing inspiration' then if it were on television for one particular day. Also take into account that if a video lives online the ease by which it can be shared through social media increases. This gives students the opportunity to discover FIRST through their friends or family online allowing them to have an instant link to a local team or event.

I think we are definitely headed in the right direction with this and i'm looking forward to seeing what we can make happen next season.

TL;DR: FIRST is a complex and nuanced competitive event that needs the proper context and explanation in order to facilitate the audiences emotional involvement in the narrative. I believe the internet is a more conducive environment for this.