Interactive Broadcasting
Here are the companies and businesses listed under the Interactive Broadcasting category.
Click a location on the left to narrow your search and find a supplier near you!
Let others know whether you recommend any of these companies by leaving feedback on their company pages.
INTERACTIVE MEDIA CORPORATION
Neos Interactive is a leading provider of digital-IP based entertainment and in-room technology for the hospitality industry.
www.neos.tvRIGHTMOVE.CO.UK
Searchable resource containing homes for sale in the UK
www.rightmove.co.ukMIRANDA TECHNOLOGIES LTD
Manufactures and sells professional digital video/audio interfaces and advanced display products for post-production facilities, TV networks and AV
www.miranda.comGLOBECAST UK LTD
Provider of domestic and global broadcast services for video, audio, business television, multimedia, and IP/data delivery.
www.globecast.comYES TELEVISION (EUROPE)
Recommended browser requirements: I.E 6.0 and above, 1024x768 screen resolution and above. Copyright © 2010 Yes Television Asia. ...
www.yes.tvSOLO SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LTD
Solo Transmit live pictures from the concert with a 3 channel multiplex for the BBC. ... The BBC choose Solosat.com for Gardeners World Live 2008 H...
www.solosat.comJFMG
We co-ordinate the use of spectrum and issue licences for applications including ... Channel 38 UK Wireless Microphone Licence - available NOW! Cha...
www.jfmg.co.ukLocal Interactive Broadcasting
Ask the community
Need help finding a company or supplier?
Can I disable the "press red button" watermark that appears during interactive Austar/Foxtel broadcasts?
I don't like the Press Red Button watermark that appears in the top right corner during broadcasts which have extra content. I know it has a purpose, but I would like to stop it from appearing. Is this possible?
sco_84
Question answered by Emily L
You can't disable it permanenty, but if when you go onto a channel eg. Sky News it has the Red Interactive Button Just push "back" on your fox/austar remote and it should get rid of itCould music ever be electromagnetically broadcasted as visible radiation?
I know that music on the radio is broadcasted through radio waves and then reinterpreted through a device to emit the specific code of sounds. But, do we have the technology to build a broadcasting antennae that has the ability to emit music at a short enough wavelength in the visible spectrum, that we would visually be seeing music? Sorry, for the run-on sentences.
Ryan F
Question answered by Midatlantian
I think you are not asking if this would be a practical way to transmit music to radios, but rather whether it could be done: whether you could "see" the sound. The answer is definitely yes, but - oops - really 'no'. In your question you mention how radio waves are 'reinterpreted' into sound. It is important to understand that, essentially - and certainly in modern audio equipment - there is nothing 'fixed' or 'natural' in this reinterpretation. There is sort of equation of relationship, an interactive circuitry - and that equation is fulfilled - that circuitry operates - in such a way that you hear sound that corresponds to electromagnetic waves. Ultimately, though, it is as arbitrary as the dots and dashes used to form words - in Morse code - that have symbolic meaning. Nothing in the dots and dashes really corresponds to the concept, except we have decided to make it so. Now, we can take sound and come up with a dots-and-dashes relationship with color, and build a device that would carry out that relationship. We could then produce a sound organ, or a video display, that had a slightly different color for every possible frequency. But would we be seeing the sound, or our artistic creation based on the sound?Will a royal caribbean cruise have the world cup on a TV?
I plan to go on a royal caribbean cruise in late June this year. I know the rooms have an interactive TV, but will the ship have acceess to a channel with the football (or soccer :P) world cup on? If you could provide a source / website that shows they definately will that would be great :)! That's great! Thanks for the quick answers :)!
Awe
Question answered by Mike
This is how it really works. You are not guaranteed that you'll get it. RCCL has to buy the rights for the world cup. Then they get specific coordinates to tune it in on one of their satellite dishes. If you are in a location that is outside of the satellites footprint, then you will not get it. Also if the corporate suits at RCCL didn't feel the World Cup was important enough to their bottom line, they wont pay for the rights. If the WC is going to be broadcast on a channel that they are already getting then yes, you will be able to watch it. How do I know this? I was the broadcast technician onboard NCL and HAL ships for several years and have had to set this up. We didn't always get the biggest games because of the obscene amounts of money it costs for ships to gain broadcast rights. As well during the rugby world cup we didn't have the rights to air it, but the shoreside salespeople still told passengers ahead of the cruise that we would be getting it. Lying fools that they were. Conclusion: cross your fingers.What was that game show called that used to be on GSN?
I haven't seen it on recently. It had a bunch of interactive games where people could call in and win a prize if they solve the puzzle/game. I remember that it was on late at night, but I can't think of the name. Is it still on, and I just haven't seen it?
Yankees Fan (79-52)
Question answered by Sean B
QuizNation (originally titled Playmania). Final broadcast aired three years ago on Halloween night.Do artists or songwriters get paid for online streaming?
Who gets paid? Spofity for example, is it considered a radio or not? What about Pandora? For FM and AM radio, its just the publisher and songwriters who get paid. But for master use of recording with interactive media like spotify, who gets paid? Pandora, its kind of in between being interactive and non interactive, who gets paid? How much does each party get paid?
notsofast
Question answered by Gregory E. Seneff, Sr., Esq.
You have touched on several different types of uses of songs in your question. Here's a general response: When a sound recording is broadcast on terrestrial radio (AM & FM) like on a regular car radio, only the songwriters and publishers receive royalties, as you indicated. They are paid those royalties by "Performance Rights Organizations" (or "PRO's") which in the USA are ASCAP, BMI & SESAC. Most other countries only have one PRO. The radio stations pay a royalty to each of those organizations based on their annual revenue and that money is split up based on statistical data collected by the PRO's and then distributed to the writers and publishers (half to each, even if the songwriter has retained their own publishing). The artists featured on the recordings played on terrestrial radio currently receive nothing for the broadcast of their recordings. The radio industry's argument for that is that they are promoting the music and increasing record sales for the artists (as if the artists get paid much for record sales). In other countries it is not unusual for artists to be paid royalties for terrestrial broadcasts of their music. There has been legislation proposed to require terrestrial broadcasters to pay artists (and labels) for the broadcast of their music, but the broadcasters are lobbying hard - for obvious reasons - to prevent that from happening. A note about terrestrial radio while we're on it - public radio and non-profit radio pays much less, if anything, to the PRO's even if they raise millions of dollars from donations from listeners (such as "religious" radio stations) or through government grants (such as PBS-related stations). For digital broadcasts (XM/Sirius, internet radio and the like) the PRO's receive royalties from the broadcasters and distribute it to the songwriters and publishers much the same way as for terrestrial radio broadcasts. However, one big difference here is that the featured artists on the sound recordings broadcast digitally, as well as the copyright owner of the sound recording, and the background singers and background musicians get paid royalties as well (50% to the copyright owners; 45% to the featured artists; 2.5% to the background singers; and, 2.5% to the background musicians). This money is gathered by SoundExchange and paid out. One must be a member of SoundExchange to get any royalties. A big difference between PRO's and SoundExchange: the royalties are due from the digital broadcasters based on the number of listeners, NOT on revenue. So, if you want to start you own internet broadcasts of the genre you love best (say, heavy metal polka band music), you better be earning lots of money. If you are not and your listenership grows you will be on the hook for the royalties without regard to your income. The major broadcasters generally don't have nearly as much difficulty paying such royalties as compared to some schmo like me or you who just likes a particular type of music we can't find on the radio dial. So, based on how it is set up now the same people will be in charge of the music choices we will have on digital broadcasts. The only way to get around the problem is to have artists, copyright owners and background singers and players not sign with SoundExchange and either waive their rights to their royalties from digital broadcasters (in writing) or get paid directly from the broadcasters on some other basis (again, in writing). I am not advocating that artists, copyright owners and background singers and players not sign with SoundExchange - it is currently the only way for them to get paid, but I am saying that the current royalty system does not encourage unique or new genres to be introduced or for the popularity of non-mainstream music to increase in digital broadcasting - and it effectively restricts competition with the big boys by upstart broadcasters. However, the concept of compensating artists for using their music is completely valid and I encourage my clients to sign up unless they have a philosophical problem with the way it is currently structured.Mars One is BS they are running it like a reality show?
"Mars One is a not-for-profit organization that will establish a permanent human settlement on Mars in 2023 through the integration of existing, readily available technologies from industry leaders world-wide. Unique in its approach, Mars One intends to fund this decade-long endeavor by involving the whole world as the audience of an interactive, televised broadcast of every aspect of this mission, from launch to landing to living on Mars." "In 2022, several months before departure, the Mars One selection committee will determine which groups in training are ready to depart to Mars. We expect at least six groups will be ready for the trip. Each of these groups will have obtained the qualifications and skills necessary for the trip to Mars, so in that respect it should not matter who goes first. However, the symbolic and historic significance of this issue is a different matter altogether. Who will be the first four people on Mars? Who will get to be the first human in history to set foot on the Red Planet and be known for it forever? Because our mission is humankind's mission, we will make this a democratic decision. The people of Earth will have a vote which group of four will be the first Earth ambassadors on Mars." "Mars One will conduct a global search to find the best candidates for the first human mission to Mars in 2023. The astronaut selection process will be announced in the first half of 2013 through an announcement on our website, social media channels and the mailing list. Mars One is an international organization - we encourage anyone in the world who is 18 years or older to apply for the selection program. The application process consists of four rounds. Round 1: All candidates must submit their application to Mars One online. The online application will consist of general information about the applicant, a motivational letter, a resume and a one minute video in which the applicant answer some given questions and explains why he or she should be among the first humans who set foot on Mars. Approved application videos and letters of motivation will be available to be watched by everyone on the internet, unless an applicant decides against making his or her application video public. At the end of round one, a team of Mars One experts will decide which applicants will pass to round two. Round 2: Candidates for round 2 will need to get a medical statement of good health from their physician. The applicant will be invited to meet with a Mars One selection committee in his or her region. After conducting an interview with the candidates, the selection committees determines who will pass to round three. Round 3: This round is the national selection round, which could be broadcasted on TV and internet in countries around the world. In each country, 20-40 applicants will participate in challenges that demonstrate their suitability to become one of the first humans on Mars. The audience will select one winner per country and Mars One experts will select additional participants to continue to round four. Round 4: Those who pass to round four will be expected to be able to communicate in English. The applicants will be responsible to reach this level of English. Round 4 will be an international event that will be broadcasted throughout the world. The Mars One selection committee will create international groups from the individual candidates. The groups will be expected to demonstrate their ability to live in harsh living conditions, and work together under difficult circumstances. The groups will receive their first short term training in a copy of the Mars outpost. From the first selection series, of which Round 1 starts in 2013, six groups of four will become full time employees of the Mars One astronaut corps, after which they will train for their mission. Whole teams and individuals might be selected out during training when they prove not to be suitable for the mission." This sounds like a "reality" show. What they mean is, if you "look funny", are not good-looking - "sexy" - are not "nice enough", or are not "perfect" (whatever that means) in the ignorant masses eyes, you are going to get "voted off". Well, these contestants are going to work hard. And it's not survival skills, brain training or academics. It's working your *** off to become a person you are not so you can gain the public's approval. WTF do they know? WTF is this? @JohnW HAHAHAHAHA LOL
I'm a Turtle
Question answered by Paula
In 10 years time (ie 2022) --- 1) they'll have made a small amount of money. Advertizing revenue (from the TV show) minus the cost of "training" the groups. Plus donations from interested people ... Of course they'll need $100 billion and they are likely to have a shortfall of $100 billion. 2) they can "select" a winning group to go to Mars ... BUT 3) there is no existing technology to send someone to Mars --- so that part of the venture simply won't happen. (Even if by some miracle they raised the needed money) What did you expect ? You wrote at length expressing your doubts. The reality is that it will be 2038 at the earliest before any person goes to Mars. Just let them play their game.Is there an HD TV that doubles as a graphics tablet?
I'm an animator and my latest obsession is finding a High Definition TV that is also an interactive pen display. Basically, I want a big fancy screen where I can draw AND watch my fave shows (as they're being broadcast) I obviously don't expect it to be portable, but even then... IS there such a thing? If not, what's the closest thing?
The Magic Number Five
Question answered by classicsat
There are touch screen monitors, or kits for TVs. Not cheap though.Renaissance accelerated learning programme what do you know about it and does your child?
have access to this teaching aid for children who have the ability to learn faster than his class mates. My grandson who is gifted in reading and though only just seven he has the reading ability of a ten year old. He is being deprived of using this programme in his school. Not many school broadcast the fact that they have this facility in their primary school. I have promised to find out more about this programme it is an interactive training programme produced by a company in England. Can you help does your son or daughter use it do you have a gifted child who needs to stretch his learning capacity and have not been told about this?
Nettie
Question answered by curious student
I am the mother of 2 girls, one 18 and one 6. I have been throught these programs with my oldest and am going to be entering them again with my youngest. Neither program in our school district is for just gifted children, all children are part of these programs. They introduced the accelerated reader program when my daughter was in the 2nd grade, we didnt enjoy it. It was expensive for the school to buy access to books for the program so reading selection was limited. My daughter is an avid reader and this was a hindrance in all that she wanted to read. The better your child does and the sooner they reach their goal the harder the next goal becomes its sometimes tripled from the last level. This was hard for us and as I said my daughter loved to read but limiting kids to only program books really made it difficult. I am sure now a days there are a larger selection of books at least that is my hope as my youngest daughter takes up this program in the fall. The renaissance program here is separate from accelerated reader. Its actually used in the high school level. Its an award for overall academic performance. Our school seemed not to keep very good track and the prizes tended to be very cheesy. The stores where kids could actually get discounts were very limited also. I wish you and your grandson luck, you are very fortunate to have a gifted child. Enjoy!Why has analogue been replaced by digital as a primary broadcast signal for tv?
I'm doing a science project and I'm not actually sure why so any help would be great, thanks!
Nicole
Question answered by classicsat
Two primary reasons. The first is that digital channels, as a whole, can be located in less spectrum, with the surplus sold off to telecommunications. The second is that it provides more channels, HD, and better interactive/psuedo interactive services, such as EPG and weather.How do computer networks and mobile telephones differ from broadcast systems?
considering that all three freely distribute signals that many terminals can pick up.
Question answered by Lowlevel
The main way that they differ is that broadcast systems are 1-way. So there's no way to shout into your radio and make the DJ hear you. Computer networks and telephone networks have a 'node' at either end and signals can be sent either way along the connection. Doom: Thanks for the props man... However, the 'upstream' part of Sky Interactive is transmitted via the telephone network, not via the satellite (broadcast) stream.
Businesses local to you in these sectors: