

BBC announces the closure of the Digital Media Initiative - nyodeneD
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/The-BBC-announces-the-closure-of-the-Digital-Media-Initiative-DMI

======
ljf
I was working at the BBC at the time this was first suggested (on web stuff,
not video) and saw the edges of this project. From the start it felt like the
start of a good idea, but with a huge remit and no focus.

The idea of being able to edit video locally using a low quality version of
the file, seems like a good one. All the rendering is done on high end servers
working at full capacity with no wasted machines. Users can edit from their
desktop without having to use a high end machine too. Until you talk to anyone
who works in video - how can they be sure the video is lit, focused and
presented correctly without viewing the source file. And the process of
uploading files, waiting for edit versions and downloading the final files,
even over a decent connection added huge overhead.

Felt like there wasn't enough discussion with the actual teams that would use
this.

But as I say, I was not involved nor did it affect me and my team directly so
I could be way off in my very small view of the project.

~~~
phillc73
I was involved, but on the BBC Worldwide side. I had numerous meetings with
the core BBC public service team working on this, over a period of about two
years.

Each one of these meetings simply felt like going over the same ground, and
any feedback we'd given regarding what would work for BBCW was either
forgotten or ignored. In the end we just forged ahead with our own digital
projects as the business required.

I must admit I'm not surprised this project has been shut down.

------
dabeeeenster
I'd be interested to know what technology platform was being used. Around the
time this project was being commissioned, the UK govt and the BBC were VERY
close to Microsoft.

As part of the NHS's connecting for health project, a huge amount of money was
spent on MS licenses and associated infrastructure.

Time to make public these contracts with Siemens and see what's what. Like
that's going to happen...

~~~
gregsq
Here's a hint.

[http://mediasmiths.com/portfolio/bbc-digital-media-
initiativ...](http://mediasmiths.com/portfolio/bbc-digital-media-initiative/)

~~~
keithpeter
This page seems mainly concerned with Fabric, the part of the 'initiative'
that appears to be working.

~~~
jermy
Which was largely non-video related, and implemented on IBM WebSphere

~~~
keithpeter
Payers of the licence fee would appreciate more of this kind of information,
thanks

~~~
jermy
There's a bit more info from somebody on the inside over at
[http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1eyrdo/bbc_ab...](http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1eyrdo/bbc_abandons_100m_digital_project_director/)

------
jmedwards
£100m? That just isn't OK, I wonder who will be losing their job.

~~~
joelanman
The failed NHS IT project cost over £12 billion:
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/22/nhs-it-
project...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/22/nhs-it-project-
abandoned)

~~~
timthorn
Not entirely accurate - components of that programme (eg PACS and the Spine)
are successes. Not to say that on their own they're worth £12bn, but it's not
true to say that the £12bn was completely wasted.

------
smegel
I just assumed all major broadcasters were digital now...does this mean they
are still recording and editing in analog?

~~~
kierank
They are digital but most are far from tapeless.

~~~
phillc73
From a Post-Production point of view, we deliver very, very few programmes as
files. It's all generally still on tape, and at the moment HDCamSR or HDCam in
the main.

The Digital Production Partnership[1] looks to be changing that. All the major
UK broadcasters working together to a common set of specifications, who'd have
thought?

In Channel 5's delivery specifications they state that after July 1st, 2013
they will no longer accept tapes. We'll see.....

[1]<http://www.digitalproductionpartnership.co.uk>

------
kevinbluer
Perhaps a slight bit of irony there that the TLA of "Fabric Archive Database"
is FAD.

------
fmavituna
Is the produced code open sourced or publicly downloadable? That's possibly
what BBC should do, providing £100M actually produced something worth open
sourcing.

~~~
jermy
It's very unlikely to be useful, unless you are running the same platform and
have an interest in implementing business rules for the same use cases as the
BBC have. Much of the interesting functionality will have been licenced from
outside providers, and most of the cost will have been paying Siemens, paying
Siemens to cancel the contract, and other staff and consultant fees.

------
danso
There's a damning inspector general report on this, dating back to 2011:

[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/c...](http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmpubacc/808/808.pdf)

Here's a key conclusion, along the themes of "this is what happens when the
people with the money don't really understand what the developers are doing":

 _The BBC transferred too much financial risk to the contractor, Siemens,
given the level of technological innovation involved. This approach meant that
that BBC did not have a good enough understanding of the contractor’s design
and development work, and was unable to intervene effectively even when it
knew delivery was at risk. This resulted in a two year delay in securing the
technology for the Programme. We welcome the BBC’s commitment to consider more
carefully the appropriate degree of risk transfer for future contracts. It
should have a close understanding of the design and development approach being
taken by a contractor and should retain the ability to intervene without
waiting for non-delivery or contract termination._

