UK
Since they first showed the Super Bowl live in 2008 (other than the couple of years it was on C4) they’ve only taken the world feed once*, and that was the very first year. They said at the time they did that because, as they weren’t experienced showing it, the world feed was easier to work with because it had a fixed number of fixed length add breaks.
(*They might have on one other occasion but since that first year it’s been the norm for them to take the US network feed.)
The BBC have got very good at blanking and sponsorship messages use a beauty shot or clean feed, no doubt helped by carefully following the feed from the truck producing the game. They’ve just done that tonight, but it was a dirty feed (with clean audio) with NFL Network branding, this was to hide some Pepsi advertising on the CBS feed.
This may be a stupid question, but is part of the reason for not showing those ads, even as an 'entertainment-only experience' Ofcom restrictions? I mean does Ofcom have rules about showing ads of items/services not directly available in Britain?
It’s more the BBC being ultra cautious about avoiding product placement style advertising. Sky are happy to let it go because Ofcom are more forgiving with live events where the UK broadcaster has no control over the feed.
Each broadcaster has a different approach. BT are very hot (and good at) blanking sponsorship messages. Sky tend to let them go a bit more, unless it’s a clear 30 second ad and they’ve a studio to go back to, in which case they’ll step away.
BBC are also blanking the AWS sponsored stars features, where as Sky aren’t. Again, different policies for each broadcaster, the BBC being very cautious given their public funding at the attention / criticism they’d get, even for something outside their control.
The BBC used to take the world feed instead of the US domestic broadcast, nowadays both BBC and Sky have the domestic broadcast.
Since they first showed the Super Bowl live in 2008 (other than the couple of years it was on C4) they’ve only taken the world feed once*, and that was the very first year. They said at the time they did that because, as they weren’t experienced showing it, the world feed was easier to work with because it had a fixed number of fixed length add breaks.
(*They might have on one other occasion but since that first year it’s been the norm for them to take the US network feed.)
The BBC have got very good at blanking and sponsorship messages use a beauty shot or clean feed, no doubt helped by carefully following the feed from the truck producing the game. They’ve just done that tonight, but it was a dirty feed (with clean audio) with NFL Network branding, this was to hide some Pepsi advertising on the CBS feed.
This may be a stupid question, but is part of the reason for not showing those ads, even as an 'entertainment-only experience' Ofcom restrictions? I mean does Ofcom have rules about showing ads of items/services not directly available in Britain?
It’s more the BBC being ultra cautious about avoiding product placement style advertising. Sky are happy to let it go because Ofcom are more forgiving with live events where the UK broadcaster has no control over the feed.
Each broadcaster has a different approach. BT are very hot (and good at) blanking sponsorship messages. Sky tend to let them go a bit more, unless it’s a clear 30 second ad and they’ve a studio to go back to, in which case they’ll step away.
BBC are also blanking the AWS sponsored stars features, where as Sky aren’t. Again, different policies for each broadcaster, the BBC being very cautious given their public funding at the attention / criticism they’d get, even for something outside their control.