<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal
of Multimedia Tools and Applications</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Social &amp; Interactive TV: An Outside-In Approach</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Venu Vasudevan</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>N. U.S. Highway</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Libertyville</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>venu.vasudevan</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>jehan}@motorola.com</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Management</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Design, Experimentation, Languages</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2008</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>36</volume>
      <abstract>
        <p>Social and interactive TV has been held back by both technical and ecosystem limitations over the past two decades. Technical approaches to enabling Social TV have relied on proprietary TV middleware, whose success in turn depends on widespread and expensive technology upgrades by cable and satellite TV operators. Additionally, users have increasingly adopted to socialize on the web, even where it pertains to TV [2]. This makes any attempts at creating TV specific social communities unattractive to users, who already have a social presence (and identity) on the web. This paper proposes an alternate outside-in overlay architecture for Social TV. Such an architecture leverages the emergence of a second screen with strong and built-in interactivity, and an approach to reuse rather than replace web social software to enable Social TV. In this paper, we briefly describe the motivations, architectural elements and implementation experience around such a system.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;Social networking</kwd>
        <kwd>interactive TV</kwd>
        <kwd>ambient interfaces</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>Categories and Subject Descriptors</title>
      <p>H.3.4 [Systems &amp; Software]: Current Awareness Systems</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>General Terms</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>The growth of interactive and social TV over the last two decades
has been a story of fits and starts. On the interactivity front, there
have been a number of intriguing research and platform
experiments [1] without true commercial success. Commercially
successful TV interactivity has been inhibited by the inability of
the combination of 9-button remotes (the lowest common
denominator for input-output) and TV middleware to support truly
compelling interactivity on a shared device. Chicken-and-egg
issues around community creation have inhibited commercially
successful social TV. Solutions where Social TV communities
have been enabled as separate from web communities have not
resonated with end users because issues around the effort involved
and the value received. On the effort side solutions that require
users to subscribe to yet another community, with yet another
identity discourage participation and come in the way of a
frictionless and largely lean-back experience that TV is and
should be. Assuming discounting the effort, the value derived
from socialization is a direct function of the size of the
community and the extent to which a user’s social graph is
already subscribed to that community. Given the existence of
large web-based social networks (e.g. Facebook &amp; Twitter), the
absolute and relative lack of scale of a brand new social TV
community has not proven attractive enough to end users to
garner large scale participation. More recently, a wave of TV
‘check-in’ applications (e.g. Philo, Miso, IntoNow [8]) have
attempted to bring social interactivity to TV in the same way that
companies like FourSquare have popularized location sharing.
The general problem is that each is a vertical (application) that
require a sizeable community to really be useful. Others, like
GetGlue have attempted to build a platform and go beyond
checkin to include social recommendations with some success.
In short, TV architectures of the past decade have been built on an
inside-out architecture, one that creates specialized industry
specific middleware for interactivity and socialization as it
pertains to TV. This means that application developers who wish
to cater to the Social TV market have to adopt industry specific
standards &amp; build application software specifically tailored to TV
(both the device and the content). This inside-out architecture has
failed to attract the armies of application developers and the
collective creativity that has enabled other devices (notably
mobile) and other media (notably web video) to benefit from
vigorous in-market experimentation. Other work has done a more
comprehensive survey of efforts in TV interactivity [10], in this
short paper we focus on our proposed solution.</p>
      <p>This paper proposes an alternate outside-in architecture that
minimizes the impedance mismatch between interactive TV and
the web, and maximizes the reuse of ‘non-TV’ content and
applications to enable interactive and social TV experiences. Key
components of an outside-in interactive and social TV architecture
are as follows:</p>
      <sec id="sec-3-1">
        <title>Portable devices (e.g. tablets and smart phones) are now</title>
        <p>so numerous and pervasive, and are almost omnipresent
on the couch and in the vicinity of users as they watch
TV [3-5]. When on the ‘couch’ these devices are used
less in their traditional roles as communication or
enterprise devices, and more for media multiplexing
while watching TV [6]. We refer to this class of devices
(or devices adopting this role on the ‘couch top’) as
companion devices, in that they are companions to the
main TV screen in terms of engaging the user with
simultaneous but complementary content. Given the
rich capabilities and rapid evolution of companion
devices, the interactive TV platform is migrating
entirely to the second screen as a layer on top of
software platforms (such as Google’s Android and
Apple’s iOS) that are already familiar and attractive to a
large population of software developers.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-3-2">
        <title>Given emerging trends around the ‘appification’ of</title>
        <p>interactivity [7], the component model for TV
interactivity is inherently application focused, Thus TV
apps can be authored and published to standard
application marketplaces (e.g the Android marketplace,
Apple iOS App Store, Amazon AppStore etc.) like any
other application. To an application developer, there is
no extra technological learning curve in creating a TV
app, and the added bonus of utilizing a software
platform that is robust, well supported and possibly
familiar to them.</p>
        <p>The TV specific framework is almost transparent to the
application developer, and entirely located on the
companion device (therefore not requiring expensive
and time consuming upgrades to set-tops or cable back
office). The main goal of such a companion device
framework is to reduce or eliminate user effort in
discovering, selecting and invoking interactive and
social capabilities in a manner that is matched to the
content and user. The value added by the companion
device framework is in three areas: adaptive
synchronization, flexible personalization and seamless
integration. Adaptive synchronization enables the
automated and flexible means for synchronizing content
on the TV screen and the companion device at various
levels of fidelity (e.g. program, program segment,
scene) appropriate to the genre. Flexible personalization
enables customizable experiences that mix branded and
user generated content in flexible ways. And seamless
integration enables easy context sharing between (and
across) component 3rd party applications and the
companion device framework.</p>
        <p>In the rest of the paper, we briefly describe the technical
components of an outside-in architecture (referred to as the
Companion Device Framework or CDF). We focus our efforts
around the Android platform and application ecosystem, and
describe an application container for TV-related activity that helps
you discover and interact and coordinate second-screen
experiences (in the form of apps) with what is being consumed on
the primary screen. We then discuss the application orchestration
framework and model for driving these experiences on the client,
and conclude with potential futures</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>2. ARCHITECTURE &amp; REALIZATION</title>
      <p>The Companion Device Framework (CDF) encompasses a
variety of network and client services to enable dual‐screen
TV/video experiences across a shared video screen (primary) and
a personalized supplementary interactive screen (secondary). In
the base case, the primary screen is a TV, and the supplementary
feed is directed to a user’s personal mobile device – which may be
a mobile phone or tablet. Advanced use cases include video feeds
to public displays, time and place shifted supplementary feeds,
and sophisticated ways of synchronizing user engagement with
feeds (supplementary and base video) into a unified analytics
around user engagement. The client-side framework is currently
Android-specific. However, the concept and protocols may be
applicable to other platforms subject to the inherent limitations
they may impose (e.g. iOS).</p>
      <p>The base user experience requires viewing context
information, notably the channel identifier and EPG program
metadata – related to the primary video feed to be pushed to the
companion device in order to drive appropriate second‐screen
companion experiences. The framework is agnostic to where this
information is obtained; we have integrated it both with traditional
back office solutions (where the device gets notifications
whenever the user navigates through content) as well as custom
solutions that support Internet video sources such as Hulu &amp;
YouTube. However, as we discuss in Section 3 this metadata can
be obtained through a variety of audio/visual methods that analyze
the primary screen content.</p>
      <p>CDF encompasses a number of components that are utilized
by the client-side components and integral to the experiences that
are built using CDF. The main platform components are
summarized as follows:
•
•
•
•
•</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Companion dashboard: Integrates application</title>
        <p>container and related client-side services to support use
cases discussed previously (namely contextualized
suggestions and related meta-data inherent to the
TVviewing experience). The main application screens can
be seen in Figure 1 (the app also provides Remote
Control &amp; Guide functionality which is not shown), and
enable a credible ambient experience as well as easy
1click access to suggested/recommended applications.
Eventually we plan to incorporate a diversity of
adaptive synchronization mechanisms herein.
Model-based orchestration: This component supports
flexible personalization in ways that combine branded
recommendations (from the content studios and
distributors) with user favorites (personal or from their
social network). Specifically, this component provides
authoring and run-time support for media rights owners
(studios/MSOs) to author controlled companion
experiences associated with their content.</p>
        <p>Identity management and device rendezvous: User
authentication supports both web identity (via OAuth)
such as Facebook Connect as well as custom
TVspecific identities that are integrated with the
backoffice.</p>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Application Support: Applications built to take advantage of CDF as well as third-party applications appearing in the marketplace (also includes support for web applications).</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>Advertising and analytics: Leverages the personal ad</title>
        <p>space in the form of traditional banner or second screen
ads. These ads may be stand-alone or coordinated with
content/ads appearing on the primary screen and
personalized with viewing context.</p>
        <p>Model-based orchestration is achieved via the Companion
Model that is provisioned as a cloud service (currently hosted via
Google App Engine) that providers the administrative interface to
publishers and MSOs that allow specification of the rules
dictating app suggestion on the client. This deterministic model
facilitates contextual app recommendation via a mix of
businessspecified and personalized suggestions. For businesses, the model
provides an interface for content publishers and MSOs to specify
the mappings between applications and TV-related content (i.e.
what the user is currently watching). For example, HBO may
choose to promote it’s own application on the Dashboard when
one of its programs are being viewed on the primary screen. This
can be enabled via the campaign management style interface
(front-end) to the Companion Model. Additionally, users can
personalize application recommendations by ‘pinning’ favorite
applications, as well as receive recommendations from friends
(social). The Dashboard interface allows access to the user
recommendations by moving the arc clockwise via a gesture on
the client.</p>
        <p>Applications that appear on the Companion Dashboard can
further be categorized by be a) applications inherently developed
to support CDF (more on this below), b) any third-party Android
application available in the marketplace and c) a web application
or URL. Other than serving as a contextual application launcher,
there is a benefit to launching those apps directly from the
Dashboard as opposed to the traditional Android Home Screen. If
supported (more on this in a moment), Companion Dashboard is
able to pass metadata (such as what you're watching right now)
directly to the application as part of the extra-generated intent.
This behavior is transparent in that if the application doesn't
support it, it will launch just like any other application would.
Adding support to capture the extra intent information is trivial
and an extremely minimal amount of code. Some of the metadata
(intent info) is being standardized in an effort to get re-use among
support apps. Currently, we are modeling metadata generated by
the Companion Dashboard as Activity Streams. This is reflected
in actions that can be performed via the Dashboard on both
applications and channel/program specific metadata (See Figure
1.). Long pressing on either of these areas presents a toolbar to
users that allow them to rate/share and comment on them. This
data is captured in the Activity Stream format and can be exported
to a backend for analytics purposes.</p>
        <p>We developed several halo experiences to showcase the
capabilities of CDF. These applications are developed such that
they inherently support all the benefits CDF provides (as outlined
above). However, as it's primary capability of being an application
launcher - the Dashboard supports any third-party application
available through the marketplace or otherwise (both native and
web) as well as URLs. One particular application that illustrates
the capabilities of supporting CDF was an application called
TweetTV (see Figure 2). This was similar to other third-party
Twitter applications with one twist, it utilized the extra intent
passed to it about what the user was consuming on the primary
screen to automatically segment, filter and curate tweet streams
that related directly to the primary screen content. For example,
when the user was watching a sports event, such as a MLB game,
upon launching TweetTV they would be presented with tweets
corresponding to Team A, Team B, and a general stream of
MLBrelated tweets without having to do nothing more than simply
launching the application. This demonstrates the ability to not
only provide suggestions and recommendations of applications
based on what the user is watching, but also contextualize the
delivery of those experiences to the user.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>3. FUTURE DIRECTIONS</title>
      <p>Key future directions involve broadening the diversity of
synchronization choices (e.g. to include techniques such as
ambient audio [8,9], increasing the style and variety of
applications that can be integrated into the ecosystem (both
Android and HTML5 applications) and to further simplify the
integration effort in incorporating marketplace applications into a
single, cohesive TV companion experience.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>4. REFERENCES</title>
      <p>[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_television_standards
[2]
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700111884/The-online-watercooler-TV-networks-trying-to-integrate-shows-with-socialmedia.html
[3]
http://www.wirelessweek.com/News/2011/02/Technology-Second</p>
      <p>Screen-Key-TV-Engagement-Mobile-Video/
[4]
http://www.intomobile.com/2011/04/07/motorola-socialtv-letsphones-tablets-interact-tv-shows/
[5]
http://www.yctvblog.com/blog/2011/01/25/connect-your-phone-andtablet-to-your-tv/
[6]
http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp</p>
      <p>content/uploads/2009/09/ThreeScreenReport_US_2Q09REV.pdf
[7] TV Apps: Evolution from Novelty to Mainstream,
http://pro.gigaom.com/2010/05/tv-apps-evolution-from-novelty-tomainstream/</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list />
  </back>
</article>