real-time

[Dan Goncharoff]

I wouldn't use real-time for a delayed broadcast. Neither does
MLB.com, which takes about "live streaming baseball" and "full game
archives". "Unedited" might also work.

It also takes about live game DVR controls, allowing one to pause the
"live" game.

DanG

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 4:13 PM, victor steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       victor steinbok <aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM>
> Subject:      Re: real-time
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I forgot if this was one of the things mentioned in all the previous
> discussions--and I don't mean just the latest part of the thread. But AFAIK
> there is a second shade of "in real time"--not just "as it happened" (in
> fact, I see a flaw in this particular phrasing--perhaps, "as the events
> unfolded" as if one were a remote observer and participant at the same
> time), but "the entire thing". For example, MLB changed broadcasting rules
> to make all baseball games broadcast in their recorded entirety (possibly
> replacing some of the commercials). This came about after a Seattle TV
> station broadcast a Mariners game because it was initially scheduled for the
> same time slot as IIRC basketball playoffs (perhaps even conflicting on the
> same channel). The station took the broadcast and pared it down to only bits
> that showed when something was actually happening--a lot like soccer game
> summaries on FoxSoccerChannel, where a 90 minute game could be compressed
> into under 25 minutes. In the case of the Mariners, the came went from over
> 3 hours to about 45 minutes, including commercial breaks. The next day, MLB
> issued its edict that basically said, "Don't do it again!", with a formal
> rule coming a bit later. In this case, MLB wants game to be broadcast "in
> real time"--that is, the entire broadcast, from beginning to end. This is
> why you often see re-broadcasts of games on cable channels that are
> unnecessarily long-winded and sometimes even include rain delays. In fact,
> when I come across some of these games (including ESPN rebroadcasts of other
> sports), they often replay the entire commercials as they were shown in the
> original broadcast. Even the ticker is the same. Of course, the irony of
> using this as "in real time" means that it's not a "as it happens"
> broadcast. For example, a delayed broadcast (for whatever reason) is "in
> real time" but not "live".
>
> VS-)
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> At 5/3/2011 02:37 PM, Dan Goncharoff wrote:
>> >I don't like "real-time" but disagree with the alternatives that have
>> >been offered. For the POTUS watching the operation, I would go with
>> >"as it happened".
>>
>> I don't mind "viewing the raid in real time" but will acknowledge
>> that the NYTimes avoids it at least once.today.  "... the president
>> and his advisors gathered in the Situation Room of the White House to
>> monitor the operation as it unfolded."  [Behind the fold in the page
>> A1 article.  And remember as a former NYC straphanger I fold my NYT
>> vertically.]
>>
>> Joel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org