• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, 8 hours ago

Is reality still reality when it is “augmented” reality?

If you are a word purist like I am, then you might agree that the word “reality” must stand alone without the aid of adjectives or qualifiers. Something is “real” or it is not.

Under that reasoning, appending words such as “augmented” or “enhanced” to the word “reality” would seem to change “reality” into something less than “reality.”

However, those who use and support this kind of phrase-making likely believe the opposite -- that “augmenting” reality makes it more real, not less.

That seems to be the position taken by local TV stations that are adopting the use of augmented-reality and virtual-reality technologies to their newscast’s weather segments.

Twice this month, the TV Blog has received announcements on the subject from CBS.

The press releases reported on the launch of “state-of-the-art Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality (AR/VR) technology-driven” studios at KCAL, Los Angeles, and KTVT, Fort Worth/Dallas.

The system that launched on KCAL on June 11 was the company’s seventh in the CBS Stations Group to adopt the technology. 

CBS says this particular facility is the largest of its kind in the CBS Stations Group, measuring 3,500 square feet.

The launch of KTVT’s AR/VR-enabled news studio this past Monday is the first in Texas, says the press release, and the eighth in the CBS Stations Group. 

The six others are WCBS, New York; KYW, Philadelphia; WBBM, Chicago; KPIX, San Francisco; KCNC, Denver; and WFOR, Miami. 

The new systems provide an “immersive” experience for viewers, CBS says. KTVT’s AR/VR studio “transforms storytelling by offering a dynamic, visually rich experience that brings weather to life,” said the KTVT press release.

“From hyper-realistic weather simulations to immersive storytelling environments, the technology enhances both presentation and viewer comprehension of complex topics,” it said.

Let’s take a look at that last statement. What exactly are “hyper-realistic weather simulations”? 

Here again, the purist in me reacts skeptically to a coinage such as “hyper-realistic.” It begs the same question posed earlier in this TV Blog: Is “hyper-realistic” actually “realistic” or more to the point, “reality”? 

Moreover, the words “weather simulations” can refer to several things. One is the prospect of some sort of CGI- or AI-based animation in which, say, a tornado is simulated hyper-realistically as a substitute for video of the real thing. 

I doubt the technology would be used for this purpose at present and I am not saying the CBS stations would do this. 

But who knows when enhancing reality to make it hyper-realistic will become the norm in TV news?

“Weather simulations” might refer more directly to a new way of showing the movement of weather systems across geographical swaths of the United States and how these fronts will eventually impact local markets.

This kind of weather forecasting has been in place in one way or another for years, which brings me to a consideration of the claim set out in the KTVT press release that “the technology enhances both presentation and viewer comprehension of complex topics.”

As one who watches local TV news and its weather segments, I have long come to the conclusion that these evolutionary steps in weather presentation create more incomprehension, not the other way around. 

They come across as more complex than the complex weather topics that they are supposedly designed to simplify. For me, they tend to overwhelm weather stories and forecasts, not enhance them.

The above screenshot provided by CBS shows KTVT meteorologist McKenna King in the center of the station’s new simulated studio.

In the shot from KTVT News, she stands astride the state of Texas in front of a “First Alert Weather” banner, which is meant to convey a sense of emergency where none exists. 

It is the use of phrases such as this one that make me skeptical that these new AR/VR systems are little more than gimmicky bells and whistles meant to attract eyes. 

All local newscasts open today with manic weather segments featuring meteorologists leaping and dancing hysterically in front of green screens full of weather maps and moving weather fronts.

In the screenshot, Ms. King is not leaping and dancing. And it may be true that from the perspective of TV meteorologists, new technologies offer them new sets of communications tools to improve their forecasting and “storytelling” (as the CBS press releases refer to weather reporting).

Earlier this month, I came across obits for Gary England, who was considered a hero in Oklahoma.

England, who died at age 85 on June 10, was the meteorologist at KWTV in Oklahoma City for 40 years. 

The market is located in what is known as Tornado Alley and his forecasts and warnings of the sudden storms are credited with saving countless lives.

According to the obits, his weather reports were hyper-local, not hyper-realistic. An obit in The Wall Street Journal said England knew his coverage area so well that he knew what locations and businesses likely stood in the path of a storm and he could cite them by name as he warned residents and workers in those locations to seek shelter.

His reports were not complex. They were the opposite as he addressed his grateful audiences simply and directly without exaggerating the prospect of danger at times when there was none.

Behind the scenes, he was a proponent of Doppler radar technology to increase warning times, and his station is believed to be the first in the nation to apply it in weather emergencies.

But that was backstage. On camera, no AR/VR technology was necessary for England to broadcast his forecasts and urgent weather warnings in meaningful, personal ways.

And he didn’t need to stand on a map of Oklahoma either.