Category Archives: video annotation

Videolyzing Pharmaceutical Ads

There are just two countries in the world where Direct-To-Consumer (DTC) advertising is allowed for pharmaceuticals: the US and New Zealand. The ostensible motivation? To educate consumers, to raise awareness of medical conditions, to get people talking to their doctors, or to reduce the stigma associated with certain conditions (e.g. Viagra)

Since the laws changed back in 1997 in the US opening the floodgates for big pharma to peddle their wares directly to patients, there has been a debate about the efficacy and value of DTC advertising. Even today the FDA lists several ongoing studies evaluating the understandability and effects of DTC advertising. But the debate is political too. Congress has recently started floating proposals to limit the marketing powers of pharmaceutical companies for the first 2 years after a drug has been approved by the FDA. This would give regulators additional time to evaluate a new drug’s broader risks once it were available on the market.

Drugs aren’t the only DTC advertising issue generating controversy either. DTC medical device advertising is already generating a debate about the ethics of advertising products to people that can’t possibly understand the medical risks and decisions necessary for a medical device implant.

This is not to mention that DTC could be pushing up the overall costs of health care by directing people toward brand name “designer” drugs that may not be any more effective than alternative treatments. Obama’s $1 billion stimulus funding for Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) should help with this somewhat by doing real comparisons of which treatments are “worth it” both in $$$ and patient value.

But big pharma is big business. Huge sums of money are invested in pharameutical advertising ($5.2 Billion in 2007), with spending growing at an annual rate of about 20% from 1997 to 2005. And with huge returns on investment, who can blame big pharma for wanted to drive traffic for new drugs by going straight to the people who would need treatment. The birth-control pill, Yaz, increased its sales from $262 million in 2007 to  $616 million in 2008, utilizing a few high profile (and misleading) broadcast ads.

Misleading or inaccurate information could lead consumers to make poor health decisions, or take risks that they may not fully understand.
So how does the government keep consumers safe and pharmaceutical advertisers honest? Right now the process is managed by the FDA Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications (DDMAC). Advertisers are required to submit promotional materials to the DDMAC when they are first used or published, but not before. This means the FDA’s role is purely to “check up on” what advertisers publish, ex post facto. Ads can be circulating for months before they are critiqued and evaluated. And if an ad is found to be misleading, the FDA sends a warning letter to the offender asking them to retract the ad. That’s it most of the time.

What does the FDA check? According to their website, “advertisements cannot be false or misleading or omit material facts. They also must present a fair balance between effectiveness and risk information. FDA has consistently required that appropriate communication of effectiveness information includes any significant limitations to product use.” They require that all drug advertisements contain information as a brief summary relating to side effects, contraindications, and effectiveness. For instance, the law states that, “an advertisement may be false, lacking in fair balance, or otherwise misleading if it: “Fails to present information relating to side effects and contraindications with a prominence and readability reasonably comparable with the presentation of information relating to effectiveness of the drug, taking into account all implementing factors such as typography, layout, contrast, headlines, paragraphing, white space, and any other techniques apt to achieve emphasis.” The FDA has a very specific set of guidlines for how ads can be used in the video domain as well; including different categories of ads such as “product-claim ads”, “reminder ads” and “information seeking” ads.

The current FDA procedures for the evaluation of DTC video (broadcast) ads are wholly unwieldy. They include the submission of TEN (!!!!) copies of an annotated storyboard with each sequentially numbered frame and associated annotated references and precribing information (PI) supporting claims. Isn’t there a better way to do this?

This got me thinking about how an application like Videolyzer, that I originally built as a tool for bloggers and journalists to critique and debate online video, could be used by someone like the FDA (or the pharma companies) to streamline and digitize the evaluation and sourcing of video advertisements. This is in addition to exisiting journalism outfits, like Consumer Reports Ad Watch, which could use the tool to add back context to an overly curt video advertisement. Yaz, a birth control pill marketed by Bayer gained notoriety in late 2008 for two ads that were deemed misleading by the FDA and for which they had to run corrective ads in 2009. I’ve added the original version of one of the Yaz ads to Videolyzer for anyone interested in seeing how the tool can be used to critique a pharaceutical ad.

YouTube Finally Does Deep Linking

YouTube announced yesterday that you can finally form URL’s which allow for navigation to specific parts of videos. Also, if you’re writing a comment, you can just specify something in the form: MM:SS and this will be detected and turned into a link to that part of the video.

This is an interesting and I would argue non-intuitive way to specify links in videos. At the same time, it keeps the overall interface simple unless you’re an advanced user that knows the format for creating these links. It’s the expert interface way of doing things rather than the GUI approach. When someone hits, “add comment” why not augment the UI to let the user more visually specify where that anchor should be placed, perhaps even specifying an interval?

Videolyzer Alpha Online

Version of Videolyzer is now online! Videolyzer is a tool designed for journalists and bloggers to be able to collaboratively assess the information quality of a video, including its transcript. Information quality involves things like credibility, validity, and comprehensivness among other things.  Videolyzer was designed to support the analysis, collection, and sharing of criticisms of online videos and is initially geared toward politics. To try it out with some of the recent presidential debate content go to

Comparison of Video Deep Tagging Systems

Recently I’ve been looking at and comparing different factors in the design of several deep video tagging applications including Viddler, The Click, Mojiti, and Gotuit’s Scenemaker. Basically, I’m looking at a few different factors in the design space of these systems including the coarse cost of adding annotations (e.g. # of clicks, navigation, typing text etc.), whether or not the video pauses when adding an annotation, how annotations are anchored (e.g. on segments or on points), and if annotation on annotations are possible including whether any notion of threaded responses is supported. Each of these systems touches the design space in a different way. The take away from this exercise is that there are several interconnections between the costs associated with interaction (including video pausing) and the type of anchor used and whether annotations can be added to other annotations. These different design criteria affect the efficiency and user experience of the resulting application.


Cost: 4 clicks + typing (navigation, add annotation, select type, type text, confirm)

After the add annotation button is clicked, the video pauses so that the following actions don’t interfere with watching the video. If you expand a comment the video does not stop.

Anchors: annotations are anchored to a single point in the video, thus both in and out points do not need to be specified. Anchors are shown on the timeline as points.

Annotation on Annotation: People can vote on a comment using a thumbs up / thumbs down metaphor as well as reply to comments (only to 1 layer deep).

The Click

Cost: 2 clicks+ typing (add annotation, type text, confirm annotation)

The video pauses while you are typing a comment, but resumes after confirming the annotation.

Anchors: Annotations are anchored to points within the video but are not shown in the timeline; the only way to navigate is to move to next or previous comment.

Annotation on Annotation: No.


Cost: VERY HIGH. 5 clicks + typing + navigation + positioning.

The video pauses when an annotation is added.

Anchors: Annotations get added to a segment of the video which defaults to 5 seconds long. The in point begins at the click point.

Annotation on Annotation: No


Cost: 3-5 clicks + typing + navigation ([position in], [position out], mark in, mark out, confirmation click), including 0-2 clicks for navigation

The video stops only when the “end segment” button is hit. Thus the video continues playing after the start segment button is hit so that the user can continue watching the video. This seems to be a result of the use of segments in the application since if it were a point marker you would have to pause at that one point. I like the idea of only pausing at the end segment click though.

Anchors: Segments with in / out points.

Annotation on Annotation: No.