We spoke with Gianluca Latini, Head of the TV Production Centre in Milan, to understand how RAI approached the production of the Games from its Milan headquarters and what lessons this experience offers for the future of large-scale event production. Remote production was the central pillar of the project

*This content is included in the March issue of TM BROADCAST. You can access the full magazine here.

The Olympic Games are always one of the major milestones in the global television calendar. The scale of the production effort is reflected in audience response: this year’s Winter Games recorded record levels of engagement among broadcasters within the European Broadcasting Union (EBU). In the host country, Italy, the impact was particularly notable. Two out of three viewers followed the Games’ coverage through RAI, a proportion even higher than that recorded during Paris 2024.

At the centre of the Olympic production ecosystem stands Olympic Broadcasting Services (OBS). Since replacing the traditional host broadcaster model after the Sydney 2000 Games, OBS has profoundly transformed the way Olympic television coverage is conceived and produced. Rather than reinventing the entire production ecosystem at every edition, the Olympic movement now relies on a permanent host broadcaster, equipped with a long-term technological roadmap capable of evolving from one Games to the next.

The innovations deployed this year were already analysed in a previous issue of TM BROADCAST (you can read the article here), based on insights from OBS CEO Yiannis Exarchos. On this occasion, we aim to offer a complementary perspective by focusing on the public broadcaster of the host country. Through an in-depth conversation with Gianluca Latini, we explore how RAI approached the production of the Games from its Milan headquarters — and what lessons this experience may hold for the future of major event production.

RAI’s Milan headquarters played a central role in the broadcaster’s coverage of the Winter Olympic Games. With around 650 people working in the building, it is the second most important RAI facility in Italy — and during the Games it effectively became the technical hub of the public broadcaster’s Olympic production.

For Gianluca Latini, this position was the result of several converging factors. The first was the role of the city itself within the organisation of the Games. “In Milan, as you know, we host all the ice sports, so it was a fundamental site for the Olympic Games”.

“That was probably the most difficult aspect of the project: we had to deliver essentially the same level of coverage, but with lower costs”

The second reason is related to the broader context of the Milano-Cortina Games, which reinforced the city’s importance. While Cortina is a small mountain town, Milan is a major metropolitan centre that became deeply involved in the overall Olympic operation. The third key factor was geography. “We are very close — around two kilometres — to the IBC, where the ‘palace of television’ for the Games is located”, Gianluca Latini explains.

When these elements are combined, the result becomes clear: Milan became the focal point for many operational activities surrounding the Games, even those not directly related to the competitions themselves. “Everything that happened before — and of course during — the Olympic Games made it clear that the Milan headquarters of RAI had to become the centre of our technical project for the Olympics”, he concludes.

Delivering the same coverage… with a smaller budget

The production of the Games presented significant operational challenges for the Italian public broadcaster. “The first challenge was the responsibility of being the national public broadcaster in Italy, which meant providing very strong coverage of the Winter Olympic Games,” Latini says.

The second challenge was financial. “We didn’t have the same budget we had in the past, for example during Torino 2006. That was probably the most difficult aspect of the project: we had to deliver essentially the same level of coverage, but with lower costs”.

This constraint forced RAI to rethink its production model, with remote production becoming the central pillar of the strategy. “In practice, this meant having fewer people on site, both because of the logistical challenges and because of the cost of hotels”, he explains, noting that many of the competition venues were located in small mountain towns where accommodation capacity was limited.

As a result, the production team decided early on to minimise the number of staff deployed to the venues. “Our first decision was to try to have as few people as possible on site in the mountains and to rely mainly on remote production.”

Preserving the sense of a major broadcast operation

The second challenge was ensuring that cost reductions did not translate into a perception of reduced coverage for viewers at home. “We didn’t want to reduce our presence too much,” Latini says. “We still wanted viewers at home to feel that this was a major broadcast operation.”

In this context, he highlights the role played by Olympic Broadcasting Services (OBS), the host broadcaster responsible for the international feed. “They did a really special job with drones, special images and many other elements. I know Yiannis [Exarchos, CEO of OBS] very well, because over the past year we have had the chance to work together, and he was very helpful in giving me the possibilities I needed.”

One example of this collaboration was the selection of the main studio location in Milan. “I wanted to have a very nice studio in Milan, in a particular location. I didn’t want it to be in Piazza Duomo, because that is where all the television networks usually build their studios. I wanted a different point of view of Milan”.

The solution was found at the Arco della Pace, near the Olympic Court. “With the help of OBS, we found the right place at the Arco della Pace, where the Olympic Court was located. So I placed my studio right in front of it, in a very distinctive part of the city”, he explains.

The decision also brought financial advantages. “A studio in Piazza Duomo would have been quite expensive, while our studio at Arco della Pace cost significantly less”.

“We didn’t want to reduce our presence too much. We still wanted viewers at home to feel that this was a major broadcast operation”

Remote production as the technological backbone

From a technological perspective, the project relied heavily on remote production infrastructure connecting the IBC with RAI’s Milan headquarters. “From the IBC to the RAI building in Milan, I asked to have dark fibre connections,” Latini explains. This approach provided major operational advantages. “It gave us many possibilities and meant that we did not need to take up much space inside the IBC, which, as you know, is quite expensive.”

At the IBC, RAI installed only a small operational room acting as an interface between its infrastructure and the OBS production systems. “That way we could clearly understand where a possible signal problem might occur,” Latini says. “For example, if we didn’t receive one of the feeds, we could check whether the issue was on the OBS side or on our side. Having that interface allowed us to identify the problem immediately. In practice, it was just a small room — a signal control room receiving the feeds and sending them back to us.”

The use of dark fibre also ensured a highly reliable connection. “It was not a standard connection, which can be more difficult to stabilise. Dark fibre is much more reliable. In fact, we never had any problems, and it was also cheaper than building everything inside the IBC”, Latini highlights.

The “Olympic floor”

The real production centre was located inside the RAI’s headquarters in Milan. “We dedicated an entire floor of the building — the fourth floor — which we called the ‘Olympic floor’,” Latini explains. The space hosted two identical production galleries. “One was dedicated to Rai 2, which was the Olympic channel for RAI, broadcasting the competitions throughout the day. Rai 2 is one of RAI’s main channels. The second gallery was entirely dedicated to the Rai Sport channel.”

This configuration allowed RAI to manage simultaneous competitions effectively. “When two races were happening at the same time, and both were important — for example, one could be a major race in Cortina and the other important because an Italian athlete was competing — we could broadcast both: one on Rai 2 and one on Rai Sport.”

All production resources were connected through a single technical infrastructure. “All these systems were based on a single matrix. All the resources were shared for everything we had on that floor. That included editing, the two galleries and all the other operational areas”.

The facility was designed not only for the Olympics but also as a long-term production hub for future events. “Of course, in the future we will not have that dark fibre connection, so we will rely on IP connections, but the concept will remain the same”, Latini notes. “The idea is that we will not go where the signals are — the signals will come to where we are.”

At the IBC, RAI installed only a small operational room acting as an interface between its infrastructure and the OBS production systems

A model for future major events

RAI intends to apply the same approach to upcoming international productions. Latini specifically mentions the future FIFA World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico. “In that case we might have two channels — one on Rai 2 and another on Rai Sport — not necessarily all day long, because there are not enough football matches for that, but for the main match and the second most relevant one”.

In this model, Milan becomes the permanent production centre. “The idea is to use Milan as a kind of standard production hub: today for football matches, tomorrow for the European Athletics Championships, then for the Swimming World Championships or European Championships. Everything will come from remote locations into this floor, which will become the central production structure.”

The layout of the production space also plays an important role. “Everything is on the same floor: offices, production areas, editing. This is important because all the people work together in the same place. The main concept is to have an operational area that is always ready to work at any time.”

The infrastructure is also designed for flexibility. “All the equipment is mounted on wheels. So if for six months we don’t need the full setup, we can move the equipment and use it elsewhere — for example, in Sanremo or other major events in Italy produced by RAI. Nothing remains unused. The cabling is permanent, so when we need to reactivate the system we simply reconnect the equipment and everything is ready again.”

“This saves time, saves money at the IBC and reduces the number of people needed on site. This is the main concept that is changing the production of large events,” Latini concludes.

Fewer cameras and smarter production

The remote production model also influenced RAI’s on-site presence at the competition venues. “The same approach applied to external connections. At each venue we only had one camera in the mixed zone, because we decided not to build studios on site, mainly for cost reasons and also because of the logistical difficulties of bringing people there,” Latini explains. Most editing work was carried out at the Olympic floor in Milan.

Journalists working at the venues transmitted their material via mobile networks using SIM-based transmitters. “With a new system, the journalist could open their own computer and see exactly what the editing technician was doing on the editing station. They could say, for example, ‘Please use this shot’ or suggest changes in real time,” Latini explains.

In practice, this meant that almost all editing operations were handled remotely. “In practice we did not need editing technicians on site — only one as a backup, who was also a cameraman in the mixed zone. If necessary, he could edit from the cabin, but in reality we did all the editing in Milan”.

“The camera signal from the mixed zone was also sent here remotely,” Latini continues. “We asked OBS to send us the feed directly, and we used it here exactly like a studio camera, as if it were physically connected to the studio. The same applied to all the venues — Cortina, Livigno and the others.”

The Arco della Pace studio itself operated almost entirely remotely. “We only had a cameraman and one technician there to provide microphones and earpieces for journalists and guests. Everything else was done remotely. The camera was connected directly to the studio in Milan, so the production team could communicate with the cameraman, manage tally signals and operate everything exactly as if the camera were physically connected.”

RAI applied the same approach to other locations in the city. “We did the same at Casa Italia in Milan. That was also a remote position, with only two or three technicians: a cameraman and one or two technicians to manage the logistics of guests and interviews”.

“In this way we had two studios showing Milan live: one at Arco della Pace and another at Casa Italia, which was located at the Triennale, another iconic location in the city.”

Additional studio facilities were also prepared inside the RAI headquarters itself. “Inside the RAI building we prepared three additional studios,” Latini says. “One small studio for news; another slightly larger one that could be used for different situations — for example if the connection with the IBC failed or if weather conditions stopped a race for some time”. These spaces functioned primarily as backup environments.

A third studio was designed for larger productions. “The third studio was much larger and used for post-race coverage. Many guests came there, and it allowed for full production with replay systems and editing after the competitions.”

How much can a national broadcaster differentiate?

In events such as the Olympic Games, the international feed produced by OBS sets an extremely high production standard. As a result, the room for differentiation by national broadcasters is often limited.

“The Winter Games are not like a football match,” Latini says. “In football you can place many cameras. You want to see your coach, your number 10, the penalty area, because anything can happen. You have many possibilities to add cameras and create different angles”.

“In winter sports it is not exactly the same,” Latini continues. “Take hockey, for example. In Italy we don’t have such a strong national involvement that would justify placing additional cameras just to follow one particular player. It’s not like football for us”.

The limitations are even clearer in disciplines such as alpine skiing. “If you want to add a camera on a ski course, you have to run cables across the mountain,” he explains. “That is very expensive — and the athlete passes in front of the camera for just a few seconds.”

Given the extremely high quality of the OBS production, additional investments do not always make sense. “For me it is not really necessary to add something very expensive that would not give you a significantly different point of view. That is why I did not feel the need to deploy our own cameras”.

“That is also why we decided to place cameras only in the mixed zone, because that is a real editorial position where you can offer interviews and interact with the athletes. But beyond that, it didn’t make much sense”.

This philosophy also extends to the way RAI approaches studio locations during major events. While many broadcasters aim to build visually striking studios directly at the venue, Latini believes the balance between editorial value and cost must be carefully considered. “Of course, I would have loved to have a studio in Cortina. That was actually my dream. But the cost was simply too high, so in the end we decided not to do it”.

He argues that this dilemma is not unique to the Winter Games and will likely become even more relevant for future global events — for example, the Football World Cup in the USA. For Latini, the solution lies in combining remote production with more flexible visual environments. “We prefer to have the studio here, with a very nice LED wall behind it, where you can display beautiful images from New York or wherever you want. For viewers at home it is almost impossible to tell that you are not physically there but actually in Milan”.

At the same time, a minimal presence at the venue can still preserve the sense of immediacy. “Then you can have a very small position inside the stadium —two people, a very small studio —just to give the feeling of being present at the venue. This is the direction we want to follow in the future for our productions.”

 “If I were a broadcaster anywhere in the world, I would like to have the same level of quality that OBS delivered for this event”

The key lesson

Looking back at the project, Latini identifies several important lessons. From a production perspective, he is unequivocal about the quality delivered by the host broadcaster. “If I were a broadcaster anywhere in the world, I would like to have the same level of quality that OBS delivered for this event. I think they produced a really special broadcast for these Winter Games”.

For RAI itself, however, the most important takeaway concerns remote production. “We were forced to adopt remote production because we simply didn’t have the possibility to do everything on site, mainly because of the costs and the particular geography of the mountain venues.”

So there are two lessons he took from this experience. “The first lesson is that we will try to use remote production much more in the future.”

The second lesson is more philosophical. “Sometimes only when you are forced into a certain situation do you discover the best solutions.” Without the budget constraints, RAI might never have adopted such an ambitious remote production model. “We might have said: yes, we could try remote production, but maybe it is not possible, maybe it is strange, maybe people would not be happy because the journalists are not on site, or because there could be signal issues”.

In practice, however, the experience proved highly successful. “In this case we had to do it, and in the end it worked very well. We had no signal failures, nothing happened, and the costs were reduced by a significant percentage.”

“For me,” he adds, “this is my main personal takeaway from these Winter Games”.

Key personal takeaways on the remote production model 

“Sometimes only when you are forced into a certain situation do you discover the best solutions”

“In the end it worked very well. We had no signal failures, nothing happened, and the costs were reduced by a significant percentage”

“The idea is that we will not go where the signals are — the signals will come to where we are”

“This is the main concept that is changing the production of large events”