Natalie Linford

Critical Analysis

MMP Name: The Local Radio Cure

 

Throughout my project, I faced challenges that I never expected to and I definitely cannot say that my original view of this documentary, is what the final result actually looks like. However, I definitely did some things well and I am proud of what I have produced. With all that in mind, this analysis is an overview of what went well, what didn't, and how professional my work is. 

 

Professional Production Values:

Looking back on my finished documentary there are definitely elements of it that show professional production values and elements that may not. The first I’d like to mention is the high quality of my interview with Kevin Scott. The Video itself had good lighting, was filmed from a good angle with a relevant backdrop, the content spoken about was relevant to the topic and the audio quality was also rather good with little to no intruding background sounds. However, my Interview with Marinella was not as good quality. The audio was still clear and the background used was relevant, however, the visual quality and lighting could have been better. I used a video camera to record this interview changed settings on it to improve the recording. 

 

My presenting audio that ran throughout the documentary, thanks to me editing out background noises and fuzziness, was also of high quality. It was loud, clear and the words themselves were engaging/ interesting all of which are key things to ensure a documentary is professional. 

 

As my documentary was radio-related that also meant it was music-related. Despite only being able to use 42 seconds of 3rd party footage I ensured that there was upbeat music played in certain areas of the documentary to keep it fun and break up things. I used good quality audio, ensured it transitioned in and out well and didn't use too much to ensure I did not overshadow the important information.

 

In terms of the footage I filmed, it was all good quality, interesting, and topic-related. For example, I speak about the different elements on social media that can help expand the number of people who see Hot Radios campaigns and I included footage showing each of these elements to ensure people could understand what I was talking about. However, as much as my footage was well lit, filmed from different angles, and related to each point I talk about, due to technical issues where I couldn't use Premiere Pro to edit it coursed small glitches or jumps within certain footage that had been edited.

 

For editing, I had to use two different software's called Canva and Adobe rush neither of which have anywhere near the number of tools and level of quality that Premiere Pro has. It was hard to learn how to use these new software's in a short span of time but sadly it was also rather hard to cut certain clips (to edit out mistakes or sudden camera movements) without the jump being obvious in the final piece. This also happened with some of the onscreen titles, meaning some of them also did not look as professional as hoped. 

 

Moving back to elements that showed professional production values, I created informative graphics that were interesting, interactive, and factual. The pieces were high in quality and illustrated the point I was making at that time better than a video could. 

 

 

Legal/ Ethical Issues:

The only legal issue I had to take into consideration was the Copyright law. I used 40 seconds worth of music, videos, and photos that were not mine, and therefore I had to ensure I was legally allowed to use them. The Videos and music came from sites called Pixabay and Freesound. Both of these sites produce Copyright free content that is allowed for use and therefore I didn't have to seek permission for them. 

 

The photos I used however were pitchers taken by different Hot Radio presenters during their shows. I gained permission from the Hot Radio Director to use content from their socials (which these pictures were on) however, to be extra safe I also asked each presenter if they were happy for me to use these images. Permission was given and therefore I had no legal worries when it came to Copyright. 

 

Journalism Practise within the Industry:

As an overview, my documentary was well-balanced and unbiased by showing both the positive and negative elements of social media effects on local radio. The documentary also shows that the subject is well researched by me and that I have gathered statistics, interviews, and other forms of evidence to back up the idea. All of these elements show good journalistic practices within the industry. 

 

In terms of my Interviews (particularly the one with Kevin) I also showed good journalist practice by asking all the correct, relevant questions and gaining good quotes that could be used. However, I did have other interviews lined up that fell through, some for covid related reasons. I feel I could have tried harder as a journalist to replace or re-arrange these interviews to ensure more content help improve the documentary. 

 

Also, there is a question that I ask during a section of the documentary that states “So why would people listen to the radio where there are adverts and you can't pick the songs you want when they can use apps like Spotify?”. This question could be seen as leading, biased, or almost mean towards radio therefore it is definitely unprofessional and something I wish I didn't include as in the industry as a journalist I could get in serious trouble for. It is something I realised when it was too late to edit it out but in the future, I will definitely be more careful with my wording.

 

Conclusion:

In conclusion, I think overall my project is definitely of a high, semi-professional standard. However, there are still areas both on the production side and the professional journalistic side that I need to work on before completing a project like this again in the actual industry.

Word count: 1000 words