3. What have you learned from your audience feedback?
Our post documentary audience feedback can be found on YouTube at the following URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQA_J2oYoDI
From our audience feedback we learnt essentially how to construct our interview and what to include and exclude. We used a questionnaire with our audience to get a feel for what they thought was necessary within an interview before we started filming. This feedback which can be found on our group blog essentially explained to us what our target audience saw to be necessary components of a documentary about the public drinking ban. Our pre-documentary questionnaire which was aimed mostly at new drinkers (ages 18-21) essentially told us that we needed to have interviews, cutaways, and informing voiceover and facts and figures in order to make it appealing to them, this was heavily taken into consideration when creating the documentary. An overwhelming majority also told us that it was better to include someone who had knowledge of the topic and deals with the issue on a daily basis in an interview than it was to have someone who in influential in society which again, was taken into consideration when organising interviews which led us to interview people such as a WPC and the person who helped organise the London Tube Party. After taking the pre-documentary results into consideration and creating our documentary we asked our audience for feedback on the documentary, so we sat them in a room in a somewhat structured interview and asked them questions (see URL above and Figure 7). This gave us a great insight into how our target audience viewed our documentary. For the most part we learnt that people liked our documentary, however, there were some elements that could be improved. These elements included the use of cutaways, a member who was questioned stated that he felt that there should been a better use of cutaways as he felt that some of them didn’t necessarily directly relate to the topic and another audience member noted that he felt that some of the interviewees had said somewhat irrelevant subject matter. There was fortunately praise aimed towards our documentary as well as constructive criticism. One good point that was raised by the female audience member was that she felt that the graphics were “really really good” and “kept her interested”. Another positive point that was raised was also that we had a good quality of speakers which we hoped to achieve after taking what our pre-documentary questionnaire told us as the specific speakers that the audience member pointed out were mostly non influential people within society but those which has a deep knowledge of the subject of the drink on different levels such as the barman and the drinks connoisseur. The questions raised can also be seen on our group blog consist of:
1. What aspects of the documentary did you think worked well?
2. What do you think could be done to improve the documentary?
3. What codes and conventions, if any, did you notice within the documentary?
4. Did you find the documentary was biased or non biased in any way?
5. Was you able to get a clear idea of both sides of the argument?
6. Do you think the documentary was informative?
All these questions prompted mostly positive feedback however, as previously noted there were the inevitable negative elements such as some of the cutaways and some of the interviewees answer but also the voiceover as one audience member pointed out that although the documentary was formal “it didn’t dominate that documentary” as it came across that “it didn’t blend in as his voice was a bit low and he sounded a bit nervous”. All this feedback both positive and negative would be taken on board were we to re-create this documentary or create a new one fresh and we would attempt to have a clearer, bolder voiceover, have more concise speakers and more precise cutaways where every single cutaway fits within the context of the documentary.
No comments:
Post a Comment