Stage 3 Evaluation: Hour Show

What is your view of your programme after it has been completed and finished
I’m very happy with our show. At the end of the date we managed to pull off the show, and complete the package to the full hour. However, it definitely had its difficulties.
One of the largest problems was the lack of time before the show to prepare the script. Three members of the group were still editing their package in the few hours before we went live, which resulted in myself and one other member of the group creating and editing the script during the morning of the show. However, we did manage to arrange the packages together and make sure that it all fit under the BBC Radio 1 audience.

 

How effective do you think your approach/strategy was through all its stages – i.e the activities chosen, the planning and organization done?
Throughout the first month I schedueled many meetings to make sure everyone was in progress, however this became very difficult as many members of the group would not be in attendance. It was very difficult to find out progress from a few members which made the planning process very difficult.

After a few weeks, we decided on specific roles for one another. By doing this, we split up the responsibilities and made it easier for us to focus on our own work, while making sure the hour long show would be ready in time. One member had the script, one was on timing, the jingle, the playlist and the guest segment, were all included in this roles.

My approach was quite blunt. I was always checking on peoples progress while also stating my own, in the hope that we would be on time. Meetings became effective the closer to the deadline we were. A few members were still recording the day before the show, and the documentaries weren’t completed until hours before we were meant to go live. The organization between the group should have been better, and if the team had worked together it would have been more relaxed.

 

How successful do you feel your programme was in meeting its purpose?
The main focus within our hour long show was to show support. SUPPORT was our theme. The target audience was BBC Radio 1, and we managed to convey support on topics that related to a 15 – 29 year old audience. Due to the lack of preparation, the chat became very colloquial, which ultimately may have helped get the BBC Radio 1 feel.

 

How successful do you feel your programme was in meeting its intended audience?
The target audience was BBC Radio 1 is a 15 – 29 year old audience, interested in a variety of mainstream topics. Many are social media enthused and are up to date on a variety of cultural and fashion brands and icons. Celebrity culture and Top 40 music are also very popular in this target audience.

Many of our packages focused on the BBC Radio 1 feel, and included Top 40 tracks that are known by the audience. Our guest was also perfect for BBC Radio 1, as a 21 year old actor, Jay had all the right knowledge and chat to help enthuse an audience while stick to the Radio 1 feel. I also managed to include the social media link for Jay’s page to keep it BBC Radio 1 related.

If we had planned the script ahead, we would have remembered the social media and time check, to really make the show professional and BBC-esk.

 

How appropriate do you feel your programme was in meeting the requirements for its selected station?
As our show was BBC Radio 1, we had to make sure we followed the Ofcom and BBC regulations, to stick to the legalities of the show. We had to make sure our guest was suitable, and inform him of the BBC rules of no swearing. We had to stay informal, yet friendly and approachable.

With the songs used, we only had instrumentals to Top 40 tracks, as well as a mix of songs within the jingles. All these songs were very popular, and were covered under the PRS and MCPS. If we had more time, we should have mixed the songs together more, to make the transitions clean and fresh, just like BBC Radio 1. Instead, the changes felt slightly messy.

 

Describe how the technical aspects of your programme supported and enhanced its intended effect?
Throughout the show we used a variety of bed music that were all under the BBC Radio 1 feel. We used this to help keep the pace for the show and I believe we did this effectively. The bed music was at the right level throughout and we managed to make all the audio clear and timed. The jingles were also used well to make sure that we had short breaks between the documentaries. We created a main jingle, and two shorter ones to refrain from repetition. I believe this was done well, as it gave us a variety of jingles to use, that fit with specific packages, depending on the theme and emotion.
If I were to do anything differently, I would have spent more time with the bed music and timed the bed music around each speech, so that it flowed nicely into a jingle, rather than fading each backing track out.

 

How appropriate was the music selected for your programme? Did you successfully achieve what you set out to do?
The show had a variety of backing tracks used to keep the pace throughout the show. We used some short synth beats by ‘Kygo’ and “Years & Years’ for instrumental, while using 2 known songs ‘Fast Car’ and ‘7 Years’ for the short jingles.

As our show was based on support, I created a jingle based on this through songs discussing ‘leaning’. I used a classic of ‘Bill Withers – Lean On Me’ and mixed it with ‘Major Lazer – Lean On’. The transition from a 1972 classic to today helped to show the contrast. While ‘Lean On Me’ is out of the BBC Radio 1 target audience, the song is still well known due to covers in TV shows, such as Glee and many television talent shows. Overall, I was pleased with the music choices, as they kept the pace and mixed from instrumental to songs in the jingles.

The plan was to have music that was not distracting, yet kept the pace throughout, and I believe we managed to achieve this. If I were to change anything, I would have added different backing tracks, as it started to have too much repetition throughout the full hour.

 

Describe the team work involved in the whole production. What aspects of it do you feel helped the programme to be successful and what aspects of it do you feel can be improved?
Throughout the hour long show, myself and two others were very focused on the time and making sure that we ran smoothly. We were therefore always discussing while the microphones weren’t live. There was no major mistakes throughout the hour long show. During the show, one member of the team forgot to fade up the correct microphone, but a simple gesture from myself fixed the problem quickly. We managed to work well together in the studio. Some were quieter than others, but we always knew where we were in the script, and had a suitable running order.

Before the show, there were a few issues with members of the team not pulling their weight, and other members having to do the work for them. The roles and responsibilities that were put in place were not completed and therefore as the first to finish the documentary I spent a lot of time planning the hour long show alone. For the future, I would improve the meeting process, to see peoples progress – that way roles and responsibilities would have more priority towards the end.

 

If you listened to this programme on the radio, what would be your reaction as a member of a typical audience?
I would be very interested in the idea of support, and the different topics available – however it definitely wasn’t perfect. The show was definitely in the right target audience and could captivate the audiences attention, however I feel as though the pace of the show was too fast at times, due to the rush to fit in all the documentaries. If I could have done this outside of the graded unit I would make the show longer, to fit in all the documentaries, while also listening to the presenters thoughts and feelings in more detail. This way, there would be more chance to build a rapport with the presenter and get to know them.
The end of the show was very long and unplanned, which could be seen as unprofessional. As a member of the audience I would have a negative reaction, as it seemed very faint and unprepared. This is the section I would have changed in the future, with more segments – such as social media – planned incase of extra time.

 

What changes or modifications did you make to your approach during the course of the activity? What other approaches did you consider?
During the hour long show, we tried to focus on the timings to make sure we hit the 60 minute mark. To do this, we tried to fit jingles into the script and change the timings after every documentary to see where we were in the hour. We added sections to the script, such as a monologue with the guest, to fill more time and had an extension version incase more time was needed.
Our original guest also dropped out of the show a few weeks before, and a new guest was needed. This changed our roles and responsibilities as I was originally in charge of the guest segment, however when we found a new guest, we reshuffled the roles so that the guest would feel more comfortable being interviewed by someone they know. This was a successful swap, as it caused no problems with the timeline and we were still in control for the hour long show.

 

What aspects of your production skills would you concentrate on improving after critically evaluating your work? Justify your answer by referring to the programme.
Timing was key during this project.
The roles and responsibilities that were to be done for the 15th of May were not complete in time, which resulted in lack of preparation and confidence while on air. The script should have been done two days before, along with the packages to discuss timings and have two days to practice. It would have been suitable for the whole team to meet the deadlines, to really help focus on the radio show, rather than the documentaries.

For the future, we should have had meetings planned in advance, instead of myself always calling for a meeting on the day – that way people may have stuck to their deadlines more.

Overall – the hour long show did go well. The planning before the show and off microphone was very hectic, however the actual show went very well. We sounded confident and enthusiastic on air, and did broadcast a very supportive show.

Stage 3 Evaluation: Hour Show

Stage 2 Development: Legalities, Ethics & Health and Safety

Legalities
While working with guests and interviewing members of the public, it was important to sign Audio Release Forms for all members of the public involved in the 6 – 8 minute package, as well as the hour long show.

This was very important as it gave me permission to broadcast, edit and adapt the information given as well as the option to be acknowledged as a contributor to the project. A copy of the Audio Release Form was also given to each member of the project to keep in case of any queries. All members, including the LGBT Officer, the Dundee University guests and the presenter signed the Audio Release Form – as well as the guest used throughout the hour long show.

The facts and figures used within my documentary were also confirmed by the United Kingdom 2010 Census, which has also been published within many national media outlets. It was important to get the figures correct, as the facts were opening the storyline.

The music used within this package were also covered under the PRS licensing, used as a backing throughout the show and 6 – 8 documentary.

 

Ethics
While working with the LGBT community, one of the biggest slip ups people can find is using the wrong pronouns when someone is transitioning. One of my biggest concerns was making sure not to unknowingly insult a guest but using the wrong pronoun. I made it very clear before interviewing each member what their preferred pronouns were and tried to stick to this while interviewing and introducing them in the 6 – 8 minute package.

With the Gender Recognition Act 2004 allowing transgender people to legally change their gender, it was even more important to make sure that I made no mistakes. While many members of the community understand it can be difficult and are very lenient about slip ups, I wanted to make sure I stayed professional and accurate.

Ethically, it was important also to make sure that I followed the Ofcom rules on fairness (Ofcom Section 7), making sure that the story told was non bias and showed a spectrum, not putting anyone unnecessarily in a bad light. It was important not to name and shame, while also showing as much privacy (Ofcom Section 8) as possible for each guest.

Health & Safety
When interviewing the LGBT Officer at Edinburgh College, I had no problems contacting and meeting with Caitlyn. As Caitlyn is a member of Edinburgh College, the fire exits were already in place, and a quick tour and guide around the Radio Studio helped show any problems and thoughts in case of an emergency. While Caitlyn was a stranger to me before this project, there were many other pupils in the studio, and within Edinburgh College itself.
Interviewing the LGBT Society at Dundee University meant that I had to travel up to Dundee alone. Luckily, one of my friends is at Dundee and in the society, which meant that I had a guide throughout my journey and something that knew all involved. We also held the interviews within Abertay University recording studios, which meant I was logged as a visitor and was informed of the fire exit drills by a member of staff.

Health and Safety was also important while in the studio, as thete were many of us broadcasting throughout the show. While the room was crammed with 8 people, all members of the room were aware of the fire exits, and the studio etiquette while working with electricals.

 

 

Stage 2 Development: Legalities, Ethics & Health and Safety