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: Meetings

Meeting 1 (1/5/16)
Once we had started the production of our packages, we began to create deadlines for our work. Within this first meeting we decided on three deadlines;

10th May: Complete Individual Packages (6 – 8 mins)
15th May: Scripting Deadline for a run through at 12pm.
17th May: Guest preparation in the morning before our show at 2pm.

We also discussed our individual plans for each package.
Not all members were in attendance.

Meeting 2 (3/5/16)
Our second meeting was very short and quickly discussed our individual plans for our 6 – 8 minute packages. During this, those in attendance seemed to be on track, with interviews planned and recorded, and editing beginning to happen.
Meeting 3 (9/5/16)
On the 9th of May, we had one day until our individual package deadline was to be handed in. During this, half the group were not in attendance. With the group we had, we discussed the plans for our guest, planning the angle we were looking for – as well as how the individual packages were coming along. With final touches, a few of us were ready for tomorrows deadline.

Meeting 4 (10/5/16)
The deadline for the individual packages.
Myself and another member of the group were ready for the deadline. 3 other members of the group were nearly finished, while one was not in attendance and had not completed the interviews.  Communication was very difficult as members of the group were ignoring the Facebook group chat in place to discuss the project.

During this we discussed suitable plans incase of an incomplete package. We decided that extending the guest interview would be the best idea, as this can be rearranged in a quick amount of time, dependant on how long is left. We also realised we had a lot of content that could be discussed with our guest that was not in the script.

Meeting 5 (16/5/16)
We planned to meet at 9am on the Monday morning to continue with the individual packages. I was the only member in attendance.

With a single day until the hour long show, I checked with the group on how everyones individual roles were coming along. 3 members of our group were still editing their 6 – 8 minute package, which resulted in myself and another member of the group taking over other peoples roles. I created the script, the jingle, and also helped create the playlist. The bed music was also edited by myself.

Meeting 6 (17/5/16)
On the morning of the package, I created a schedule for the day, and discussed with the other group for a suitable time to practice in the studio.

“Okay… So tomorrow! 
10-10-30: BREAK
11:30- 12:00: READ THROUGH

Bed music was edited for timing, while myself and Ellen (who was in charge of time management) discussed the script running order, and timed the show during the run through.

After creating one jingle, myself and Mel planned to create a few more jingles to help expand the show and refrain from repetition.

With a few issues arising during the upload of the packages, we spend the next hour discussing the show with Jay (our guest), Mel planned his segment, and all began to piece together the script to make sure it would run smoothly.


Stage 2 Development: Meetings

Stage 1 Planning: Meetings


First Meeting (2/2/2016):
During this meeting we were placed into our groups and discussed our personal plans for the documentaries.

After deliberating the station style and target audience, we decided to go with a BBC Radio 1 feel. We decided to use this station style due to us all being within this target audience of 15 – 29 years old. Not only this, but we are all from different parts of the UK, and beyond – and BBC is known for focusing on not only local, but national affairs. The main key is that BBC 1 like to focus on social media, and while all our group use social media sites to research and browse, we believed that this station is best suited for us all due to its chatty and informal feel, yet still informative.

Using the BBC Radio 1 idea, we decided on a list of themes that we could use that would link into the station feel.

The themes discussed were as follows;
support – helping others and gaining encouragement
countries – local and nationwide findings to help educate audiences with different cultures.
student living – encourage students and pre-students to go into further education and show a balance to student life.

After discussing the possibilities, we decided to go with SUPPORT as we felt this fitted into our individual documentaries best. As some members of the team couldn’t attend the meeting, I then sent all our discussions to the team through our Facebook chat to keep all of the group notified and then make sure to hear their opinions. The rest of the group not in attendance agreed with our decisions.

Second Meeting (9/2/2016):
Within the second meeting we focused on the individual packages and how these would fit into our theme of support. After discussing each package, we then turned this into a running order for the hour long show, so that we had an overall feel for how the show would work.

ELI: Hidden Doors
CALLUM: Young Carers
NAOMI: Breast Cancer Awareness
MEL: Brewing Beer

We decided on this running order as it gave us space to have the more serious topics mixed in with the feel good content.

Third Meeting 23/2/2016):
In this meeting, we used the time to brainstorm possible guests for our hour long show. We wanted someone that would be able to connect to at least one of the documentaries, while also having their own support network or situation. During this discussion, I mentioned my friend had recently been on a 6 month adventure in South Africa and used this time for self betterment and a way to support her.
The group agreed, that if she was free we should have her in the hour long documentary – as she was also a singer, and adding her music would help break up the show from constant dialogue.

Fourth Meeting (8/3/2016):
We had a short meeting to make sure everyone was happy with their individual packages, in regards to the documentary pitch the following week. Many of the group seemed happy with this discussion and believed they were all on track for our deadlines.
As the only member of the group to attend all meetings, I’ve published all minutes to our Facebook group chat to keep everyone in the loop.

Fifth Meeting (15/3/2016):
I invited our guest, Sophie Stanistreet to the college to discuss the support documentary idea. This gave us a chance to pitch our show to her, and help find a way to fit her into the running order. The group seemed happy with the ideas being thrown around, and Sophie seemed comfortable with show idea. At the moment, Sophie is unsure whether she will be free for the documentary live show, and therefore we are currently finding a backup, in case Sophie cannot be in attendance. A few of our group members have a friends interested in the documentaries and we could use them if necessary.

Sixth Meeting (12/4/2016)
In this meeting we decided on team roles in the coming weeks for the hour long show.
For this, we needed to decide on specific areas that need focused on, so that we can all work together. The roles were decided between myself, Eli and Ellen – and then we discussed with the others on Facebook, as they were unavailable for the class.

The roles are as follows…
Jingle – Ellen
Scripting – Callum and Mel
Guest Segment – Matt
Bed Music selection – Naomi
Playlist & Synergy Production – Eli

Further roles will be decided on the lead up to the actual show, regarding presenting, producer and editor.


Stage 1 Planning: Meetings