Evaluating Audio Work
Firstly I will anaylse my interview. For my interview piece I chose to conduct an interview about the increase in the pension age and the newly announced pension cuts. I was influenced to write this piece after a conversation with my dad who was complaining about how old he will be when he retires. I then started researching the current pension age and found that just over a year ago it was increased yet again for women and that many women born between 1950-1955 could face an extra 18 months wait until they were entitled to reach their state pension. During my research period the new pension cuts were also announced which allowed me to develop my piece into how disappointed and disgraced people were with the treatment towards the elderly in the society. This tied in with a piece I had written not too long ago on elderly care.
I hadn’t heard many interviews on the pension age increase on the radio. Yet I did watch a few videos on youtube. They seemed to address the same ideas and issues I had when interviewing women who were angry about the extended wait they had to endure when receiving their pension. Radio 4 interviews were quite influential to my piece as the interviewer always tendended to ask his/her questions in a clear and concise way. Their time limit like mine can also be quite minimal at times so I always felt like their editing and selection of audio was cleverly done.
With regards to my final interview I was happy with its overall structure. The interviewee Christine Gavigan gave detailed answers with reliable knowledge. Her first hand view after experiencing the increase age in the pension age herself (she had to wait another 18 months longer than expected) also saw her giving emotive answers in which audiences could relate and sympathise with. However there are a few things I would have changed looking back. Firstly my interview was conducted on the phone which meant the audio itself wasn’t a clear as I had hoped. I drastically tried to increase the sound when editing however it was still quite mufflely in places. Another issue was how much I had hoped to fit into the interview meaning some key areas which I had hoped to fit in were cut out. The original interview lasted 10 minutes and had to be cut down to 2.45 so interesting questions and answers were lost although I did try and include the most relevant answers. So next time I’m going to set a time limit for the interview in a bid to force my questions and answers to be as concise as possible.
I felt when it came to my podcast that I prefered its overall outcome compared to my interview. My podcast was about the benefits of going to university along with benefits of getting a job straight from school. I also incorporated the idea of whether there is still a prejudice attitude towards those who hadn’t gone to university and a got a degree before embarking on their career.
Podcasts I regularly enjoy listening to are from the BBC, especially Chris Moyles. I found these are always interesting not simply because of their comic value but the incorporation of sounds,a solid structure and interesting topically debates. So from this I tried to reflect my podcast as a sought of debate with a clear structure consisting of the introduction, interviews and a concluding finish.
I’d also read a lot of influential magasine articles before conducting my podcast which allowed me to determined the arguments within my podcast (these can be found in my documentation). I decided that I needed both sides of the arguments from a range a students and non students to make it act as debate as I myself wasn’t going argue just one side. This I feel worked really well. I liked the ideas and views coming from a variety of teens and how it forced the audience to question their own opinion as I concluded my piece without a definite answer as to whether university is the best path. Compared to my interview the sound was a lot more clear as interviewed each individual in person. I struggled to find an interesting sound or piece of music to be incoporated into my piece, so I went to my universities cantine and interviewed the background noise of students chatting. I think this worked well at the start of my piece however I do believe that I could have used something slightly more interesting. Overall I was pleased with my podcast as I believe it used a newsworthy topic, contained concise interviews along with clear editing.