A2 MEDIA  PORTFOLIO

The research method I chose for my audience feedback for my main and ancillary tasks was a questionnaire using Google Forms. This allowed me to reach my desired demographic, which was teenagers and young adults because I felt like they are the quickest to judge a media product in this digital age. A questionnaire, as opposed to a filmed focus group, allowed me to reach a larger sample size and although the reliability of the answers produced by a questionnaire because social desirability might play part, I decided to carry it out to collect the feedback. I attached the pictures as well as the link to the music video in the email.

 

So after determining the participant’s age, I proceeded to ask them simple, open questions with several suggestions to consider when they produce an answer. I realised that by giving them suggestions might influence their focus on which part of the product they discuss, but I believed people who had little idea about media except of the mainstream which they are exposed to daily could use a little boost of ideas.

 

In the questionnaire I asked how well they believe the main and ancillary tasks combine together as well as any other opinions they had about the quality of the products.

 

What I learned from my audience feedback was that people hold more importance to the aesthetics, whether it would be a video or an image, than previously thought. While the response to the question about the quality of the video was an in-between one, meaning people thought it was good enough to look like a music video but lacked something to make it more professional, the responses to the digipak and the magazine advert were different. They differentiated in a way that the digipak and the advert received more positive responses than the main task.

 

This perhaps is the result of a team work. While all of us working on the video held strong opinions about making the video looks aesthetically pleasing, when ideas clash together, compromises do not always turn out the best for the video. I made the ancillary tasks on my own which immediately explains why they have a different look from the actual video.

 

My approach to the ancillary tasks was to keep it as professional as possible. Meanwhile, when we were working on the video, we did not have that as a main priority, in fact we didn’t have much of a main priority except to make it conventionally acceptable and indie-genre-like.

 

Another thing I learned from the audience feedback was that our target audience is not afraid of change or unconventionality. While we were busy having the video adapt as many indie genre conventions as possible, we forgot to put our own concepts and ideas to make the video have more soul and individuality to it. Perhaps another brain storm hour should have been spent between us, where we discussed our own ideas and elements that we think would make the video more exciting.

 

Overall, when reviewing the responses of the questionnaire, I found we did a good job telling the story but we could have worked harder on making that story more interesting and appealing, not only relatable. We also should have worked harder on our setting and cinematography to make the video more appealing to the eyes of our target audience.

 

In terms of my ancillary tasks, things which have been pointed out to me by the audience feedback were completely sensible and logical and I believe by adding/removing certain elements (adding ‘more social media logos to the magazine advert to make it more modern’) would undoubtedly improve my media products.