In this week’s lectorial we were tasked with completing a ‘learning graph’ to give ourselves a retrospective visual representation of how far we’ve come this semester. Each line represents a different aspect of the course and area for educational growth: technical skills, conceptual/theoretical skills, professionalism and sense of media practice.
Each aspect of the course seems to have progressed positively, which is relieving to see on paper.
Here is mine: 
This is the conclusion of the audio essay, which essentially encapsulates the entire contention.
The recipe for a successful children’s narrative will include a sense of moral guidance regarding issues that relate to them as an audience such as family disputes or sibling rivalry, as well as a comprehensive and gratifying structure shown through the three-part narrative concept, and an ending that is satisfying, gives closure, overcomes said hardships and provides insight and wisdom to the children absorbing the text. A successful children’s narrative gives it’s audience the realistic perspective that endings don’t have to be “happy” to be satisfying as hopefulness provides equal gratification.
Today was our final PB4 meeting before we all disband for the mid-year break.
We met for two hours after the lectorial and worked through finalising our scripts and getting all our ideas and thoughts in order.
I’ve finally completed the audio script, and I’m quite happy with it. In the audio essay, our primary focuses are Narrative, Text, Textual Analysis and Narrative Structure, so my task was essentially to define these and to elaborate them in a way that isn’t too dry for listeners.
After having previewed some of the Audio Essay drafts in last week’s tutorial, I am now hyper-cautious of overloading the listener with information, which is what some of the other groups seemed to do.
I hope that I have found a perfect medium between informative and engaging.
Today Alec and I (Hannah was away sick for today’s tutorial) welcomed a new member to our Project Brief 4 Team, Amelia!
She was very apologetic about her late arrival but we didn’t mind at all, it’s nice to have some extra brain power and some fresh ideas brought to the table.
She is very confident with editing software so she has taken the weight of editing the audio essay off my shoulders because, as you must know by now, editing is not my strong suit.
So at this point it’s looking like I will be writing the script for the Audio Essay, Amelia will be editing it, Hannah will be writing the script with Alec for the Visual Essay and the two will collaboratively edit the Visual Essay as it is so much harder than the audio.
Today we discussed the concept of ‘Institutions’ in the lectorial. An institution is basically an enduring organisation that comprises individuals working towards a common communicative goal. The following is a flow of notes that I jotted down during the class discussion:
While doing some research for this week’s topic, I stumbled across this little gem.
I think it is so important to emphasise individualism when discussing audiences as no viewer is the same as the next. Everybody has their own beliefs and values and I think that this is the hurdle at which media producers are most likely to fumble. By assuming that everybody will consume media in the same way, producers open themselves up for a lot of heat, some viewers may be offended by an advertisement, while other’s are entertained.
It is essential to find a middle ground when communicating with audiences to create something that is informative, engaging, and credible.
In this week’s lectorial, Brian discussed one of the most critical elements of media: audiences.
This lecture brought back fond memories of Year 12 Media and the study of Audience Theories. I maddened myself trying to memorise each theory before the SAC, what it was, who established it, whether the communication was linear or non-linear, whether the audience was active or passive.
The point of discussion that struck me the most was when Brian posed the question: who cares about audiences?
Me. I do. I have to.
I want to pursue a career in Public Relations and Marketing, and a huge aspect of a job like that is understanding what consumers want, and rallying that information back to companies so that they can provide their audiences with what they desire, thereby making money and contributing to economic growth. I want to be a part of that cycle.
So Brian really had me here, and his lecture got me thinking about what I want as an audience member. How do advertisers communicate with me and how to I respond to this?
From the spam emails in my inbox, to the endless flyers and catalogues strewn in the streets, all the way to the Sham-Wow ads on TV, I am constantly an audience member as much as I am a media-maker.
And with that label comes a more profound understanding of how I will communicate with my target audiences.
I made a crippling error today.
After reminding myself multiple times while hurrying around and getting ready for uni, after having made this mistake before and seemingly not learning from it, after two months of being a university student and knowing better that I really do require them, I forgot my headphones. Again.
After the initial rage and disappointment directed at my life decisions passed, I rested music-lessly with my head on the train window.
And it was in that moment that I noticed the most peculiar thing.
I looked up and made fleeting eye contact with the teenager in front of me, and realised that we were the only two people in our carriage who had looked each other in the eye.
Everybody else who was packed like sardines in our carriage was glued to their phone, iPad, ebook reader, iPod, or some form of a screen that illuminated their face with that telltale bluish glow.
Even the elderly were actively tapping the keypad of their flip-phones, texting whom? I’ll never know.
I stared around aghast, but more than that, intrigued.
What were they doing? Who were they talking to? What applications were they avidly engulfed in?
And I wondered how strange we must seem to those from third world countries who don’t share the same digital culture that we do. I mean, here we are with a screen in our palms and wires plugged into our ears, being mindlessly dominated by this device and foolishly thinking that we are in control.
I know what it’s like. I’ll log onto Facebook and read a thoughtlessly racist or homophobic or just generally ignorant status and my day will be instantly ruined.
Social media is a buzzkill, there’s no denying it. Because we’d all rather be in Waikiki where that model from Instagram is, or eating that burger that your coworker just tweeted about, or driving that new BMW that your uncle who ‘poked’ you until his friend request was accepted just posted about on Facebook.
And still we make the conscious decision to expose ourselves to such dispiriting activities that involve mindlessly scrolling through the lives of our own personal ‘followings’.
So why do we do it? For the ego boost that getting 11 likes on Instagram for your most recent ‘selfie’ gives you? For the gratification of knowing that there is someone, anyone out there, who cares enough about your chicken parmigiana to double tap it?
This philosophical debate is brought to you by my headphones, who couldn’t make it today because I possess poor organisational skills.
Today was the group’s second meeting, and as I was unable to attend the first, today was the day that we made a lot of executive decisions regarding PB4. We have come to a decision about how we will generally structure our two essays and what we will primarily focus on.