Blog 1
I was just running through my news feed on Facebook the other day and I saw a post that made me thinking. Basically it was an article on an ongoing prosecution case in Vietnam, where a certain powerful character was caught on camera kissing a girl in an elevator against her will. Worse thing is, she is under 18. The whole community was enraged, and almost all media bodies in the country used their power of influence to push for a prosecution.
The main thing is all over the media, it seemed that that powerful character had bought the clause of silence from her family. Somehow this story was made public, and after some intensive research, I found that the original source is not very trustworthy. What it did was making his family falling further into despair, being the central of attention in the whole country (and certainly not in a good way). I always believe that in story like this one, the person to be aimed at should only be the individual that commits the outraged incident, not his whole family. And it all started with a bit of disinformation. I guess choosing this studio as my first choice this semester is a great thing, for now I have started to ask the authenticity of EVERY tiny detail, expecting it to be totally accurate. Having an eye for detail is always beneficial.
In studio this week, we formed the group to prepare for the Fake Live. I am members of two groups with the role of DA and camera operator for each so it was sensible for me to focus on being the DA at the first stage. Initial discussion about Brexit was amused and some of us were thinking of making it the main panel discussion, but then Morgan came up with the great idea of a game show. The idea itself has a lot of potential to be amazing, although we have not decided on its context yet. Looks like this assignment will be extremely fun.
Blog 2
I was encouraged to produce something controversial this week. As an off-the-ground collaborator, my job is to write sport content locally and internationally. I did mention in the first set of blogs that sometimes I produce articles that have great-viewing potential, but not necessarily all accurate. It is part of the reason why I choose to this studio to be my very first option as I felt that practicing journalism requires great acknowledgement of authenticity in information. It is a prestige to be able to spread information to the community, but sometimes view level blinds individuals.
The article that I was originally assigned has some level of controversy in it, mainly because I felt that it has some power of misleading as the information in it has not been confirmed, while the writing tone requires a highly opinionated view. Since I felt it would not be right to write something I might not be proud of, I turned the assignment down. Has fact checking made me a better reporter? On the inside, perhaps.
This week, our group for the Fake Live agrees on the concept of our game show. It is going to be about fact checking rather than a panel discussion. I feel that on one hand, the idea is refreshing and much more enjoyable compared to a talk show. But on the other hand, it is quite complex since we have not tried this idea in class before I think. This was shown as we had a rundown before the actual go. As a DA, I have to communicate with other members on the set effectively. This was achieved, as the rundown was better than we expected. However, we nearly ran out of time and considering the complications that could occur on the day, this is THE factor to be considered for me.
Also, a note on the Fact Check Brief that we found a guest to bring in some expertise for our great discussion on set in a few weeks to come. My group has set a basic direction, but not a clear pathway at the moment. Hope we can come up with something good and in sync for the pitch in a few weeks.
Blog 3
This week has the most enjoyable session in the studio as of yet. With a quick word, I think the Fake Live was extremely successful for all groups and everyone would have a lot to write about because it was so fun. It was great seeing everyone setting up and helping each other in moments of needing some audience or talents, for example.
I started out the day being the camera operator for Group 1. I guess there is not much to comment upon, as operating is ultra straightforward for me nowadays. It is pretty funny how on the first two weeks I was so afraid of anything going wrong when I put my hand on the $60,000 (or something like that) camera, and now I quite enjoy getting the shot right with the direction of the director and DA. And I am glad I played a part in the success of the piece (which I felt the other members also thought that way) without any prior discussion about it at all (but one trial last week).
I was the DA for Group 2, and I feel that we did great. The game show was very enjoyable for everyone, as it is unique compared to the other groups. The graphics ran quite smoothly, although one piece of it could not be played (my ears still feel the effect). Time management was great as we achieved the show without running overtime. On my part, I feel that I should have had better communication with the floor manager, as on one incident something came up and it was my Director who tried to reach her (which should not have been the case). But overall, I am very happy with the outcome. It is really really great seeing something unfolds successfully from just the spur of an idea.
Blog 4
Following the Fake Live, I want the successful run of groups that I am a part of to go on all the way to the end of the semester. Throughout the break, me and my teammates for the Fact Check brief has come up with many many ideas, which in the end we put in together into one big file with our connected idea to present for the pitch.
And I felt that the pitch was successful. Our brief will consist of one expert guest in the form of Jimmy Buckley – a friend of Euan. Thomas will be our host, as he always does a brilliant job, just like he is born to be one (he is a natural!). Morgan will be the director, as he sort of played that role for my group in the Fake Live too. He always brings up great ideas, and certainly contributed many for this brief (a huge shoutout to Euan too!). Me and Tyler are set to be camera operators, but this might change.
We came up with the ultimate idea for the brief to be a talk show. I am quite confident at this context because we have practiced this many many times over the course of the semester. We presented quite clearly to our special guests how it is going to be, from the stage to the clothes of our panel. And the moment our guests said “excellent pitch”, I have a feeling this brief is going to be very good.
The judge also provided us with some great ideas that we should totally put under consideration, such as putting out the potential problems with the guests with the idea of interviewing extinct animals, or letting the panel breaking the fourth wall. I think that many details that we set out on Tuesday might change, as there are still a few weeks left before the actual brief. But hearing opinions of experts did help us to a great extent.
Fact Check Brief Proposal
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1phkXAGqzDbNwB1gX20ta_DPr2D-NjkjXhJmhRVunWmU/edit?usp=sharing