The specific impact of different media forms and methods of delivery (For Assessment)

Nowadays, TV is the easiest method of delivery, due to the fact that everyone owns a TV. Nowadays there are a multitude of media forms that are suitable for everyones taste, but eache of them has its own advantages and disadvantages. For instance, Television has become the primary source of news and entertainment, permitting you to reach a large number of people on a national and international level. On the other hand its message its temporary and its quite expensive in terms of creative, production and airtime costs. What makes it so different from other media forms is the fact that it demands a visual presentation of the message. Internet on the other hand has revolutionised all media forms, attracting more and more audiences. The internet is changing the way in which we do things. Not only that we can permanently communicate one with each other, whenever we want and with no limit, but we can also adopt  new innovative and creative ways of doing our projects. The internet is something amazing because you can customise almost everything. You can personalise every single project that you do, using programs such as Prezi or Google Maps. Now I see the Television more like a way of relaxation, and a way of keeping up with the latest news and personalities. But the Internet is something much bigger.  This whole process happened really quick, and that is why you should constantly be engaged in order to keep up.  So the Internet, managed to combine different new media forms into a single source. People are thrilled that they can do whatever they wanted only by staying in front of a computer. Every thought, every idea of yours can catch different shapes, colours and so on, because you are the one who decides how your work is going to look. I think its fantastic!

Now I will be reffering at our first broadcast lecture. As a first step, we were asked to contrast and compare two studio based programmes, by paying attention especially to the content, the look, the presentation, the sound and the treatment of the audience.

One of the programmes is The one show, which is a topical magazine – style daily television programme. Generally, the show has a mix of stories followed by discussions with the reporters, experts and an interview with the guest. The guest usually has a book, film, programme, concert, CD or DVD to promote. As I am from another country, I must confess that I am not familiar with this TV programmes, and I haven’t seen them until now. After watching online some of the editions, I was pleasantly impressed about this programme. I really liked the fact that it covers a variety of stories of different topics. It is like a news programme in my opinion, with the difference that it has a more entertaining way of presenting the subjects. At the beginning, when I saw that in a single show are so many topics I thought that is a little bit “crowded”. In my country, the TV shows were made basically after the same theme. I mean there were TV shows about music, fashion, conflicts, celebrities and so on, but the topics were separate.

After all I really enjoyed the TV show, and I noticed the fact that all these topics helped me not to get bored. In terms of presentation, I think that the presenters have a really good chemistry, and chemistry is everything in TV. I think they look really natural in front of the cameras, and that is a hard thing to achieve in these days. I have heard some rumors, that they actually don’t like each other, but if it this is true, that means that they are really good at what they are doing. What I like about them is that they act really competent and professional. Moreover they have great personalities and that is why the public will adore them. I think that they are perfect for this kink of show. They are both serious and funny, they are sensitive but also tough when its the case…They cam make you feel the emotion, the tension and the excitement whenever its the case. In my opinion the are the perfect mix.

Now I will refer at the audience behind the cameras. I loved the idea that they don’t have an audience in the studio. First of all, it is better to have the feeling that only you are the audience, it seems more personal. I think that an audience will have destroyed the nice, friendly and relaxed atmosphere from the studio, with the crew providing natural reactions. It is really awkward to know that whenever somebody is laughing or clapping etc…. they do so because they are told to. I think that it makes less enjoyable the show. More than that, I believe that the guests are more relaxed and they feel more comfortable; the atmosphere is be more homely. On the other hand, I love the fact that they try to involve the audience in front of the television by convincing them to vote for different causes, by making them participate in all sort of events.

In terms of the studio, I think it looks great. I like the mixture of the colours, but I think that here is just a matter of tastes. I like the fact that is more different than others. You can recognise it very easily. It is very modern due to its furniture, its lightnings and also due to the colours. It makes you enjoy even more, every part of the show.  I believe that the decor fits perfectly with the world in which we live now. Unlike other studios, this one seems to me more welcoming, more comfortable, more homely but also more stylish.

In terms of the sound, I noticed the fact that they don’t cross the limit. I mean its not music in the background all the time, they chose carefully the sounds that they use and also the music. They keep the perfect equilibrium between image and sound.

In terms of audience, I think that it would be better if they allow the public to call live 10 minutes at the end of the show, time in which the audience can ask questions to the guest. By doing this, I think that the public will be more and more interested in this show, and the audience will increase.

My second programme is Britain’s got talent. I must say that I really enjoy watching this show, and I think that I have seen almost all the series on Youtube. Though this programme doesn’t appear on a daily basis, I think it has a great impact amongst people. I mean the idea of the show is extraordinary. Ordinary people become famous over night, they entertain the public with incredible things. It is incredible what talents are hiding behind simple people… I think this show is breathtaking. You don’t know at what to expect to, you don’t know what are you going to see at that show. It is not like The one show, which is mostly based on the life of celebrities and news. This programme is about people like you and me, who have the opportunity to show their talent in front of the whole world, hoping to be noticed and win the grand prize, thing which would certainly change their life. So I believe that it is unique. I definitely think that this type of programme attracts every type of audience, regardless the age, gender or colour. Is for everyone’s taste.

Regarding the presentation, unlike The one show were the presenters had the main role, here the things are different. The most important role is that of the judges. The presenters only introduce the contestants into the stage, while the hard work and all the attention is pointed at the judges. Now,  I will refer mostly to the 2009 and 2010 judges: Simon Cowell, Amanda Holden and Piers Morgan. I think they were really carefully chosen. I mean, they were really good at what they were doing, they were professionals. But their personalities were so different. I think that they were the cherry on the cake. They added a little suspense on the show, and they were the ones that aroused emotions in the hearts of viewers.  For example Simon was more harsh, more tough and he always said exactly what he thinks. On the other hand, Amanda not only that is really beautiful but she is also sensitive and is more careful at the feelings of the contestant. She always defends her point of view.  And Piers, I think it represents the equilibrium between those two mentioned above. So, we as audience can hear several opinions and comments, and we can even recognise ourselves in the image of one of the judges. Another important difference between these 2 shows, is that in The one show the presenters have a script, while at Britain’s got talent everything is more spontaneous, because the judges speak only what they really think and express their own thoughts and emotions.

Moreover, in terms of the audience, these show is really different that the other one presented above. It has a very backstage audience. The approach is different this time. I think that in this kind of show the audience is good, because it highlights the emotions of the contestants, their failures and their successes. I think it highlights the fact that everything is real, is not only a show were the audience is paid to applaud or to laugh. Their reactions are natural. And they also add an extra suspense. The audience from the back of the cameras, is mostly composed of the families and friends of the contestants.

Furthermore, I think that the studios of the 2 TV shows are quite different in several aspects, beside the fact that the one from Britain’s got talent is a lot bigger that the other. Both studios are really amazing in terms of colours and furniture. But the big difference between those two is that at Britain’s got talent, the music, the sounds, the lights, the colours are set according to the preferences of every participant. The decor always fits perfectly with everything that happens on the stage. The changes are not major, is more about the lights and the colours, but I think that these details really help to create a very good atmosphere.

About adinavlad

Optimist, friendly,'ll get to know me :)

Posted on May 21, 2011, in Creating Impact. Bookmark the permalink. Comments Off on The specific impact of different media forms and methods of delivery (For Assessment).

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: