Reflection

Revised Post to Peer Reviewers

Here is the hyperlink to my podcast.

I feel that it should be known that I missed the firs round of revisions due to complications... So any input on my project would be greatly appreciated.

The major weaknesses in my project would probably be a lack of content if anything which I tried to compensate for with sound effects, interviews, and quotes.

The major virtues of my project are for sure the interviews because I feel no other podcasts have tried to include anonymous statements on a taboo issue like I have.

Peer Review for Mike Duffek

For my peer review of a fellow class-member, I decided to review the podcast on national security by Mike Duffek, "P3-Draft".

Why I gave him a content suggestion...

• I felt that a lot of the content he presented was very well argued and thorough but it kind of felt like too much at once. Maybe if the information were broken up into smaller sections I wouldn't have been as overwhelmed as I felt.

Why I think this helped...

• I feel that this recommendation is viable because by breaking up the sections: maybe by sound effect or voice over, the listener would have more time to ponder, understand, and digest the information provided to them.

What I drew upon from in class discussions (an intangible source material)...

• When discussing the genre conventions of each genre in class, it was brought up that a podcast is specifically and exclusively audible genre. Therefore, going back and rereading something is impossible, instead the typically lazy audience won't go back and re-listen to something that requires more thought because it requires more effort.

What I liked...

• I felt that the author employed a very crude and blunt diction in order to be as straight-forward to the audience as possible. This mentioning of taboo subjects in the argument against increased government intervention in private Internet affairs makes in more entertaining and realistic.

Peer Review for Ben Meyer

For my peer review of a fellow section-member, I decided to review the Quick Reference Guide of Ben Meyer on the redesigning of the SAT, "New Year, New... Test?".

Why I recommended him to make him a content suggestion...

• When first reading through this essay, it was quite hard to find any gaping flaws. On the second read through, I noticed a odd imbalance in the sources referenced to page count ratio. Basically, I feel that, even though you are walking a thin line with QRGs, you could further furnish your essay with your salvaged content in order to lengthen your impressive essay.

Why I think this helped...

• I believe that my recommendation to the essay was valuable because there is a very thin line one most walk on when writing QRGs on the border of too much and too little information. I feel by alerting the author of this he might lean on the side of safety and add a little more content.

What I drew upon from in class discussions (an intangible source material)...

• In the preliminary lessons of the course, our class was tasked with listing the various contextual boundaries of the different genres we would have to do our projects within. When addressing the QRG, two somewhat opposing rules where mentioned: having succinct content and providing the reader with complete knowledge on the subject.

What I liked...

• The true beauty of this project lies in its heightened attention to its audience. Who'd read an essay on the changes made to the SAT? Those taking the SAT. The QRG relies on conversational and causal diction and an easy to follow layout in order to appeal to his younger audience. 

Reflection on Project 3 Production

AUDIENCE QUESTIONS:

1. Sadly, no dramatic successes come to mind for this week. I feel that much of my time was spent just following the directions of the outline I made. I feel that my use of interviews might yield a very successful project.

2. I feel that I'll need to find a better way to include my sources because it is very difficult to give them credit in the podcast genre. Currently, they are unmentioned so I might just start prefacing with something like: "According to a study by Mr. Blahblahblah on Dotcom.com...".

3. Next week will be a challenge because I have a lot of content to create in not a lot of time. Plus I have various extracurricular obligations to attend to as well:(.

4. I feel a little uneasy about my project right no because of this is the project with the highest point value, the one where I must express the most of my own opinion, and the one with a medium I am least familiar with.

Production Report 11B

CONTENT OUTLINE EXCERPT:

INEBRIATION AS AN IMPORTANT SOCIAL CONSTRUCT (BODY 1)

• EVIDENCE ONE: 
• An anonymous interview with a high school friend of mine on how drinking is an important part of a teenager's social life.
• This is important because gives a voice to the true feelings of adolescents.
• This will prove that young people truly feel that their rights are being infringed upon.
• EVIDENCE TWO:
• An anthropological account of the social importance of inebriation in primitive and modern applications.
• This is important because it illustrates the importance of drinking in human social circles.
• This will prove that the want to drink is an integral part of human culture and therefore its prohibition is unnatural.

RAW CONTENT (script of my podcast):

With me today I have an anonymous interviewee who is here to tell us about his experience as a college student has personally experienced the social utility of drinking especially in circles considered too young by the government.
***The interview will be done during the time of the recording***
Surprisingly, the idea of "getting messed up" being an important, even vital, component of the human social structure are supported by long-trusted anthropological records. Alcohol and various other recreational drugs (marijuana, peyote, ayahuasca, etc.) have been important in various religious rites and rituals since our species's humble beginnings. Furthermore, some believe these drugs are responsible for our creation of religion and a few others believe that they might be responsible for our bipedial nature, Terence McKenna's Stoned Ape Theory.

AUDIENCE QUESTIONS:

1. Once again, I had to try to keep my passage as brief as possible to compensate for the podcast format. Furthermore, I decided no to overplan my interviews in order to maintain a conversational and casual tone with the interviewee.

2. I noticed that I am going to need more raw content and factual support to aid my argument while, finding out a way to give my sources credit using the podcast format.

Production Report 11A

CONTENT OUTLINE EXCERPT:

INTRODUCTION

• THESIS:
• The current drinking age is detrimental to the physical, social, and legal wellbeing of minors.
• GRABBERS:
• Open with a personal experience on how the current drinking age has effected me.
• Detail the history of the law determining the legal drinking age.

RAW CONTENT(a script for my podcast):

In 1984, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act was passed and threatened to significantly reduce federal highway funds to any state that did not outlaw the consumption of alcoholic beverages by people under 21 years of age. This law sought to make our nation's youths safer, but instead transformed many minors into criminals before the eyes of the law, created a distrust and fear of law enforcement amongst our nation's youth, and prohibited American citizens from indulging in a vital social construct as old has advanced human culture itself. In the college setting, the aforementioned detriments of this law are very, very apparent.

AUDIENCE QUESTIONS:

1. Due to the podcast's exclusively auditory form, I had to try to keep the content less bulky and had to eliminate all pontification and fluff. I tried to make my intro succinct yet grabbing to compensate for the podcast genre.

2. Nothing too surprising (like an epiphany or unexpected problem) happened during my production process. I guess those will really pop up when I am recording my project.