The document discusses an examiners report on a media studies exam question about whether media production is dominated by global institutions. The report provides advice on what students should and should not do when answering the question. It recommends that students focus on the specific question, provide facts and statistics, and compare a major institution with an independent one using case studies. The report advises against only discussing one media producer, not addressing contemporary issues, and drawing simplistic conclusions without evidence.

1. January 2010
Lorna and Holly

3. Mark scheme
Explanation/analysis/argument (20 marks) AO1 specific
Use of examples (20 marks) AO2 specific
Use of terminology (10 marks) AO3 specific

4. Topic Headings – these are general issues which may be raised by the question set.
Film:
A study of a specific studio or production company within a contemporary film industry
that targets a British audience (eg Hollywood, Bollywood, UK film), including its patterns of
production, distribution, exhibition and
consumption by audiences. This should be accompanied by study of contemporary film
distribution practices (digital cinemas, DVD, HD-DVD, downloads, etc) and their impact
upon production, marketing and consumption.

5. Level 1- Minimal
Explanation/analysis/argument (0–7 marks)
minimal understanding of the task
Minimal knowledge and understanding of institutional/audience
Minimal argument evident, with little reference to case study material
minimal relevance to set question or a brief response (under one
and a half sides of answer booklet)
Use of examples (0–7 marks)
minimal case study material
limited range of, or, inappropriate examples
examples of minimal relevance to set question
Use of terminology (0–3 marks)
Minimal or frequently inaccurate use of terminology
simple ideas have been expressed.
some errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar, which will be noticeable

6. Level 2 – Partial
Use of examples (8–11 marks)
some evidence from case study material
partial range of examples from case study and/or own experience
examples of some relevance to the set question
Use of terminology (4–5 marks)
Some terminology used, although there may be some inaccuracies
Some simple ideas have been expressed in an appropriate context.
some errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar

7. Level 3- Developed
Explanation/analysis/argument (12–15 marks)
capable understanding of the task
Proficient knowledge and understanding of institutional/audience
factual knowledge is mostly accurate
Some developed argument, supported by reference to case study
Mostly relevant to set question
Use of examples (12–15 marks)
consistent evidence from case study material
range of examples from case study and/or own experience.
examples which are mostly relevant to the set question
Use of terminology (6–7 marks)
Use of terminology is mostly accurate
Straightforward with some clarity and fluency.
Arguments are generally relevant, though may stray from the point of the question.
There will be some errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar.

8. Level 4 – Factual, Developed
Explanation/analysis/argument (16–20 marks)
excellent understanding of the task
Excellent knowledge and understanding of institutional/audience
factual knowledge is relevant and accurate
A clear and developed argument, proven by detailed reference to case study
Clearly relevant to set question
Use of examples (16–20 marks)
Offers frequent evidence from case study material – award marks to reflect the range and appropriateness of examples from case study
and/or own experience
examples which are clearly relevant to the set question
Use of terminology (8–10 marks)
Use of terminology is relevant and accurate

9. Film Industry
This was by far the most popular media area addressed by candidates, with a significant number of candidates using Working Title & Universal as a case study. This case study had a varying degree of
success, for example, weaker arguments used a case study of Working Title films in 1994 with almost no reference to contemporary issues of production, distribution or exhibition. Candidates seem to
have far more knowledge of marketing than any other phase of film production, but at times this led to naive answers, which ignored the role of non-theatrical exhibition in generating revenue for film
companies or drew simplistic conclusions about independent company’s lack of marketing expertise compared to those of major studios. The most common approach was to compare the production
processes of major studies with those of smaller UK companies. In particular, Universal and Warner Bros were common case studies, in comparison with Working Title, Film Four and Warp Films. More
able candidates looked at the success of big US studios and their blockbusters (like Avatar), compared them to Universal backed Working Title and its output of hit formula rom-coms like 'Love Actually'
and independent productions like 'This is England'.
The better responses were focused on the question set and discussed the ways in which the majors dominate film production and distribution with case studies of Avatar, The Dark Knight and Harry
Potter. Candidates referred to Paramount and Universal, and the issues of horizontal integration and synergy were cited as key reasons for the dominance of the majors. Those that were equipped with a
comparative study of an independent company were able to really engage with the question and consider an element of debate. ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ was a popular example of a small film reaching a
global audience through differing factors rather than expensive marketing and synergy. Small British films such as ‘This is England’ were also referred to as films that fail to reach a global audience and
meant that the question was well addressed.
Candidates who only looked at one media producer were often disadvantaged. Having a detailed comparison between US Major/ UK Minor (for example), often helped candidates see a bigger picture,
which was not always the case with very in depth case studies, where candidates often repeated historical context data. Some candidates were clearly prepared with the case study that they presented,
but they did not fully engage with the question set.
Do note that the use of factual information and statistics helped illustrate answers; however, there were instances of obviously false or incorrect data, which detracted from the answers.
There was plenty of evidence that showed candidates who reproduced learnt answers could show great recall of factual material from their case studies but failed to address and apply this knowledge to
the set question. This led to a number of candidates achieving much lower marks than they were certainly capable of.
Centres must teach students the skills needed to adapt their case study knowledge and understanding to the demands of a specific question. Simply knowing the history of an institution and
understanding its current position within a particular industry is not enough to meet the marking criteria at the highest levels.
The logical step for this question and which worked well in answers was to agree with the statement and use a large institution and example to prove this, in conjunction with an independent institution
or one which is not global plus an example to show that the statement is not the whole truth. The approach of contrasting two institutions led to some very good responses. This is to be encouraged as it
provides candidates with more options to formulate a response to the set question. Only a few answers then went on to mention ‘guerrilla film making’ outside the domination of global institutions.
Examiners report

10. Examiners report- Do’s
• The better responses were focused on the question set.
• Factual information and statistics helped illustrate answers.
• The logical step for this question and which worked well in answers was to agree with
the statement and use a large institution and example to prove this.

11. Examiners report- Don'ts
• Almost no reference to contemporary issues of production, distribution or exhibition.
Candidates seem to have far more knowledge of marketing than any other phase of film
production.
• Simplistic conclusion
• Candidates who only looked at one media producer were often disadvantaged. Having a
detailed comparison between US Major/ UK Minor (for example), often helped
candidates see a bigger picture.
• Simply knowing the history of an institution and understanding its current position within
a particular industry is not enough to meet the marking criteria at the highest levels.

12. Intro
• State if you agree/ disagree.
• Example: Media production is dominated by global institutions
such as the big six film companies who sell products to a global
audience.

13. 20 purple unicorns
walking sausage dogs-
big 6
• 20th century fox
• Paramount
• Universal
• Warner bros
• Sony
• Disney Disney- has subsidiaries which allows them to
produce and distribute without the use of other
companies.
Marketing- big 6
can spend more
money advertising
their film.
Distribution- has money to reach a
wider audience.
The big 6 company name sells
the film.
Better quality technology can be use- more
money to spend.Bigger companies can hire
bigger named stars.
Bigger companies have more
money to spend.
Give examples from both big film case
study and independent film to compare
Points that could be made:
Compare big institutions
with independent
institutions.
Include case study facts

14. Conclusion
- Don’t sit on the fence
- State if you agree/ disagree.
- Summarise key points.
- Don’t add points that haven't previously been made.
Example: I agree that media production is dominated by larger
institutions as they have an advantage of their branded name and
more expense. This allows their products to be reached by a
broader audience nationally compared to an independent film
companies products.