The radio show ran smoothly with only minor technical errors. However, the reviewer felt it lacked professionalism, partly due to their own inexperience. They played American rock music aimed at listeners aged 16-25 and focused on appropriate topics. While the introduction was smooth, the reviewer lacked confidence compared to their partner and sounded unnatural. Technically, they used the equipment well with only brief periods of dead air when fading songs in and out. The reviewer would improve their presentation and eliminate dead air if given another opportunity.

1. Radio Show Review (Internet Radio)
Overall the show ran smoothly with limited ‘major’ technical errors and mistakes, however
personally I believeit was very amateur and not to the highest of professional standards- partly due
to my own fault rather than my partner.
An America-Rock style of music was played on our show aimed at a demographic of 16-25; being
part of the sub-culture in which the intended target audience is and having an understanding and
interest in it, leads me to believe that the music we played, our jingle and general chat was suitable
for the intended audience. We stayed on topic and spoke about suitable issues that related to the
show. From my prospective the needs of this particular niche were met and the type of music that
would be expected from this genre was played.
The beginning of the show was very mixed in terms of how professional it was; the show started of
very smoothly with an ident followed up by an introduction by both me and my partner; as
expected- this being our first show- confidence was very low to begin with (more so for me) and
gradually got better as the we became more comfortable with each other and our surroundings,
however it is obvious my partner presented at a much higher standard and related with the
audience more easily. There was clear enthusiasm in his voice and he was able to be himself and act
casual whilst still providing everything that would be expected of him. Listening back to our show it’s
clear to me he had an understanding and interest in this particular genre and was able to share his
knowledge, thoughts and opinions easily with the audience.
On the other hand it’s clear to any listener that I was not confident in what I was saying to begin
with and sounded very fake and scripted throughout the most part of the show with few exceptions.
At certain times it was more natural than others, however this was due to the fact I had messed up
and had to continue unscripted- more noticeably towards the end of the show when my partner had
to pick up from me. My voice could not always be heard over the microphone- this was not a
technical error but a personal one since I kept moving away from the microphone causing the
volume of my voice to rise and fade continuously.
On Technical terms I believe we used the equipment well. Whilst there was dead air at times this
was 99% of the time due to the fact we did not fade in/out the song quick enough, however it was
quickly sorted. No major errors were made that were obvious to listeners or that delayed us in
continuing with what we were doing. The only time that dead air was clearly noticeable was toward
the end of the show when I messed up and my partner had to continue for me a few seconds later.
If we could repeat the show again, I would change the way I present myself over the radio and
appear more ‘confident’. We could transition between songs more smoothly and quickly and try and
eliminate all dead air.