The document provides a summary and self-evaluation of a podcast project. It discusses the research, planning, time management, technical qualities, aural qualities, and audience appeal of the podcast. Research focused on gaming and podcasts. Planning covered topics and guests. Time management was poor due to delays recording guest lines. Technical quality was limited by equipment. The guest provided an in-depth opinion but audio quality was poor. Peer feedback praised the guest's analysis but noted audio quality needed improving. The creator agrees audio quality should be the focus of improvements in future projects.

1. FMP Evaluation
Your name

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
• My research was not ultra in-depth, but provided
enough info to create a good podcast. It allowed for
Charlie to also give an in-depth evaluation of
anthems launch which sounded very professional.
Despite this, I feel like I could've done some more
research into anthem as a whole. My research into
podcasts was substantial as it helped me come to the
decision of creating a gaming themed podcast which
was the idea I had in mind anyway, but the research
helped build upon what I already wanted to do

4. Planning
• My planning was to a standard level And helped me
pan out what I wanted to do with my podcast such as
when I planed to have a gaming podcast and when I
planned who was going to be in it and things like
that.
• My planning wasn’t anything too good so at that I
say I wish I would’ve done more so I could’ve made
my podcast the best it can possibly be but I was
limited on time so there is that
• If I had another chance I would put a little more
effort into my planning

5. Time Management
• My time management was bad for this
project, however some of it was down to
Charlie not recording his lines however I
could’ve found someone else to do the lines.
It was bad as I didn’t get the lines finished for
a very long time when I should’ve complete it
• If I was to have a second chance I would
definitely try to get someone else to do the
lines as it would’ve saved me a lot of time

6. Technical Qualities
• The technical qualities of my podcast were not
that good as I wanted them to be. This was
simply to the lack of high quality audio
equipment and I couldn’t find any sound
effects that were suitable for it either, but I
feel this was made up for with the level of
speech. Compared to a professional podcast it
was sub-par.

7. Aural Qualities
• Its creative quality's as a whole were not that
good but the opinion Charlie gave was very in
depth and made very good points and
comparisons. The sound isn’t that good but
that is because of the lack of access to high
quality audio recording devices. Something I
would improve is my own audio as it wasn’t
very good and I didn’t actually say much

8. Audience Appeal
I feel like I have target my audience well as it provides good
insight into whether buying anthem is a good investment,
and the audience I aimed for is the gaming community.
the fact I used someone who is a genuine gamer an someone
who plays games a lot, renders his opinion valuable to
listeners which is another way in which I have targeted my
audience.
The specific bit of content that applies to my target audience
is the thing we spoke about, which is gaming related. And our
target audience is gamers.

9. Peer
Feedback

10. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
I like this product because it has a lot of depth and
gives a lot of insight into the game and weather to
buy it or not.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
If I could make an improvement I would make the
audio quality a bit better than what it is.

11. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
– I like the fact that they is a lot f depth to it.
– I like that he gives his own genuine opinion of the
game.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The improvements is that the audio quality could
be improved.

12. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
• I liked how Charlie spoke in detail about anthem and gave
god insight into is launch
• I also liked the way he two games were compared as it
heled visualise how anthem is without actually seeing i
• What improvements could have been made to the
product?
– The only major thing at needed improving was the sound quality
as it wasn’t up to scratch and sounded not too god

13. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– I actually agree with it a lot. I know that the audio
quality wasn’t that good, however it couldn’t be
helped. I also know that Charlies speech was vey good
and gave a lot of useful information
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
• I don’t actually disagree with anything, however
it must be known hat I had no access higher
quality audio recoding devises

14. Peer Feedback Summary
The changes I would make involves
attempting to lok for a better audio
recorder so I can have better quality
audio for my podcast.
Everything else was fine from the
editing to the actual audio content
and in my opinion, and based off of
the peer feedback.