The document discusses the production process of a podcast evaluating horror movies, including research on other podcasts, planning the structure and content, time management during production, technical qualities compared to another podcast, issues with audio quality during recording, and intended audience. Feedback indicated that while the information was good, the voices needed to be louder and clearer as audio quality varied, and guests could have been included more.

1. Audio
Evaluation
Thomas Dickinson

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
A strength of the research was finding out the similarities
between great podcasts to see what common elements they
have. Which means I can include certain elements in my podcast
to make it professional and flow well. Another strength of the
research is finding a tone and theme, in most podcasts the host
talks quietly and it has eerie music in the background. However,
in my podcast I want it to be fun so I don’t think I will be as
formal as other podcasts are but I may still include elements.
The weaknesses of the research were, that it was time
consuming analysing the different podcasts; because I wanted
my podcast to be original I might’ve subconsciously stolen parts
of the pre-existing podcasts.

4. Planning
The strengths of planning were being precise about what the
podcast was going to contain structurally and thematically. Also,
it helped decide what my product was actually going to be about
as I had 3 options to plan and decide from.
The weaknesses of planning were that it took a long time coming
up with ideas especially when you're only going to use one out
of the three. I could’ve chose ideas that were similar to each
other so I didn’t have to plan things so different and make it
harder for myself. This would’ve meant I’d have had more time
coming up with my main idea, which would’ve benefitted the
podcasts quality and structure.

5. Time Management
I used my time well overall, as I never ran out of time and
nothing ran over into another week. The only instance that my
time management could’ve improved is when filming the
podcast as I had to rerecord which took time away from editing.
Luckily, the editing didn’t take very long as I only made one or
two mistakes which were easy to cut out. My product was
finished on time, however with more time I’d have booked
equipment, recorded more and made it entertaining like it was
before the recording messed up instead of rushing. Also, I
would’ve been more ambitious with my editing by adding sound
clips from the film, and by getting the most out of transitions and
general effects

6. Technical Qualities
https://youtu.be/S_qrioIOOi0
In my podcast and this podcast we both discuss horror movies in
an in depth way.
Both podcasts have a fairly laid back approach to the content
they're discussing.
In the Dead Meat Podcast they interview the actress from the
film in mine I just ask my friends for their opinions.
My podcast is much shorter and has a rough structure whereas
the Dead Meat Podcast is almost structureless but flows a lot
better than mine.

7. Aural Qualities
My work doesn’t sound great because when I tried to record it with
the Tascam and the microphone it came back just making static noises.
So I had to rerecord it on my phone the day after, so some parts sound
very quiet and others sound normal due to where I held the phone
while recording. Instead of being creative, my work leaned into being
informative which wasn’t entirely my intention, as I wanted to make a
nice split between entertainment and information. I like the use of the
music in my product as it fits the podcasts theme and I don’t think it
dragged at all. I’d improve the speaking parts of my podcast by using a
Tascam and a microphone again; checking the previous clips as I go
along like I should have done initially. Overall, the strong parts of my
podcast were the music and the information as they worked and were
well executed. Finally, the weaknesses of my podcast were the
speaking parts as the quality varied, and the entertainment as my
podcast doesn’t have a lot of back and forth conversation like I initially
wanted.

8. Audience Appeal
I’ve appealed to 15-25 year olds because people of that age range enjoy being scared
more than any other age; because the podcast is on a horror film they’ll enjoy it more.
The secondary age range my podcast appeals to is 26-70 because people younger than
15 shouldn’t be watching horror films because they’re not suitable and people older
than 70 might choose not to due to health issues at their age.
My podcast appeals to males and females as the film I covered has good
representations of both genders, so anyone can put themselves in the characters
shoes.
I have appealed to belongers because horror movies are a big thing nowadays so
belongers would want to know more about them to fit in. The secondary
psychographic my product appeals to is achievers, because it’s a podcast which means
it’s just audio so it can be listened to while on the go and being productive.
The primary social status my product appeals to is middle class and working class as
that’s my social status so the viewers might have similar opinion as me. The secondary
social status would be upper class as they could still derive joy from my podcast just
not as much as the primary social status.

9. Peer
Feedback

10. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
The information given in the podcast was very informative
The music and sound effects made me get drawn in even more
• What improvements could have been made to the product?
• One thing they could improved is the speaking, it was really quiet.
The guest and the host could of spoken louder and clearer. The
intro, outro and sound effects where very loud compared to the
voices and made it sound very unprofessional. Also, at one point
there was speaking and music went over it and you could here the
person speaking in the back very quietly.

11. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
• I really liked the product I thought it was done quite
professionally. The music that is in between each cut is
really good, I think it sounds amazing.
• What improvements could have been made to the
product?
• Next time the people that you’re doing it with should
be quiet on set and you should also include them more
because they’re only on the podcast for the intro and a
little bit at the end. But other then that it was really
good.

12. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
– The product is interesting because it is very
informative.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The host’s voice was low and I couldn’t hear it. I also
couldn’t understand the words that came out of his
mouth due to his bad pronunciation.

13. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
• I agree that the voices are quiet for the majority of the podcast.
• I agree that the podcast is very informative as that was part of my goal.
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
• I think all the points made are at least somewhat correct as I did rush my
words and there was a lack of speaking from the guests on the podcast.

14. Peer Feedback Summary