The document analyzes feedback from test audiences on various elements of a coffee documentary. It found that most respondents were women aged 15-35 who found the documentary informative, entertaining and professionally produced. However, some felt background audio needed improving and suggested adding more historical context. Feedback also indicated the print ad and radio trailer were effective at promoting the documentary but could be enhanced further. The conclusions were that audience feedback validated many aspects but also provided insights on small changes to make the documentary more appealing to broader audiences.

1. Evaluation- Question 3
audience feedback

2. Question 1- What is your gender?
• This shows us that it will
be women that are
more likely to watch our
documentary than men
and it.
• It also say that are target
audience should be
more women because
more were interested in
watching our
documentary.

3. Question 2-How old are you?
• This says that it hits our target
audience of 15-35 because the
majority of people who watched it
15 who watched the programme.
• More people watched it that are over
41 than 36-40 which suggests that
it might interest the over 40 and
they are might be willing to watch
it.
• Not many people under 15 watched
the programme which i expected
because they don't really drink
coffee so this means that they
would be less inclined to go and
watch a programme about coffee.

4. Question 3-On a scale of 1 - 5 (with 5 being very
and 1 being not at all) how informative did your
find the extract of the documentary?
• This suggests that people thought
our documentary was very
interesting and this says to us
that the information that they
thought it was worth watching.
• Nobody said that it didn't interest
them which is good because it
means that is people will watch
it.
• Very few people said that it wasn't
that interesting which says that
it isn't there sort of
programme or they don't think
we did enough to make it
entertaining for them

5. Question 4-On a scale of 1 - 5 (with 5 being very and 1
being not at all) how entertaining did your find the extract
of the documentary? • This also fits with people thinking it is
interesting because more people
were entertained by the programme
than that weren't so this says we
made it up beat and made it look
good.
• Only a few people said they weren't
entertained which means that they
might not be that interested in
watching it and wouldn't be wanting
to come back and watch it.
• Overall I think it good that more people
said they found it entertaining
because it shows that it was a well
put together and that it looked good
so people will watch the
documentary.

6. Question 5- Do you think the documentary extract
looked professional?
• Everybody that watched the
documentary said that it
looked professional which is
goods because it means that
we followed the codes and
conventions of a real TV
documentary.
• It is good also because it shows
that we didn’t make it look
like it was an armature
production and that it looks
good and has the content to
keep people wanting to watch
the rest of the programme.

7. Question 6- If you answered "No" to question 5, why did
it not look professional?
• Even though nobody said no
to question 5 somebody did
say ‘the background voice
needed to be clearer.’
• This tells us that even though
they thought it was good
this person thought that the
sound quality wasn’t great
for the background voice.
• This says that the sound will
need to be improved more
if it was to be published and
put on the tele.

8. Question 7- During the interviews, did the background imagery look well
suited to the occupation of the interviewee or relation to the
documentary?
• Everybody agreed that the
background imagery was
relative to the occupation and
what is being said.
• This is good because it meant that
we got the rule of thirds correct
for the interviews because it
made sure that all of the
background was relevant to
what the person is doing.
• This also says that the cutaways
that we got to avoid jumpcuts
were good and were relevant to
what the person is talking about
and this makes it easier to be

9. Question 8- Do you think the editing of the documentary is of a
high standard?
• This is good because the majority
of the people who watched our
programme thought that it was
good editing and was seen to
look professional.
• The people who thought that
sometimes it looked well edited
tells us that there are some
parts that might need to be
better edited which means that
we will have to look more
closely at it.
•

10. Question 9- After watching the first 5 minutes of the documentary,
would you watch the full programme?
• This is good since only one person
said that they wouldn’t watch the
full programme which means that
we made in interesting enough for
people to want to continue to
watch the programme.
• This is also good because it means
that the content, visuals and the
edit are what the audience that did
the survey wanted to watch and
this is good because it means we
have captured the audience
attention and made them want to
watch the rest of the programme
so this will mean more people
might want to go and watch the
programme.

11. Question 10- If you answered "No" to question 9, tell us
why you wouldn't want to watch the rest of the
documentary?
• The one person who said
they did like the
programme wasn’t
because they didn’t like
any of the feature its just
they aren’t interested
which means that they
aren’t interested in
coffee.
• It also tells me that it
wasn’t the way we
edited or the content it
was just they don’t think
coffee is something they
want to watch.

12. Question 11- What do you think we could add or
change to improve the documentary?
• The main thing that the audience wanted
us to change was the sound quality
which could easily be done and this tells
us that there are certain things that
would make it better. They also think
that we could improve the music which
means that they think it wasn’t a good
choice.
• Another improvement the audience said
we could improve on was that we could
look at the history of coffee which
suggest that people may be interested In
how coffee is made and where it
originates from so this means that there
is something else that we can add to the
documentary.
• A few of the people who responded to the
question said that it was good and even
made one person who doesn’t like
coffee want to watch it which means
that it was good because it means the
programme did entertain them.

13. Question 12- On a scale of 1 - 5 (with 5 being very and 1
being not at all) How professional does our Print Advert
look for the documentary?
• This tells us that people
thought that our newspaper
advert was very good and
this suggests that it caught
peoples eye and made them
look twice at the picture
which was the idea of what
we wanted to happen.
• Nobody said the advert wasn’t
professional which is good
because it means that we
managed to do a good job
on it and make it look like a
professional had done it.

14. Question 13- Do you think that the print advert
related to the theme of the documentary well?
• All of the people that
answered our
questionnaire said that
it did look professional
which says that what
we did made it look like
a professional had done
it and this also made it
look good.
• It is also good because
nobody thought it was
bad and this would also
mean that they thought
that it was good.

15. Question 14- Would the print advert
make you want to watch the
documentary? • This tells me that the print
advert caught people
attention and made people
want to watch it because it
stood out and made people
be interested in what it
represents and this is good
because it means they are
interested.
• The fact only one person said
they wouldn’t watch the
programme says that

16. Question 15- If you answered "No" to
question 14, tell us why not?
• This has told me that it has caught
there attention because its “arty”
which means that this person
looked and analysed it in depth
because it shows they thought
about the picture and looked in
depth at it and this shows that It
did catch people attention.
• As she said it was “artsy” was good
because that means that it will
catch people attention and this
means that they might be more
inclined to go and watch the
programme.

17. Question 16- How do you think we could
improve the Print Advert?
• This tells us that there are ways
in which that could make the
print advert better and this
tells us what the audience
think that it could be
improved so that it can grab
more people attention.
• I think the idea of putting a
swirl in the coffee would have
made it look a little better and
this would have made the
picture sand out more and
would have caught more
people attention.

18. Question 17- On a scale of 1 - 5 (with 5 being very and 1
being not at all) How professional does the radio trailer
sound?
• This tells me that the audience thought
our radio trailer was good and that it
was professional.
• Most people from our audience
feedback said they thought it looked
professional which tells us that we
made the radio trailer to a high
standard and that it shows that
people are interested in watching it.
• Only 1 person sad that it wasn’t
professional which suggest that they
might have not thought it was done
well or they just didn’t like it.
• This tells me that more people think
that it is a good trailer and this
shows that its good.

19. Question 18- Do you think the radio trailer
clearly linked to the theme of the
documentary? • This says that the people who
answered our documentary
thought that we linked the
radio trailer with the
programme.
• It also says that all the people
asked think that is good
because it represents what
the audience think of the
production and the fact all of
them said that it was good
shows that the audience
think its good.

20. Question 19- If you answered "No" to
question 18, tell us why you thought not
• This is good because it
shows that nobody
thought that there is
something that we could
improve anything and
this means that they all
thought that it was a
good production.
• This links with people
thinking that it links to
the documentary which
says that everyone that
answered the questions
thought that it is was
well linked to the
documentery.

21. Question 20- Did the radio trailer make
you want to watch the documentary?
• This tells me that more people
thought that it did make them think
that it is worth watching and this
means that we made it interesting
so that the people who responded
said they are able to watch it.
• The people who said that it didn’t
make them want to watch it may
have found it not entreating enough
to watch which means that we could
have used different clips to make
them more interesting.

22. Question 21- If you answered "No" to question 20, tell us
why?
• This tells me that it isn’t
that they think the radio
trailer isn’t good but that
it isn’t there sort of thing.
• I think that we could
change the voiceover
because it could be more
enthusiastic and this
means that people may
feel more enthusiastic
and want to watch the
programme.

23. Question 22- How do you think we could
improve our radio trailer?
• This tells me that there are
things that the audience think
we could improve on the
documentary. This will mean
they will are inclined to go and
watch the documentary.
• I think that we could change the
voiceover because the
audience didn’t think it was
very clear and wasn’t
enthusiastic. This says they
might be less likely to want to
watch the programme.

24. Conclusion
• Overall the audience feedback was very helpful because it told us that a
lot of the respondents to the questionnaire liked the products we
made and this shows that it was done well and was liked by a lot of the
people. It also told us areas that could be improved or changed.
• The audience feedback tells me that there are things in the documentary
that we can change to make people more likely to watch it. The little
changes that the audience said we should change would make the
documentary more appealing to audiences and this means that they
would recommend it to other people and this mean our audience
would be larger.