This document summarizes the feedback received from the author's target audience on their documentary project about the 2017 UK election. The author conducted focus groups, distributed questionnaires, and received written comments. Feedback indicated that the documentary needed more information about the election, clearer labeling of sections, and improved sound/video quality. After making changes, a second questionnaire showed improvements were noticed and the products established a clear brand identity adhering to Channel 4 conventions. The author learned that audience feedback was essential to creating high quality, gratifying products for their target viewers.

1. Evaluation Question 3 – what
have I learnt from my audience
feedback?
Script

2. Focus group
 I referred to my focus group of target audience members throughout the
whole process. (add a picture of focus group)
 This is because these will be the type of people who I aimed my products at,
so getting feedback from them continuously is very helpful in terms of
understanding what is liked and disliked, and therefore how to make my
products more successful.
 Due to politics being a topic which appeals to a large majority of the
population, and anyone over 18 being able to vote, my target audience is
fairly broad. It is also gender neutral so appeals to both males and females.

3. Target audience
 I predicted that my target audience members would mediate my product
with a preferred reading (Stuart Hall) (screenshot of Stuart Hall research)
 They would interpret the presenter (show presenter) as an aspirational
source of authority in the exploration of the 2017 UK election, be gratified
by the cinematic/documentary ambient music and the professional looking
aesthetics perpetuated through all products. (Aspirational person bubble or
something)

4. Written feedback
 I also wanted continuous feedback, so I found printing products off, such as
my double page spread, and getting written feedback helpful. I then asked
my focus group to write on the back of it what they thought about it, and
also gave some people post-it notes (show image) in order to revcieve
feedback. I found it very helpful to get this feedback as it meant I could
correct my work before I sent it out in my questionnaire, which was to be
sent out on a much larger sample. (show picture)
 I also found contacting my audience via email very helpful as it enabled me
to ask them questions on things I was unsure on. This enabled me to find
out what they would find more appealing to see, and what would therefore
be more successful. (show screenshot of emails)

5. Initial feedback
 Once I had completed the first draft of my documentary, I decided to make a
questionnaire in order to gain broader audience feedback, on a much larger
scale. I did this in order to see what changes I needed to make according to
the audience’s demand. (show screenshot of my questionnaire)

6. Learning from initial feedback
 I found my first questionnaire extremely helpful as there were more major things to improve
on, meaning I had more things to change and make better. (show results from questionnaire
throughout this slide)
 I was able to learn more vital things that needed changing earlier on in the process, rather than
later on. I was also aware if I needed to film more clips or edit them further, giving me more
time to complete all of these elements.
 I may not have realised any of the things which my audience pointed out if I had not conducted
the questionnaire, meaning it was extreamily helpful to do.
 The main things which were pointed out was that; I needed more information about the
election, make it more obvious that my extract was at the beginning, and to edit the sound and
footage quality.
 After taking time to make these alterations, and complete my ancillary products, I decided to
send out another questionnaire to the same group of people in order to see if the
improvements were noticed. (show screenshot of second questionnaire)

7. Feedback from second questionnaire
 I decided to re-ask the questions which I did not get very good feedback from in my first
questionnaire, in order to see if the improvements I made were noticable.
 Like from my first questionnaire, I learnt a lot from my second one in regards to the liking
or disliking of certain features.
 I was very pleased that 100% of respondents thought that my documentary had improved
since my first questionnaire. (show results)
 The basic function of a documentary is to provide information, so I therefore added some
more statistics, since this was a criticism from my last lot of feedback, and I was pleased
to see that 66.7% of people thought there was enough information, with only 33.3%
saying there was some. (show this result)
 I was also very happy that 100% of people thought the image quality was good
throughout all of my products (show result), and only 11.1% of people thought the sound
quality was not sufficient, compared to 88.9% who thought it was good throughout (show
result). This is a huge qualiy was good in my first questionnaire (show result).

8. continued
 100% of people also said that they thought all 3 of my products created a brand
identity. (show result) I was very happy with this result as my audience noticed
features which I purposely included in order to create a brand identity (show
result), for example the colour scheme, all locations being in London, the use of
a presenter as the ‘face’ of the documentary, and the same font used
throughout. I am pleased these features were recognsied as products with a
strong brand identity arguably result in much more successful products.
 As well as the strong sense of brand identity being important, so is making sure
products adhere to Channel 4 conventions. I am pleased that 100% of people
said they think all 3 of my products adhere to conventions of a Channel 4
documentary, poster and double page spread, which also adds to the success of
my products.

9. Conclusion
 I have learnt that audience feedback was a vital component of my
production process and it ensured that my products were the best quality
they could be. If I never received initial audience feedback at the planning
stages of my production, my documentary may have been far less gratifying
for my target audience.
 Audience feedback has also acted as evidence of what was successful about
my products, enabling me to effectively and meaningfully evaluate my
products in other evaluation questions, as well as during my production.
 I can now apply audience theories such as audience reception theory (stuart
hall) and uses and gratifications theory (Bulmer and Katz)-using my focus
group feedback as evidence for my analysis.