For our recent 161MC we had to develop a TV show and a website to go alongside it. The website had to both fit the feel of our show and function like any other magazine show website. Things we chose to add to our website include: a mini game, a competition for comic con tickets, articles about all things geeky and bios and pictures of our presenter team. Overall, I’m happy with the way our website presents itself, what do you think of it?
http://abbiegailhewitt.wix.com/geek-week-tv
TV studio session – Tuesday 5th May
Our show was named The Geek Week and was designed as a topic a week show that would cover a specific area of Geek culture. This particular show concentrated on cosplay, its history and growing presence in modern western 
society. Our lengthy research into things Geek really paid off during the design and concept of our set which looked really good on camera with various items of Geekyness on display with a colourful couch and posters lining the walls. In hindsight I would have like to have the walls filled with a little more colour but the majority of our shots were tight and prevented the cameras from seeing the wider less populated set. Our VT’s were suitable to our project: one showing a trip our presenters took to MCM Birmingham Comic Con shortly after we had decided what topic to cover in our show and the international VT being of a trip to a large comic book store there and exploring the influences on the cosplay community. I feel these met the required criteria for our project however one of them seemed to be far too lengthy and I worried it would loose the interest of the audience. My role within the television team was Camera 2 operator, a role I hadn’t had the opportunity to prepare for as I had missed a few practice sessions due to 
international trips and the team deciding that my role should b changed, however, I found the process of camera operation simple and easy to pick up on the day. Essentially it relied heavily on floor manager and director working well together. Unfortunately, our director didn’t seem to take the project very seriously and acted rather unprofessional and as such communication between him and the floor manager were strained. I think the project would have benefited from a stronger director who could communicate clearly back and forth with the floor manager. Our director not only demonstrated a lack of professionalism in communication to the studio from the gallery but he also forgot to bring in the VT creating a large problem for us during the shoot even though we were allowed to add the VT after shoot. This meant our timing had to be really tight as we didn’t have the VT in front of us to make sure we could add it easily later. I was largely disappointed with our director in general and felt that we should have had someone else at the helm. Inside the gallery, early on in our shoot it seemed disorganised and argumentative which was a direct issue from lacking a strong central figure present. However, once we had began rolling and resolved our technical issues they co-ordinated themselves well. The auto-que scrolled a little too slowly the first run through but this was rectified for our following shoots. Our major problem on set was the audio, we hadn’t prepared sufficiently for 
recording audio in the two sections of our set which we discovered after our first take. This is something that we should have highlighted during practice but without our demonstration able to make practice we should have pretended that we had to move to a different section of the set. We remedied this by moving our mics so that one was positioned to pick up audio from the makeup tutorial even whilst not on screen and tilted the other slightly to accommodate for the interviewee. Our camera operators were organised and very aware of the schedule and timing of the show, especially camera operator one who also had the added job of operating the on set TV screen after positioning his camera into a suitable shot for the next segment of the show. We had four cameras in total, one unmanned aimed as a close up on the make up demonstration to give a constant view during the show. The Floor Manager also did a successful job of queuing the cameras and the Presenters were aware of which cameras they needed to look at during which part of the show. We had a duo of presenters who both dressed up in costume to fit with the theme of cosplay our show was following. They made for a good group but sometimes felt too scripted and seemed to be a little nervous. During one of our takes we found a gap of six seconds that needed filling and the 
presenters did a good job of filling this section with dialogue between presenter and make up artist. Myself and the floor manager also dressed in costume to add to the theme of the show and create a calming atmosphere which I think helped and showed commitment to the show. Other members of crew chose to wear Geek related items of clothing as well which showed a unison amongst the team. Reflecting upon my own performance, I feel I did so quite successfully considering I missed two rehearsals due to being away in Istanbul and had my job role changed from Presenter, to Floor Manager to Camera Operator in the last week. I would have liked to have been more aware of the blocking of the set beforehand and perhaps should have requested an image the set sent to me whilst I was aware to help prepare. With more time I also would have studied the operation of the cameras a little more in depth and was fortunate to have the assistance of the other camera operators in setting it up. I would have spoken out against the choice of director from the beginning to try and persuade the group to pick someone more capable of the role and also would have spent more time familiarising myself with all the roles in the studio and the equipment as then I would have been better prepared for a switch in set role. My feelings towards working in TV has not changed since this experience and it is still an area of Media that I would prefer to avoid. It feels far too regimented and structured and lacking in creativity and freedom to be a career I would enjoy pursuing.
On the 25th March Jeremy Clarkson, long time presenter of the TV show Top Gear, was sacked after he reportedly verbally and physically assaulted a Producer of the show in London during shoot. Following these events a question hung on everyones mind, what would become of Top Gear?
The BBC’s approach to the news of Jeremy’s sacking was careful, a statement was produced on their site clearly defining their course of action and their reasoning behind the decision that had been made. An ongoing investigation began on the 4th March, the results of which were made public since the issue was being followed very closely by the world. The reasoning behind the sacking of Clarkson is all reasonable and justified outlining that “There cannot be one rule for one and one rule for another dictated by either rank, or public relations and commercial considerations.” They continue to state how much of a talent Clarkson is and praise him for the time he has devoted to the show whilst insisting that everything will be aimed at a new series of Top Gear to be released in 2016. ://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2015/03/25/bbc-releases-statement-on-clarkson/
If I had to put myself in the shoes of the Channel Controller of BBC2 and making the decision on how to react to the incident, I think that I too would have let Jeremy go. It is common knowledge that he had had a history of being problematic and controversial amongst crew of the show and the public at large and that he had been allowed to get away with this relatively untouched. Laws pertain that physical
harm inflicted upon another is not acceptable and if Clarkson had been allowed to get away with this simply because of his status and standing in society then this would have been discrimination against the producer who was harmed.
Would Top Gear be harmed by the loss of Jeremy Clarkson? Yes, definitely. There is no avoiding it, he has built up such a large fan base from the show that many audience members would feel that the show had lost its charm upon his departure. His departure also saw the rest of the presenter troupe leave, James May and Richard Hammond. James May stated that he would not return to a ‘lame’ version of the show with a ‘surrogate Jeremy’. In the passing weeks the BBC lost millions of viewers following the sacking. Interestingly however the remarks from Tymon Oisin suggest that he would have been willing to resume work on Top Gear alongside Clarkson and felt that he could resume a working relationship with him but did not want the truth to go unknown. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/08/top-gear-jeremy-clarkson-james-may-richard-hammond-itv-bbc
Round One: The Presenters
Top Gear: The Top Gear presenter entourage consisted of Jeremy
Clarkson, James May and Richard Hammond. All members of the presentation team are male and it is clear that the show is mostly aimed towards a male audience. The three have a strong friend like relationship which translates across well on screen and relates to its target audience in a jokey colloquial manner. This manner helps create lasting memories in their audience often finding people referring to specific lines used by the presenters. Although they do a good job at avoiding revealing the fact, it is apparent that a lot of their discussion are scripted beforehand.
Score: 9/10
Loose Women: The Loose Women show currently consists of four predominant anchors; Kaye Adam
s, Ruth Langsford and Andrea McLean and an additional rotating panellist from show to show. The ladies all have a similar colloquial mannerism to one another but don’t engage in the ‘boyish’ banter that the Top Gear team do. They instead aim to appeal to ladies as the title suggests by occasionally engaging one another in gossip and jokes. There discussions feel much less scripted and free however their discussions don’t create lasting impressions on its audience. The rotating cast also means that a particular cast member a viewer enjoys could not feature in the next show and potentially loose fan base, but also new presenters to the show could have an opposite effect.
Score: 7/10
Round Two: The Look
Top Gear: The set design of the Top Gear show is situated in an open warehouse type environment and filled with cars and various car paraphernalia, from old run down cars to car se
ats and an engine coffee table. The whole show is very centrally themed on cars and establishes exactly what this show is about from the get go. Its opening graphics of the spinning axel and the title Top Gear also reinforces the car theme. The shows theme tune is snazzy and upbeat with a quick pace to it, again matching the theme of racing cars. The set is quite minimalist however and there is little colour thrown in, perhaps as a method of appealing to a male audience.
Score: 7/10
Loose Women: The set design for the Loose Women, like its presenter entourage, changes from season to season so i’ll be looking at its mos
t recent incarnation. Their set is also quite minimalist but makes use of vivid popping colours to draw in its viewers. This I feel draws in the female audience it is intended for and creates a ‘modern woman’ feel, as does the dress code of its presenters and guests. The theme of the show is more broad and generally aims at what a female audience might find appealing and as such doesn’t have niche items like Top Gear does.
Score: 8/10
Round Three: The Content
Top Gear: The content of Top Gear is spelled out from the very start of the credits: Cars. And yet, it manages to appeal to a much wider audience than simply car enthusiasts through various funny challenge
s and special star guests. I personally find Top Gear more interesting of a show then the Loose Women and I am not a car enthusiast at all, yet as a male I think it appeals to me for many of the reasons mentioned before. One piece of content that I feel Top Gear could have benefited from would be more interaction with its audience perhaps in the form of voting or tweet suggestions for challenges.
Score: 9/10
Loose Women: The Loose Women show covers a much broader and topical approach to its show
than Top Gear does, creating an interesting variations of stories each week compared to Top Gears singular approach. I personally find the stories discussed on Loose Women to be of little interest to me with a major focus on celebrity gossip and weekly relevant news stories. This is not surprising as the show simply isn’t aimed at me. I feel like the show could benefit from a more permanent presenter group with a different star guest to mix it up from week to week.
Score: 7/10
Six groups (BBC Academy College of Production) Floor manager Ed Sharpe
– Producer: The final decision maker
– Director: Sound and Vision
Group 2 with Ross
11:30 – 12:30 in TV studio (ETG06) and then 1:00 – 2:00 (ETB04)
The brief is to make a studio based “magazine programme”. This is similar to a glossy magazine, comprised of items each made to fit the tone, style and subject matter for the intended audience. We have to make these items to add in. Examples of these types of show: This Morning, The One Show, The View, Good Morning, Lorraine, Loose Women, Top Gear, The Gadget Show. We must watch as many of these types of shows as possible to get an idea for what we are creating and analyse it.
We are recording live, no editing is allowed. You can do as many takes as you like and the final piece should be 10 minutes long. You can choose a title and theme for your programme and the content of which should include a mix of researched clips and your own VTs. You must interact with your audience via social media. You will audition for studio and VT roles but work as a team. At least 2 clips found from the internet that fits your theme that is copyright approved. At least 2 VTs one of which must be international/produced outside UK. A studio based interview. A demonstration item or a performance, an audience participation item using social media. Try to go see a studio recording. Peer marking that reflects on your contribution of the final piece, this will have an impact on your final grade.
Technical talk/lingo (Talkback):
– Crab left/right, tilt up/down, track out, zoom in, pan left, throw focus, thats a wrap. Be decisive and clear.
ABC – Accurate, Brief and Clear
The Journey Begins 