Question 3: What have you learned from your audience feedback?

The feedback method that was used for the audience research was the same for both productions, with a hard copy questionnaires being utilised. The demographic audience that was researched were 16/17 year old media students; this meant that some of the demographic were not of the target audience meaning the music video and print productions would not appeal to them. However, the positive side of this would be that they understand the editing and camera techniques that were installed into the production. Separate questionnaires were made for each production, yet the feedback techniques were similar. The first six questions were multi-choice, with the first five being a choice of score from 1-5, 1 being the worst while 5 was the best.

The first two questions for the print production questionnaire focussed on the genre of the music and whether it was successfully reflected in the digipak and magazine advert. The average score that was generated for the first question 3 out of 5, with 4 being the highest and 2 being the lowest. While the average score for the second question was 3.5, with the highest score being 4 and the lowest being 3. For both questions the male members of the audience voted higher than the females, showing that males found the genre reflected more than the females. This was shown with one female member of the audience writing down that she struggled to understand the genre of the print productions. The next two questions, three and four, focussed on the standard of graphics used in the print productions with an average score of 3 for both questions. The colours that were used in the magazine advert were highlighted as the strongest feature of the print productions, standing out to attract the attention of the audience. This was a common opinion from both males and females, although males still voted higher in this section. The fifth question solely focussed on the Britishness of the package, collecting a poor score from both genders. The average score was 2, suggesting that the audience did not feel that the prints had a successful British feel. This would be the area that would need to be improved next time the task was taken. The sixth question asked the audience if the advertisement would encourage them to buy the digipak, with the common outcome if the audience being undecided. This meant the advert would have to be improved for the next album, potentially having an increase the persuasive language that was used on the poster.

The overall views of the print productions were good, getting an average score of 3 out of 5. The audience were not offended by the images meaning that a mainstream high street shop, like HMV, would accept to having the digipack in their shops. The demographic that favoured the print productions were the males who had an average of 4 out of 5 compared to the 2 out of the 5 by females. This could be affected by the use of the male gaze that is highlighted best on the first panel with the representation of the female character and the camera angle that is used.

This would have to be changed for the development of the next front cover that is made, with the sales from females being affected by this.

The first two questions for the music video questionnaire focussed on the feelings of the audience, how much they enjoyed it and whether their attention was held by what they were watching. The average score for the first question was 3.5 meaning the audience fairly enjoyed the music video. The highest votes, 4 out of 5’s, were made by females showing that they enjoyed the music video more than males did. The average score for the second question was 3.5 with a wide range of votes, the highest being a positive 5 and the lowest being a disappointing 2. The voting was again for positive from female audience members, with 4s and 5s contrasting from the 3s and 2 from males. With the music video being inspired by Ellie Goulding, who has a higher female audience than male, this reflected on the scores in my own production. Learning from this, the next music video that would be made would have to have connotations of more a balanced audience from the researched artists. The next two questions, three and four, focussed on the technique side of the music video asking the demographic audience about the mise-en-scene, the camera work and the editing. The average score for question three being a strong 4, with four members of the audience out of six voting 4 out of 5 along with a single vote going to 5 out of 5 and 3 out of 5. These results showing a positive feedback to the camera work and editing of the music video with two demographic members labelling the editing as the strongest point of the production, however one member suggested that improved editing would help to increase the appeal. This shows the different views that people have, highlighting the difficult task of keeping everyone happy with the music video that is made. The average score for question 4 was 3.5, the highest vote being 4 with half the audience voting this way. The lowest score was 2 out of 5, contrasting with the nature of the votes and lowering the average score. The fifth question asked the audience their opinion on the length of the video, with the majority voting that the music video was too short. This highlighted the need for the possibility of having a back up narrative structure in case the first choice doesn’t work like during my production. The sixth question asked whether the audience would listen to the music track again, with 50% saying that they would. This showed that half of the demographic audience that evaluated the music video were not members of the target audience, making it difficult to find the opinions of the audience that the music video was aimed at. However having a mainstream audience evaluate the music video, this helps to suggest ways that a wider audience would be appealed to the production in the future.

The overall view of the music video was positive with an average score of 3.5, yet lots of positive feedback written on the questionnaires with the strong points of the production. These included the editing, the stop motion, the running motion scenes, the location of the music video and the use of natural light.

The music video also did not cause any offence to any of the audience members, meaning the music video would be accepted by the mainstream. On a negative however, one member was confused by the ending of the music video with the characters running towards each other in the snow.

This person was not a member of the target audience however so would not understand the genre conventions of the music video. The different genders both voted similarly showing that the music video appeals to both males and females. Yet the 16 year olds in the audience voted higher than the 17 year olds overall, suggesting that the age of the audience members that are appealed to the music video are young teens rather than the older teens who would discuss music more with their friends.