From FMMC0104
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: == Report #1 == This report contains some good details and clear writing, but lacks sufficient analysis - it feels too much like a "data dump" of information rather than a consideration of...)
 
(Report #1)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Report #1 ==
 
== Report #1 ==
 
This report contains some good details and clear writing, but lacks sufficient analysis - it feels too much like a "data dump" of information rather than a consideration of how the channel works within the context of the TV industry. You claim that ESPN has a "monopoly" on sports broadcasting, but this is untrue - sports pervades networks and there are numerous other national & regional sports channels. Be sure to proofread your compiled reports to avoid repetition and convert bulleted lists into clearly written paragraphs. For your presentations, print out notes to more effectively manage and structure your time. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 
This report contains some good details and clear writing, but lacks sufficient analysis - it feels too much like a "data dump" of information rather than a consideration of how the channel works within the context of the TV industry. You claim that ESPN has a "monopoly" on sports broadcasting, but this is untrue - sports pervades networks and there are numerous other national & regional sports channels. Be sure to proofread your compiled reports to avoid repetition and convert bulleted lists into clearly written paragraphs. For your presentations, print out notes to more effectively manage and structure your time. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Report #2 & 3 ==
 +
These reports offer some good points and information, but they fall short in terms of detailed analysis. Your section on programming insufficiently discusses the content and form of the shows themselves, and the audience report does not truly analyze how fans engage with the channel via the website. Be sure to proofread for typos and clarity of writing. Your presentations were mixed, with a solid account of ''SportCenter'' but underdeveloped and vague account of the website. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 19:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:45, 24 November 2010

Report #1

This report contains some good details and clear writing, but lacks sufficient analysis - it feels too much like a "data dump" of information rather than a consideration of how the channel works within the context of the TV industry. You claim that ESPN has a "monopoly" on sports broadcasting, but this is untrue - sports pervades networks and there are numerous other national & regional sports channels. Be sure to proofread your compiled reports to avoid repetition and convert bulleted lists into clearly written paragraphs. For your presentations, print out notes to more effectively manage and structure your time. --Jason Mittell 16:02, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Report #2 & 3

These reports offer some good points and information, but they fall short in terms of detailed analysis. Your section on programming insufficiently discusses the content and form of the shows themselves, and the audience report does not truly analyze how fans engage with the channel via the website. Be sure to proofread for typos and clarity of writing. Your presentations were mixed, with a solid account of SportCenter but underdeveloped and vague account of the website. --Jason Mittell 19:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)