(New page: == Report #1 == This report has strong research and some solid details, but falls short of the assignment's goals. The structure is too redundant & repetitive, resorting to lists of inform...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Report #1 == | == Report #1 == | ||
This report has strong research and some solid details, but falls short of the assignment's goals. The structure is too redundant & repetitive, resorting to lists of information rather than analysis of the channel's strategies. You don't sufficiently account for how FX differs from other channels, how it fits into News Corporation's portfolio, and why it's not a premium channel. You need to proofread for consistency, typos, and proper italicization of TV titles. Your presentation had good details, but you need to plan better to fit your information into the time limit. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC) | This report has strong research and some solid details, but falls short of the assignment's goals. The structure is too redundant & repetitive, resorting to lists of information rather than analysis of the channel's strategies. You don't sufficiently account for how FX differs from other channels, how it fits into News Corporation's portfolio, and why it's not a premium channel. You need to proofread for consistency, typos, and proper italicization of TV titles. Your presentation had good details, but you need to plan better to fit your information into the time limit. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Report #2 & 3 == | ||
| + | These reports offer good details and solid description of the programs and online strategies, but clunky writing and poor proofreading gets in the way of the ideas - be sure to edit more carefully for clarity and proper writing throughout (including citations). You spend too much time summarizing & describing the programs, needing more in-depth analysis of the strategies. Your presentations were solid and effective in outlining your key points. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 22:55, 24 November 2010 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:55, 24 November 2010
Report #1
This report has strong research and some solid details, but falls short of the assignment's goals. The structure is too redundant & repetitive, resorting to lists of information rather than analysis of the channel's strategies. You don't sufficiently account for how FX differs from other channels, how it fits into News Corporation's portfolio, and why it's not a premium channel. You need to proofread for consistency, typos, and proper italicization of TV titles. Your presentation had good details, but you need to plan better to fit your information into the time limit. --Jason Mittell 16:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Report #2 & 3
These reports offer good details and solid description of the programs and online strategies, but clunky writing and poor proofreading gets in the way of the ideas - be sure to edit more carefully for clarity and proper writing throughout (including citations). You spend too much time summarizing & describing the programs, needing more in-depth analysis of the strategies. Your presentations were solid and effective in outlining your key points. --Jason Mittell 22:55, 24 November 2010 (UTC)