| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Report #1 == | == Report #1 == | ||
This report contains solid details, research and information, but does not always present them as clearly as it could - there's not clear enough structure for how your points should be organized. You don't sufficiently explore how Showtime seeks to differentiate itself from HBO, and how the premium cable business model works. Avoid lists of information, but incorporate details into analysis. Your presentation was effectively structured and informative. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC) | This report contains solid details, research and information, but does not always present them as clearly as it could - there's not clear enough structure for how your points should be organized. You don't sufficiently explore how Showtime seeks to differentiate itself from HBO, and how the premium cable business model works. Avoid lists of information, but incorporate details into analysis. Your presentation was effectively structured and informative. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 16:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Report #2 & 3 == | ||
| + | This is a solid pair of reports, with good details, clear ideas, and effective research. You could expand on some points, like the CBS syndication of ''Dexter'' or the controversy on the ''Bullshit'' name. You need to proofread more carefully for typos or other clunky wording that gets in the way of your ideas. The presentations were mixed, with a good discussion of ''Dexter'' but a less analytical exploration of their online strategy. --[[User:Jason Mittell|Jason Mittell]] 01:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:15, 24 November 2010
Report #1
This report contains solid details, research and information, but does not always present them as clearly as it could - there's not clear enough structure for how your points should be organized. You don't sufficiently explore how Showtime seeks to differentiate itself from HBO, and how the premium cable business model works. Avoid lists of information, but incorporate details into analysis. Your presentation was effectively structured and informative. --Jason Mittell 16:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Report #2 & 3
This is a solid pair of reports, with good details, clear ideas, and effective research. You could expand on some points, like the CBS syndication of Dexter or the controversy on the Bullshit name. You need to proofread more carefully for typos or other clunky wording that gets in the way of your ideas. The presentations were mixed, with a good discussion of Dexter but a less analytical exploration of their online strategy. --Jason Mittell 01:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)