On my way into work this morning I was listening to NPR (National Public Radio) as I always do and I was trying to be very cognizant of what made it compelling to listen to as oppose to reading it or watching it.
They told a feature story on Polio survivors that was moving and interesting... I'd like you to listen to the podcast on it and see if you notice what they do different in radio casting than written or visual.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103892252
when you get a chance, take a glance at the rest of the site too:
www.npr.org
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
In this feature article I noticed that the story, was told like a story. Also they skip to different people telling their part of the story. I liked how in the begin they described how the doctor looked and how he gets around. It gave an image and by listening I could see what was going on. Also by listen I was most interested in what was going on, and I didn't lose focus on what I was doing.
Anastasia Ioannou
The podcast was told like a story [like Anastasia said]. It was engaging, and used actual recordings of people's quotes [the narrarator guy didnt just say for example: Mr. Whoever said...]. The podcast grabbed my attention more than an actual article could ever do. The imagery was especially detailed and descriptive.
Maggie Todaro
What i noticed in the podacst was that it was told like a story, which is cool, and they used peoples actual recordings of their quotes rather than the narrator just saying everything. It grabbed my attention more because you get to hear the reactions in people's voices and you cant get that in an article.
Josephine
I noticed a lot of things while listening to the podcast. It is news and tells a story. It's not just a monotone person talking. The speakers switch off and keep you engaged. I like that the quotes have the actual people speaking instead of the narrator. There was information and different stories from different people who have and survived. It kept me interested and I learned something new.
They add additional sounds in the background. For example, when they were saying how a polio doctor had a patient waiting at about 1:10, they played a curtain opening. It is also (like everybody else said) is like a story. If this was a written news article there would be more facts, facts, facts, but in this there is more emotion.
also comparing this to if it would have been on television the news anchor would have said a couple of lines about it and then there would have been interviews from people and little snippets of information from the news reporter but in this there are still interviews but no news anchor and instead a narrator. in an article you also can't hear the tone in the interviewee's voice and you cant detect their emotions.
i found this story very interesting, i think more than if i were to watch it on tv because on tv there are many distractions like what the reporter is wearing, or watching how they look, and other things that could distract us from paying attention to the story.
I think that this podcast was very engaging because the narrator told it like a story, and included a lot of voice in it, which gave it greater variety and grabbed the audience's attention. I also noticed that this podcast was very descriptive. I felt like the narrator was painting a picture
in my head by describing different scenes.
Also, I had the chance to interpret the emotion of all the speakers because the podcast was expressed with a lot of opinion which helped me to understand its point more.
Before I listened to the podcast, I read the article. I never heard of the Polio disease. I noticed when I was reading it I just wanted to get it over with because what I was reading seemed so long, and I thought, who has time to actually read this all?
Then I listened to the podcast, and it was really engaging. I felt like someone was just telling me this really sad story about how the disease is a threat to those who have it or even had it. It was interesting to hear. and it engaged me to listen to it. They were constantly skipping towards other people and what they had to say about it, which included the facts. I remember when it said 8 minutes and so to watch I thought it would take forever... But I never got bored while listening.
Mary Torosyan
When comparing the podcast to the radio podcast, the podcast I feel was more engaging and was a conversation/ story. In a news story there is just the facts and no emotion. During a radio news story there is still facts but there is a feeling to it. You feel as if you are at the scene of a crime when you hearing it. Also you may lose interest in a specific article while reading it, I know I do. The radio does not have that problem. You go through the story so quickly that you just listen to it and it doesn't take as long. Overall I think radios rule.
Avi Solkoff
I noticed that this was told like a story and instead of people's opinions being told in the podcast, they actually said them, themselves. I think this was more engaging and it actually made it easier to understand as well. I also noticed that if you really paid attention it sounded like you were in the room with them. You heard noises like footsteps, curtains opening and those things made it more engaging.
I also noticed that at the end, the guy repeated who he was and who/what he was reporting for.
In the podcast, there are background noises which a written story can't show, like the squeaking and knocking sounds. It was very detailed like how they described how the doctor looked like and how he uses a electric scooter. They also had the people telling their stories/quotes instead of the narrator just saying it. Also, the narrator put some feeling while he was reporting which you can't hear in a article.
- Janet C.
Like everyone said it was told like a story. I liked how they actually got the public opinion which was told by the person. Over all it was really good podcast and very interesting because I really didnt know much about the polio and the effect it has on the people who have had it
Allison O
Like everyone has said the podcast was like a story. The podcast was very descriptive and full of details that engaged the listener to want to keep on listing to the podcast.
What I noticed was that in the pod-cast, they would record the peoples' quotes and also they would skip around stuff that are in the article. They described a lot more and some thing that they described or didn't say in the pod-cast were added as captions to the picture [in the article]. They would add sounds (like the quotes, conversations, sounds in the room and sounds people with polio would make) and the way the narrator would say it, sounded like a story. I think the sounds made it more interesting (as if you were there). Something else I noticed was that the sentences in the article, would be changed around when the narrator would say it. Also, the article described the doctor and the disease thoroughly. I think the pod-cast was kind of the same but in my opinion, I would much better listen to the pod-cast. When listening to it, I also read the article to find out the differences. I got lost a couple times, though (from how they skip around.)
-Gabriela Varas
To e the podcast was more helpful to see what was going on. The story was pretty interesting and made we want to listen more about what was going on. The podcast wins in this battle because there is more information than in the print.
Domenico
ummm i think they are more descriptive in order for the audience the get a image in their head. They speak slower and there's a little more emphasis in the words and its told more like a story. as if its like one of those tapes you put in as a read along. and i think the emphasis makes you have more of an opinion.
-nadine oquendo
I noticed that this article was told like a story and didn't use one tone throughout the entire podcast. There was enthusiasm in the narrator's voice and they gathered many direct quotes. There was a lot of descriptive content which really helped the audience get a clear, vivid picture in their head to really comprehend and understand the event.
Brianna H.
Post a Comment