Peer Review for Chandler Gillette

This post is a peer review for a student who is not in my section of class.

1. The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

I reviewed Chandler's Video Essay, "5 Arguments Against FBI Backdoor".

2. A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

My Comment

3. An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to review Copy Editing for Chandler's video essay, mainly to talk about his sources.

4. An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I really just wanted to comment on the credibility of his sources. As an author, or creator, it makes a lot of sense when you choose your sources, and that isn't always as easily conveyed to your audience, so I suggested Chandler go into a little bit more depth as to why he chose the sources he chose and what that meant to the integrity of his project.

5. An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I encouraged Chandler to go back and include some sort of works cited page/document/description since it is so easy to add on YouTube.

6. One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I admired how cohesive Chandler's project was. I am aware I am taking more of a risk to having a shoddy project because I change from on-screen to off-screen and back again. And while I still think it sounds good, you can't get a more smooth transition than not having one at all. Really enjoyed his project overall.

Peer Review for Coby Allred

This post is a peer review for a student in my section of class.

1. The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

I reviewed Coby's video essay titled "Anwar al-Awlaki: Was His Death Justified?"

2. A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

My comment

3. An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to review Coby's project under the 're-design' option, mainly because I noticed one little thing and thought I should comment on it.

4. An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I suggested Coby include a physical list, some sort of works cited, along with his video or in the credits of his video so that one could fact check or even have the tools to learn more outside just the information he provided in the video.

5. An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I also suggested Coby re-design his title so that it is more catchy to his audience and thus more receptive. An easy title to remember is one that is more likely to be shared and passed on (both via the internet and through word of mouth).

6. One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

Coby's project is undeniably professional. His speaking voice is wonderful!

Editorial Report 9a

This post will be a reflection on my first body paragraph.

Old Intro
New Intro

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I got some comments about the fact that I am spending too much time explaining and not enough time arguing for my side, so I have revised my first paragraph to be more concise. I still had to give background so that my audience can understand what on earth I'm arguing for, and the way I am presenting it now feels a lot more factual and short.

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I morphed the transition paragraph into the first paragraph so I could really cut down on how much time I wasn't spending on arguing, because that really the point of the project.

Editorial Report 9b

This editorial report will be on the last paragraph/outro of my project. I felt like it was weak before and just still cut out abruptly, so I edited it to make my project more full circle while supporting my argument.

Old Outro New Outro

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I actually ended up keeping my outro relatively brief just to save time, and because I didn't end up keeping the introduction of myself. I did change what I said because I was spending too much time, again, not advocating for my point - being in favor of vasalgel. I still kept the sentence where I inform my audience of a greater significance of the video, because it is honestly something important to me, but I condensed it more and kept it strictly at the end.

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

Again, I used to have just little paragraphs that led up to the final paragraph and it didn't come off well (as far as, it didn't present to the audience where my video was actually going to end). So I squished them all together and got rid of almost anything that wasn't directed toward my argument.

Reflection on Post Production Part II

This week I have been editing all parts of my video; script, and visual component alike. This is a reflection on my progress of the week.

1. What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I was so proud of myself for getting my whole script re-adapted on Tuesday, and then adding my visual components in on Thursday (I made a list of which pictures and videos I wanted to have appear at each part, where I wanted screens with text, and planned out which videos would be only of me speaking, etc.). Everything went so smoothly during compilation, too. I always anticipate having crazy technical difficulties, but I didn't really have too many!

2. What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

The only challenge I had was on myself. I was so confident because I was so well prepared during the week that I still underestimated the time it would take me to complete the little things after I had put the whole project together. For example, I filmed all my videos on Saturday, and had them all compiled on Sunday before noon. Once I finished the fine tuning and the never ending uploading/exporting process, here we are at 10 pm on a Sunday. That was honestly my only thing that went wrong today; it took me over two hours to upload to Vimeo (for peer reviewing - I think it was the wifi, not sure), and another hour to export onto my desktop.

3. How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

A lot a lot faster because no uploading or filming or uploading. Or uploading. *twitch twitch*

4. How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I would have to say I was the most interested in this project overall since the genre was so open. I hope that doesn't hurt me in the end, because I wasn't doing the project for the project, I was doing it for me. Actually, I got a lot of good resources by just talking to my friends about my project who were interested in it too (like the quote I use at the beginning, one of my friends brought that up when I was telling her about my project). I'm definitely the most proud of this project in terms of its relevancy in the medical community and our society right now. I think it's always a good sign when you can spend so much time on a project and not be completely worn out of it by the end, and that's how I feel with project 3.

Revised Post to Peer Reviewers

I will be attaching my revised version of my project 3 video essay after the second week of post production.

Male Birth Control: Innovative Option or Experimental Hoax?



1. Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know.

Yes the title is long. Yes the video is long. I beg of you, if you take on the task of enduring the whole thing to just listen the points I'm making about why Vasalgel is a step forward for our society; that's what I'm trying to sell you on.

2. Major issues or weaknesses in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)

I'm afraid I drone on too much because I'm trying to give background at the same time as I'm arguing for my side.

3. Major virtues or strengths in the “Fine Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)

I, personally, like the way I have tied things together, and I feel like the information I present and factors I use are all cohesive. I'm proud of the fact that I used actual quotes from people to present the sides of my argument that I'm trying to touch on.

Peer Review for Sofia Haserot

This is a peer review for one of my classmates who is not in my section of class.

1. The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

I reviewed Sofia Haserot's untitled Video Essay on Obamacare.

2. A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

Sofia's project

3. An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed

I chose to analyze content because I knew I would be able to talk the most about that, (as opposed to form, because all she had available was a script).

4. An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I advised Sofia to look more into the argument side of the project; it seemed a little like she was aiming to recreate project 1 because of the lack of argument. I also suggested she make a few of her paragraphs more clear in why they exist and what theyre supposed to do for the audience.

5. An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I really ended up editing a lot of organization because of the fact that I recommended she combine her first and second paragraph. It seemed to me like she was focusing too much on the introduction of the story that she skimmed over the details and how she felt about the story.

6. One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I did, however, admire the fact that Sofia chose a topic she knew she would be able to argue, she says so in the beginning of her open post. So maybe she just needs more time to edit so she can make a stronger one-sided argument out of it.

Peer Review for Payton Leahy

This is a peer review for one of my classmates in my section of class.

1. The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed

I reviewed Payton's "Why Sony Needs To #FreeKesha"

2. A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed

Payton's Video and my comment

3. An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed 

I chose to review Payton's video based on Copy Editing. I began watching her video and immediately wanted to do form because I could pick out things right away, but I saw other commenters had already made remarks about form and so I thought I should switch it up a little for her sake.

4. An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I made comments to Payton in regards to the three sections of the Copy Editing rubric, language use, design elements, and credible sourcing. I remarked on each of these and tried to steer clear of comments she had already gotten. I try to make my comments ones that address the problem and a possible solution so I'm not just putting a whole bunch of responsibilities on the author.

5. An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback

I commented on the sourcing Payton was using. Even though it was just a rough cut, she acknowledged to her critics (I guess that's me) that she was using credits at the end, but I also recommended she cited sources as she went along so that her audience would find her credible throughout the video.

6. One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from

I really did like the tone Payton used. It wasn't insanely aggressive (I think I can be like that) but I was still able to listen to her whole video.

Reflection on Post-Production

This collection of questions and responses is relevant to my video, "Male Birth Control: Innovative Option or Experimental Hoax", for the first round of post-production.



1. What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

I got myself caught up on my blog posts. Last week I fell a little behind and now I am back up to date with the posts.

2. What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

The biggest challenge of this week for me was deciding what fit into the genre form or not. A lot of the examples we have looked at have taken different approaches, like sitting at a desk reporting or simply putting audio over picture. I just dont want whatever I do to be out of genre content.

3. How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

I am hoping I get to edit more next week, and I will be more comfortable with my project. This week was really good for getting myself back on track and this next week I would like to even get ahead if possible.

4. How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I am very comfortable with the length of my project, and even most of the content. Only at the end do I noticeably rush out of speaking and somewhat harshly end my video.

Open Post To Peer Reviewers

Male Birth Control: Innovative Option or Experimental Hoax?

Rough Draft
(in audio form)

1. Key information about your particular project that you would like anyone who peer reviews your draft to know

I chose to do my project analyzing this new product called Vasalgel; it's a form of birth control for men. A lot of people are doubting it because it isn't finished and a lot of people have immediately accepted it and claim it will change the world. My video will be analyzing these claims and taking a side on one of them.

2. Major issues or weaknesses in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those weaknesses)

I know the sign off (outro) is weak. I'm definitely wanting to edit that one more but I can't figure out how to just leave my audience without sounding like a news anchor.

3. Major virtues or strengths in the “Rough Cut” that you’re already aware of (as well as anything you’d like to know from your editors about those strengths)

I like how I've analyzed my quotes and pros and cons list; I think that was a well thought out part of my project.

Editorial Report 12b

This post is about how I changed my second 'body paragraph' video section in my essay from the script version I had in the beginning of the week to the version I had at the end of the week.

Rough
Final


1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

This section was definitely more sophisticated from the get-go. I mentioned in my previous editorial report how that was something I was focusing on for my first body section. I changed the quotes I used long before I even recorded, though I think that is still worthy of mentioning. I felt like I couldn't obtain as much of an analyzable reaction from a previous quote I had from Refinery 29 "...How do the choices suck? Wear a _____ condom" to a quote from the same source that exhibited more of the vibe I was trying to get with people who are reacting negatively to the product that said "The point of the story here is that the more safe and effective birth control options that are available, the better" from the author of the article.

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

Again, the organization of this paragraph/section was not a primary concern for me because I really focused on one thing - the reactions of various parts of the public. So, the form was cohesive from start to finish.

Editorial Report 12a

I took two recordings of the same part of my script before and after its revision. The clips are linked below, along with my comments about how they changed through my editions.

Rough
Final

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

I thought I was a little repetitive in my word choice in my rough draft. Although I still don't think I am finished, I like my vocab choices more in my second version. I feel like they're more sophisticated but still comprehensible. The rest of the content really remained the same. I am comfortable with the layout of my script, which is where I did most of my editing. So, both of these recorded versions are, more or less, edited drafts, when you consider my real rough draft is in print.

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I'm working on making myself seem more professional, and so I tried to bring down the pitch and over-enthusiastic energy in my second time around. I still want to be energetic and keep my audience awake, especially for these scenes where the only thing present is my voice (over a picture or short silent clip) but that was the major formatting change I made.

Peer Review for Michaela Harrington

This is my peer review for a student's project who is not in my section.

The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed (1 point)

Michaela's project does not yet have a title.

A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed (1 point)

Michaela's Content Outline

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed (1 point)

I chose to review Michaela's content outline because I just wanted to get a feel for how other people are organizing their projects as far as where they choose to make their comparisons and how they plan on constructing their intro and outro.
An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?) (5 points)

I encouraged Michaela to either take a more solid stance for or against fracking, or if nothing else justify how she is viewing the topic as simply a question of "how did this arrive" or suggest a solution for it. Right now it seems too neutral.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback (5 points)

I commented on Michaela's labels for her paragraphs as they pertained to the organization of her outline as it stands. It is clear she had put in thought to the chronological flow of her project.
One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from (5 points)

I like how simple her outline was to read. I think I'll go back and make an outline for my own benefit that does not include the questions I had to answer for the blog post, but rather so I can just see a 'zoomed out' view of how I picture my project.

Peer Review for Shauna Bratton

Shauna is in my section of class; this is a peer review of her project.



The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed (1 point)

Shauna's project is currently untitled.

A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed (1 point)

Shauna's Research Report

An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed (1 point)

I chose to review the research report, because it was the second thing I saw on Shauna's blog, and then I also noticed it was incomplete.

An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?) (5 points)

I recommended Shauna to return to her content outline so that she may be able to ask herself more questions to find sources that answer them and thus expand the reaches of her project.

An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback (5 points)

Since this document did not have to do with the physical layout of her project I could not comment on any structural topics. Nevertheless, the credibility of the sources she used was something I commented on and commended her for because whether a source is giving true information is critical to one's project.

One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from (5 points)

I like how Shauna's project is going to be on a topic that is undoubtedly controversial. For example, my project could be seen from both sides, although I feel strongly about one side. But very often, for Shauna's topic, people get very heated and refuse to see the other side's perspective.

Reflection on "Birth Control For Men: Innovative Option or Experimental Hoax?"

This post is a reflection on production week and how I feel my progress was made.

1. What were some of the successes (or, things that went right) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

This last week was good as far as the actual progress of my project was made. I finished my script and went back to add unspoken cues and cinematic effects. That sounds weird and professional, but I don't know a better term for it.

2. What were some of the challenges (or, things that went wrong) during this week’s process work? Explain, with evidence.

It was hard for me to find time to squeeze in my blog posts, but I thought it would be more important to actually focus on my project. I put off my posts too long and I wish I could progress more on my project this week, so I guess you win some you lose some, but I hate being behind like this!

How do you think next week will go, based on your experiences this week?

Well, considering 'next week' is actually right now, I would say I am behind where I want to be but I know I'll be able to catch up, especially over the weekend. So, I'm disappointed I let myself get behind but I know there is hope yet!

How are you feeling about the project overall at this point?

I hope I'm not too informal. I have seen all types of different examples of video essays, where the narrator is shown, and not shown. I'm hoping my video essay does not resemble too much of a talk show and can retain its professional nature. When I say that it sounds like I'm saying I have no control over my project; what I'm really using this for is just to make a mental note to myself as I'm going through through post production and editing.

Production Report 8b

In this post I will evaluate my first body paragraph from my outline and my actual script and how I interpreted my outline to make my script.

My first paragraph from my outline

• My first body section will be the background on Vasalgel and also background on other more traditional types of birth control. I want the feeling of this segment of my video to answer: What is this birth control? Why was it created (What was it created to solve)?
• Evidence: Vasalgel is a men's birth control that will be released into the market in about two years. It is currently making headlines for its update being tested on rabbits, and having being done so correctly. It is an injection of (polymer? phospholipid?) into the vas deference where the sperm flows, and creates a semi-permeable blockade. It was created actually just as a social experiment and now it has developed into quite a promising product that could mean a lot for the advancement of science and society (gender-equal birth control).
• What This Evidence Proves: That, in fact, this product was not created necessarily to 'solve' any issue. (Something Ill have to respond to here is "well, why fix what isn't broken? that is a little off topic for now but I will answer with essentially the industry is not broken but could be greatly improved).
• Important because: I am giving necessary background knowledge and answering basic questions the viewers will inevitably have.

My first paragraph from my script

A popular quote about birth control is “Isn’t it better to unload a gun than to shoot at a bulletproof vest?” What’s this quote mean? Why don’t we have birth control for dudes? Cue Vasalgel. Yes, a birth control for men. Originally developed in 2011 and now making big news in the media because of tests results released that this product is now being tested on rabbits. Successfully.

Huge news for medical community. Huge news for our society – for women, for men, for men and women together.

So, no, this isn’t the first form of birth control that exists for men. Sarcastically They’ve got options! Condoms, a vasectomy (though that’s permanent) the clean sheets pill (for anyone who doesn’t know what that is, the clean sheets pill is a pill that entirely stops the flow of semen. Just cut motion nope. This pill must be taken 2-3 hours prior to sexual intercourse – because guys plan it out like that and is really hard to get your hands on, especially after a survey was conducted on young men in the US, only 20% said they would be interested in this pill. Some said they wouldn’t take the pill because it would be too much of an inconvenience. Really? Really. show pictures of ‘the pill’. What’s worse, is that 20% may not sound like a whole lot, but it’s actually a higher percentage than men who say they use condoms.) So there ya go. The current options for men. (source: MCIP)

For women? The pill, a shot, a patch, a ring, a sponge, a female condom, an IUD. (source: planned parenthood)

That’s why Vasalgel is making waves right now. Vasalgel is the first semipermanent  birth control for men that still has the accessibility to be reversible. So, what is vasalgel? Its just a liquid polymer mixture that is injected into the scrotum area where a man’s vas deferens is. The vas deferens is the channel that brings the sperm from the testicles to the urethera. (source: huffpost) So once vasalgel is injected into this duct, it expands to the diameter creating a blockage. But remember when I mentioned that vasalgel is a polymer mixture? So yes, it creates a dam in the vas deferens but, like a dam it is semipermeable, lets say. So the sperm can still flow through but are rendered sterile because the vasalgel administers a polyelectrolytic effect, where the polymer (a polyelectrolyte) reacts with the biological molecules, the sperm, so that they are no longer able to be useful in the realm of creating offspring.

I focused on answering the questions I had initially thought of in my outline to form how I wrote my script. In this project I really want to focus on informing the audience (besides obviously making my argument). If there was any greater purpose to this project, I would like for my audience to want to learn more about birth control after seeing my video. So I want to keep my style light and fun and upbeat, yet stuff in a lot of content, and make for an exciting, but informative video essay.

Production Report 8a

I will be assessing my progress of the production week by analyzing some rough cuts of content that I have for my video essay so far. I have written my script and I am at the point where I am now inserting the unphysical parts (or more cinematic aspects) of my video.


Content outline Introduction

My video will have a stinger-like opening where I introduce myself and a little mystery on the topic I will be discussing (something along the lines of working birth control into the subject but not giving it away so my viewers will want to keep watching).


Script Introduction

Boy: “You’re not on birth control? Aren’t you afraid of having a child?”

            Slow motion: “aren’t you afraid”

           

            Hi, I’m Katie Russell, and over the next few minutes I’ll be talking about everything wrong with boys.

Slow motion: Boy: “Single mother”, “get the pill”, “inaudiable male grunting”

            Okay, no. But I would like to discuss everything wrong with this sentence, the mindset behind it, and this new product, Vasalgel, as a possible solution towards the problem that our society has with gendered birth control.

To transform my outline into my script, I just utilized the structure I had in mind, as far as having a stinger leading into a brief introduction of what I intend to talk about. I then added unspoken cues and information that allows me to visualize how the video will look from the audience's perspective.