As is the case with all media products, a music video is created for the consumption of an audience, therefore to assess the success of our pop video and ancillary products; it was important that we obtained feedback from our audience. By gathering a variety for feedback from members of our target audience and from wider audience demographics, using in particular the comments from our Focus Group, I looked to answer the question of “What I learnt from my audience feedback”
We considered the JICTAR system of demographic classification to help identify our target audience. Aware that our products and band require a high level of worldliness and patience in order to understand or enjoy or products, we decided our target audience would consist of members of the A, B and C ‘classes’. Class A consists of the ‘upper middle class’, those with status and wealth, who are likely to have a high level of education. Class B which encompasses the ‘middle class’ of society, those with education but less wealth and status, such as doctors or teachers, and class C which includes members of society with a limited level of education and status, but likely have skills such as plumbers and electricians. Classes A, B and C collectively account for 50% of the population. We had decided that our target audience would consist of both genders, however on a certain level, our video may attract more males given the emphasis on the female band members. Our target audience would consist of people age 18 – 60, as those younger than 18 are more attracted to products that are more conforming to conventions as well as their unlikely interest in ‘Bluegrass music’ and the video may be ‘lost’ on those above 60. We did not deduce specific area or aspiration profiles for our target audience.
You Tube allows users to upload their videos to; be seen by and commented on and rated by any other of the 48 million You Tube users worldwide. The original plan was to upload our video to You Tube, as this means there is the potential to reach a huge audience spanning the globe, and would provide a great opportunity to receive feedback from an audience out side the targeted one. However we were unable to upload the video, due to a dispute with the band, who are the legal owners of the copyright. This was a huge blow to our plan for obtaining audience feedback.
The main points we wanted to address through audience feedback were; whether or not the audience enjoyed it, what message they got from the video, did they believe the band had potential to be ‘stars’, did they relate with the band and how we could improve the video.
We decided that a focus group would be the most beneficial way to attain audience feedback. A focus group is a demographically diverse group of people assembled to participate in a guided discussion about a particular product before it is launched or to provide feedback. It differs from a questionnaire in that audience responses can be monitored and it is possible to request for responses to be built upon if required. It is also instant unlike a questionnaire. Our focus group consisted of eleven 17-18 year olds, this was just on the border of our target audience, but still proved useful. As media students themselves, they were keen to engage with us. There were 5 males in the room and 6 females. We wrote a set of carefully designed questions – it was important that they were ‘open’ questions, so that they did not prompt a certain response. The questions asked, and the most useful responses are listed;
1) What did you think of the video overall?
“We couldn’t understand the lyrics”
“It was very amusing”
2) What message do you think was being portrayed?
“All about having a good time”
“Having a fun, carefree time”
3) Do you agree with this message?
“Yes, they looked like they were having a lot of fun whilst shooting the video”
“This is what pop music is about, having fun”
4) What narrative do you believe was being shown?
“I don’t believe there was any narrative being portrayed”
“If there was a narrative, it was unclear”
5) How is each member of the band represented?
“They all have a natural chemistry”
“They look quirky, slightly odd”
“The blonde girl looks slightly in your face” “They all look very natural”
“They all bring a different aspect to the image of the band, all individual”
6) Do you think they had the potential to be stars?
“Not in England, no”
“Possibly in Europe”
“They look too random to be stars”
7) Is the video entertaining?
“It was at the beginning but began to feel slightly repetitive”
“It was very different to any other pop video, so yes”
“It was broken up nicely by the different backgrounds”
8) Do you identify with any of the band members?
“No, they are too old for us to identify with”
“They are in too much of a niche market to identify with”
9) What do you think could be improved?
“More time focused on their faces”
“Slower spinning”
“Stop the spinning every now and then to allow a rest”
10) Did you find the spinning distracting?
“Yes, slightly”
“Only towards the end of the video”
“Felt like I was on a round about, sickening”
11) What would you give the video out of 10?
“7”
“5”
“8”
“9”
The responses were all quite varied but none of them came as a shock. Despite quite a lot of constructive criticism and negative feedback from the group, the ratings out of 10 were very high, higher than anticipated from a group of this demographic, which suggests Barthes’ Jouissance prevailed, and the audience enjoyed the ‘unexpected’.
To build upon the focus group, and to try to make up for the lack of feedback from You Tube, we took in to consideration the feedback from our peers such as; friends, family and other peers. We found that the originality of the video was really appreciated - they liked the fact it was unlike existing products. One of the most appreciated comments was “I think it’s amazing, really good job. It’s something new and different”. The lack of narrative was commented on, and it was suggested that the video could have been improved with the inclusion of a more obvious narrative through out. The repetitiveness of the spinning was also criticised.
Blumer and Katz (1974) devised a theory called ‘Uses and Gratifications’. The theory suggests that the audience take an active role in relating media to their own lives and it looks at the ways in which an audience interacts with a media product. The theory incorporates 4 elements; Diversion, Surveillance, Personal identification and Personal relationships. We can apply aspects of the theory to our media product;
1) DIVERSION – This suggests that an audience looks to a media product for; entertainment, escapism, and emotional release from everyday life.To expand on this, theorist Khuleshov stated that a media product has to entertain the viewer for 70% of the time to provide the audience with a sense of diversion. Some of the focus group felt some diversion, with 7 of the 11 members saying that they were entertained for 100%, however other 3 members of the group stated that they only found the pop video entertaining for around 50% of the time, therefore they were not successfully ‘diverted’. This emphasises the fact that different people respond differently to a product.
2) PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS – this incorporates the suggestion that an audience looks for ‘companionship’ in a media product. There were mixed responses when we addressed this issue with our focus group. The majority of the group, 9 of the 11 concluded that they felt there was no relationship formed. The quite substantial age difference between the band and our focus group, suggests an explanation for this. We did not expect the product to work on this level.
3) PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION – this element of the theory is about how an audience can relate and compare with both the narratives and characters of a media product. Our video did not work as well as we had hoped on this level, as our non of out focus or peer group felt that they could relate with any of the band members. We had anticipated that perhaps the female members of the focus group would identify with the younger female members of the band. However none of them said they identified with them. But as expected, there was no relation between the males of the focus group and the product.
4) SURVEILLANCE – refers to media products that act as a supply of information to the audience. This is very difficult to relate to pop videos, as they usually focus on the other aspects of the theory.
Stuart Hall is another theorist on audience, and devised the ‘Encoding, Decoding’ theory. The basic model is that a Producing institution puts out a ‘preferred meaning’ by attaching it to a Media Text. This is the encoding phase. The decoding phase is how the audience ‘decodes’ or responds to the preferred meaning of the media text, they respond in one of three ways; they will accept the preferred meaning, they will take an oppositional reading and reject the preferred meaning or they will take a negotiated meaning.The message or preferred meaning that we aimed to put across through the video was; that the world is a fun place and that the band embrace this and don’t take themselves too seriously.
The ideas of Greek philosopher Aristotle, although 2000 years old, can still today be applied to media texts. His ideas can be used to analyse how media products work on or ‘persuade’ an audience. Aristotle suggested three different ‘ways’ that a media product ‘appeals’ to an audience; Ethos, Pathos and Logos.Ethos - or ethical appeal, suggests that a media text appeals to an audience when they are convinced by the character or author, so they need to be ‘credible’, just as Television news readers need to appear credible in order for us to believe them, and accept what they are saying. This can also be applied to pop stars in a Pop Video or actors.
Pathos – or emotional appeal, discusses how a media product appeals to the consumer’s (audience’s) emotions. Emotional appeal is a powerful tool for selling a product or persuading an audience that your argument is correct, language choice is a common way of doing this. Pathos applies regularly to the media that we regularly consume.
Logos – or logical appeal refers to a media text ‘persuading’ by the use of reasoning or speaking/ writing. Logos suggests how by using reasoning within a media product, to support your claims and discussing why your point is valid or correct, is highly important when it comes to ‘persuading’ an audience. This can be applied to TV News and University lectures.
We wanted to asses whether our audience understood and accepted our preferred meaning, which we found they did in the main, but from the analysis of our feedback it is clear that a narrative element to emphasise the message of the video would have been well received, so this is something we would change if we were to do it again. We would also re-asses the constant movement of our video, and look at trying to recreate the overall feel of the video with out the 360 degree panning as this proved to be distracting. Furthermore we successfully subverted conventions, and managed to entertain the majority of the audience, supported with some positive comments. It was always going to be a difficult task to create a product that would be widely accepted by an audience for such a niche group, but I feel the audience understood this and appreciated the originality.
