Listening Journal - "Live? Die? Kill?"

Tweet

"Family" was one of the most common answers
to Mill's questions. (Picture by Austin Evan)

Title: "Live? Die? Kill?"
Producer/narration/reporting: Karen Mill
Length: 14 min 14 sec
Link: Third Coast International Audio Festival

For this documentary, independent radio producer Karen Mill, traveled around her neighborhood and asked people three questions: What do you live for? What would you die for? And what would you kill for? Mill interviews around 100 people for this feature and uses what she considered the best answers for her piece. To find those people she visits an art gallery, a Baptist Church, a farmers market, a senior center and a winery.

The documentary has a very promising title. After all, these are three questions that sound so simple and are yet so hard to answer. However, the documentary wasn't particularly interesting. I feel, Mill went a little bit overboard and should have maybe only concentrated on one of the groups that she visited. The most interesting part of the documentary is her visit to the senior center... I know this might sound cruel but, who would think, that people this old still have so much will to live?

The quality of the narrators voice was ok. In parts of her interview, I could barely make out what she was saying but other than that, the narration itself was fine. However, I have to admit that when I first listened to the piece, I thought the narrator was a man for the first five minutes. Whether that is a good or a bad thing is yet to be determined.

The length of the documentary was ok. At times I thought, it was a little boring and repetitive though. It's 14 minutes long, but I feel with a little bit more of an angle and more focus, it could have been done in a much more compelling way in maybe 5-7 minutes.

All in all, this feature is alright. It's a little bit frustrating to know that this could've been made so much more compelling, if Mill only narrowed down her interviewee group. There is one more thing that I noticed and that really irritated me: Mill often starts sentences with her narration and has them finished by her interviewee. I just feel that is really cheap and that this should only be done, if the quality of the soundbite is really bad. Why not let the interviewee say the whole thing?

At the end of the day, the idea to this feature is great but the realization is mediocre.

Listening Journal - NPR NEWSCAST

Tweet

NPR NEWSCAST with Carol Van Dam on Saturday Oct. 10, 12 a.m (duration: 4 min 49 sec)

This newscast included stories from all over the world, including the gunmen attacks on a main Pakistani army facility, killed NATO soldiers in Afghanistan, multiparty negotiations with North Korea about its nuclear weapons program, UN peacekeepers that were killed in a plane crash in Haiti, Pennsylvania's new budget, fires in California, the opening of the ski season in Colorado and Nevada, the US president speech to a gay rights group and several sports news. Most of the bulletins were readers and natsound was only used once for the story about the governor of Pennsylvania signing the new budget. Other than that some bulletins hosted NPR nationally and internationally posted correspondents.

I was surprised at how much better I could follow the NPR newscast than the BBC one. Hence, it's only natural that I found this NPR newscast much more interesting. The sentences were clear and concise and were all connected in context. I also liked that there was a sports section at the end. However, I found that only half of the newscast was focused on international news, the other half dealt with national news. And this is completely fine, considering it's called NPR, i.e. "National" Public Radio.

The quality of sound was great except for the recording of the correspondent in the Haiti story. It sounded like it was recorded over the phone. The sound was low and a bit muffled. I wish, the announcer would have mentioned that this was recorded over the phone. Maybe then I wouldn't have noticed it that much. As for the natsound, Van Dam only used one soundbit of the governor of Pennsylvania when he spoke about the new budget. I liked the use of that soundbit because it summed up what actually happened and also gave some background information.

The announcer's voice was good. Carol Van Dam seems to know what she's talking about and doesn't seem rushed in anything.

At the end of the day, I really liked that newscast. Even though it fit more stories into less time than BBC's newscast, I felt I could actually follow the information. The balance between natural sound and the information that was selected to make the bulletins conclusive was exactly right.

(Picture: copyright Carol Van Dam - The announcer of this newscast)