How you came up with your ideas and why you chose to go with the one that you did?
The idea of producing an anti-discrimination video was suggested by one of the group’s members and quickly agreed upon. The reason why we thought it would be good to go with it was that we all had certain discrimination experience, as our group is very diverse. We have a homosexual, an Afro-American (who is also Muslim), a pagan and an international student. Some of the group had had more experience in that aspect than the others, but in one way or another we had felt discriminated against.
Moreover, we felt that even though so many campaigns existed already on the subject, this was an ongoing process and we wanted to express our outrage towards the issue. On the bright side, we also wanted to portray cultural integration and moving beyond discrimination and accepting people as people (as we felt we did in our little group, as we quickly became friends regardless of race, culture or sexual orientation).
How you worked as a group, the skills that you used (both individually and as part of the group), other skills and knowledge that it would have been useful to have, how you might acquire those skills?
We worked really well as a group, despite the creative argument we had the third morning. We are close friends already and we tried to avoid arguing as much as possible, deciding upon issues by the principle of majority, after a period of discussion. We tried to include all our members into the process – some were acting, others were directing or shooting the footage, others were providing music/sounds for background of the piece. Naturally, some had more experience than others – whether by obtaining an A level in college or because they were media production students (who had had Avid sessions), so they used the skills they had acquired previously throughout the production of our piece, both in shooting and editing. However, the less experienced of us tried to contribute as much as possible.
It would have been useful to have more skills in shooting and editing videos, as it was important to us to produce a good piece not only ideologically, but also visually (although we knew we weren’t going to receive marks for that). It would have been also useful to know more people, because we wanted to portray as many discrimination cases as possible (Asians, Arabs, Muslims or disabled). However, we couldn’t find any who were free or willing to be put on camera, so we settled with what we had inside our group.
What problems arose and how you solved them (or should have solved them)?
I already mentioned the heated argument we had in the third morning, due to either creative differences in opinion or critics towards the understanding of group work as a whole – though the principle of majority was in place, there still needed to be a general group discussion before voting or deciding, which sometimes didn’t happen if someone was not present at the moment of the decision being taken (perhaps because we were so pressed in time). Perhaps it would’ve been better to solve them privately and not interfere with other people’s work, although we got “swallowed” by the argument and our concentration on the issues took over our awareness of people around us (though it is merely the fact that we were interfering in their editing process, rather than the fact they heard our argument that I’m concentrating on, because I refuse to acknowledge that having a creative argument in front of other people is unprofessional).
What things you learned from the experience both about media production and yourself?
I learned a lot from activity week when it comes to media production and me as a media producer, as well as towards group work. Media production is a complex process and people often work together in a group, which inevitably leads to members of the group being outvoted and their ideas being rejected. Or as Spencer puts in, when someone comes with a very provocative and controversial idea and others say “are you crazy?” and stick with the safe approach, rather than exploring risks.
What our advantage was as media students in contrast to what would have been our duty as media producers, was our opportunity to risk and explore possibilities beyond the safe, conventional approach to things. That is because as media producers we would’ve had to rely on the fact that the audience has to understand our object for us to be sure that we’ll get paid or get publicity, etc. Though as media students that shouldn’t have been our concern, as we were not to produce something understandable for our “co-students”, but a successful media object, which is not always an easily-understandable one.
What I understood about myself is that I am able to distinguish between personal and professional, between friends and co-workers (or co-producers), as I was approaching this university project with the idea of “if I were an actual media producer right now, what would I want to do?”. And thus my colleagues could be my opposition in the production process, but still close friends of mine in other areas of my life. Moreover, I am aware that I don’t like to play safe, even with the risk of people not getting my ideas, because I really dislike media objects who are too obvious, too cliché, where I know the ending before the beginning.
I could relate to Spencer’s explanation that in these processes of media production we would learn and discover who the people with ideas, the creative, often too provocative or controversial people are and who the conventional ones are. Though I don’t mean to say this in a negative way, when I’m talking about people playing it safe or being conventional, as this is what mainstream media production is actually based on. I just mean to stress on the difference between people being OK with being ordinary and enjoying the riches of mass media and those who see ordinary as a bad thing and strive to escape the boundaries of what’s massive and push the limits when producing certain media objects.
As a whole, I see the whole production process as a very beneficial one, as in my opinion it is real practical preparation for our lives as media producers (as the course is not to teach us how to be ones, but to guide us in the process of becoming more successful). On a more personal level, I gathered impressions about people around me in a professional (not friendship-wise) aspect, so when I am a producer tomorrow, I will know who I want to work with/for or who I’d like to work for me. Plus, it’s always good to have creative differences and arguments, as one fictional sports show producer from the TV show Sports Night puts it: “If you’re dumb, surround yourself with smart people. If you’re smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you!”Labels: 101mc |
