Analyzing the Radio

“Ideas initially take form as hunches. They don’t come into the world fully realized. The light-bulb moment is greatly overrated.” — Steven Johnson

I recently had the pleasure of listening to “Where Ideas Come From,” a discussion from the Ted Radio Hour on National Public Radio. Matt Ridley, Susan Cain, and Steven Johnson all talk about the process of discovering or creating an idea.

I was enthralled as I listened to these people. But I also instantly noticed the difference between a Ted Talk from television and the Ted Radio Hour.

The sound bites were interspersed almost in a pattern. I slowly became able to predict when another sound bite was being inserted as I heard the narrator deliberately pause to give the bite time to run.

Further, music slowly creeped in beneath the voices. The music grew and became louder as the sound bites of the interviewees got closer to the question: where do ideas come from?

Also, some of the sound bites were overlapped with the narration in a way that would not be featured on television. It just wouldn’t make sense. But on the radio, you can do it because visuals do not accompany what you are hearing.

Take the first talk for example, what most listeners will not notice is that the show is changing between Ridley speaking in the studio and Ridley’s past talks. Visually, this would not make sense. Yet, in radio, it is barely noticeable. Ridley’s voice only slightly changes in quality when he is in studio. 

Lastly, the actual topic is very interesting, but I am not sure how many people would watch a television segment or a short video on the matter. There is a lot of talking going on. This, of course, is fine for me. However, the general public does not want strictly talking. They want visual elements. 

I believe sometimes certain stories are almost ready-made for the radio. This one in particular was a great example of a story that needs to be told, but needs to be told in a particular medium as well.

http://www.npr.org/2012/06/06/154448804/where-ideas-come-from

Live Tweeting Reflection

I live tweeted an event for the first time in my life on election night. In short, I loved it. In a bit longer fashion, I was very surprised at how exciting it can be to get information out before anyone else. I almost exceeded my tweet minimum within an hour or two of tweeting. After that, I slowed down. I watched more carefully, and tried to pick out the important information.

However, just like in any form of communication, the audience must be kept entertained. It is terribly easy for your 140 character tweets to slowly slip into monotony if you do not add some interactivity.

I started posting photos of student organizations preparing for election night. Then, I posted more photos of what my friends and I were doing at our own self-proclaimed election party. These tweets were interspersed with quotes from students and any breaking details on the polls.

This brings me to the troubles of live tweeting. Any so-called breaking information may or may not be entirely true. As much as I loved tweeting information just as soon as it was aired on television or the web, not every piece of news you hear should be then re-posted on social media sites until it has been fact checked. My friends and I were very interested in this as three different websites read different poll results for states around the country.

Overall, it was a great experience. I never take the time to engage in live tweeting when I watch an event. I would like to say that I absorb the moment more than report it, but there have been times I have looked back and wished I had documented something more. Whether through photography, live tweeting, or any other form of documentation you must remember that accuracy is of the highest importance.