Group feedback on inital ideas

Idea 1- Stammering

 In this i spoke about my first idea which was stammering. I told the group everything i wanted in my documentary.

Group feedback on idea 1

They liked the idea and though it will be good because i can relate to it on a personal level. But they think it will not get a lot of views because it has a niche target audience 

Idea 2 - Obedience

I this i told them what i wanted to do and what will be involved in making this. I told them what kind of experiments i will be using in this to show what teenagers actual are like.  

Group feedback on Idea 2

They liked the idea because they said that the target audience that is stated in the brief will be bale to relate to this topic a lot, which will make them carry on watching the show. But they said it may be hard to try and get interviews with experts.  

Idea 3- Pressure 

In this i again told them everything i wanted in this documentary and who i was going to interview and why i have chosen to choose them. 

Group feedback on idea 3

They though by me interviewing parents about there children i will get a bias interview and the information that i relay to the audience will be untrue because the parents will not say that they treat a child differently. 

Intial Ideas

Idea 1

Documentary Topic:

Does having successful sibling make younger siblings feel under Pressure?

Documentary Angle:

Does having successful sibling make younger siblings feel under?

Documentary Mode and Why? (consider where you will position the documentary in the key issues)

A reflective mode because it will convey to people that this is not necessarily the truth but a reconstruction of it. It sorts of allows the viewers to make up their own mind on the topic, not making them feel pressured to think something they don’t want to.

Appeal to Target Audience? Any clear limitations?

My target audience will either be the younger or older sibling, this is because in my documentary i will be focusing on the older and younger sibling, so that can give their opinion on the theme and how they feel about it, and will give their first hand experience on the topic and how they feel about it and wither they agree with my overall question. But the people watching may not having any siblings so will not be interested in the topic so will not watch it.

How much information will you assume your audience already know? Why?

The audience who have older or younger siblings will have a lot of information on the matter, because it directly affects them. But the people who do not have siblings will have no information on the matter, so I will have to have interviewers in the doc so that they understand what it feels like to be under pressure from siblings.

Key groups you hope to interview:

Family members Older and younger siblings Teachers who taught both siblings             /              vox-pops with general public

Idea 2

Documentary Topic:

Obedience

Documentary Angle:

How teenagers react to different authority figures and are teenagers  actual what the media make them out to be.

Documentary Mode and Why? (consider where you will position the documentary in the key issues)

Why teenagers are seen to be disobedient towards police and to the general public. It will be an interactive documentary because it will allow the audience to get into the show and connect with it on a personal level, which will make them stay watching and enjoy the show more. Also, the film making who is me will actually part of the documentary, and we will also see or hear myself in it, either talking to someone or giving there own opinion of the topic.

Appeal to Target Audience? Any clear limitations?

Use 16-24 in experiments. But they might not want to take part due to not having time. Also the whole documentary is going to be about people aged between 16-24, which is the age of the target audience, By doing this the target audience will then be able to relate to the topic of the show and will stay watching because they are linked in with the show, and will want to find out more about it.

How much information will you assume your audience already know? Why?

They will know a lot about it, because the documentary is based on the target audience. The  Documentary will just show evidence that most teenagers are not how the media portray them, and will not be giving out a lot of facts about teenagers because they target audience will not need to be informed on thing that they already know.

Key groups you hope to interview:

Teenagers 16-24 General public 30+ People in the media. Psychologists.

Idea 3

Documentary Topic:

Stammering

Documentary Angle:

What it is like to live with a stammer, and what treatment there is out there.

Documentary Mode and Why? (consider where you will position the documentary in the key issues)

Ways to overcome it- speech therapy classes  / How you get treated by the public- they don’t know who to react, you get mixed reactions, some stay to listen some walk away.  / How it makes you feel- not normal, embarrassed   Will be an interactive documentary because I will be part of the show and will talk about my experiences. And I will do some door steeping to get interviewers with people. The audience will be able to connect to this better because it will be a personal topic and they could get emotionally attached to see if people I use overcome the stammer.

Appeal to Target Audience? Any clear limitations?

Not everyone has it and are not interested in it. But the people I am using will be 16-24 which is the target audience, so hopefully they will watch it because they will be able to relate to the ages of the people appearing in the show

How much information will you assume your audience already know? Why?

They don’t know very much, just that you can’t talk properly. I will inform them on what it actual is, and how it happens

Key groups you hope to interview:

People with stammer (need to find people with a stammer) Speech and language therapist  ( do not know any) The public and how they respond to stammer My parents, and when they first noticed I had a stammer.

Nicholls Modes

Rationale

Conventions of a news studio- Videos

Studio news readers or anchors ( Me and Farhana)

In our video we looked at the reader and anchor. We looked at the costume, framing, choice or presenter and the body language of the anchor. I feel as if we showed the conventions of a news anchor very well. We showed that the anchor needs to wear formal clothing by making myself, who played the anchor, wear casual clothing. Also we made some of the framing in certain shots not be the right camera shot. For example we put the shot in a long shot when it should have been a mid-shot. We also made our anchor be the weather reporter as well. This shows the convention of choice of presenter, by showing that the anchor and weather report should not be the same people. We also look at the anchors body language, and showed the anchor sitting with his feet up and leaning back on his chair. This shows the viewers that a proper anchor should not be doing this.

 In this video they looked at the mode of address to the viewers. They showed us what the anchor should be doing, by using graphics, and texts. Then it showed us what it would look like if the anchor did not follow these rules. For example at 0:07 it says that the anchor should talk clearly. But then we see Antony not speaking clearly. This then shows the viewers that it is like when the anchor is not speaking clearly. Also they look at where the anchor should be looking when talking to the camera. We see this at 0:20 the anchor looking around the room as he talks. It shows the viewers what it would feel like if the anchor of a real new show was looking around the room as they give the news.





Interviewing experts and witnesses (TJ and Kavel)

In this video they looked and interviewing expects and witnesses. I really like how they got this news convention across to us. For example they used graphics to show what has to be on screen as the interview is taking place. You see this at 0:17. We also get to understand what kind of camera techniques are used in an interview. This is shown at 0:11, when they show a panning shot of something random before the interview. This is done to set the scene. We also get a feel of what locations are used to suit certain people. We see two interviews, done in the park, which tells the audience that the people that are talking are just normal everyday people.





Report structure (Ellie and Taylor)

In their video they looked at the report structure of a news report. We see her give a understanding of the order of the start of the show. This is because. Taylor signs in, by saying her name, institution and her location. We also hear music being played in the background, which is Taylor, explains has to catch the mood of the report. This is shown at 0:14, it is done to match the report more dramatic and to build tension so that viewers stay watching. Taylor also talking about interviewers with someone from another location. This is shown at 0:44, Taylor makings a joke about it, saying that the interviewee does not really care about the topic and interview. She also says that after the report, there will be a rundown of what has just been talked about with graphics and a voice over. This is done at 1:02.

Factual TV rules for beginners

Accuracy in the term of this context means, how the presents and communicates facts to the viewers. Also the facts they are giving the audience, if they are real or fake. This rule is important to the producer because if the documentary was found out to be giving false information to the viewers, it will lose a huge amount of viewers and also it could be punished and fined by the corporation. Also it is important to have accuracy, so that the views are getting a true account of what happened, and true facts about the topic, because they could be using the documentary for educational reasons and will have to have true facts to help them with educational reasons.  

Good example

This monkey world documentary is an example of a documentary that shows good use of accuracy. The show archive footage of actual monkeys in their day to day lives, which is not staged and is all accurate. This is shown at 2:56; we see a monkey stealing food from a house. Because this is actual footage the viewers will know that this is a fact and monkeys actual do this. Also at 8:10 the voice over says that a certain kind of monkeys have orange babies. We then see a real life video of an orange baby, which connotes to the viewers that the voice over and whole documentary is real and the facts that they say are all real and truthful. Also the documentary presents the facts with a voice over, along with actual real like footage of what the voice over is talking about, which backs up what the voice over is saying, making the audience believe it more. This is shown at 10:40, we hear the voice say that the monkeys will go down and eat clams, we then see the monkeys actually doing this, which is evidence that the voice over is truthful.  

Crime watch is a bad example of a show showing accuracy. This is because even though they are reporting real life events, they also do a reconstruction of the event and in this to produce a narrative will make the story look and sound even more dramatised than it is. For example at the show will put together a scene to what they think happened on that night, and will also put other stuff in it, to make you think and feel different ways for different people. So for example at 13:19 we see the family walking in the house together and talking. This might have not even happened in this way but, the documentary has put this in there to make us like the family more, so that when they are robbed we feel even sorrier for them. 

Balance in term of a documentary is looking at a documentary and seeing if it has both sides of an argument in it. If it does it is thought to have balance and is it does not it does not have balance is not normally in all documentary because the makers want to you believe one side and not the other. In a balanced document, facts supporting both sides will be told and, shown to viewers, and normally, you will see leaders of the both sides talking. This rule is important to the producer because if it has both sides it will appeal to a wider target audience, which will boost the show’s ratings. Also it is important to have balance for the audience so, that most people can feel passionate about the show from both sides of the argument.

Good

 In BBC polities we see the leader of UKIP being interviewed by two presenters. This is an example of a show that used balance, this is because we do not just hear one side of the case, we get different people who are on opposite’s side of the argument, talking about the topic. In this even though there is not a direct opposing view, the presenters question everything he says, and will sort of go against what he says, which will  make the show has a balanced arrangement. For example at 3:38, Nigel say he does not want to get rid of something, then the presenter buts in and say "but would it not be better to do so" This is making the view point balanced, by given all of the opinions and not just the on from Nigel. 

Bad

In this documentary about the E15 mums, it shows a very un-balanced side. The documentary just listens to the E15 mums, and what they think about the situation and having to move out of their flat due to them not being posh/ rick enough. What makes this documentary not balanced is the fact that we do not get to hear from the council in why they are making the mums move out. The viewer does just get to see the reactions of the E15 mums. For example at 4:30 we see a mum say why she is being kicked out and where she has to live. But we do not get a say from the council, on why they are doing this and the benefits it will have on others if this does through.  

Impartiality in term of a documentary is when the show does favour a certain side of the argument. The show is un-bias towards any side, and will allow both side of the argument both have equal air time to talk about what they believe in. Also the presenter, who is presenting the show, will not give his or her opinion on the topic, even if they do have a strong opinion.      

An example that shows a good use of impartiality is Question time which is shown on BBC. In this they show will focus on topic and on question that will be talk about by professional people how know a lot about the topic, and also will allow the audience to give their opinion on the matter. The presenter does not give his opinion; he just acts as the mediator, allowing people to have time to talk. This rule is important for the producer because it will make the show seem fair and will not be scrutinised for taking a certain side to the argument. So for example 3:41 a man is talking about Scotland independence, and when he finishes talking, the presenter does not agree or disagree on what he is saying, all he does is asked a member of the audience is they feel they say way, and if not asked them to say what they want to say. 

Jeremy Kyle is an example of a show that shows impartiality being used badly. This is because Jeremy has an opinion on each person that comes on the show and the situation, he will show the audience and views his opinion, throughout his facilely expressions and body language, and also the ways he talks to people, such as this tone of voice. For example at 11:25 we see Jeremy, question what the mum says and makes her statement false and incorrect, This show that he is bias towards the topic and is giving his opinion on the situation. Also at 33:18 we see Jeremy make the man say sorry to his girlfriend. He says it in a very loud and dominating voice, which connotes to the viewers that he feels as is the man is wrong in the situation and women, is right. This again is showing that Jeremy is bias towards the women side, which does not show impartiality. 

Objectivity & Subjectivity 

Objectivity in term of a documentary is when the show only shows facts and statistics, about the theme of the show. This is likely to be in a special interest documentary, which is very niche appeal.

A show that shows good use of objectivity is The Gadget Show. This is because they will talk about a gadget and will inform the viewers on all of the facts about the gadget, such as price and who made it. For example starting from 0:50 we get information about computers, the presenter says "laptops arrive on the scene in the 1980s. This is an objective fact that cannot be questioned. The rule of objectivity is important for the producer because it will make their show trust worthy, which will make viewers want to watch it, because they know that they are not being lied to. It is important for the audience, because it will allow the viewers, to know that what they are watching is a show that they can trust and use to help them make decisions on buying gadgets. 

Subjectivity in term of a documentary is when the show does not give facts on the matter, and what they say you cannot prove it. This normally will be seen in live audience shows where the audience give their opinion on topics. A show that uses a lot of subjectivity is "The Big question" This is because the audience give their opinion on the topic that is being disused, without any facts what so ever. So for example at 1:19 the women share her opinion and say that Islamism is a growing concern, and that we are scared to confront it. This is a clear subjective opinion, because there are no facts to back up what she has to say. Also because people on the opposite side can question her, shows that it is a subjective view.   

Acts

Opinion in terms of a show t is what the show does to show their own opinion on the matter, and also what they do and show the audience to make them think a certain way, though camera language and what they choose to show the viewers. The background music and tone of voice that the voice over has will also show connote to the viewers and make the viewer’s thing a certain way.

This show has a clear opinion on what they are filming. It is based on working class people that are finding it hard to live. It makes the viewers have an opinion on the topic by doing certain thing. Firstly, the tone of voice the presenter will use it very soft and warming when talking about how the family live. This is done to connote to the viewers that they feel sorry for the families and so should you. If the viewer’s feel sorry for the people that are involved, it will make the viewer’s carry on watching the show, which is good for the institution. Also the show will only show certain information to the viewers that will make the viewer’s change their opinion on what they are watching, For example at 2:20 we are informed that the father bikes home after working, having to travel 5 miles just to save on the bus fare. This may be a lie, but it is put in the show to make the audience have an opinion on the topic, which is that we all should help and feel sorry for these families affected. The rule is important to the producer because by showing a clear opinion on the matter, will make the show more factual and will make people that also have the same opinion on the topic stay watching the show. The rule is important to the audience, because if the show shows, a clear opinion on the natter, it will influence the viewers, to think the same. At 5:20 we see facts being presented to use on screen, which will make the viewer’s understand how hard the families are struggling, to live. The facts are blunt and straight to the point, allowing the audience to understand what the family is going through even more. This will make the audience stay watching the show because they are emotional attached to the show. Also it is good that the show has a clear opinion on the theme, and shows this to the viewers because it will give the viewer’s something to engage in and have an opinion on as well.    

Question time again is a show that demonstrates not giving their opinion on the matter. I will just be focusing on the actual presenter, because he is the one that does give his opinion on the topic that is being talking about. The rule is important to the producer. Because it will give them a wider target audience and that they are not just giving one side of the topic and saying that one side is better than another. Also the producer will make the presenter not have an opinion, allowing the show to still be open for further discussion even after the show is finished, which could lead to a part two of the show, making the show more popular and boosting ratings. The rule is important to the audience to the, for many reason. Because the show gives both opinion on the matter it will allow the audience to also   say what they want to say about the topic, which we see at 14:32 where the women is allowed to say what she feels and give her opinion on the matter. So by the show not having an opinion it allows for audience interaction to take place, which will make the audience like the show more and what to watch and be part of it. The presenter does not give his opinion on the matter, allowing the topic to still stay open for further discussion.  

Bias in term of a documentary is the opposite of impartiality. It decides with one side of the topic and will support that side throughout the whole show. They will support the side by showing facts and evidence that will inform the viewers, and will make the viewers also support a certain side. The show will always have an unfair and UN balanced opinion on the topic, in order to portray that certain side as better or right. The background music and tone of voice that the voice over has will also be bias. 

This is an example of a show that only shows one side to a case, which is that McDonald's food, is not good for you. Which means that it is a show that shows the use of good bias. It only shows one side of the argument in order to get the point across to the viewer’s much more effectively and clearer. For example at 2:43 we see that the McDonald chips have not gone off yet. We do not get another opinion to why this is; we just assume that it is because of a bad, un-healthy reason. Also the presenter has a very bias tone of voice towards the McDonald food and the other food. For example at 1:11 he says that he has got a real hamburger where they make real meat, this is a bias view, and is basically saying that McDonald meat is not real meat. We do not get to hear from McDonald them on what is in their meat. By doing this it makes the viewers also have a bias view on the topic and side with the presenter, because he is looked at to have the most knowledge on the matter.   

Bad

This is a documentary that does not give their opinion on the matter they are talking about which is an example of bad bias, because they are not showing any bias in the show, and giving their own opinion on the matter. In the show the presenter does not show a bias view on the topic, all he does it follows the people around and understand why and what they are doing. For example at 3:01 the presenter ask normal question that is no everyone mind such as how did you get into bare knuckles fighting. The rule is important to the producer because by not showing a bias view it allows the viewers to make their own mind up on the matter and they will not be pressured into thinking something, which could make them not like watching the show.

Representation in terms of a documentary is how the show presents certain situation a different people, in order to make use the viewer’s think and react in different ways. You can represent certain situation a different people by the types of sounds you use and the type of camera shots you use for each person. A show that shows good representation will represent the people at more than 2 dimensional, allowing the viewers to see more than one side to the people.  

This is a good example of representation because we get to see

This is a bad example of representation because the show only presents the people on the show as being one thing and not given the viewer’s information on other aspects on their lives. The rule is important to the producer because by just showing one side of a person will allow the show to represent them in a way that the audience will be entertained. So for example if at the start of the show we fully understand what each person that comes on is like in the outside world and what they do, and where they live, we will be able to make up our own opinion on the matter, which could not be the opinion that the show wants us to think. For example at 1:03 the two girls go in to fight and a bell is rung, as in like a boxing match. By doing this the show is representing the girls as fighters, which makes the viewer’s think of them as lower class, making us like watching the show better, knowing that we are better than them.    

Access vs. Privacy in term of a documentary is very important. Access is only showing something to the viewers because we deserve to know and the right to privacy is taken away due to what has happened. It is also when you cannot really get information from the source so you will have to use hidden camera in order to get this information. Privacy is showing the viewer’s something that does not deserve to been show to other people.

This is an example of a show showing access, it is about the 9/11 bombing and the people how were involved, and what they did. We as viewers have the right to know who these men were and what they looked like, so their right of privacy gets taken away. The rule is important to use, because it will allow people it understand what happened on events that has changed their lives. It will allow the viewers to feel as if they know what went on, on that day and know what people now know we did it. At 1:20 we see the face of one of the people that hijacked one of the planes that went into the twin towers. His right to privacy is less important than comparing it to the viewer’s right to access.

This is a bad example of privacy. I feel as if the show should not be looking into the lives of these children in as much depth as they do. The children in the show have got a right to keep their personal lives private from the rest of the world. In the show we get to understand personal issues that the children have in real depth. For example at 8:15 we find out the child parents have split up. People could say that this should be kept private and we should not know this because it is personal to the family. But on the other hand it allows the viewers to engage in the show more and want to watch it.

Contract with Viewers

This show is a good example that keeps with the rule of contract with viewers and gives an accurate account on what happens at the airport. This is important for the maker to use because it will allow the audience get an accurate account of what happens at the airport, which will make them carry on watching because they know that it is all truth.  

This is a bad example of a show that sticks with contract with the viewers. This is because the show leads us to think that bear stays overnight in all of these extreme environments, trying to stay alive, but in reality when we think he goes bed outside, the cameras stop rolling, and bear a his crew go and stay in a hotel an gets to eat a full course meal. But the show does give us this information and makes us think that he has stayed over, which is deception and does not stick which contract with the viewers.    

Analysing a news broadcast

Start at 2:21

Interviewing experts

This is where the anchor in the news package will ask questions and get the opinions of either experts in the field or witnesses how saw the actual event. This is often used to give the viewers more information on the topic or event. Also it is very typical for only bits of the interview to be shown. The bits that are shown are often the most interesting and informative bits. In the example I have chosen we can see the use of interviewing expects. This is shown at 3:58. We see a man from institutions from fiscal studies, who are talking about the topic of a later retirement age. The camera is set up in a basic mid shot. By having it set up in a basic shot, it connotes to the audience that the news team just wants them to focus on what the expect is saying and wants us to get as much information as we can out for the interview. As in this interview with the expect, it is set in an office, which we the viewers are suppose to think is the expects. By doing this it makes the expect who is being interviewed, look more powerful and clever. So this then makes the viewers trust his opinion more, which will reflect the news package as being very informative and reliable. This will then make the viewers carry on watching the show. In the interview we only see one set of graphics and that is at 3:58, we see a sort of name tag appear at the bottom of the screen. It is used to inform the viewer who is on screen, so from this graphic we learn that the expect is named Paul Johnson and is from an institutions from fiscal studies. This just gives more information to the viewers so that they know that the man giving information is a professional and not just a random guy of the street. This interview that is in this new package is using a expect that is knowledgeable on the topic and is not part of the story. By doing this is again makes the viewers feel as if they are getting professional advice on the topic and all of the information that they are receiving is true. Also because ITV is a very developed and wealth company, they have to portray a professional vibe, to the viewers. So by using expects it shows that they can give the best advice, and can get professional and posh people to be part of their story.

Report Structure

This refers to how the new package is ordered. It would normally start with a summary of the topic and what is actually happening. It would normally then go into a sign in from the field reported, who would then talk more and give more information on the topic. Then you would see archive footage, showing typically the event happening with a voice over in the background. In the example I have chosen we see a clear report structure. At 2:25 we start off with an animation, of a women getting older, which ties with the voice over who is saying that we will have to work still as we get older. We then see archive footage at 2:41 of a mothers and baby class, and then its goes into an interview of a mother is will benefit from having the change. By having an interview with sort of an expect it gives the viewers a firsthand opinion on the matter from the view of another person. We then get facts communicated to use though the use of graphs and animations. This is shown at 3:00. This is done so that the viewers can receive more facts on the topic in a lighter and less academic way, which more people can benefit from. So by having this, it the story can be understood by the younger generations, and those who don't like to listen and been told things directly. After this we then have a voice over talk to use more about the topic. By having a voice over it makes the show able to show more things at once. So that the viewers can see different visuals, so that they don't get bored of looking at a man’s face as he talks. When go to an outside broadcast, on the anchor, which is summarising the whole news package. By ending on an outside broadcast with an anchor will make the package seem professional and formal. The location that he anchor is at is also very important. We see Big Ben behind him, which makes the story seem important because they are standing next to an important and popular building. Also right at the end at 4:34 we get a sign off. By doing this is ends the package and connotes to the viewers that in the show they will not be talking about that topic again. This also makes the report structure have an actual structure and order to it, which will make the viewers feel as if the new package has been given attention. Which will make the viewer stay watching it. Overall a clear report structure will make the institution look very professional and will show that they understand what and how a news package should be put together. In big institutions like ITV and BBC we will always have a clear report structure.

Mode of address to viewer

In a new package, the anchor and what is included in the package will always let of a certain mode of address. The mode of address depends on the story that is being produced, and the target audience. So for example a new package on sport will be less formal and more lade back than a news package about politics. The mode of address will be given on the tone of voice, accent, language complexity and the types of facts provided. In the example I have chosen the mode of address is very formal. This is because the voice over that we hear though out most of the package is from a man with a very posh British accent. Also the tone of voice we hear from him is just a normal and basic voice with no other emotion behind it. By having this it makes the viewers think that the news package is very important and that the news team knows that they are talking about, because as humans we believe things more when they are told to us by a posh man, because we associate them to education. Also at 3:06 we hear the term flat rate payment and at 3:11 we hear the words pension credits. These are examples of complex terminology, which connotes to the viewers that the news package knows what they are talking about and that this story is important due to the complexity of the words. This then makes the viewers pay more attention to the package.

Start at 9:53

Link to studio

This is where a reported who is at another location to the studio is directly talking to the studio, and answering questions that the anchors in the studio have. It can be done live or pre-recorded as live. In my example I have found, we can see at 10:10 the anchor is the studio as "we will go live to our reported now" By saying live it makes it more interesting because whatever is happening is happening right at that moment, which add intensity, which makes it more exciting for the viewers to watch, and it also makes it more engaging, due to the information being given it up to date and fresh. Also at 10:26 we see the reporter standing in Westminster outside parliament. He is standing there because the topic of the report is related to the parliament, so it the location adds authenticity to the report making to more realistic for the viewers. Throughout the report the camera stays in a mid shot the whole way though. This is done because the camera operator did not want to take the viewers attention away from the actual topic of the report. So by the camera staying still it will connote to the viewers that the reporter and news team just wants to focus on the actual report rather than making it look good, with lots of different camera shot. Also because the report is live, it would be very hard to change shot types, due to there just being one camera filming on location.    

Field reporters

This is when a reporter is sort of embedded in the situation or event that they are talking about. They are the main anchor of the news package. The purpose of using a field reported in a new package is so that it is a much more effective and real way to give the viewers information, so that they are interested in the situation much more and believe in the facts that they are given. The anchor in the field report will always dress to suit the environment. So for example in my example at 1:30 we see the anchor, talking and he is wearing a helmet and bullet proof vest. He is wearing this for safety reasons, and also to make the situation and the stuff he is talking about more real for the viewers. Also at 1:32 the anchor is talking about ground bombs and how the soldiers have to be highly vigilant. As he is talking about this he is in front of a solider how is checking out a potential bomb. By doing this it makes the situations even more believable that there are actual ground bomb everywhere, and it also engages the viewers into the package more. Also by reporting next to the situations you are talking about it connotes that you have a very high level of involvement in the topic. The anchor for this is a white middle ages man. He is used because he sorts of represents a figure of a typical solider, which makes him suits the topic and environment he is in. Also because this is from ITV which is a well developed company with lots of money, they can afford to send anchors of two places to report from. You would not typically see a filed reported from cheaper and less developed new stations, due to not having the money to send people.          

Actuality Footage

Is footage that new uses that was filmed by an ordinary person, to show the viewers what happened in an event, such as an earthquake. They use it, because it is the only footage that they have because, the event happened spontaneously, which means that the news crew was not there to get actual professional footage, to show on air. The actuality footage that is used is often always very poor quality and unsteady. The purpose of using this type of footage is again because it is the only footage that they have to use. Also it makes it more real to the viewers a shows the viewers exactly what happened, in the event, making the viewers fell more sympathy for the people effected, than if it was professionally  recorded. The example I have got is from the BBC news on the earthquake that happened in China. The footage goes on for 1:15 seconds and we see many aspects of actuality footage. For example at 0:03 to 0:12 we see CCTV footage of when the earthquake started, and it shows how the people that were affected by the event react to the situations when it hit. At 0:09 we see the CCTV camera begin to shake a lot as the earthquake hits. By showing this it gives the viewers an accurate account of what actually happened and how the people really reacted to the situation. By the viewers seeing this it makes them respond to the situation much more realistically and will be able to feel more sympathetic for the people involved, than if they just heard a news report talk about it and see professional footage that just shows the after meth of the event. Also by using actuality footage it draws in the audience, making them want to keep following the event that is happening, and is a much better style of video to show to inform people on the event.