After watching this podcast, I have decided that it has several good and bad aspects. First, things I liked. I liked the place chosen for the podcast. I liked the topic and the arguments during the discussion. I love discussions on topics and I found it very thorough. I also enjoyed the atmosphere chosen to film the podcast in. I know for a fact that, if there was anything going on in the background, I would not have paid any attention to the podcast. I will need to remember this when the time comes for my podcast.
Second, things I did not like. I did not like the fact that not everyone contributed equally. In my opinion, you cannot have a good debate without equal participation. I did not like the pace of the debate either. I understand that a podcast must have some form of a script so that people do not get off topic or accidentally say someone's argument, but it seemed that too often, the people were reading from the paper in front of them, instead of speaking to one another. I feel like it either should have been practiced more, or the papers should have had short notes on them to be used as a reminder. It created an obvious tension in the conversation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment