TASK 4 - One Direction interview with Daisy Wells

One Direction, the biggest band name around at this moment in time in the musical industry. After picking up their first BRIT Award and having number one hit singles in America, they are certainly doing very well for themselves. They have recently beaten the UK band The Beatles, after being the only band from the United Kingdom to have reached a number one in the American chart show. So, these five boys have come a long way from The X Factor, where they first all auditioned seperately. After being turned down and told to go home, the founder and one of the judges on the show, Simon Cowell, decided to put the five boys together and create a band and oh how I bet he is rubbing his hands together now.
Since recently releasing tickets for thier second world tour next year, the boys became millionaires over night. In just England alone, once the tickets were released to all UK fans, the boys made 19 million pounds overnight, all whilst they were sleeping.

However, to put a cloud over the boys sunshine, they are now being sued £630,000 by an American band....also named One Direction. The American band have said that, after the UK boys success in thier country, they feel like anytime anyone says anything about One Direction in America, they will be talking about the UK band and not the American band. They have said that they 'warned' their founder Simon Cowell that if they came to America with the same name, then they would be forced to sue. But Simon Cowell made no change to the name and carried on as normal, and it wasn't until the UK band scooped up that American number one, that the American band have now decided to take legal action.

As a fan of One Direction myself, I was shocked to here that this had happened. However, I did also understand why the American band were sueing the boys over this issue. The 5 UK millionaires, Harry Styles, Louis Tomlinson, Niall Horan, Liam Payne and Zayn Malik, have the help and support of Simon Cowell and were given a record deal even though they did not win The X Factor. However, the American band have had no support and do not have the money to promote themselves. So this money that they may gain will help them in rising in stardom, although I'm not sure people will even like them after being horrible to their favourite 5 British-Irish boys. And so I decided to ask a true One Direction fan, someone who has been there straight from the start and goes to see the boys with her fellow One Dirtection fan friends and scream down arenas and camp in sleeping bags just to catch a glimpse of them or go to a book signing 500 miles away from home. This person is none other than my siser,  Daisy Wells.

- Hello Daisy, I am going to ask you a few questions about the band One Direction and for you to explain your views and opinions on the issue that has been raised about One Direction being sued over having the same name as an American Band, okay?
Yeah okay. (She fidgets on her chair, looking eager to tell her views on the issus and to stick up for the boys that she admires and is totally in love with, as I'm sure any 14 year old girl is at the moment)

- Okay. Firstly, when did your love and obsession for One Direction start?
It started in October 2011, when The X Factor had just started again. Firstly, I saw each of the boys audition seperately on television for their first ever audition. I liked Liam Payne at the time, he was really good looking and he had an amazing voice. All 5 boys made it to the next stage of auditioning, where they performed by themselves in front of just the judges. They were all then called in and told that they weren't going through to boot camp. I was really dissapointed because I was starting to like them and thought that people around my age group would have appreciated them.

-But then they were called back weren't they?
Yeah, Simon Cowell called all five of them back and told them that he was going to put them into Boot camp, but as a band. I was so happy because I had seen all of the other boys auditioning and thought that they were also really good, but together I thought they could have been amazing, and I still got to see Liam Payne! The fan groups started immediately, everyone dedicated their Twitter accounts to update people around the world of what was going on with them and where they could be seen next around the world. Their stardom was growing quickly.

-Although they didn't win The X Factor and only came 3rd, why do you think that they have had such big success and even more so than the winner, Matt cardle?
Third place is a really good place to come in the competition, out of all those thousands of people who auditioned, to come third overall isn't a good shout. But the main reason I think is because they were young, and people were starting to like them even more and so instead of finding the love for them myself, I sort of followed the crowd to begin with because everyone was talking about them and I wanted to be involved in that, so I started to become a fan and stay up to date with where they were and what they were doing. I also think because they were so nice to their fans, even when they were just starting out, that people couldn't help but love them. They always dedicated everything thatr ever happened to them on their fans, and that made us feel special to them.

-So, because of this love that you and millions of other girls around the world have for them, what are your views on the band being sued over having the same name as the American One Direction band?
I think that if the American boys would have complained sooner, when the UK One Direction weren't that famous and were slowly making a name for themselves, then it wouldn't have mattered and it could have been changed, because people wouldn't have become so attached to the name and associating the boys with that name. But I think it was all a game plan to wait until they became really famous and to wait until they came over to America and win that number one single, because that way the American band could get more money out of Simon Cowell and the boys,

-But apparently the American band asked Simon Cowell to change the name before they came out to America?
But they still waited too late. And they never did anything to follow it up when they first asked Simon Cowell. They could have made an issue out of it when the boys started to really become famous, but instead they waited until the boys came to America and were well known around the globe as this amazing boyband and then decided to deliver the killer blow. But I honestly don't think that they have done themselves any favours. The UK girls hate that American band now, saying that they are picking on One Direction when all they want to do is make music to please their fans.

-So leading on to my next question, do you think the American One Direction have ruined their changes of becoming a success by sueing the UK boys such a large amount of money?
Yes I do. If they had complained when the boys were only mildly famous then people wouldn't have minded so much. But they obviously thought that by complaining when they had so much money would mean that they could promotoe themselves with the money given to them and then make a living out of their band. But no one will want to listen to them now. People are angry at them for putting a downer on the boys trip to America and even the American fans are angry at them, saying they are ashamed to be American when people ruin other people's happiness.

-But can you understand why the boys wanted to sue? The UK One Direction have support from Simon Cowell and money coming in from every angle. But these guys created themselves and have no one there to promote them.
No I can't understand it really. If they are that passionate to become a band that is well known and is a huge success then they need to work for it. The UK band were just lucky that they were spotted at having great talent and then being put into a band. But they made that leap to sign up and audition for The X Factor. Those American boys need to stop complaining and get themselves noticed and get an agent and become promoted. That is the way to do it to become a 'real' band. Not complaining over silly things to get money. They need to move over and accept that One Direction will always belong to the UK boys and it is them that needs to change their band name now. Our boys beat them to it.

So after that interview I learnt that One Direction fans will probably all think the same. They are adament to stick behind their boys 100% and are prepared to say and do anything to make sure that they are happy. But they are biased in their opinions and I am sure that if I interviewed fans of the American One Direction, then they would say things which supported the American band and put down the UK band. From my perspective, I think they just need to figure it out between themselves and whatever is decided in court will be and the fans will have to accept it.

Task 3 - One Direction interview

Purpose - The main purpose of this interview was to find out why there was such big controversy about two bands having the same name and what a big fan thought about the UK One Direction band being sued over it. As it is mainly younger people that like One Direction, as it has come across on social networking sights such as Facebook and Twitter, and also there are only ever stories in teenage magazines about the boys and what is happening in their lives, older magazines such as Heat and OK!tend not to have any stories about them as they may feel that people would go off the magazine if it was basing itself around young boys.
So this interview would be likely found in teenage magazines or on programmes which attract these age groups, such as MTV, which also has programmes such as 16 and pregnant and My Sweet 16.


Interview Planning - As I was interviewing my sister I needed to choose a time in which she didn't have any homework to do for school and where I had time outside of college and work. We decided to sit down one evening and do it then.
Firstly, I had to think of the questions that I was going to ask. I had to make sure that they were written so that they were understood by Daisy, the person that I was interviewing, because she was only young and so the questions had to be written in simplier terms than if I was interviweing an older person. This was the only planning I really had to do, apart from getting my research together so that I could structure my questions properly, because Daisy lived with me and so I didn't have to travel anywhere to ask someone the questions and she was willing to be part of my interview because she was such an avid fan of One Direction and was keen to help me with my work.


Structure - As the answers to my questions were going to be written down, I decided to firstly introduce Daisy and ask her how old she is, what she does in her spare time and how long she has been a fan of One Direction and what made her fall in love with them so much. I then decided that I would write this interview as you would see it in a magazine, with the questions being asked in one colour and the answers in another, so that you could tell which was which. I also decided to include pictures of the interview subject. Before I decided on whether or not to include pictures of Daisy, I needed to ask her mum's permission, incase she didn't want Daisy's face being broadcast over the internet.

Preperation - The preperation that I needed to do was to brief Daisy with the questions that I was going to ask her, so that she had a rough idea of what she was going to say as her answers. Although I did explain to her that, although I was writing her answers down, I was going to edit them into short passages so that the answers come across as simple and clear and get straight to the point. I also had to have her consent that what she said was going to be posted online and that there may be people from all over the world that would read my blog.

TASK 3 - Quicken Trust interview

Purpose - The main purpose of this interview was to make people aware of the charity that we were interviewing and making a documentary on. This is the outcome we wanted to achieve and so we thought, as well as the documentary, that we would create an interview with the founders of the charity and place this on Youtube so there were more ways than one for people to find out about The Quicken Trust.
As we had made a documentary on this charity, we decided that we should include the interview into it, so that, again, people could see it in more places than just YouTube once we had finally uploaded it. And so people would mainly see this interview on a television documentary, or it could be made into a documentary film about what they do out there and how they help people in Uganda.
We wanted to inspire people about what these founders of The Quicken Trust do and how they take volunteers out every year so that people can help in the jobs that they do. It is also to explain to people why Uganda has ended up in the poverty stricken way it is in now and how we can help them.

Interview Planning - As we had to travel to the headquarters for the Quicken Trust, which  is situated in Hailsham, we had about 2 weeks emailing both Geoff and Geraldine, the founders of the charity, to organise a date which suited both of us. This was a bit of a struggle as we all had college and they had 2 weeks to spare before they flew out to Uganda and stayed there for 3 months on another project that they were starting. We finally decided on a saturday morning, which we discussed with our work managers, and we were all free. We travelled up there in two cars, as we could all drive, Lauren and I in my car and then Johnny in his car with all of the camera equipment because he had top of the range recording equipment and it took up a lot of space. We needed a place that was well lit and where there was no noise which would interfere with the recording. They decided to take us into their living room as it was hidden away from the main road and it was really quiet, which was perfect. We then had to set up the camera equipment and check the sound settings, which didn't take too long because we were all trained on how to use a camera and check the settings.

Structuring - For the opening of our interview, we asked them to introduce themselves and explain what it is they did within the charity and what the Quicken Trust was. This, we thought, would be a good opening to our documentary and we could easily edit this and have a video of what the Quicken Trust did after this introduction. Once they had done this, we asked them many questions about what they did within the charity and what they got volunteers to do, each question was gradually built up to give an overall description of the charity and what their aim is and where they achieve to see themselves in 5 years time.

Preparation - Before we started the interview we asked each of them to sign a talent release form which showed our tutor that we had their permission to film them in their house and to broadcast everything that they said. We agreed that we would email them the documentary before we put it on YouTube and broadcast it to the college at the end of year show, so that they could listen to it and tell us if we had got all the information right and whether they were okay with themselves being seen on YouTube. We briefed them on the questions that we would be asking them and allowed them time to think of what they were going to say, making them feel relaxed by complimenting their home and asking them questions away from the interview, about their interests and everything. This was a light hearted yet educational interview which contained humour but also inspired and educated people about the charity.

TASK 4 - Sherlock Nudity radio interview

http://youtu.be/00QuwUyYz1Y - This is the link to my Sherlock Nudity interview with Lauren that I have uploaded onto YouTube. 

TASK THREE - SHERLOCK NUDITY INTERVIEW

Purposes - The main purpose of this interview was to find out what other peoples views on The Daily Mail article on the Sherlock nudity were. As we had to do a radio interview of some sort, I thought this would be a good idea because you don't have to see any images for this interview, just to listen to it. 

This would be the type of interview that would be found on a radio station, having being pre recorded and being played back to the audience. Only on some radio stations that have debates like this, so not a radio station like Radio One. More like Radio Two, as they have weekly debates about issues and this could be a good one to bring up. 

Also, on some television programmes which broadcast the news, such as BBC and ITV, they have voiceovers of what people have been recorded saying in interviews, with only a map of where they are talking from being shown to the audience. On YouTube, they only allow you to upload videos, and so for a voice recording you would have to make a small video to take up the time that the interview goes on for. This would be good to show some of the pictures that were being spoken about in The Daily Mail so people can see them and decide if they are really that bad, whilst listening to what someone else from the public has to say about it. They can also then comment on the video and express their views which would  be good for someone who is doing this as part of their assignment as they would have more views to write about.

Interview Planning - I needed to first ask for the permission of the person that I was going to interview. Once I had got this I needed to think of some appropriate questions to ask her, relating to the subject. I really wanted to ask her questions which allowed her to open up and tell me exactly what she thought and so I decided to introduce her to the interview and to get involved with the questions that she was asking and nodding at her answers, so that she wasn't so uptight the whole way through the interview and could relax a bit. 

The next thing that I needed to consider was where I was going to record her, because as it was during college time that I did it, people were constantly walking around and making noise. So I decided to ask if I could book out the radio booth and record inside of that. The walls are soundproof and it gives a nice crisp sound to the audio once it has been recorded. 

I decided to record on my Iphone because it offered me the recording device I needed and it was easy to email to myself once it had been saved so that I could then import this to YouTube and paste the link onto my blog. 

The date and time for the interview was discussed with Lauren, the girl that was being interviewed, and we decided that we would meet on the 16th, which was a Monday, as we both finished college at 1pm and so we could both walk down to the radio booth together. When we started our first recording and listened back to it, we realised that where I had been holding the phone close to me the whole time, you couldn't hear Lauren very well. So we decided to record it again and pass the phone between one another this time and speck clearly into the mouthpiece. When we listened back to it, it sounded much better and we were able to edit the end bit where it had some background noise from me. 

I required Lauren to be honest and truthful in her views on the issue that was raised and to speak clearly and slowly, all of these things I briefed her on before I started recording. 

Structuring - As I briefed Lauren on the questions, I realised that her answers were a considerable length and so I decided to only ask her around 6 main questions because I didn't want the interview to go on for ages and to bore the listener, I wanted them to be intrigued and interested in what Lauren had to say and to learn something from what was being spoken about. 

There was no introduction, it started off by me just asking the questions straight out. She was then given time to answer and then I asked the next question. When the interview had finished I thanked her for her time. I had an overall question which was 'So overall, do you think that the issue was dropped because of the respect that the actors Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman have?' This was the ending question because it explains that the issue was dropped and I wanted to know if she thought this was the reason and if not, why?

Preperation - As I said above, I first asked Lauren if she would mind answering a few questions. I explained to her the issue that I was exploring and the questions that I would be asking, to see if she had any questions or issues about answering these. Also, once we were in the radio booth, I briefed the questions to her so that she wasn't taken by surprise when I started recording and that she had a good idea what she was going to say as her answer. 

Task 2 Research - One Direction being sued over band name

One Direction are a 5 piece British boyband who formed during the X Factor and came 3rd overall. Although they did not win they have done incredibly well all over the world and are currently doing their world tour.

Whilst visiting America, an issue was brought up about the boys having the same band name as another 5 piece boyband from the USA. The US band has stated that One Direction knew that they had the same name but decided to go along with choosing the name because they didn't think that they would ever travel to America because they never anticipated how succesful they would actually become. However, they travelled to America for a month and arrived home last week before travelling straight to Australia for their concert in Sydney.

Once the boys had landed in America, the US One Direction had the right to sue the english band because they were now in their country and making fame out of their name. The US boyband stated that 'the British lads have the likes of Simon Cowell backing them up and supporting their career. We have no one. They can afford to pay us the money that we are asking for and still be successful, this could be our chance to make it.' They also said that the money wasn't the main reason that they are sueing the Bristish boy band. They said that what they do in their band is out of love and passion, and the money will just help them along their way to stardom.

The case is being taken to court, along with Simon Cowell, and are being charged £600,000 in damage costs and also three times the profits made by the boys.

Task 2 research - The Quicken Trust

Quicken Trust was founded as a registered charity in 1996 with no intention of working in Uganda. It started as a support to help develop new UK based charities.

Following a visit to Uganda in 1999 and a further visit in 2000 its focus changed to assisting the community of Kabubbu ~ 'The Forgotten People' ~ in their search for a way out of poverty, destitution, death and despair to self-determination and hope for their future.

They did this by advertsing themselves through schools and colleges and workplaces so as to make themselves known and to inform people about what it is that they do. They take small groups of volunteers out to the village of Kabubbu in Uganda, and set them jobs to do whilst out there. Some jobs may be building houses, building orphanages, teaching children subjects in their schools or going to the local market to buy families essential supplies.
In 2004 it re-registered with the Charity Commissioners (Registered Charity No. 1102474) and as a Trust Company Limited by Guarantee (Registered Company No. 5047081). Their focus is to partner with the lives of those in need.

Among the population there are over 1,500,000 children who have been orphaned because their parents have died of AIDS or HIV. Some have one parent remaining, although in most cases this parent is also ill with AIDS or the HIV virus with only a short amount of life left to live and a large family to bring up and support.

In 1906 in his book 'My African Journey' Winston Churchill called Uganda 'The Pearl of Africa'. And it was. But since then and particularly during the 1960's and 1970's under the regimes of Presidents Idi Amin and Milton Obote the pearl lost its lustre. And it has been struggling to find a new future for itself from those terrible years of devastation.Landlocked Uganda sits across the equator. It is about the same land area as the UK and has a population of over 30,000,000. It is a population racked with AIDS. Tens of thousands of people die from this disease each year and for many years now the country has been recognised as the worldwide epicentre of AIDS.Over 5% of the children in Uganda are living without a future. In Kabubbu alone there are more than 400 impoverished orphans.

Task 2 research - Sherlock Nudity

One of the issues which I decided to investigate and research was the problems that were raised in one of the BBC Sherlock episodes. The episode was called 'A Scandal In Belgravia' and was broadcast on the 1st of January, 2012, at 8:10pm.

The show had Lara Pulver as a special guest and she played Irene Adler. This character turned out to be a dominatrix, one of the reasons why the program caused so much controversy. People thought that, as it was before the watershed (which is anything aired before 9pm) that this kind of career should not be spoken about, as young children watch the program with their parents and families and parents do not want their children asking what a dominatrix is.

Another topic in the episode which people have found offensive is the fact that Lara Pulver was also naked for a full 8 minutes within the episode. Although you did not see anything that could be classed as really bad, parents did not think it was right to see a naked woman strolling around on the screen and saying things which could be classed as sexual.

There is a point, within the first opening seconds of Lara being introduced with no clothes on, straddling Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays the detective Sherlock Holmes.

The main areas of concern were that children were watching before the watershed because parents did not expect anything that was not suitable to be shown. They then knew that if they decided to let their children continue to watch the program after 9pm, then anything that was shown that contained any strong language or sexual references or violence, it was in their own hands and no one could be blamed but themselves.

There was only one newspaper which picked up on the nudity and decided to make a big deal out of it by writing it as their main story for the 2nd of January , 2012. They said that the explicit scenes within Sherlock were 'Shocking' and 'Outrageous'. However, as many people have pointed out, people who didn't really think that the nudity was a big deal, have said that The Daily Mail have contradicted themselves in the article. They have used the pictures of the naked woman in their paper, one of the main issues of the article. The title of a blog called The Media Briefing was, 'Daily Mail illustrates Sherlock nudity outrage...with nudity'.

A BBC spokesman said: "We're delighted with the critical and audience response to the first episode which has been extremely positive. From an average audience of 8.8m, there have been just 59 complaints."

"We had lots of conversations about it and I think we were right in thinking it's a bit of a cheeky show and that just because you're on pre-watershed doesn't mean you have to be dull," Stephenson said.

Lara Pulver has been seen before in the BBC program Spooks. In it she played a masculine MI5 agent , much unlike the role she played in Sherlock. In Spooks she was professional and dedicated to her job, whereas in Sherlock she takes her job as something that she does for fun and to meet people like Sherlock Holmes. She also does favors for people, such as policemen, so that she can ask for favors in return, such as faking her own death.

Another issue that was raised was that the main story line for the episode was that Irene Adler (Lara Pulver) had footage and images of herself whipping another woman. Many hints are given as to who this person is and it didn't take a genius to work out that they were of Kate Middleton, the newest member to the Royal family.

The primary research that I did was to ask people their views and opinions on the episode that was shown and the issues that have arisen from it. I asked members of my family and also the twitter fans of Sherlock, all of whom were more than willing to have their say.

Pulver told The Radio Times: "They give you a self-adhesive bra that sticks to you and ... imagine a sanitary towel made of tan Lycra, but with wire through it so it cups the underneath of you. And Louboutin shoes.

"Paul McGuigan (the director) very sweetly said to me, ’OK, the choice is we spend hours shooting it to avoid seeing straps or we take all that off and shoot it quickly.’

"I thought I couldn’t put myself through being there all day, practically naked anyway, so I might as well get completely naked and get it done in a few hours."

All of the quotes above were from when I was doing my secondary research and looking at websites with existing articles about the nudity issues with Sherlock. I also looked at the Daily Mail article which was printed and distributed for people all over the UK to read.

Light-Hearted, Promoitonal & Entertainment - One Direction on the Alan Carr Show

In this interview, Alan Carr's approach to One Direction is different to any interview that I have previously watched with another host. Firstly, he gives a fun and entertaining introduction to his guests and so sets the mood for what is about to come and what sort of show his is, if anyone hasn't seen it before. He allows the audience to get involved by asking their opinions and allowing them to scream in return.

When One Direction come on stage for the first time, he greets them all with a hug and so sets a friendly mood also, as hugs are seen more friendly than just a handshake, which can be considered as more formal and his show isn't very formal. To prove that it is not a very formal chatr show is, to start with, Alan Carr does not ask them questions striaght away. Instead he pulls out some dolls which have been made and starts to laugh and joke about them and how some of them don't look like them at all. It is very funny and has everyone laughing, even the audience at home. Alan Carr is always saying jokes and making the conversation very light-hearted which will relax the boys and give them confidence in the interview. There is also a dance off at the end between One Direction and Alan Carr, which you never normally see and so it was unique and different.

Alan asks a multiple of questions, both open and closed. A closed question he asked was 'So do you all have houses of your own now?' to which they answered 'Yes'. A closed question is when you ask someone something to which they normally only say yes or no to beacsue there is nothing to elaborate on. However, an open question is when you ask someone a question which they can describe something or give you more detail on a particular topic. An open question that Alan Carr asked during the interview was 'Tell us what the name of your album is about'. to this question One Direction explain and describe their new apartments to Alan and the audience and give a lot of detail about them so the viewers get a good description as to what sort of place they live in. The reason that both open and closed questions are asked is because some questions are more important than others and are what people are really wanting to ask about. For example, the housing question you can't really go into it too much because of security reasons, but the CD is what they have come to promote and so an open question is more suitable so that it can be spoken about in a well explained way so the audience has more insight into it.

The interview starts off with the boys being introduced in a humorous way, and there is music to lift the mood and the audience are allowed to scream and shout, whereas in Interviews such as Piers Morgan's life stories people normally only clap in appreciation, which shows that The Alan Carr Show is aimed at a younger audience because they are having One Direction as the guests which would appeal to the younger audience rather than older people who adults would recognise and grew up with.

Alan Carr then asked each boy a question in turn about things that involved only them so that they all got a mention of something that has happened to them or that they can do. He doesn't linger on one boy for too long to make the others feel like they aren't as popular.

After these questions was the dance off, and so entertainment was given after the questions so that there was that light-hearted feel again and then Alan Carr wound it up whilst dancing and introduced his next guest at the end and so it had a different ending than most chat shows.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=one+direction+on+alan+carr&oq=one+direction+on+alan+carr&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=0l0l0l6254361l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0

Light Hearted, Promotional & Entertainment - Jonathan Ross Show (Daniel Radcliffe, Seal, Noel fielding & Sir David Attenborough

The beginning of the structure for The Jonathan Ross Show was the opening sequences with the music and the animation and the bumpers, to introduce the programme. You are then presented with Jonathan Ross who goes straight on to telling some jokes and adding humor to some stories that have been in the news. It really sets the tone for the programme, making the viewers realise that, although it is a chat show, there will be humor added to the interviews that are going to take place and that it will be a a fun and interesting thing to watch. He takes the mickey out of things that have happened in real life, such as a Chinese airline hiring men that have had operations to become women, and so is mainly aimed at the older generation as its target audience. It is also aired after the water shed and so the audience know that there will be mild references to things that they may not want to show their children if they have any. There was also a showing of a clip from YouTube of an acrobatic dog, and so this will promote the popularity of this video and it is bound to now get more followers.

Jonathan then goes on to introduce his guests one by one, who are all sat back staged and are linked into the main screen in the main studio so that they can talk to Jonathan. He introduces them in a positive light, always saying something nice about then, and having a short talk to them to make them feel at ease.

The first guess was Daniel Radcliffe, who is more commonly known for playing Harry Potter. Firstly they spoke about Harry Potter as a whole and Jonathan asked open questions to Daniel so that he could elaborate on his time as Harry Potter and what it was like when they shot their very last scene. There was also clips shown of the Japanese fan girls to add humor, and stories were told about obsessive fan girls to also add humor into the interview. The audience also laughed which created a light hearted feel. There was also promotional talk because Daniel discusses his new role in the movie 'The Woman in Black' which is coming out in cinemas on the 10th of February 2012. So they are promoting Daniel as an actor who is now doing other things aswell after being involved with Harry Potter for 10 years and so they want to now show him in a different light and promote all of the new things that he is doing, such as talking about a new film he is in also, which they are currently filming, called 'Kill your darlings'. They also discuss his personal life and chat about his girlfriend, so the audience and viewers at home can feel like they are relating to his life as a real person and not someone that he is pretending to be, there are sexual references in this part of the interview and so adds laughter and is nice to know that he can joke about his personal life in front of thousands of people. Both Daniel and Jonathan are relaxed back in their seats and so they both have laid back body language which instantly puts the viewer and audience at ease because they can tell that there is no tension between either of them.
The summary of this interview is Jonathan complimenting Daniel again on his success in Harry Potter and everything else that he is now doing and he is given a round of applause from the audience and Jonathan himself as a way of saying thank you for coming onto the show.

Jonathan introduces all his acts in the same way to make them all feel as comfortable as each other. There was also a time in this interview when he was talking to Sir David Attenborough, that Jonathan bought a couple of penguins out onto the stage so that David could feed them. It was just something that you would never really expect to see, two penguins on a stage in London. And so it really gave the show a feel good mood and had everyone bonding with eachother when all his guests were feeding the penguins.

The main purpose for the interview was to promote everyone's new upcoming programmes, films and songs. But it was also to entertain people so that they would want to watch it again if they really enjoyed it and it made them laugh. He normally has quite well known people on it aswell, people with big fan bases so that it is more likely that he will have a bigger viewing rating.

The wind up of the interview is Jonathan saying 'that's all we have time for this evening' after everyone has finished talking about what they have been asked. He then tells the viewers who will be on his show next week so that everyone knows and then he says good evening, and so ends the programme on a positive note. The structure is mainly interviewing someone and then getting the next guess on and once everyone has been interviewed then they have a music artist that is on the show playing at the end as the credits go across the bottom of the screen.

http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=302560

Promotional - Radio Interview with Andrew Scott

A promotional interview that happened was on the radio station, RTE 2FM which is based in Dublin, Ireland. The interviewee is Andrew Scott, who most recently played Moriarty in the BBC adaption of Sherlock. The listener automatically knows this because the radio presenter announces this in his introduction of Andrew, because it is his most recent piece of work and so many people were raving over his incredible performance that they wanted to get him on their show to congratulate him and promote himself as an actor and Sherlock as a series. There is automatic confidence building in the introduction by the way the newsreader congratulates Andrew on his role and his amazing acting talent.

Instead of going straight on to serious questions about how Andrew got the role, there is humor added beforehand to add that to even more confidence building and to laugh away any tension that either of them may have. They were joking about one of the scenes in Sherlock where Moriarty (Andrew) has to ask a policewoman to slip her hand into his pocket, just so that he can have some chewing gum whilst he is in a courtroom for his own trial after trying to steal the crown jewels. He says it in such a seductive way that people can only but laugh at the sheer awkwardness that was created in that scene. So there is a humorous approach right at the beginning of the interview, which could appeal more to the audience if they know that it isn't going to be totally serious and that there will be some laughter in there.

The radio presenter asks both open and closed questions for Andrew to answer, but even on the closed question, Andrew elaborates on them anyway and so there is never any need to ask why or how because he explains it all in his first answer. The questions are mainly direct questions about Sherlock, so as to make the audience aware that this is the most recent piece of work that Andrew has done, and to promote it as a television series. They also talk about Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays Sherlock, and so they promote the main characters because some of the listeners may have already seen some of their work and be interested to watch Sherlock if they haven't seen it already because their previous work was enjoyable.

Aswell as promoting Sherlock, the radio presenter also tries to promote Andrew as an actor. They discuss past work that he has done such as Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, Dead Bodies and a 3 short films called SeaWall, Chasing Cotards and Silent Things. Two of which you have to purchase online to watch or download and you can watch Silent Things on Youtube. The radio presenter is always cheery, which makes the conversation light hearted between both himself and Andrew and he cracks some jokes in there aswell, so as to further build confidence, as Andrew speaks quite quietly to begin with and then he becomes louder as the interview goes on.

Andrew also gives the listeners a brief description of what it was like playing Moriarty and how he felt about the conpetition he faced because of there being so many previous Moriarty's before him. And so he allows the audience an insight into those emotions that he felt whilst playing Moriarty and it was all his own opinion and it was straight talking, rather than hearing things from another persons mouth and suggesting that it may have been nerve racking for Andrew to play this part. They also talk about his private life, such as where he was originally born and where his family live and where he now lives and how long he has lived there for, and so the listener can feel like they are learning more about the man himself rather than just Moriarty.

There is a real summarisation of this interview in the last few minutes that they are talking. The radio presenter asks Andrew where the listeners and himself can see him next, and Andrew says a number of films and dramas that he is currently doing or has just finished filming. The radio presenter then reads out some texts that were sent in from the listeners, congratulating Andrew on his performance and their speculations as to whether Moriarty is actually dead or not from the last episode in January. He then thanks Andrew for his time and they say a happy farewell to eachother.

Overall the structure was really good. There was an introduction, a well done to Andrew and then questions about his acting, previous acting and his current affairs and what we can see him in next if people have become a fan of him and his work. The radio presenter was a good interviewer as he kept the conversation going and so there were never any silences or him not knowing what to ask next and so it flowed nicely.

http://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradiowebpage.html#!rii=1%3A3168723%3A4678%3A16%2D01%2D2012%3A

Combative News- Shirley Phelps-Roper on Fox News

Definition of Combative - Showing an inclination to dispute or disagree, to willingly want to fight.

Most news stories are quite sophisticated and there is a limit as to what can be said, here in the UK. But there was one interview that became very combative between both the interviewer and the interviewee.

The interview was between Shirley Phelps- Roger and a Fox News reader. The newsreader firstly intorduces the story to the viewers and talks about the rights of people and how we all have free speech, but she goes on to ask us if we think pikiting dead soldiers funerals is going too far. And so she is making the audience get involved with the debate that is going on to make them feel like part of the argument. There is a sort of structure to the way she presents this news story. She introduces it first and then goes on to two different interviews, for and against. The subject that is being focused on are the people of a certain church who believe that all soldiers are gay and that God hates gay people and that we will all be going to hell because we worship the gay people and we worship Jews and we support soldiers going out to war. They believe that everything that happens in this world is God's will and we should just let it be rather than interferring with his work.

The first interview she does is to a father of a dead soldier, whose funeral was protested at by this cult of people. This interview firstly adds sadness to the story, the fact that they have a real witness from what they are doing, and it really sets the mood for what the story is actually about. It is actual evidence of how it is effecting people. In this interview, the newsreader is kind and expresses her condolences to the father who has lost their child. She makes it obvious that she is against the protestors and so it is obvious that it is already quite a bias interview that is going to happen. She also asks why they are going to sue this lady and her community for protesting at the funerals, even though it is obvious why they are doing it. It is an open question which allows them to elaborate on their answer and say more than one reason why they are doing this and to explain themselves clearly. There is also a lawyer present at this interview and so their are currently three people against one, another indication that this news report has already been decided who is on whose team. She also uses really suggestive questions in this interview, such as 'Tell us what lies they have said, because they have said lies haven't they?' This question lets the audiences know that lies have been told and that she wants the interviewees to elaborate on them and explain what these lies were.

There is also some promotional aspects in this interview because they talk about the website where people can go and donate funds for their sons charity, to support other soldiers in the war. There is also a serious approach to this story, there is no humour in anything that is being said and no one is laughing or smiling when they are talking, it is a very serious topic. As said before, there is already a biased view on the story, because the newsreader calls the Shirley a 'crazie'. The main purpose of this news story is to enhance the audiences understanding of the churches purpose and why they do the things that they do. Whether there is a valid reason for it or whether they are all just mentally challenged.

When the news reporter switches over to interview Shirley, she is already against her and her way of doing things, and so emotion is already showed when they are talking because her anger is slowly building by the things that Shirley is saying and she is willing to fight this lady in the things that she is saying and doing because she believes, like so many others, that this is wrong, and so she is allowing the audience to see her emotions clearly. The interview develops further until they are both throwing abuse at one another because they both have such different views. Their body languages are negative, they are both leaning forwards towards one another and both pointing their fingers and yelling. Not many questions are asked by the news reporter, she is mainly saying what she thinks about what Shirley and her family are doing.

At the end of the news report there is no final summary or round up. They are continously yelling and shouting at eachother and there is no way that she is able to summarise it up, so she simply says her last word and then cuts Shirley off. This means that there wasn't a proper structure to the interview. She had an introduction, two interviews for and against, but there was no conclusion to what they had learnt about Shirley and her family.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3PyoUPcobA

Hard News & Investigative - Michael Moore 'Bowling for Columbine'

Definition of Hard news - This is when news deals with serious topics or events that have happened.

An example of an interview that does this is Michael Moore with his documentary film called 'Bowling for Columbine' This is a documentary where the filmmaker Michael Moore looks into why the shooting happened. It could also be classed as investigative news because he investigates into the two shooters and as to why they may have done what they did.

The introduction to Bowling for Columbine was Michael Moore making an account at a bank in America, at which point they give you a free gun, just for signing up for one of their accounts. It starts the film off with people thinking 'Do you think it's a good idea to be handing out guns in a bank?' It gives the audience into the first insight that there is something definately wrong in this town if they hand you over a gun for free. The introduction mainly shows the people of America obsessed with their guns and how they worship the guns and that this is a place where young children grow up, and are constantly seeing guns or hearing about violence in the news involving their own country and so may be influencing them.

Certain towns have certain reputations. In the documentary there was one guy who was put 2nd on a state bomb list just because of the town that he was from and because he owned a book which allowed people to make small bombs. He came from Colorado and this was seen as a state that had a bad reputation for people and their guns. In these towns, Michael Moore interviewed the residents both for and against the guns. One of them was Charles Heston, who lead Pro gun confrences all around America. There were also residents who thought Colorado was a good place to raise their children, even after the Columbine shooting and those who were still scared and affected by that shooting that took place.

Michael Moore didn't really do many interviews, it was mainly him narrating and giving out facts to the audience along with pictures or footage of what people were saying or wars that were going on. There was an example when he used a montage of pictures and captions linked with music soundbites, which were describing how the U.S backed wars and assasinations on people and countries. It was shown because he wanted people to realise that this could be what influenced those two boys to commit the Columbine shoot out. They were two boiys who grew up knowing violence, simply because of the country and town that they grew up in. In 1989, a CIA agent disobeyed orders from Washingtion. He was from Panama. And so because of what he did, they decided to overthrow him by invading Panama, and this resulted in 3,000 casualties of innocent people. The U.S also trained Osama Bin Laden, who later went on the destroy the Twin Towers, making it one of the most well known terror attacks in the world. They also gave millions of dollars to Saddam Hussain, another terroist who they later hanged for terroist attacks. In 1998, America bombs a factory in Sudan because they believe that they are making explosive weapons. They then later find out, after blowing it up, that it was infact a factory making Aspirin. On April 20th, 1999, America dropped the most amount of bombs in one day than ever before in the kosovo war. And so this leads the audience to think that Americans are obsessed with violence, and so like to make everything seem like a threat so that they can cause destruction.

Just one hour after the largest amounts of bombs dropped by the U.S, the Columbine shooting took place, with guns bought from a local store legally and using bullets from K Mart, which have no restricitons as to who buys those bullets. Just 10 days after this shooting, Charlton Heston held a Pro Gun confederation in Colorado, where the shooting had taken place. So still, even after a massive tradegy like the shooting, Americans were still promoting guns to people, therefore inforcing the fact that they are obsessed with guns and violence, and most probably the reason why the shooting took place.

The narration by Michael Moore is done in a serious tone. There is no laughter or light-heartedness in his voice because he is talking about a real life tragedy that took place. However, in some parts his voice does have some sarcasm in it, to show that even he, a fellow American, thinks that some of the people from his country are gun obsessed and he finds it ludicrous. It mainly is narration throughout the whole documentary, apart from interviews done for a specific reason. One of these interviews was to Charlton Heston himself, to ask why he holds his gun conferences to towns who have just had a serious tragedy happen to them. Aswell as the Columbine shooting, there was a young girl of 6 years old who was killed by her classmate, a 6 year old boy, because he brought a gun to school which he had found at his Uncle's house. Just 3 days after this happened, Charles Heston went to the town and held a Pro Gun Conference to the people of that community. It was Michael Moore's turn to then interview him to ask why he did this. He used very suggestive quesitons throughout the interview, such as 'Then why not do this?' He was suggesting that why doesn't Charlton Heston go to other towns to promote guns, rather than to towns who have recently been seriously affected. He also used many open questions such as 'What would you say...?' This way the interviewee can give an open answer and is made to elaborate on their answer instead of giving a simple yes or no.

Before he goes into his main questions though, Michael Moore uses quite confidence building questions so as to make the person whom he is interviewing feel relaxed and comfortable in the environment in which they are and not feel intimidated in any way. However, he also asks serious questions after making them feel comfortable because he wants to get to the point. When Charlton Heston would not answer his questions properly, he placed a picture of the dead 6 year old girl on his front drive, as to make a stand for the fact that she was shot in the face by a gun, a weapon that Charlton Heston promotes.

He summarises his film by pointing out that the Americans think that people such as Marilyn Manson and violent movies are to blame for all the shootings that happen in America. But Michael points out that other countries listen to Marilyn Manson, other countries watch violent movies, and thier killing rates due to guns are miniscule when they are compared with U.S figures. In the UK, 68 people a year are killed due to guns. In Australia it is 65 and in Japan the number is 39, Japan being the home of violent video games. But in America, the amount of people killed each year by guns is 11,127. A much higher figure than other countries. With that, he ends his documentary after stating real facts and figures to the audience, to leave a lasting impression on them.

the purpose of the interviews and the whole film was to enhance the audiences understanding on the subject of the Columbine shooting and all the other shootings that happen in America, and to explain, possibly, why they happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jGtAcDefHg