Peer Perspectives: Decoding the BCM241 D.A Pitches I Critiqued

This week, I was tasked with reviewing and providing feedback to a couple of my fellow BCM241 peers. This involved accessing their blogs, watching their 2-minute video pitch, and reading the accompanying contextual blog post. I looked over both Katie and Zeke's pitches and submitted some feedback to help them better meet the assignment marking criteria.

Starting with Katie, my experience viewing her D.A. pitch was wonderful. Overall her video and post were very strong. The page was aesthetically pleasing, and the theme was consistent throughout her video and accompanying image resources. Her video was easy to watch, covered important information, and included references throughout.

Here’s what I wrote to Katie about her pitch:

I was thoroughly impressed with Katie existing research, but found the article "Analysis of TikTok’s Success Based on Its Algorithm Mechanism” by Yuhang Zhao (Zhao, 2020). This explores TikTok's growing popularity as a platform and the micro-influencer movement, where creators only need a smartphone to succeed.

Moving onto Zeke's post, which I found difficult to critique. I have known Zeke for a few years, which made highlighting issues with his D.A. pitch tricky. This was even more challenging when he gave me such a glowing review of my pitch.

After reviewing Zeke's post alongside the BCM241 AT1 marking criteria, I couldn't help but feel a sense of unmet expectations. Zeke's has showcased impressive content over the years in BCM. However, this wasn't reflected in his current pitch. I noticed the 2-minute video link needed to be added to the blog, and there were references to some weekly readings in the reference list that needed to be integrated into the post itself. It left me uncertain whether these references were intended for the video pitch or the written contextual blog post. Here's what I wrote for Zeke:

After reading Zeke's post, It was clear he had identified a niche to investigate solely from the 250-word contextual report. However, I struggled to determine what his D.A. actually was. From an ethical standpoint, I found it challenging to provide this criticism due to an existing friendship; however, as a researcher, I have ethical and moral obligations to ensure my recounts are accurate and not influenced by emotions (Mavrogenis, et al., 2020) & (Moore, 2023a). I recommended a text delving into Zeke's chosen niche, which explores YouTube reviews of popular cultural items (Jaakkola, 2018).

Overall, I enjoyed reviewing my peer's blog posts. It allowed me to view the pitch from different perspectives. Using autoethnographic skills such as Data Gathering, Background Research, Analysing Data and identifying any ethical issues such as unconscious biases allowed me to identify areas I can improve on in future blog posts, as well as confirmation that I'm on the right track in certain areas (Moore, 2023b). Katie's pitch showed me how vital a consistent aesthetic theme is, and after this reflection, I will execute in my future posts (Anderson 2006).

Last Updated: 17/08/2023 @ 2:32pm