ANALYSIS OF FOCUS GROUP

(Featuring: Luke Gyesi-Appiah, Amanda Stafford, Anna Garcia, Amey Perry, Charlie Rayns, Charlotte Bennett)

POSTER

1) What were your first impressions?• The group really liked the poster and thought it

was very successful• Something of a popular topic was our title,

‘Fatual’. Members of the group thought this was a clever pun and thought it was very effective

• They also really liked the focal image of the burger and the use of newspaper within it as it reinforces the theme of government health advice and the ever changing beliefs

• All members also really liked the tag line and thought it completely resonated with the themes of our documentary

Continued… I think that something we could have improved on was

utilizing our tag line and placing it in our other products. For example, it could have appeared at the beginning of our montage during the documentary. This therefore would have established a better brand identity and linked the products more successfully. The tagline also creates a sense of enigma for the audience due to the rhetorical question and immediately grabs the attention of the audience, especially the secondary audience who are fox thinkers and do not respond well to a lot of copy

Mrs. Bennett also thought the photography was very effective and created a cinematic and filmic style to the poster

2) Did it give you the right amount of information? All of the group thought that it did

give the right amount of information, while still catching the attention of the audience, which is what we aimed to do

Due to the tag line, it gave an insight into the documentary without revealing too much

3) What did you think about the font, colour and image? Mrs. Bennett mentioned the fact that she liked the burger as it looked

‘nasty’ and not appetizing, to connote the revolting effects fat has on the body. This made it easy for the passive and active audience to realize the harsh consequences eating unhealthy can have on the body. Charlie, who is in our secondary target audience and therefore more passive also picked up on this to suggest that he been sensitized to the ‘nastiness’ of burgers. Thus, the more he is given access to this idea of burgers being perceived as grotesque and bad for you, the more we avoid it in aspects of our life. Charlie would have therefore liked this image because this is what he is used to

The audience thought the use of white font was also very effective as it stood out from the background and caught their attention. It also contributes to the brand identity as the font is white in our documentary which makes the campaign more cohesive

Our actor choice, by using a teacher who is in the suit also connotes the fact that everyone eats unhealthy, even if they are sophisticated which creates personal identity with the audience

4) Is there anything that we could have improved on? A clear point that we have established as something to

improve on is the cohesiveness of the campaign regarding the poster and radio relating to the documentary. For example, due to the shallow depth of field, creative font and colour, it gave the poster an ‘auteur’ style, similar to the radio which worked together to create a filmic and cinematic products. However, this cohesiveness was lost as the documentary lacked real cinematic style and creativity. Therefore, in some respects, the ancillary tasks were more successful. Thus, the consistency of the brand is not followed through in the documentary as it is something that you would see on TV, for example on Channel 4, like one of our group members said, instead of in independent cinemas.

RADIO AD

FEEDBACK

The focus group overall really enjoyed the radio advert and thought it was a very effective product. We were very happy with our response due to the fact that sound is not a visual medium and is therefore a very difficult method of attracting the audience. However, I think that we used sound to successfully target the audience and advertise our documentary.

1) What were your first impressions? Luke liked the opening ‘mish-mash of voices’, probably as it

gave him the gratifications of entertainment and information. He could have perhaps really liked this element to the radio advert as he is a fox thinker, being in our secondary audience, and therefore appreciates something with pace and interest to quickly attract his attention.

Amy would have liked to see a gap between the opening vocal montage and the main voiceover, as it was perhaps too intense without a gap.

Mrs Bennett would have liked to see more cohesion between the radio ad and the poster with the documentary. She found the radio ad and poster to be more suited to our sophisticated audience, as they satisfy Maslow’s highest need for creativity due to the engagement of the audience, especially as the music is more creative and powerful.

2) Did you feel like it was an appropriate length to keep you engaged the whole way through? Anna said that she was hooked from the

beginning, probably as the montage gave her the gratification of personal identity, as she felt that she could relate the confusion portrayed by the headlines.

Mrs Bennett would have liked to see the tagline in order to create a better brand identity. It would have also given the active audience an intellectual pleasure of an enigma to solve if it was at the end of the advert. This would have perhaps further encouraged them to watch the documentary

3) Would it catch you attention if you heard it on the way to work?

Mrs Stafford said yes as she though that it sounded professional. This coming from a sophisticated audience shows that we pitched it right, and chose the right tone for our documentary.

They all agreed that they could relate and image it to a real life context.

4) Do you think the tone was effective and appropriate? All agreed that yes, the tone was

appropriate. Mrs Bennett reiterated her point

about the cohesiveness between the poster and radio and created by the dramatic and cinematic tone, which is lacking with the documentary. She found the radio ad to be much more sophisticated. Therefore this is something which we could have definitely improved upon.

5) Do you think that it gave the right amount of information about the film? Luke said yes, as it was not

overloaded with information which would have caused even a sophisticated audience to switch off due to sensory overload.

Mrs Bennett liked the excerpts from the documentary, as it gave her the gratification of information, without giving too much of the narrative away.

6) Were the clips from the interviews appropriate for the radio?

Everyone agreed that yes, the clips were appropriate this was because it did not reveal too much information – if we had, then it would make her think that she wouldn’t need to watch it. There is just enough to grab the audience’s attention, as it sparks the need to fulfil the gratifications of entertainment and information by watching it.

7) What do you think we could have improved on? Is there anything you would have liked to have heard?

Everyone would have liked to have heard the tagline, and would have liked it to be slowed down a bit as they felt that it was too intense. It was probably a lot to process – which creates sensory bombardment considering it is only audible.

Charlie also said that he liked the ‘64%’ headline being separate, as it made it more dramatic.

An active audience member Something very important to note is the fact

that there was one sophisticated audience member therefore who stated ideas that the other group members did not think of. However, they all agreed with the sophisticated ideas. This therefore links to the two step flow model theory where a sophisticated individual/ authority as an active audience produces their own opinions and ideas which are then passed onto the more passive audience.

Who is our target audience? PRIMARY  * 24-35 year olds  * B income bracket  * Any race/gender/sexuality  * Liberal Opinions (Mosaic group)  * Striver, Experiencer, Innovator,

Thinker (VAL types)  * The Reformer, The Explorer, The

Succeeder (Young and Rubicam) 

From our focus group we can confirm that this was the correct group of people to focus on, as they all had very positive feedback, so much so that they could even offer criticism of what else they would have liked to see from the product, ie. more sophistication in the editing of the documentary.

They were more satisfied with the ancillary tasks of the poster and radio ad, which they found to be more sophisticated products, with a greater brand identity across them, which lacked when it came to the documentary.

Due to their sophistication, they were able to understand the narrative of the product, and could relate to the topic of confusing government health advice. 

One said that they could imagine hearing the radio advert in the car, which was very positive feedback, and reflects that it would be broadcasted on the type of channel which they would listen to. 

As we targeted diverse minds such as Experiencers and The Explorers, we seem to have satisfied Maslow’s highest need for new knowledge, through the challenging topic of contradicting previously accepted advice. 

Perhaps we made the income bracket too specific – in hindsight the documentary could relate to a much larger multitude of classes due to the worldly topic, and the fact that it affects everyone.

Secondary target audience SECONDARY AUDIENCE  * 16-19 year olds  * E income bracket  * Any race/gender/sexuality  * Striver, Experiencer, Innovator,

Thinker (VAL types)  * The Reformer, The Explorer, The

Succeeder (Young and Rubicam)

We chose a sophisticated group of this target audience to interview for our focus group, and therefore arguably did not present an accurate depiction of how the whole group might react. However, those who we did interview enjoyed the topic and found it interesting, perhaps due to their maturity and sophistication for their age. 

The narrative of the poster seemed to be a bit more lost on them than with the older audience. We tried to portray the idea of a man in a suit overwhelmed by contradicting advice about the simple act of eating a burger, the suit representing how the topic affects everyone, however our secondary audience seemed to only see a man eating a burger filled with newspaper headlines, reflecting their age. This is a reflection on the fact that we should have made the concept of the poster more balanced between targeting our primary and secondary audience, but also that perhaps this secondary audience was too young to fully grasp the main themes of our products.

We based our decisions on previous media knowledge, and we think that we made educated decisions on our target audience, as most of it was accurate. We struggled a little with the MOSAIC groups and how they relate to media choices, however I think that Liberal Opinions was the best choice.