In the politics genre, the transcript about Hillary Clinton explained Clinton's plan to wipe out AIDS in today's generation. The entire transcript was developed with interviews and comments from the hosts, byline, and Mrs.Clinton herself. This is completely different to how my own transcript is written. My interviews are not continuous, and each interviewee not only answered once, but they all gave input to a different question. I also noticed that compared to this essay transcript, mine went on and on in the introduction and between interviews.
"Last year, 1.7 million people around the world died of AIDS. The U.S. government wants to make that number zero. Today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unveiled what she calls a blueprint for achieving a generation free of AIDS. But as NPR's Richard Knox reports, the plan leaves a lot of big questions unanswered." (Introduction to Clinton Reveals Blueprint For An 'AIDS-Free Generation') The content was different overall in regards to information and written style.
"Last year, 1.7 million people around the world died of AIDS. The U.S. government wants to make that number zero. Today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unveiled what she calls a blueprint for achieving a generation free of AIDS. But as NPR's Richard Knox reports, the plan leaves a lot of big questions unanswered." (Introduction to Clinton Reveals Blueprint For An 'AIDS-Free Generation') The content was different overall in regards to information and written style.
NPR radio's "College Football: Pro and Con(servative) Views" transcript was much more similar to my own than the last. The major similarity is the way it was written, not a lot of interview mentions, unlike the transcript for Hillary Clinton's that was almost entirely dialogue.
There are some minor differences, but are acceptable. Our topics are distinct and the perspective is more of a first-person kind in their transcript, like an editorial. For example this line:
"Yes, yes - I know college games can be entertaining, and there's loyalty and tailgating, but wherever fans are, give them a choice, they'll gravitate toward the best."(College Football: Pro and Con(servatove) Views, stanza 9)
After comparing my draft to the published NPR radio articles, I understand how transcripts can vary from genre to genre depending on how important opinions and what the discussion is focused on. When it comes to public figures like Hillary Clinton, interviewing them is a huge plus, and therefore, more dialogue. In terms of sports, adding public input is more of a choice, even though it adds credibility to your issue. Engaging with people holds onto the interest of the audience in both transcripts. I want to ask my interviewees more about their opinions and experiences, fix unnecessarily long paragraphs and rewrite my introduction to hook the audience a bit more.
There are some minor differences, but are acceptable. Our topics are distinct and the perspective is more of a first-person kind in their transcript, like an editorial. For example this line:
"Yes, yes - I know college games can be entertaining, and there's loyalty and tailgating, but wherever fans are, give them a choice, they'll gravitate toward the best."(College Football: Pro and Con(servatove) Views, stanza 9)
After comparing my draft to the published NPR radio articles, I understand how transcripts can vary from genre to genre depending on how important opinions and what the discussion is focused on. When it comes to public figures like Hillary Clinton, interviewing them is a huge plus, and therefore, more dialogue. In terms of sports, adding public input is more of a choice, even though it adds credibility to your issue. Engaging with people holds onto the interest of the audience in both transcripts. I want to ask my interviewees more about their opinions and experiences, fix unnecessarily long paragraphs and rewrite my introduction to hook the audience a bit more.