While script-writing for the first video was underway, the digital team identified a few key visual components for shooting. We even allowed ourselves to start sentences with words like “but” or “so” - which isn’t always the case in more formal publications by the Center. The team adjusted from writing multi-page reports to writing conversational video scripts. The good news is that script writing became easier with every new video in the series. Still, every sentence added or subtracted and every idea introduced was an opportunity to bring up a new “if,” “and” or “but,” and a hole patched in one place seemed to open a new hole somewhere else. Our communications team then made sure we anticipated any common questions or pushback from our audiences, and our digital and social media teams made sure to keep the writing conversational and snappy. The process started with Courtney Kennedy, our director of survey research, writing a thorough answer to the topic question. That involved a lot of whittling down of the initial draft, which was about twice as long.Īt an organization that values thoroughness and collaboration, it took a while to get comfortable with the idea that we wouldn’t be able to explain every caveat in a video intended to be brief and accessible. To give a sense of how much careful editing was required, the final “Methods 101” video script was less than 400 words - about a one-page Word document - and took two minutes and 25 seconds to read. We quickly realized it would be a challenge to find a comfortable balance between brevity and clarity while scripting. (We wanted to focus on our target audience without adding too many ideas or diving too deeply into the weeds.)Īfter the initial brainstorming sessions, we decided that our first video would tackle random sampling - a concept that lies at the heart of all probability-based survey research. From that initial list of ideas, we further narrowed it down to ensure the topics stayed true to the “101” level. With the big picture in mind, a team of methodologists and communications and digital staff came up with 10 to 15 potential videos for the series.
#Energetic vox youtube series
The digital products and platforms that would house the series.Before diving too deeply into the work, we made a few initial decisions, including: Planning a video series takes big-picture planning and dedicated staff time. Taking a cue from publications such as Vox and The Washington Post, we began exploring ways to use scripted footage, B-roll and motion graphics to break down some of the big, overarching themes of survey methodology. For this reason, we decided in 2017 to invest in video as a new distribution tool, with the intent to further democratize access to our research. Video is an especially useful promotional tool on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, and in email newsletters or blog posts - media frequented by our more casual followers. More broadly, it means doing whatever we can to help our readers understand an often dense and nuanced process.Īmid a rise in social media use, we recognized the need to reach a broader audience. That includes making sure our readers have access to our methodology and a window into our thinking. Transparency is a key part of the Center’s mission.
Here’s a closer look at how we distilled the Center’s experience and expertise into this series of four-minute videos. Over the past three years, Pew Research Center has created a series of short videos to make survey research topics and techniques like these more accessible to non-specialists.
But explaining these topics to a general audience calls for a more concise approach. These guys are real engineers that have other businesses going at the same time, that allows them to grow slowly and properly and stay focused on customer service.Ask a survey methodologist to explain random sampling, or how non-probability polls work, and they’ll probably give you a detailed answer. You are right to be skeptical, but check out the Silencers sub-forum to get more answers to your question.Answered better than I could have. I don't own any of their products yet, but I like what I've seen so far and a VOX will be my next purchase. If you have any doubts, I suggest contacting some of the larger distributors like Hansohn Brothers or Capitol Armory to ask their opinion. They are real engineers building a quality product with some rather innovative designs and materials.
In this case however, Energetic Armament is not your typical garage-based FFL cranking out cheap aluminum suppressors. And why would I buy the "strongest can ever" from some unknown company that may not still be in business by time my paperwork is finally approved?I ask people that same question every time someone asks about the latest, greatest $199 suppressor, and use Huntertown Arms as the example of "what not to buy".
0 kommentar(er)
