Editorial Report 9b

This blog post will show how my podcast has changed since the first draft to the second draft after editing and revisiting the project.

Selection from Rough Cut:

Here (it is called original rough cut 2)


Re-edited Selection:

Here (it is called re-edited rough cut 2)

1. How did the content change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version?

        The content changed when I re-edited it because it included an example of the things that would be included in the patient report.  Since I included the examples, not only was it more clear for the audience to understand what kind of things are added to a report of the appointment.  This really helped to validate my claims of the use of logos and ethos in this genre of writing.  I think that the content is being communicated more effectively in the re-edited version because the audience has a better sense of the material that is included on the medical report and why it is an example of the rhetorical strategy of logos and ethos.  

2. How did the form change (even slightly - details matter!) when you re-edited it? Why do you think the form is presenting the content more effectively in the re-edited version?

I think that the form changed just a little bit when I re-edited it because once again, I included a bit more of an emotion behind my voice so that the podcast segment wasn't just a monotone 9 minute drag. I think that the re-edited version related more to the audience so that the connection between the topic, the audience and the author was much stronger. This is an important part of the form for the podcast because you don't want the author to just be rambling on and on about something but not make any connections about the importance of these things in their life and in the lives of the audience.