Different styles of reporting

As our first class assignment, we have to compare the two following videos:

Linking Gaza to the Outside World

&

Barbers' Tales

I am going to start comparing by following the five main points given in class: tone, voice, perspective, pacing, and structure. The tone of New York Times's "Linking Gaza to the Outside World" is more informative, while The Monocle Briefings's "Barbers' Tales" has a lighter tone, more entertainment-driven. The distinction is also made by the song playing in the background of "Barbers' Tales." The reporters are talking via voice off, and do not appear in the video at all, allowing a richer visual to the audience. As for the voice, the man in "Linking Gaza" is more monotone, detached from any emotion, working only on transmitting the information to the viewer. The two reporters' voice in "Barber's Tales," on the other hand, is light, and conveys cheerfulness and intimacy. The perspective is as well quite opposite, as in the first video, the reporter seems to take a very outside and objective position, as the woman in the second video transmits feelings in her documentary, and seems to be in direct relation with her interviewees. The pacing is different as the first video seems more still than the second one. In the first one, the reporter is following the action, whereas in the second video, the reporters are creating the action. Finally, the structures though are comparable, as in both videos, the reporter comments on the images. However, in the first video, the commenting seems more direct than in the second video, where the reporters are "reciting" an article after taking all the required shots. In both cases, the interviewees are showed in their regular "duty," giving more life to both documentaries.

I would tend to take the first video more seriously, due to the tone and perspective, but would enjoy watching the second video more, as it is entertaining as well as informative. The two videos are obviously not treating the same kind of information, which makes it hard to compare on content. The first video really takes the viewer to the heart of the action, but I would tend to remember more the information given in the second video, as the colors and sounds are more developed. As for the reporters, the first one seemed more in the action than in the second video.