The comments I have written on other people’s digital artifacts pitches have been decent, though there is plenty of room for improvement. While I have been okay with linking to resources and commenting their idea, I do need to address the lecture materials more and focus on the lessons learnt in them and apply them to each person’s individual digital artifact.
The first digital artifact I commented on was Tobias’s digital artifact, a podcast called ‘The Future of all Things’. The digital artifact would be a weekly podcast with a discussion between the host and guests, talking about the future, topics like the environment, cryptocurrency, and the economy. The podcast will be from the perspective of the younger generation. My comment brought up two sources, one related to the future of AI development and the other one on the theory about multiverses. Both suggestions were designed as potential topics to discuss on the podcast and were related to the screening we watched in BCM 325. I also praised how his notes will be shown on the podcast as a way to give a glimpse into the process of making a product. I believe that I did a good job, but I could have commented more on the planning stages, more links and resources to the lecture materials, and focus more on the theories and ideas they focus on.
The second comment was on Kara’s ‘The Pitch‘. Her digital artifact is on the future of sustainable fashion and how online retailers change for more ethical options. My comment focused on how detailed her schedule was and how well it was planned, allowing time for her to take on board the feedback and implement it into her product. I only gave one resource, talking about alternative materials for clothing, but none others. In the future, I should provide more resources with more utility for the user. I also brought up the issue with sweat shops, but I was unable to provide a link, which I should have done and need to do in the future. I also brought up the advantages of using Youtube as a platform to place her content and how it will reach her target audience. I was unable to link to any concepts or resources in the lectures, which is something I need to improve upon.
The third comment was on Elissa’s ‘BCM 325 Digital Artifact Pitch’. Her digital artifact is focused on the future of sports media, in particular the Olympics, and how it will this year and in the next 20 years. In my comment, I talked about how the comparisons between the past Olympics to view how it could possibly change in the future is a good idea. Unfortunately, I didn’t connect it to the lessons learned in the lectures and the reading, in the future I should reconnect these ideas to the lecture. I connected two resources for a women’s sports-only fox channel in the conversation around the attention paid to women’s sports and the future of sports broadcasting and how it has changed throughout the years. I also commented on how detailed and efficient her planning was, allowing for time to implement changes based on the feedback and the utility for sports fans like myself and even casual fans that watch the Olympics. Once again, I could not connect the lecture materials and lesson learned to her digital artifact or my resources.
Though I believe I have done a good job with the comments, in terms of resources shared and their planning structure. What I need to do is take the lessons learned in the lecture and the materials to be included in the comments. Also discussing the utility of their project and the platform they use to share their product to the masses.