I was drawn to this piece because of its topic; I am a teenage girl that is prone to the so-called “media multitasking.” Min humorously introduces this piece with a personal reflection on her homework station, which is filled with technological distractions. (Great use of a sound clip from “Dancing with the Stars,” by the way.) The piece has a great flow to it, presenting multiple interviewees who have a variety of viewpoints. Balance is something that some journalists forget to achieve, but Min kept the debate multi-sided. "Generation M" is extremely relatable because almost everyone uses some form of technology throughout their day; therefore, it leads to personal reflection. Is my system of watching Jersey Shore while doing my calculus homework really effective? It’s something I should probably think about!

I began listening to this piece with no outside knowledge of the DREAM Act, so I was very thankful that the narrator summarized the legislation during the introduction of the radio piece. However, the summary was surface level, and I finished listening to the piece without a full understanding of the act. When the narrator began listing the effects the DREAM Act would have, the audio faded out into interview discussions about the effects. This sounded cool, but the interviews were not clear enough. I think this piece of legislation could have a significant impact on the lives of undocumented students, and I think the significance was not underscored well enough in the piece. Organization felt choppy, but I understand what the producer was aiming for. It was a neat idea to have the necessary qualifications for DREAM Act participants listed out followed by Carlos explaining how he fulfilled each requirement. This may seem like a lot of criticism, but I thought the piece was good; the topic is just so important, that listeners need to leave fully aware of the DREAM Act and what it could mean for undocumented students. This could’ve been fulfilled with more narration in the transitions.

Iris SanGiovanni sets out to disprove the common stereotype of homeless people, who are usually unfairly characterized as dirty, unmotivated, and/or wasteful. I think it is a relevant issue, because a lot of misunderstanding exists regarding homelessness. As Iris says, there truly is no single mold that homeless people fit into. They come to the streets from different backgrounds with different reasons for becoming homeless. Because the narrator made connections to her own life as a teenage girl dealing with materialism, I think the piece seemed stronger and more mature. Be cautious of talking too fast during narration, though. Plus, there’s no need to include the recorded questions from an interview if you have already introduced the topic in narration. Overall, both the narrator and interviewee are well-spoken, and the piece brings up important issues that deserve consideration. Iris’ father concludes that, “We’re all one of two bad happenings away from being homeless.” It certainly is something for all of us to think about.

Hosts Devon Dennison and Zoe Sheinkopf have created a fun podcast discussing irrational and rational fears. I was drawn to this piece because I have an irrational fear of coins. I ask cashiers to keep them. I avoid them and when I have to touch them, I wash my hands immediately afterwards. I think the piece was interesting and relatable. As seen in the interviews, a lot of people have irrational fears, at least of something, even not marrying Beyonce! Without introduction, the piece dives into a story of a young woman “irrationally” afraid of gnomes after a family prank gone bad. Using a story as an introduction effectively hooked listeners right off the bat. The radio piece has a casual feel, containing ample commentary from the two giggly hosts. I think it could’ve been condensed, though. A couple of the conversations between the hosts seemed overextended. All in all, it was an interesting and fun piece.

“Scare Those Ghosts Away” discusses an original topic, derived from the hardships of the narrator’s father and his family. The topic is interesting, but not everyone is familiar with the Sino-Japanese wars. Yumei did a great job of providing background information on the conflict, so that no listeners were lost. This is really important. I also really liked how the same music clip was used throughout to separate the piece into segments. The other background noises, however, were not as effective. I couldn’t identify what sounds were playing behind Yumei’s narration, but it didn’t add to the piece. It was distracting and I had a hard time focusing on the narration. The students selected from the United World College were well spoken, but after they shared their differing educational experiences, I would’ve liked to see more of an analysis from the Yumei. What does this disparity mean? The girl from Japan said she was taught history from a teacher with an anti-Japanese bias. I thought this fact was fascinating, but the narrator did not discuss it any further. It was a great idea for a topic, but tell listeners why they should care. There’s an educational disparity…so what?

This piece caught my attention through its description. “Seven can be a very lucky number for some people. Not so much for others!” I was driven to listen because I wondered who was rejected from what seven times over. When it became clear that the topic was college admissions, I was immediately hooked. As an incoming senior in high school, I am beginning to think about college applications; I have narrowed down my school choices and begun drafting my personal essay. The topic of the radio piece fascinated me. What does someone do when they are denied from every college to which they applied? The female narrator’s introduction clearly approached this unfathomable dilemma, but the piece faded fast. The story seemed out of order, with awkward pauses throughout and an introduction of Will, the college applicant, found almost a minute into the piece. This story will interest listeners, but rearranging Will’s narration will get them hooked faster. I would begin by introducing Will to listeners, making it clear that he was rejected from every college to which he applied, and relating his reaction to this. Reorganizing will pick up the pace of the piece, which is currently slower than desired. The narrator is rarely seen throughout, and I think that if her questions were replaced with narrational transitions, this piece would’ve flowed much nicer. This means replacing some of Will’s answers with a more concise summary from the narrator. Her voice is energetic and engaging, which is a contrast to Will’s. The conclusion is great. I like that Will addressed what his next options were, and that the narrator left listeners with a final moral of the story: “the importance of trying, even if failure happens.”