Analysis of constraints

Legal: Health and safety

Negatives

Before any filming I had to fill in a risk assessment sheet, in this sheet I wrote down all the
potential risks, and then wrote ways that I could minimise those risks. The negatives of this
was that before I could complete the risk assessment sheet I had to see the location first so I
can see the real risks and then the potential risks, so it was some ways time consuming.
Other ways that this could have been a constraint to my work, was if I never completed
these risk assessments, and something happened; I could have been sued a potential
imprisoned.

Positives

The positive aspects of completing a risk assessment before filming at any location is that I
already know all the risk to me and my crew so I would follow the ways that I sated in my
risk assessment to minimise the risks. Also if anyone does get hurt I would not be blamed
because I would have shown my crew the risk assessment and anything they do has have
nothing to with me.

Legal: Copyright

Copyright is receiving the rights to show another broadcaster, company or persons footage.
In my budget I explained copyright royalty payments where I would pay the owner of the
footage that I wanted to show in my documentary.

It protects the copyright owner’s work and the investment made to produce it – meaning…

– the author of original literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work

– the investor in sound recordings, films, TV, radio, cable

The copyright owner can sell the copyright or give someone else a ‘licence’ to use it
(perhaps dictating conditions of use)

The work is protected from the moment the following are applied:© name and date of
publication.
Negatives

In my documentary I showed a lot of archive footage that I did not pay royalties for, this
would have resulted in me being heavily fined by the owner of the footage.

This would also affect my documentary because I would be able to show any archive
footage or cutaways shots which would have affected my grade. Also I exceed the number
of archive footage that I put in my budget and had this budget been real I would not have
been able to complete my documentary.

Positives

The main positives of this are that this production was only a school production, and won’t
be aired by the BBC, so I would not have to worry about copyright. Also using the archive
footage, or other footage that I gained without getting permission helped my documentary
because I was able to get my point across better using the archive, it also gave me a way to
entertain my audience.

But there were some information that I obtained by asking permission for example the
graphic that I had on what the FA’s aims are, I received the permission from the FA to use
that after the declined my request to film inside Wembley stadium. But in the future I
understand that copyright is something that I have to take into account.

Legal: Libel

An action that lowers someone in the estimation of ‘right thinking people’ / defamation

• The right to protection of a person’s REPUTATION

Libel is usually

• broadcast

• published

• generally disseminated over a ‘wide’ area

• Slander is usually

• spoken to a small, personal audience

Negatives

Libel is when you state something false about someone who is quoted then goes on air
(defamation) or it was published which then means that you are tarnishing someone’s
reputation. In my documentary I did not do this, what I did do is ask questions such as “let’s
see if the FA’s changes have actually worked”, so I would not have to worry about this.

On the other hand if I had said that Sepp Blatter (FIFA president) were against England in the
world cup and that’s why he never allowed Lampards goal and I made up a quote to back
this I could potential be sued heavily by FIFA for quoting false information about them.

Positives

The positives that I can take from this are that in my documentary I did not try and ruin
anyone’s reputation, and also did not show false information. What did talk about in my
documentary was mainly to see what the FA have done after the world cup and are they
doing to ensure more young English players are getting their chances at top clubs. Also
another positive is the fact that this is only a school documentary and will not be shown on
the BBC, so if I did say or shown false information about someone I think it would not be a
big deal. Also if I or someone who was in my vox pop or interview said something that could
be done for defamation, our argument would be the fact that everyone has the freedom of
speech.

• freedom of expression

• free and proper administration of justice (courts)

• right of Parliamentarians to speak freely at Westminster

Legal: Data protection

The purpose of the Act is to protect the rights of the individual about whom data is
obtained, stored, processed or supplied.

Negatives

The purpose of the Act is to protect the rights of the individual about whom data is
obtained, stored, processed or supplied. In my documentary I accidently realised
confidential information about people on my blog which is a site that can be accused by
anyone in the world.

The information that I realised was people email addresses when I was posting on my blog
emails to and from my contributors. Also I am not allowed to keep anyone’s information
after they have contributed in my documentary because I could receive a £5,000 fine if I
disclose it without their consent.
Positives

Showing people’s emails could be a positive because I was able to show my teachers and
the examiner that the people who wrote my email are actual real and not made up.
Although my contributors and crews emails addresses are on my blog, I have not personal
withheld any of their information and have destroyed it by deleting them. So if someone
was to go into my email address they will not find any of my contributor’s emails addresses
so they will not be harassed.

Legal and ethical: race and ethnicity

This is the legal procedures I did or did not follow when filming my documentary, and also
did me or did anyone in my documentary discriminate against any race, gender or culture.

Negatives

In my documentary I was not in anyway offensive to any race or ethnicity, so I did not set
out to be discriminative in anyway. But ways that I could have been discriminative would be
if I constantly said in my documentary that foreign players were ruining the English leagues.
Or if I was to pin pointed out specific nationalities and said that they are bringing an
element of negativity to English leagues.

One negative to my documentary that I did commit could be the fact that I did not talk
about the female game and the problems that they face, because in my documentary did
not once talk about women’s football or have any women contributors. The reason for this
being that mainly I felt that I would not be able to strike both topics fairly in terms of
explaining them, and this was also a decision that I made before I went into production.

Positives

Positives in my documentary was that there was no ethical decimation in my documentary,

but what I did do is that I talked about different nationalities, for example one of my
questions in my vox pop was “what do foreign players bring to English leagues”. This was a
question that was open for the public to answer how they wanted, but if anyone who a ask
that question to answered in a discriminative way I would simply edit out because I want my
documentary to appeal to all ethical groups. Also the questions that I asked my contributors
were all mainly leading questions, leading to a positive answer and not discriminative. An
example of this was the question that I asked “what do foreign players bring to English
leagues” and also the responses that I received were all positive ones.
Legal and ethical – privacy

To ensure that broadcasters avoid any unwarranted infringement of privacy in programmes,

legitimate expectations of privacy will vary the extent to which it is in the public domain (if at all) and
whether the individual concerned is already in the public eye.

There may be circumstances where people can reasonably expect privacy even in a public place.

Negatives
The main negatives with legal procedures is that I did not get everyone’s permission when I
filmed at a location, because there were people’s faces in the background when filming
interviews, vox pops or presenters piece to camera. And an example of this could be seen
mainly in my vox pops specifically at White Hart Lane when Tottenham Hotspurs were
playing AC Milan and there was a mass crowd walking about waiting for kick off. The people
whose faces appear in my documentary might not want their face shown. And they can start
a legal case against me if they want.

Other ways that my documentary can suffer heavily because of this would be if I was order
to take out the scenes where random people from the general public faces where shown.
That would be very detrimental to my documentary as it would be incomplete.

Positives
The positives of showing my shots with people face in them is that if I was to blur them out
which is another solution that I could use, is that I feel that it would ruin my shots when
watching them. Also this documentary is only a school production and will not be aired by
the BBC to a global audience. So this would not be that bad as supposed to if it was being
shown on the BBC.

The main reason why I did not get the blessing of everyone in my documentary that was a
member of the general public was because I would not be able to ask everyone and it would
be very time consuming. A similar tactic is used by professional companies mainly news
companies such as BBC, Sky and ITV news as they don’t show peoples face when they are
talking about aspects such as population, the mainly show the back off people heads
because they can’t get everyone’s approval for there face to be shown.
Project specific - Budget
My budget was a £5,000 grid where I filled in, and had to consider specific aspects such as crew and
royalties. I also I had to list equipment which I would use in different production stages.

Here are some of the things that I had to include:

Pre production

 location recci
 stationary
 communication- internet & phone cost

Production

 DV camera
 Dolly
 Tripod
 Boom microphone

Post production

 Voice over artists

 CD’s
 Apple Mac
 I – movie
I also had to take some of the money that I had and save it for a contingency plan (£500) this
money I would save in case anything went wrong, during my production.

Negatives
During the course of my production (all stages) I did not keep to my budget and I regularly
exceeded the amount of times I would use a specific equipment or filming day’s where I
would have to assemble my cast and crew. Specifically in my pre production I mainly
exceeded the internet use as you can see on my budget it states that I would only use the
internet only four times and this was exceeded regularly.

In my production stage the aspects of my budget that I exceeded mainly included the filming
days where I booked out the DV camera, tripod and also microphones. And on my budget I
stated that I would use this equipment only a few times.

In post production I overused the Apple Macintosh and also the I movie programme, the I
movie programme was not a problem because it came with the Apple Mac, and I stated that
I would use the Apple mac on only one occasion because of the cost to rent it out.
Ultimately if had to keep to this budget I would not be able to complete my documentary
because the costs would be too much and I would not be able to use all of the equipment as
much times as I wanted.

Positives
The positives aspects of my budget would be that this budget was not real and only made
up, since this budget was not real I would be able to use the equipment stated on my
budget more times than stated on my budget. But there are aspects of my budget that I did
keep to in the different production stages.

In my pre production stage I did not lose any money when calling people because I was able
to use my mobile phone, and also stationary was not at any cost to me as I already owned
all of the different stationary stated on my budget.

In production the equipment that I did not overused or use at all was the dolly I would have
saved money on this because I did not use a dolly throughout my documentary. Also when
creating my documentary I used only two tapes which is the exact number stated on my
budget, I would also save money on equipment such as red head set and lighting as I did not
use them.

In post production the items and equipment that I keep the same in terms of using them
were the amount of times that I used a CD and the number of times that I burned one I kept
the same. The fact that I overused most of these items and equipment throughout the
production stage I feel that my contingency plan would be able to cover for the majority of
the equipment that I overused or exceeded the amount of times that I used tem, the only
equipment exempt being the Apple mac. Ultimately I think this budget was a good learning
experience and the next time I do use it I would be able to keep to my budget better.
Project specific - Technology

Negatives
Throughout my production there were not any negatives in regards to equipment, I was
able to use the equipment that was available to me as many times as I needed. But some
negatives that I could point out would be that fact that the budget that we had was not big
enough i.e. meaning if I was able to add more professional equipment, such as a torch light
to film at night.

Or if there were more boom microphones because on some of my filming occasions I had to
use a normal microphone which was susceptible to wind.

An example of this is that I could not use an interview when editing my documentary. The
interview was at the West Ham training ground with one of their coaches, the reason why I
could use the interview was because the wind was so bad and I was not able to hear the
dialogue when editing.

Positives
The equipment that I had at my disposal was all at a very high standard and enabled me to
produce a great documentary. The cameras that the school provided me with (DV camera)
were always available during the bulk of my filming, as there were times were I had to wait
for other media students because they booked the equipment out before me.

But all in all the equipment available to me allowed me to produce a documentary at a very
high standard.

In post production the main equipment that I was using was the Apple Macintosh and the
Mac that I was assigned with had no other media students assigned to it, so I was the only
media students using that Mac.

This allowed me enough time to produce my documentary, for example there were days
where my other lesson would be cancelled so I was able to edit throughout the whole day.
TV industry specific – regulatory and self regulatory
(OFCOM/BBC)

An OFCOM is someone who regulates TV channels a well as radio in the UK. They regulate all digital
programmes and not all for the BBC but for other channels. They operate on an OFCOM code which
has a set of rules and principles which covers constituents such as fairness, privacy and also
sponsorships.

Negatives
During the course of producing my documentary none of the OFCOM regulations really
hindered my documentary in any way. But out of the six sections the two parts that could
have been detrimental to my work would be having offensive material and also dealing with
contributors.

It was important that I did not have any offensive language and mainly offensive to other
ethnicities particularly when I talked about foreign players in English football leagues.

If me or some of my contributors tried to blame the lack of English success in world cup
football at foreign players that could have been offensive to my audience.

Dealing with contributors was difficult because in particular one of the people I wanted to
interview in my documentary, Conor Okkus was never able to meet me and film because of
him being a football player so he had a lot of traveling to do. When he had to go to away
games.

This slowed me down because towards the end of my productions he was the only person I
had left to interview, and when he told me that he could not do it I had to act fast and talk
to Jason Twum about re filming our interview.

Positives
The positives is that I did not have any offensive material in my documentary, as I said
before that all the questions that I asked in my documentary were all mainly leading
questions, because I wanted my documentary to appeal to all ethnicities. Another positive
is that I did not break any of the other OFCOM guidelines, such as secret filming,
reconstruction, payments and also criminally.

Another positive is that I had the Jason Twum interview already lined up after the first
interview was unusable because of the camera angle and also camera framing. But the
positive was the fact that I told him to book another time with me after his exams had
finished.