Emily Pecsok - #5: So… What’s the Story?

Who is your audience, and why?

The audience of the documentary is complicated. If we create an unbiased documentary, we want the audience to be the general public because we want to inform them about the cuts and allow them to form their own opinion. If we create a biased documentary and we support the cuts, we still want the audience to be the general public so we can inform them that the cuts were good idea and they should stay. However, if we create a biased documentary that is against the cuts, our audience would be both the general public and the people that can fix the problem.

How might your audience influence what you say or don’t say?

Because we are talking to the general public, we need to be aware that some people know nothing about this topic. So, when we are making the documentary we need to make sure that we give all the background and both sides of the story.

In a sentence or two, what is the primary message you want to convey about your topic?

The primary message of our topic is “What are the effects of the dispatch cuts in Vermont?”

What change are you asking this audience to make?

I know I have said this a lot, but not many people have discussed this topic before, so we really can’t properly develop an opinion until we’ve heard from both sides of the story. We have had one interview and we are currently scheduling two more. We had an interview with the Granville fire chief, who was directly affected by the cuts. We are also going to interview Doug Gibson and Steve Howard from the VSEA. Additionally, we are scheduling an interview with Commissioner Keith Flynn. Mr. Flynn essentially made the decision to do the cuts, so it is very important for us to hear from him.

Once we hear from both sides we have two options: one, we create an unbiased documentary, allowing the public to make their own decision, or two, create a biased documentary based on a well-educated decision, but still give both sides of the story. If we develop an opinion that the cuts were a good idea, and we express that, we just want the audience to not worry about the cuts, and understand that they cuts were a good idea. If we create a documentary against the cuts, we want the general public to express their concerns and help us spread the message. We would also want the people who made the decision to do something, whether it’s completely getting rid of the cuts or creating a compromise.

State your purpose for telling this story.

We are telling this story because it affects everyone in Vermont. If you are a human being there is a good chance you will need to call 911 at least once in your lifetime.

Why are you telling this story?

We want the public to know about the dispatch cuts because they deserve to know everything that involves their safety.

Why is this story important?

This story is important because it is centered around people’s safety. It has the potential to be a life and death situation.

How might you introduce your topic?

I think that we are going to introduce our topic with what exactly the dispatch cuts are, because a lot of people don’t know anything about them. So, we need to give our audience all the background information necessary to understand exactly what the dispatch cuts are.

What might be the major “movements” or sections?

Since the documentary is focused on the effects/potential effects of the cuts, the “movements” would essentially be stories about what happened because of the dispatch cuts, both positive and negative. For example, we could share a story about how someone couldn’t get the help they needed because of the cuts, and we could share a story about how people saved money from the cuts.

How might you conclude it?

No matter what, we should end the documentary with a quick summary.

I always imagined ending the documentary with a rhetorical question. For example, “The dispatch centers cost a lot of money, but isn’t your safety worth more?” Or, we could end the documentary with a very matter-of-fact statement. For example, “The only effects from the dispatch cuts are the extra money.” No matter what the last part of the documentary is, it should be a real “clincher sentence” that seals the deal.

Brennan Bordonaro #5- Whats the story?

Whats the story behind the recent dispatch cuts? As simple as it seems, this question has fueled my group and I through the last few months with no cut and dry answer. We are now at the point where the story is vastly more clear than it was in the beginning.

As with most issues, there are two distinct sides, both with opposing viewpoints. This topic definitely has two sides and they certainly feel very different. The story of the cuts is relatively simple. Cuts had to be made to the state's budget and the dispatch centers were considered fair game. To some people such as Mr Flynn, the Commissioner for the Vermont Department of Public Safety, cutting of the four state Dispatch centers to two was one way of saving money. Mr Flynn and others in the state legislature weighed the projected cost savings of 1.7 million dollars and what they thought wouldn’t have an impact on the state. They decided to close two dispatch centers over the past summer. 
This decision sparked criticism from many people. Most of the people that opposed the cuts were people that worked or were involved in emergency services, This consisted of ambulance services and fire fighters both volunteer and professional. The other group of people that opposed the cuts are the Vermont State Employees Association or the VSEA. Although the two groups that opposed the cuts are both together in that they opposed them, the opposed them for slightly different reasons. The emergency services workers opposed them because it makes our job a bit more difficult when the dispatchers aren’t local. This is because locals know the areas that they live and do a better job and have more local knowledge than someone living 50 miles away. As well as cutting the number of dispatchers available they are trying to juggle a 7% increase in emergency calls each year. The VSEA agreed with the state's emergency services opposition to the cuts, but their major opposition came from the loss of jobs. Disatchers were laid off and not enough were hired to the remaining centers in return. The VSEA recognised that the local dispatchers that were covering their home towns and places that they are familiar with is incredibly important. This is what happened and how they happened.

The story behind the cuts is separate from what happened. This is because the closing of the centers has happened but no one has told the story yet. We are the ones telling the story. For a story to actually be a story it has to convey a message of some kind, to a specific and targeted audience. Figuring out who our intended audience is, has been one of the more difficult aspects of this project. The intended audience could be everyone who ever comes into the state and might ever need to call 911 for an emergency or it could be limited to the two opposing sides of the issue. Who we will make our intended audience is still undecided but I hope we can narrow it down during the retreat. The primary message we are trying to get across is that these cuts were made without taking into account the opinions and knowledge of the states emergency workers and it has backfired. With either audience as our target audience the change we are seeking remains the same. For one or both centers to be reopened, if that doesn’t work then more significant expansions to the remaining two centers.

For the structure of our film, I think It would be best to introduce the topic and the events of it before having to much footage from either side. For the majority of the film I think interchanging speakers on different sides of the issue would be a good way to keep things moving as well as interesting. A powerful ending is something I think we should have but i am unsure of how that would be accomplished right now.

Shoshana- Blog post 5

The target audience is mostly the Vermont state government and the people who decided to make the Dispatch Cuts. This audience needs to know that the Dispatch Cuts are a terrible mistake and put people in danger. If people don’t worry about this issue, more dispatchers might lose their jobs and when people get hurt, there might not be enough dispatchers to answer the calls.  The more people know about what is going, then the issue can be dealt with before the problem becomes a major one.

The primary message that I am trying to convey about this topic is that if people don’t know understand the issue, then the problem will spread and get worse. This is why we need to alert as many people as we can so they know what is going on and hopefully we can convince them to try to stop it from continuing and the situation getting worse.

I am asking this particular target audience to stop making Dispatch Cuts. The Dispatch Cuts are not good because people are losing their jobs and there are not enough dispatchers to help when people are hurt. I would like to ask this particular target audience why they made these cuts and what they thought would happen.

The purpose of telling this story is to tell everyone in Vermont about what is happening about the Dispatch Cuts. The reason we are telling this story is to let people know what is happening and for them to help out to find an answer to end the Dispatch Cuts. This is a very important issue because with the Dispatch Cuts going on there is less help when an emergency happens. If you don’t have the right information then you won't be able to help solve this problem.

The possibilities for the overarching structure of my story are the hope for the Dispatch Cuts to end and to make the emergency hotline easier to use. How I might introduce my topic is to first talk about the recent Dispatch cuts here in Vermont. I might also talk about how this affects people’s lives. The major movement that has happened so far is that people have agreed to let us interview them. The way I will conclude my story is to tell everyone what an important issue this is. I will also conclude by helping people understand the impact of the Dispatch Cuts.