multimodal final draft

Kerrigan Holt, a pre-health biology major, watched a YouTube video called "Tigers 101" by National Geographic. The video had five quick facts about tigers and showed videos of the animals. The research was done by credible scientists, and they cited their sources. Kerrigan found the video entertaining and liked the speaker's voice. However, the title was slightly misleading as the facts were random and not about basic tiger elements like diet or habitat. The video was only 3 minutes and 16 seconds long, and Kerrigan wished it was longer. The visuals and editing style were pleasing, and overall, Kerrigan enjoyed watching it. Hi there, my name is Kerrigan Holt, and I am a pre-health biology major on the Pre-Vet Professional Pathway. I want to become a wildlife veterinarian, and one of my favorite animals is the tiger. So the source I chose was a YouTube video titled Tigers 101 by National Geographic. The video is composed of five quick facts about tigers, with videos of the animals showing in the background. The research was done by scientists hired by National Geographic, so I can definitely say that it is a credible source. They did a good job with citing their sources as well. They cited the names of the scientists and where they got the videos that they showed. In my opinion, the video was very entertaining, and I enjoyed watching it. The speaker's voice was very pleasant to listen to, which I was thankful for. I'm sure you know that the sound of someone's voice can completely ruin whatever you're trying to listen to. On the other hand, I did think that the title was slightly misleading. The facts presented in the video were just miscellaneous. When I saw the title, I thought I would be taught basic facts that help me understand the fundamental elements of tigers. Yet they were just random. One of them was how white tigers are a type of Bengal tiger, and another was that tigers are much heavier than lions despite being the same size. While I always appreciate learning new animal facts, I did wish that they would have talked about their diet or preferred habitats. I think that they should have named the video differently, so it's not as misleading. The video is also only 3 minutes and 16 seconds long, and the last 20 seconds is filled with their citations, so I do wish it was slightly longer. They could have fit more relevant facts in while still keeping it short and entertaining. I did like the music that they included. I feel like it fits the video without being too distracting. They also included visuals that were specific to what the speaker was saying in that moment. For instance, when she was talking about where tigers originated from, the video showed a map with specific points of where the different subspecies have been traced back to. I thought it was very helpful and informative. When talking about the weight difference of lions and tigers, they showed a side-by-side comparison of the two big cats to help the audience visualize. The editing style was also very aesthetically pleasing, which made the video much more entertaining to watch. Overall, I really enjoyed watching it. Thank you for listening.