Thank you, PeterSweden, who came "all the way from Norway" to Switzerland, for this interview. (Citing Noor Bin Laden. Did you really come from Norway?) Your content is important for people to realize what is happening, as legacy media simply do not report on these things.
I just wanted to comment on technical matters a little bit. Firstly, I commend you for a solid video quality. However, there are 2 things I believe would massively increase the production quality of your interviews:
1. Normalization of sound levels. You are way louder than Noor. Normalization helps even out the difference between loud and quite parts of a sound track. Most audio and video editing software has the function built-in.
2. You tend to fill in a lot of affirmative words or sounds during the interviewee's speech, which ultimately have an unpleasant effect for the hearer. Try to stay a little bit more silent when the second party speaks, even when they make a short pause; that helps us, the listeners, concentrate better. (You may also try to record 2 tracks separately and then simply cut some parts of your track.)
I hope you will see this comment as constructive, as I overall like your reporting and simply wanted to share what I believe would help you improve as a media content producer.
I did travel all the way from Norway to be in Switzerland, cost me quite a lot in travel money so thank you as a paid subscriber which allows me to pay for it!
Thank you for the comments, I know I sound way louder than Noor and that's because I speak louder than her :) I could perhaps have adjusted the sound levels a bit, but it's recorded on the same microphone and track.
As for the affirmative words, that's something I do to try and make the person I interview feel more comfortable and that they don't feel like they need to talk all the time without pause, but I'll think about it for next time!
What might be called the "Innocent's View of the United Nations, the WHO etc" is that these organizations were set up in the aftermath of the terror and destruction of WWII to give reasonable venues where nations could MEET, TALK AND TALK SOME MORE and avoid the situations involving Hitler, Mussolini etc that brought on WWII. Playing Devil's Advocate here, is it possible that Peter Sweden and Noor Bin Laden are just paranoid conspiracy theorists? Is it not possible that they and their like-minded felloz travelers are overlooking the GOOD motives of the UN founders? I remind people that my purpose here is to play Devil's Advocate. I don't necessarily believe that the UN is just a harmless "talking shop" with the WHO simply its good-intentioned accomplice. After all, UN orgs like UNICEF have done good things all over the world. Final word: I believe strongly in the ultimate authority of NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY of each country.
To me, what this all adds up to is NO COUNTRY IN THE WORLD should acquiesce to being under the thumb of the WHO. The WHO should only be a CONSULTATIVE BODY AND NOTHING MORE.
Thank you, PeterSweden, who came "all the way from Norway" to Switzerland, for this interview. (Citing Noor Bin Laden. Did you really come from Norway?) Your content is important for people to realize what is happening, as legacy media simply do not report on these things.
I just wanted to comment on technical matters a little bit. Firstly, I commend you for a solid video quality. However, there are 2 things I believe would massively increase the production quality of your interviews:
1. Normalization of sound levels. You are way louder than Noor. Normalization helps even out the difference between loud and quite parts of a sound track. Most audio and video editing software has the function built-in.
2. You tend to fill in a lot of affirmative words or sounds during the interviewee's speech, which ultimately have an unpleasant effect for the hearer. Try to stay a little bit more silent when the second party speaks, even when they make a short pause; that helps us, the listeners, concentrate better. (You may also try to record 2 tracks separately and then simply cut some parts of your track.)
I hope you will see this comment as constructive, as I overall like your reporting and simply wanted to share what I believe would help you improve as a media content producer.
I did travel all the way from Norway to be in Switzerland, cost me quite a lot in travel money so thank you as a paid subscriber which allows me to pay for it!
Thank you for the comments, I know I sound way louder than Noor and that's because I speak louder than her :) I could perhaps have adjusted the sound levels a bit, but it's recorded on the same microphone and track.
As for the affirmative words, that's something I do to try and make the person I interview feel more comfortable and that they don't feel like they need to talk all the time without pause, but I'll think about it for next time!
What might be called the "Innocent's View of the United Nations, the WHO etc" is that these organizations were set up in the aftermath of the terror and destruction of WWII to give reasonable venues where nations could MEET, TALK AND TALK SOME MORE and avoid the situations involving Hitler, Mussolini etc that brought on WWII. Playing Devil's Advocate here, is it possible that Peter Sweden and Noor Bin Laden are just paranoid conspiracy theorists? Is it not possible that they and their like-minded felloz travelers are overlooking the GOOD motives of the UN founders? I remind people that my purpose here is to play Devil's Advocate. I don't necessarily believe that the UN is just a harmless "talking shop" with the WHO simply its good-intentioned accomplice. After all, UN orgs like UNICEF have done good things all over the world. Final word: I believe strongly in the ultimate authority of NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY of each country.
To me, what this all adds up to is NO COUNTRY IN THE WORLD should acquiesce to being under the thumb of the WHO. The WHO should only be a CONSULTATIVE BODY AND NOTHING MORE.