PLEASE USE THE STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION SAME I HAVE ATTACHED IN THE OTHER FILE, READ THE APPROACH AND FOLLOW THE WAY IT IS BEEN REF, CITED AND SOURCED PLEASE.
You have corrected some (not all…) of the stylistic/written expression errors and suggestions I made on the rough draft and it definitely reads better now. BUT…the suggestions I made about structure and organisation (and title) haven’t been addressed in this version. The overall title does not reflect what you are discussing. there is hardly any real content about unofficial social media, so the title is not appropriate- I really think you need to change it. And since the ‘literature review’ chapter isn’t one, that also has to be labelled differently. The final submission has to be introduced, titled (as a whole and for its sections) in relation to what you are submitting, not the original idea or the outline proposal- there’s no formal obligation to call it that if that isn’t what it is anymore. Do you see what I’m saying? I will attempt to make suggestions for relabelling sections and perhaps a new title that reflects the content more accurately.
Obviously quite a lot of detailed suggestions about style, referencing, repetition of material for you to absorb…
but the comments yesterday about (re)shaping the dissertation is the crucial thing-
as it stands there is only brief mention of ‘unofficial’/bottom-up social media use (the anti-Super league campaign and some discussion of racism)
and much more general outline of social media marketing/management (too much- I’ve commented where it repeats itself- maybe it should be shorter and part of an intro rather than labelled ‘analysis’ which, it isn’t?)
There is also the issue of the ‘methodology’ section not being referred to again in this draft- what did the survey find? What were the interviewees’ thoughts on the issues you raise (interestingly, but too briefly) about journalism..?
There is plenty of good material in the draft which can be shaped into a good dissertation
The ‘shaping’ requires some thought, though: I’m not sure your original proposal and its research questions are necessarily what the bulk of this material has become, so we need to introduce it more clearly in terms of what it does contain/focus on
It needs a clear introduction which says very specifically- this dissertation focuses on a), b) and c). Chapter 1 will discuss….Chapter 2 focuses on….etc etc Similarly we need to have identified exactly from the outset what role your questionnaires play in the study, the period of research sampled etc
When you complete a section we need signposts to remind the reader where we have been and where we go next
As I mentioned before the ‘Literature Review’ section is not a literature review so change the title. The ‘requirement’ of a lit review relates to showing you have consulted academic sources, relevant scholars and have an understanding of the field- you DO cite Hall etc elsewhere, so that should be augmented without mis-titling the section 2 that you have.s