Follow Up on Lara Logan
http://www.cbs.com/primetime/60_mi
nutes/video/?pid=S3k3QHnsVnz2mhjU
Z7qrc7Lp01lQWCtG&vs=homepage&pl
ay=true
Short Film “9 Star Hotel”
• http://www.pbs.org/pov/9starhotel/9starhotel
_fullfilm1.php
• Observational style
• http://www.pbs.org/pov/9starhotel/video_int
erview.php
Documentary Lecture 2
Subgenres and Ethical Issues
• Develop a deeper understanding of different
genres and styles present within the
documentary production industry.
• Explore ethical issues of documentary
production
Subgenre’s of Documentary
• In his 2001 book, Introduction to
Documentary (Indiana University Press), Bill
Nichols defines the following six modes of
documentary.
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
The Poetic Mode
• “'reassembling fragments of the world', a
transformation of historical material into a
more abstract, lyrical form, usually associated
with 1920s and modernist ideas.”
• For example, the “City Symphony” films.
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
The Expository Mode
• “'direct address', social issues assembled into
an argumentative frame, mediated by a
voice-of-God narration, associated with
1920s-1930s, and some of the rhetoric and
polemic surrounding World War Two”
• For example, John Grierson’s film about the
post office.
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
The Observational Mode
• “as technology advanced by the 1960s and
cameras became smaller and lighter, able to
document life in a less intrusive manner, there
is less control required over lighting etc,
leaving the social actors free to act and the
documentarists free to record without
interacting with each other”
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
The Participatory Mode
• “the encounter between film-maker and
subject is recorded, as the film-maker actively
engages with the situation they are
documenting, asking questions of their
subjects, sharing experiences with them.
Heavily reliant on the honesty of witnesses”
– For example, “Chronicle of a Summer” (1959),
where filmmaker provokes questions.
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
The Reflexive Mode
• “demonstrates consciousness of the process
of reading documentary, and engages
actively with the issues of realism and
representation, acknowledging the presence
of the viewer and the modality judgments
they arrive at. Corresponds to critical theory
of the 1980s.”
– For Example: Vertov’s “Man With a Movie
Camera” (1929)
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
Performative Mode
• “acknowledges the emotional and subjective
aspects of documentary, and presents ideas
as part of a context, having different
meanings for different people, often
autobiographical in nature”
– Different from participatory mode as it is more
subjective.
– For example, Supersize Me (2008)
From Nichols, Bill. Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press),
Ethical Concerns
• Conflict between “artistic” ideals and profit
– Documentary makers see themselves
defending a “higher truth”
– But they “constantly compete in a business
environment.”
– This can lead to ethical questions.
Center for Social Media. “Honest Truths: documentary Filmmakers on Ethical
Challenges in Their Work.” September 2009.
Ethical Concerns: Two Types
• 1. Relationship between filmmaker and
subject: how to fairly tell the stories of the
people portrayed in your film.
• 2. Relationship between filmmaker and
audience: how to create trust between
audience and filmmaker.
Subject
• Do no harm
• Protect the vulnerable
• Filmmaker / documentarian often has more
social or economic power than the subjects of
the film.
– “I am in their life for a whole year. So there is a
more profound relationship, not a journalistic two
or three hours.”
• Sometimes the subject behaves unethically. Is
it right to show that behavior?
– “revealing a subject’s weaknesses or positions
that the audience is likely to find laughable or
repellant can be justified when they are taking
advantage of other people or when they are so
completely convinced of their own rightness, they
would be happy with their portrayal. You don’t
owe them more than that.”
Protecting the Subject
• “It’s important to lift people up who tell tehir stories, as
opposed to making them victims. It’s a moral decision not
to enter their lives to only show how poor they are.”
– Social Protection: One filmcrew prevented a teenager from
bullying his classmate when the teacher left the room.
– Legal protection: Another filmmaker’s subject told a story
about trying to bring her son across the border illegally. “It’s a
powerful story, and its important plot-wise. We consulted with
[an] immigration attorney . . . to figure out which of those
statements could put the character at risk.” The filmmaker
removed an incriminating line, while keeping the general
information and preserving the filmmaker’s interests as a
creator. “ (11)
Allowing Subjects to Share Decision
Making
• Most have subjects sign legal releases.
• But many admitted they gave their subjects
more leeway than the releases allowed.
• Gordon Quinn: “We are not journalists; we are
going to spend years with you. Our code of ethics
is very different. A journalist wouldn’t show you
the footage. We will show the film before it is
finished. I want you to sign the release, but we
will really listen to you. But ultimately it has to be
our decision.”
Allowing Subjects to Share Control
of Final Cut
• Some directors allow subjects to be part of
editing process:" I don’t want to make films
where people feel like they are being trashed . . .
We make the films we make because of these
relationships we build. It’s important to us that
people agree with the film.” (14)
• Usually an informal, not legal decision.
• Other directors feel this would “delegitimize the
film” and jeopardize its independent vision.
– “Its our work and our interpretation” (14)
Paying Subjects
• Major concern – payment can “skew reality”
as people might participate for personal gain.
• “Many filmmakers believed that payment was
not only acceptable but a reasonable way to
address the power differential, even though
payment often sufficed only to cover costs of
participation. “ (13)
– Errol Morris, Standard Operating Procedure
Two Opposite Decisions
• One filmmaker worked with a family for two
years. He never discussed payment but after year
one, he offered them $5000 each because he felt
that it was “an important gesture” (13)
• Another woman was making a film about
immigrants to America. They asked for money
but she refused, “You cross the line, are you the
filmmaker or their best friend in America? . . . It
was awkward for them but I did not want to set a
precedent.” (14)
Sharing Profits
• Hoop Dreams (1992) shared profits with
everyone who had screen time.
Deception
• One director secured an interview with a
prisoner by writing on BBC letterhead – he
wasn’t BBC>
Viewers and the Film
• If filming is about relationship with subject,
• Editing is about relationship with audience.
• “I have to be careful not to abuse the
friendship with the subject, but it’s a rapport
that is somewhat false,” said one. “In the edit
room . . . you decide what your film is going to
be, you have to put your traditional issues of
friendship aside. You have to serve ‘the
truth.’” (15)
“Truth”
• Filmmakers are aware that “choices of angles,
shots, and characters were personal and
subjective” (18)
• Many of them referred to Grierson’s quote
about “creative treatment of actuality”
• Framing and Editing
• Stating, Restaging, Events
– “restaging routine or trivial events such as walking
through a door was part and parcel of the filmmaking
process and was “not what makes the story honest.” (18)
– But some went further: “Another recalled asking her
subjects to stage an annual event earlier in the year than it
would happen in real life: I would not want to put words in
people’s mouth, or edit them in a way that’s not leading
to the larger truth. But I feel like it’s important to get the
big-picture truth of the situation on camera.”
• Archival Material
– Photographs and film from the past (like Now!)
– Need to be careful to establish context for any
archive you use.
– Don’t just use archive for “tone”
– “you put it out there as truth. Someone else will
be culling footage from your film. If it’s 1958
Manila . . . you have to be truthful.” (21)
Ethical Concerns: Subject
• Cable producers want “sexy” stories that
make money. One director said: “to look at a
homicide that happened seven years ago, and
look at who did it—it’s good entertainment. It
has no ethical or redemptive value . . . It’s not
increasing anyone’s knowledge.”
Ethical Concerns
• Trying to get the shots you need on a limited
budget.
• One director described how guilty he felt after
letting a animal handler “break a rabbits leg”
to get a better shot.
• “For us to inflict pain to get a better shot was
the wrong thing to do.”
• Making people cry for a better shot.
Ethical Standards
• Documentary media that is independent is
“essential to democracy”
• Trust between audience and subject
• No right of review for subject
• Accuracy, Fairness, and Obedience to the
law
Break
Film – Supersize Me (2004)
• http://www.lovefilm.com/film/Super-Size-Me/30209/
• Part of trend in 2000s for “personality led”
documentary – like Yes Men (2003, 2008); Bowling
for Columbine (2003) etc.
• Ethical questions: is Spurlocks core argument fair?
What is his point of view? Does he make implicit or
explicit criticisms of any groups of people?
• Modes: mix of performative and expository modes…
– The subject of the film IS the filmmaker, but he is also
– Social issues embedded in the frame.