Issuu on Google+

Intro There  are  a  range  of  different  factual  TV  programs  such  as  talk  shows  which  are   basically  shows  like  Jeremy  Kyle  and  Jerry  Springer  in  which  talk  shows  typically  have   more  than  one  person  involved  as  the  audience  normally  have  a  input,  in  order  to   make  the  programme  appear  impartial,  as  not  everyone  will  have  the  same  view  or   opinion,  while  other  shows  like  Jonathan  Ross  and  Alan  Carr  which  are  chat  shows   and  typically  a  one-­‐to-­‐one  interview  with  a  celebrity,  normally  done  in  the  style  of  a   piece  of  infotainment.  While  magazine  shows  have  some  elements  of  chat  and  talk   shows,  normally  it  contains  soft  news  and  is  infotainment.  As  Magazine  shows  are   typically  shows  that  demonstrate  that  have  interviews  stuff  with  celebrities,  cooking   things  and  much  more  as  it  is  aimed  at  a  specific  audience,  it  can  also  be  seen  as   ‘infotainment’  as  since  the  show  is  seen  as  a  magazine  programme,  they  would  have   someone  to  interview,  about  subjects  or  headlines  about  the  current  entertainment   of  informational  or  news.  While  reality  shows  are  completely  different  as  they  are   meant  to  be  shows  that  are  reality  or  even  observational  though  they  don’t  seem   like  it,  they  also  typically  follow  interactive  elements  with  each  other.  EG  like  Made   in  Chelsea  typically  follow  these  people  in  their  day-­‐to-­‐day  activates.    All  these  shows   are  shown  and  broadcast  in  different  ways  as  all  of  them  can  be  watched  on  TV,   bought  on  DVD  and  can  be  watched  through  Internet  streaming  or  online  video   players  like  BBC  Iplayer,  Netflix  and  more.  While  the  main  focus  on  the  essay  will  be   on  factual  programmes  that  are  contrasting  are  Documentaries  and  TV  news   programmes.  Both  tend  to  be  ‘Hard  News’  which  is  news  headlines  that  are  more   serious,  and  while  ‘Soft  News’  is  news  headlines  that  ‘infotainment’  news  that  is   more  entertainment  driven.  There  are  also  conventions  that  define  it  as  each   typically  have  presenters  that  explain  what  they  want  to  talk  about.  There  is  also  a   distinctive  difference  between  in  the  camerawork,  editing  and  mise-­‐en-­‐scene.    While   these  kind  of  shows  also  have  new  headlines  while  each  are  done  in  different  ways   as  news  programmes  are  impartial  through  the  way  it  is  delivered,  even  though   programming  can  change  its  ‘mode  of  address’  with  it’s  presenter  typically  carrying   the  programme  throughout,  while  field  reporters  provide  the  audience  with  in-­‐depth   stories,  with  a  ‘voice  of  god’  voiceover  that  narrates  the  story,  with  actuality/archive   footage  supporting  the  story,  this  is  similar  to  documentaries  as  they  use  a  ‘Voice  of   god’  that  narrates  through  it,  and  actuality/archive  footage,  however  this  may   change  depending  on  the  style  of  the  documentary,  as  each  is  very  different  in  the   way  that  it  presents  their  information. As  each  documentary  has  a  way  of  telling  what  it  is,  such  as  expository   documentaries  typically  have  a  voice  of  god,  and  use  images  to  illustrate  alongside   the  voiceover.  Whereas  Observational  documentaries  have  no  interviews,  no   voiceover  and  instead  opt  for  a  voiceover  to  narrate.  And  finally  there  are  interactive   documentaries  have  the  filmmakers  in  the  film  and  a  voiceover  narrates  the   narrative.  Even  though  each  one  of  these  documentaries  are  based  around  facts  to   different  audiences.  As  each  aim  for  a  ‘realistic’  film,  but  also  involve  fictional   elements  to  add  a  narrative.  That  has  a  beginning,  middle  and  end.   While  each  type  of  documentary  will  also  have  a  view  of  it  such  as  accurate   documentaries  are  from  a  first  person  POV  as  they  are  meant  to  include  facts  to   indicate  that  the  information  is  correct  or  accurate.  Such  as  in  BFC  when  we  as  the  

viewer  are  informed  that  this  bank  gives  away  free  guns  with  a  bank  account,  which   is  true  all  though  the  filmmaker  Michael  Moore  edits  the  film  in  a  way  that  misleads   what  the  audience  is  hearing.  But  the  while  it  is  twisted  what  he  says  it  is  still  true   that  they  sell  guns  alongside  with  a  bank  account,  but  he  must  also  legally  tell  the   truth  otherwise  he  could  get  sued.  While  a  2nd  POV  is  normally  objective  or   impartial  documentaries  in  which  you  would  expect  to  be  told  the  truth  and  be  given   a  balanced  argument,  such  as  in  ‘News  at  10’  the  news  is  told  truthfully  without  any   biased  feelings  towards  a  certain  subject.  The  reason  for  this  being  that  people   wouldn’t  believe  what  they  hear,  if  a  newscaster  favours  one  headline  or  subject   over  another  it  shows  based  thoughts  and  not  everyone  would  agree  meaning   programming  like  ‘News  at  10’  needs  to  be  truthful  otherwise  people  wouldn’t   believe  what  they  are  hearing/seeing.  And  the  last  kind  of  POV  is  third  person  which   is  basically  a  biased  or  opinionated  documentary,  as  you  would  hear  directly  the   filmmaker  wants  you  to  believe,  but  unlike  Michael  Moore  who  had  information  that   was  accurate,  but  took  a  view  of  how  their  system  was  wrong.  Such  as  in  ‘The  Trap’   in  the  opening  we  are  told  how  to  feel  with  the  situation.  The  reason  for  this  being   that  the  filmmaker  doesn’t  want  to  make  it  seem  like  that  this  isn’t  a  documentary   but  a  person's  thoughts,  but  the  filmmaker  makes  the  documentary  seem  balanced,   but  favours  towards  one  side  of  the  argument.  

Part  1 All  news  programs  have  a  unique  way  of  presenting  itself  with  news  conventions   such  as  the  set  that  is  used  in    ‘News  at  10’  which  has  a  set  of  features  which  make  it   identifiable  as  a  news  program  has  to  typically  have  studio  news  presenters  and  a   title  screen  to  introduce  the  program  with  the  presenter  saying  ‘welcomes’  and  then   talks  about  the  headlines.   As  news  at  10  typically  has  Huw  speaking  in  a  loud,  but  clear  and  doesn’t  convey  any   sort  of  expression  again  illustrating  how  he  is  being  impartial  and  being  objective. As  the  first  headline  which  is  about  the  Economy  being  messed  up  more,  which   includes  actuality  footage  of  David  Cameron,  talking  about  the  situation,  As  the   presenter  Huw  Edwards  says  “David  Cameron  says  we  need  to  foster  a  ‘can  do  spirit’   to  remedy  the  economy”. As  News  at  10  use  this  repeatedly  in  order  to  use  this  as  a  soundbite  and  by  showing   the  actuality  footage  of  Cameron  saying  “Britons  need  to  come  together  and  utilise  a   can  do  spirit”. As  they  use  this  to  make  sure  that  the  to  make  sure  the  audience  get  into  their   heads,  as  the  soundbite  would  be  used  as  perfect  sort  of  intro  to  the  news,  since  it   perfectly  fits  in  with  its  headline  and  then  can  go  straight  into  the  news  headline.         as  the  footage  is  meant  to  prove  that  what  he  is  talking  about  is  necessarily  accurate,   as  it  further  proves  that  Huw  is  telling  the  truth,  as  he  has  evidence  to  indicate  that   this.  As  simply  showing  some  form  of  actuality  footage  helps  prove  the  accuracy  of   what  a  newsreader  is  talking  about,  this  is  also  used  in  documentaries  however   different  as  a  documentary  you  would  typically  hear  it  through  a  voiceover,  whereas   a  news  programme  would  typically  use  a  newsreader  (non-­‐diegetic  sound).

The  footage  either  way  helps  illustrate  literally  what  the  newsreader  (or  voiceover)  is   saying  as,  as  it  proves  to  the  audience  that  whatever  the  person  is  saying  or  reading   is  accurate.  As  to  further  cement  the  accuracy  of  the  footage  they  have  shown,  as   they  get  a  manager  in  Tesco’s  to  talk  about  how  for  Tescos  this  has  been  a  hard  time   due  to  the  economy  being  messed  up.  As  this  shows  what  Huw  is  saying  is  truthful,   through  the  fact  that  they  this  proves  it  is  really  since  they  have  asked  someone   about  what  Cameron  said  in  the  actuality  footage,  further  proving  its  accuracy.  As   this  person  helps  create  the  accuracy  in  this  situation  since  what  he  is  saying,  proves   that  he  is  an  expert  on  these  matters,  as  he  is  talking  about  how  tescos  is  losing   money  from  this  situation.  However  a  problem  with  this  is  that  even  this  can  be  seen   as  biased,  since  they  only  talk  to  business  leaders.  As  by  only  speaking  to  Cameron,   this  shows  only  one  side  of  the  political  parties  atcen  on  this  subject.  Which  in   certain  peoples  eyes  is  somewhat  biased.  As  this  even  though  not  meant  to  be   subjective  is  represented  as  being  objective.  As  News  at  10  are  still  objective,a  s  they   are  simply  reporting  a  news  story  about  the  most  important  person  in  the  country   talking  about  economy    While  they  ask  Tesco’s  talk  about  how  for  them  this  been  a   bad  time  for  them,  and  the  fact  that  they  accuse  him  of  empty  phrases  and  don’t   really  mean  anything.  And  this  means  that  News  at  10  comes  off  as  expressing  their   opinions,  while  news  is  meant  to  be  impartial  and  objective.         However  it  can  also  be  seen  that  they  simply  only  reporting  the  facts,  in  that  Tescos   are  losing  money  from  this  situation.  and  that  they  are  presenting  the  news  in  an   objective  and  impartial,  by  reporting  the  news  and  not  indicating  any  sort  of  opinion   in  the  piece. It  may  then  cut  to  field  reporters  on  location  with  him  or  her  maybe  interviewing   someone  about  something.    While  throughout  the  music  adds  more  atmospheres   being  theatrically  with  his  tone  of  voice  grabbing  the  viewer  attention.    While  the   second  headline  is  different  as  this  headline  is  about  the  scandal  with  the  Pakistani   cricketers  that  were  found  out  to  have  cheated.  However  instead  of  showing  any   sort  of  actuality  footage,  they  simply  show  some  graphics,  of  picture  of  the  cricketers   moving  ever  so  slightly.  As  the  graphics  were  created  by  the  BBC,  which  doesn’t  do   too  much  to  actually  prove  what  they  are  saying  is  fact,  since  they  wouldn’t  have  any   sort  of  actuality  footage  on  this  situation.  However  the  graphics  are  made  to   highlight  elements  of  the  scandal,  as  the  graphics  at  points  show  the  cricketers   looking  sad  almost  depressed  (through  the  images),  and  here  it  is  where  they  start  to   bring  in  some  biased  viewpoints,  as  in  the  graphics  they  put  clouds  in  eh  background   to  almost  suggest  to  the  viewer  that  it  is  serious  and  again  highlights  the  bad  thing   that  they  have  done.  As  the  images  portrayal  the  individuals  in  question  for  this   piece,  as  the  mise-­‐en-­‐scene  is  very  dark,as  it  is  meant  to  highlight  the  bad  thing  that   the  men  have  done  and  this  is  done  through  the  setting  of  a  cricket  field  that  has  a   dark  sky,  again  highlighting  what  they  have  done.  while  the  costumes  also  do  this  as   even  though  all  it  tells  us  is  that  they  are  cricketers,  which  is  something  that  needs  to   be  clear  if  anyone  just  turns  over  the  channel  to  see  this  news  story.  While  there   body  language  and  facial  expressions,  while  minimal  since  it  is  just  a  animation,  

again  it  tells  us  a  lot  as  it  shows  that  they  are  dejected,  highlighting  how  they  should   be  ashamed  about  what  they  have  done.   Yet  when  this  piece  was  released  it  wasn’t  yet  fully  proven  that  they  did  what  was   said.  Yet  this  still  fits  in  with  a  general  news  story  as  it  covers  a  serious  subject,  as  the   images  and  the  music,  with  Huw’s  tone  of  voice  which  would  have  been  serious  so   that  it  wasn’t  misrepresented All  of  this  can  be  seen  with  the  mise-­‐en-­‐scene  that  is  used  to  create  this  serious   sense  with  Huw  Edward’s  even  clearly  making  it  seem  serious  with  his  body  language   showing  no  emotion  of  connection  to  make  the  viewer  think  he  doesn’t  like  a   particularly  person  or  thing.     He  is  also  seen  to  be  serious  with  his  clothing  which  when  compared  to  something   else  like  ’60  Seconds’  which  has  the  presenter  dress  casually  to  appeal  to  it’s   audience,  whereas  he  Huw  Edwards  has  to  be  shown  impartial  and  formal  so  that  it   isn’t  favoring  towards  one  side.  The  camera  shot  also  is  shown  as  a  mid-­‐shot  to  show   his  body  language  and  the  fact  he  doesn’t  really  change  his  facial  expressions.  The   editing  is  also  done  in  a  way  in  which  the  viewer  can  get  the  information  from  Huw   Edwards  and  use  archive  footage  to  talk  about  the  particularly  subject  matter.  It  also   includes  elliptical  editing  so  that  the  viewer  gets  a  understanding  of  the  important   parts  of  the  news  headline..The  program  also  uses  Rolling  pieces  of  text  to  bring  up   other  bits  of  news  that  isn’t  as  important  or  serious  as  the  other  subjects  being   covered.  News  Programs  also  typically  have  a  particular  angle  of  framing  such  as  the   the  way  ‘60  Seconds’,  ‘Newsround’  and  ’News  At  10’  all  have  a  way  of  framing  that   keep  in  the  style  of  the  program  such  as  in  ‘News  At  10’  you  always  have  a  shot  of   Hue  Edward  that  is  centred  in  the  middle,  and  has  most  of  his  chest  and  head  in   shot. One  thing  about  news  in  the  UK  is  that  despite  they’re  being  the  presence  of  some   biased  views,  in  what  they  are  reporting  and  how  they  present  certain  news   headlines.  They  also  however  present  it  in  an  objective  way,  meaning  that  they  are   not  often  or  not  influenced  by  their  personal  opinions  on  certain  news  subjects,  as   they  will  generally  be  impartial  to  how  they  present  the  news,  as  their  body   language,  facial  expressions  and  tone  of  voice  will  all  be  presented  without   expressing  a  personal  viewpoint  on  individual  headlines.   As  I  mentioned  earlier  Huw  presented  the  story  on  the  Economic  problems,  in  an   impartial  way,  that  include  elements  of  biased  viewpoints,  but  overall  it  was   objective  as  it  didn’t  really  express  a  certain  viewpoint,  instead  it  was  just  the  people   that  were  involved  in  the  piece,  showed  some  viewpoint,  since  they  asked  certain   people  about  his  indicating  a  somewhat  biased  point,  however  the  piece  was   impartial  as  it.   The  reason  for  this  being  that  if  the  news  were  presented  in  a  way  that  favoured  one   side  of  an  argument,  this  means  that  the  audience  would  receive  the  news  in  a  way   that  favours  one  side,  meaning  the  audience  wouldn’t  really  be  allowed  to  express  

their  viewpoint  on  a  subject,  as  they  will  believe  that  the  news  is  always  truthful,   meaning  if  they  hear  something  on  the  news  no  matter  what,  they  will  either  believe   that  or  take  it  as  fact.   As  without  an  impartial  view  on  the  news,  the  audience  will  perceive  it  as  accurate   and  truthful,  as  simply  things  like  a  news  presenters  tone  of  voice,  facial  expressions   or  body  language  can  give  off  a  view  on  that  subject,  meaning  the  audience  could  be   given  false  information.   As  a  network  that  is  infamous  for  its  biased  reporting  is  Fox  news  in  the  US,  where   the  laws  stipulate  that  news  can  be  subjective,  something  Fox  news  are  known  for.   Which  is  something  that  is  very  different  compared  to  British  news  presentation.   However  one  thing  that  is  extremely  biased  in  the  UK  is  the  British  tabloids  which  are   known  for  taking  political  sides,  and  that  they  use  this  to  great  effect  on  the  general   public.  whether  it  be  The  Sun,  Telegraph  or  Daily  Mail  which  are  all  in  favour  of  the   Tory  party.  While  other  papers  like  the  Guardian  and  Mirror  are  labour. As  this  helps  give  off  someone’s  opinion,  rather  than  presenting  the  news  truthfully.   However  an  action  to  this  kind  of  situation  is  that  if  someone  is  reporting  from  a  war   zone,  and  they  don’t  express  or  indicate  any  sort  of  emotion  or  response,  we  as  the   audience  may  be  left  wondering  whether  or  not  they  are  presenting  the  news   accurately  and  in  some  peoples  eye’s  this  person  may  be  left  looking  heartless,   through  the  fact  that  they  didn’t  indicate  any  sort  of  response  to  a  grave  situation   like  this.   An  example  of  how  the  news  should  be  presented  is  last  year  when  an  article  was   published  on  the  guardian  website  that  talked  about  the  importance  of  ‘’reporting   these  horrors  of  war  with  accuracy  and  without  prejudice’’  in  which  Marie  Colvin   gave  a  speech  about  having  to  be  accurate  and  objective,  even  though  she   presented  some  of  feelings/emotions  about  what  she  had  seen.  As  in  the  article  she   talks  about  “The  fact  that  the  public  have  the  right  to  know  what  our  government,   and  our  armed  forces,  are  doing  in  our  name.  Our  mission  is  to  speak  the  truth  to   power.  We  send  home  that  first  rough  draft  of  history.  We  can  and  do  make  a   difference  in  exposing  the  horrors  of  war  and  especially  the  atrocities  that  befall   civilians.”  As  here  she  is  talking  about  how  the  news  about  the  war  is  often   misrepresented,  and  the  fact  that  the  news  needs  to  “speak  the  truth”. She  also  talks  about  how  “In  an  age  of  24/7  rolling  news,  blogs  and  Twitters,  we  are   on  constant  call  wherever  we  are........The  real  difficulty  is  having  enough  faith  in   humanity  to  believe  that  enough  people  be  they  government,  military  or  the  man  on   the  street,  will  care  when  your  file  reaches  the  printed  page,  the  website  or  the  TV   screen”  As  throughout  the  article  she  talks  about  the  importance  of  finding  out  the   truth  no  matter  what  the  cost,  as  the  quote  above  talks  about  how  today  people   have  news  accessible  to  them  24/7,  in  order  to  keep  up  with  the  most  update  news   stories  possible.  And  how  we  as  the  audience  and  public  need  to  know  whether  or   not  we  will  “care  when  your  file  reaches  the  printed  page,  the  website  or  the  TV   screen”  which  agains  stipulates  how  us  as  a  culture  will  still  need  that  news  when  it   is  actually  released,  or  just  move  onto  another  subject  that  has  more  importance   now.        

Part  2 All  the  news  programmes  I  will  be  looking  at  '60  Seconds',  Newsround'  and  'News  at   10'  all  of  which  are  made  by  the  BBC,  all  also  have  unique,  ways  of  telling  the  news   or  have  specific  features  that  would  only  appeal  to  their  target  audience's.  As  each   has  to  be  represented  differently  in  order  to  appeal  to  their  different  target   audiences.  As  each  has  to  be  easy  to  identify  and  appeal  to  their  different  audiences   as  they  will  enjoy  other  things  compared  to  other  news  programming.  Such  as  '60   Seconds'  which  is  aimed  at  young  teenage  mainstreamers,  while  the  subjectivity  in   this  programme  is  mainly  entertainment  news,  as  it  follows  activates  that  the  target   audience  would  be  more  interested  than  a  typically  news  programme  like   'News  at  10'  which  covers  more  ''conventionally''  news  topics,  as  this  audience   compared  to  BBC  3's  is  more  formal  in  that  the  audience  has  a  better  understanding   of  the  subject  matter,  whereas  BBC  3,  news  coverage  is  almost  dumb  downed  in   order  to  gain  the  interest  of  its  target  audience  who  would  most  likely  be  wanting  to   watch  a  comedy  type  programme.   Whereas  the  audience  for  ‘Newsround’  is  much  younger,  meaning  the  programme   would  represent  a  themselves  differently  through  the  “headlines”.  In  a  show  like   ‘News  at  10’  the  serious  nature  is  represented  by  the  politics  headline,  featured  with   a  serious  problem  currently  going  on,  whereas  Newsround’s  main  subject  matter  is   sports  representing  itself  in  a  way  that  appeals  to  young  people  as  a  young  audience   like  this  wouldn’t  be  too  interested  in  as  serious  politically  headline,  they  would  be   into  more  light  hearted  news  (i.e  soft  news)   As  this  shows  mode  of  address  is  very  different  compared  the  other  news   programmes,  as     Newsround  has  a  newsreader  called  Ricky  who  was  a  much  more  relaxed  and   represented  himself  as  an  approachable  and  friendly  person,  through  the  fact  that   he  talked  with  a  light  tone  of  voice,  and  body  language  that  represented  him  as  a   much  more  natural  instead  of  forced.  The  show  was  also  very  different  since  it   covered  soft  news  only,  since  this  is  a  child  friendly  new  station  as  the  show  runs  on   CBBC,  meaning  that  they  wouldn’t  really  have  a  news  headline  that  headlights  a  big   subject,  that  younger  viewers  wouldn’t  typically  understand,  as  Newsround  chooses   news  stories  that  represent  the  programme  as  ‘friendly’  with  nearly  all  soft  news  as   these  would  be  headline  that  would  attract  a  young  demographic  like  that  of   CBBC.    However  CBBC  is  somewhat  subjective  and  even  biased  as  Newsround   portrayals  a  light  side  of  news,  whereas  every  other  news  program  here  in  the  UK,   represents  the  news  as  serious  news  program  that  covers  a  range  of  things.  But   mostly  hard  news,  which  perhaps  is  biased  as  representing  the  news  through  only   soft  news  stories.  

Whereas  since  Newsround  only  cover  soft  news,  they  can  be  somewhat,  seen  as   misrepresenting  the  news,  even  though  it  is  for  children,  meaning  they  have  to  make   sure  that  is  light  hearted,  yet  still  covers  a  form  of  news.  However  they  also  don’t   take  a  side  as  there  news  coverage  focus  on  subjects  where  there  are  no  sides  to  an   argument  really,  as  it  is  just  silly  stories  that  children  can  enjoy,  without  the  need  to   be  impartial  or  objective  or  subjective  since  you  couldn’t  really  take  a  side.   All  the  while  ‘60  Secs’  is  appealing  to  it’s  demographic,  through  the  colourful,   animated  graphic  design,  which  represents  the  news  in  a  sort  of  fun  way  and  grabs   the  viewers  attention  with  the  blue  colour,  highlighting  and  making  it  stand  out.  Like   ‘Newsround’,  as  everything  about  the  ‘60  Secs’  news  presenter  he  is  informal,  with   his  clothing  being  casual,  this  represents  him  as  approachable  and  ‘fun’  and  friendly   which  is  something  it’s  demographic  can  relate  to  and  not  something  that  ‘news  at   10’    chooses  to  do.  They  try  to  keep  the  audience  at  a  distance  through  Huw’s  formal   costume  and  serious  tone  of  voice.  It’s  mode  of  address  is  also  different  as  it’s  new   presenter  is  much  like  Newsround  since  it  has  young  presenter,  who  has  a  calm  tone   of  voice,  but  doesn’t  express  himself  much  like  many  other  presenters  as  his  body   language  and  facial  expression,  doesn’t  indicate  or  favour  either  side.    This  then   represents  him  as  an  impartial  person  much  like  Huw,  yet  still  his  clothing  and   general  mode  of  address  represents  him  as  a  more  approachable  person  than  that  of   Huw  Edwards. As  since  it  is  part  of  the  BBC,  they  have  to  make  sure  that  they  do  not  portrayal  any   opinions  through  the  news.    While  60  seconds  is  a  mixture  of  hard  and  soft  news,  as   it  covers    a  range  of  topics,  ranging  from  the  biggest  headlines  that  would  be  shown   on  the  likes  of  News  at  10  and  more  mainstream  news  programs  or  channels,  while   60  seconds  also  covers  much  light  headlines  from  sports  to  some  silly  things.     ‘News  at  10’  however  is  different  as  it  has  a  news  presenter  wearing  a  suit,   represents  himself  in  a  way  that  clearly  is  identifiable  with  it’s  demographic  through   his  facial  expressions,  tone  of  voice,  as  each  is  much  more  relaxed.  Unlike  'News  at   10'  which  is  more  formal  in  that  Hue  Edwards  speaks  in  a  more  monotone  voice  and   speaks  directly  to  the  viewer,  while  also  being  almost  aggressive  towards  the  viewer,   with  a  serious  voice  and  the  fact  he  is  shouting  out  the  news  headlines.  He  is  also   ''dressed  up''  in  that  he  has  to  be  impartial  about  the  headlines  so  that  he  doesn't   come  off  biased.   Whereas  '60  Seconds'  &  'Newsround'  represent  themselves  differently  as  they  come   off  more  informal  as  there  speak  in  a  more  conversational  lighter  tone  and  speaks   less  formally,  while  they  both  dress  casually  in  that  they  both  are  wearing  casual   clothing  that  includes  bright  colour  such  as  Ricky  from  ‘Newsround’  is  wearing  a  red   lumberjack  shirt.  Making  him  stand  out,  While  the  ‘60  Seconds  presenter  is  wearing   a  black  shirt,  which  unlike  Ricky,    presents  him  in  a  way  that  he  doesn’t  stand  out,   because  of  the  natural  colour  that  he  wears,  however  since,  this  only  make’s  the   Pink  neon  and  rolling  text  of  the  BBC  3  logo  stand  out  more.  And  in  a  more  relaxed   manner,  as  they  have  to  come  off  more  casual  to  their  target  audience's  as  someone   like  Hue  Edward's  wouldn't  attract  a  younger  demographic  to  watch  their   programming,  while  the  fact  that  Hue  Edward’s  dress  in  a  suit  brings  across  some  

authority  and  highlight  the  serious  nature  of  what  he  is  talking  about  while  being   objective  and  impartial,  this  is  seen  by  the  fact  that  during  '60  Seconds'  the   presenter  as  he  starts  off  the  summary  of  the  news  by  saying  what  ''another  great   episode  of  Being  Human''  appealing  to  the  target  audience  in  that  it  suggesting  that   he  watched  it  as  well,  meaning  he  knows  what  he  is  talking  about,  as  he  enjoys  the   same  programming  and  represents  him  as  the  target  audience  and  as  their  friend  or   even  ‘buddy’  .He  also  uses  alliterations  such  as  ''Murray  Mania  to  Murray  Misery''   attracting  BBC  3's  target  audience  of  teenagers  and  representing  the  news  in  a  way   that  is  more  fun  ,  with  a  little  tabloid  like  paper  who  uses  alliterations  and  word   play/  puns  all  the  time.  As  60  Seconds  tries  to  be  infotainment  because  it  covers   entertainment  and  informative  material  for  the  news.    This  is  further  proven  by  the   source  of  it's  news  subjectivity  as  it  covers  entertainment  news  and  the  fact  that  it  is   a  summary  of  the  news,  as  the  target  audience  would  get  bored  of  watching  a  news   programme  that  is  long,  as  they  wouldn't  want  their  demographic  to  get  bored  and   change  the  channel.  Whereas  since  'News  at  10'  is  represented  as  a  much  more   serious  news  programme  meaning  that  instead  of  appealing  to  it’s  target  audience   through  would  require  a  bigger  budget  as  compared  to  '60  secs'  and  'Newsround'   whose  representation  is  aimed  at  a  bigger  audience,  meaning  it  would  take  more  to   make  it  unbiased  and  attract  a  range  of  audience's  so  that  the  news  can  be  ''fair'',   whereas  a  American  news  programme  like  'Fox  News'  is  represented  in  a  biased  way   because  of  the  owner  trying  to  get  his  POV  across.

Part  3 Expository  is  a  particular  type  of  documentary;  this  brand  of  documentary  is   normally  so  that  the  filmmaker  can  express  their  viewpoint  on  a  particular  subject   matter.  This  means  that  expository  documentaries  are  normally  biased  as  they  use   conventions  in  order  to  convey  or  express  the  point  of  view  on  a  subject  matter  they   believe  to  be  important. These  conventions  include  things  like  the  use  of  a  voiceover  to  illustrate  the   narrator's  point  of  view,  while  also  being  told  from  a  third  person  view  in  that  the   person  is  detached  from  what  he/she  is  talking  about  and  portrayed  as  a  ”voice  of   god”-­‐  which  is  a  non-­‐diegetic  voice  over,  by  a  narrator  who  makes  the  audience   believe  everything  they  say  as  fact  as  if  they  almost  have  authority.  This  is  because   the  character  is  omnipresent  and  omniscient,  for  example  in  ''Mussolini  Italian   Nightmare''  with  the  opening  sentence  being  ''His  arrogance,  his  charm,  his  desire  to   rule  an  Empire,  intoxicated  a  nation''.  This  proves  that  the  narrator  is  against   Mussolini,  as  Mussolini  is  being  represented  as  an  “arrogant”  dictator  through  a   ‘’voice  of  god’’  most  audiences  will  believe  everything  the  voice  of  god  says  -­‐  it  will   be  taken  as  fact.  This  is  further  illustrated  with  the  archive  and  actuality  footage   alongside  the  voiceover,  which  is  seen  as  one  of  the  main  conventions  of  expository   documentaries.  With  the  narrator  saying  that  with  “all  his  wit  he  was  a  problem  to   Italy”,  and  that  he  was  a  bad  person,  proven  by  the  voice  of  god  when  he  states  that   a  ''young  Hitler  Idolised  him”  this  is  ‘proved’  by  his  tone  of  voice  to  be  accurate  as  it   helps  convince  the  viewer  that  the  voice  of  god’s  representation  is  right  and  that  

Mussolini  is  not  a  good  man.  The  omnipresent  voice  over  is  also  purposely  leaving   out  information  so  that  the  filmmaker  can  create  a  biased  documentary,  that  fits   alongside  their  opinion  on  Mussolini,  and  the  maker  also  leaves  out  facts,  so  that  the   filmmaker  can  make  the  viewer  feel  as  if  the  narrator  is  correct  and  any  information   that  is  given  to  them  is  completely  accurate  and  truthful  so  the  viewer  should   believe  what  they  say.  The  use  of  montage  editing  is  done,  so  that  the  viewer  thinks   Mussolini  is  the  man  responsible  for  all  the  actions  that  are  shown,  through  the  use   of  archive  footage.  This  is  done  by  the  fact  that  throughout  the  documentary  most  of   the  footage  is  image's  of  Mussolini  at  different  times  in  his  life,  while  having  a   interview  over  the  top,  so  that  he  gives  information  to  the  viewer  that  is  related  to   the  image  that  is  seen,  meaning  the  viewer  would  come  to  a  conclusion  that  the   image  and  voice  over  fit  together  to  create  an  accurate  representation  for  the   viewer  to  feel  upset  about  the  subject  matter.  The  editing  is  also  elliptical  as  certain   interviews  are  clearly  used  so  that  the  filmmaker  can  get  the  best  of  the  information   that  he  is  given  so  that  he  can  give  his  opinion  on  Mussolini,  while  being  biased  so   that  the  viewer  feels  the  same  as  the  filmmaker  and  the  narrator.  A  soundtrack  is   also  played  over  the  top  in  order  to  create  a  tension  that  fits  alongside  the  opinion   that  the  filmmaker  is  trying  to  get  a  across.  There  is  also  a  ''talking  head  shot''  which   is  used  to  inform  the  viewer  to  a  greater  extent  through  the  opinion  of  a  expert  on   the  subject  as  the  first  interview  we  hear  from  a  biographer  who  talks  about   Mussolini  as  a  child  when  he  was  expelled  from  his  school  almost  trying  to  indicate   that  he  had  this  sort  of  evil  in  him  even  as  a  child.  As  the  use  of  an  expert  helps  give   the  audience  more  belief  in  what  they  are  hearing  is  accurate  and  truthful  and   makes  you  believe  that  everything  else  you  are  hearing  in  the  documentary  will  be   fact.  As  adding  a  voice  of  god  helps  add  to  the  knowledge.  As  it  represents  Mussolini   in  a  way  that  the  audience  in  this  situation  would  find  hard  to  agree  with  as   Mussolini  is  someone  who  is  hard  to  agree  or  approve  of  in  anyway.  As  there  is   evidence  everywhere  that  indicates  that  he  was  a  dictator  that  did  nothing  but  bad   things.   Part  4 Both  'Tattoo  Tears'  and  'Bowling  for  Columbine'  are  very  different  type's  of   documentary's  with  the  later  being  a  interactive  documentary,  while  the  first  is  an   observational  documentary  while  both  have  feature  to  identify  it  as  that  type  of   documentary.  While  both  still  follow  the  same  structure  created  through  narrative,   mise-­‐en-­‐scene,  soundtrack,  editing  and  cinematography  they  do  differ  substantially   in  the  way  they  represent  their  subjects  and  how  they  tell  their  ‘stories’  For  example   in  'Tattooed  Tears'  the  way  the  scene  is  presented  with  the  prisoner  interviewing  the   other  prisoner  as  almost  he  is  actually  ''acting''  by  playing  up  to  the  camera  due  to   his  nature  of  looking  into  the  camera.  Also  the  fact  that  the  scene  is  in  the  middle  of   a  real  camera  this  is  detailed  when  the  interviewer  says  ''Check  this  out''  as  almost  to   tell  him  that  the  camera  is  here  in  front  of  him,  while  the  person  being  interviewed   doesn't  know  this  due  to  the  fact  he  is  still  in  his  cell,  while  still  being  ‘interviewed’   by  this  person.   As  audiences  general  believe  that  that  observational  filmmaking  is  meant  to  show   the  events  of  something  in  an  objective  way.  This  then  means  that  the  audience  will   generally  find  it  more  believable  and  therefore  consider  what  they  are  seeing  as  fact   and  accurate.  As  the  audience  will  find  things  like  the  shaky  camerawork,  the  

diegetic  audio  more  believable  and  real  meaning  they  will  perceive  this  as  fact,  as   nothing  is  changed  that  affects  what  they  are  seeing  the  audio  they  are  hearing  is   actual  sound,  that  isn’t  scripted  or  anything.    This  also  helps  with  the  ‘fly  on  the  wall’   way  of  filmmaking,  as  no  one  is  actually  meant  to  know  they  are  being  filmed,  is   something  that  is  next  to  impossible.  And  when  they  do  know  the  cameras  are  there   hence  the  reason  for  the  prisoner  going  ‘’Check  this  out’’,  and  this  means  that  they   would,  much  like  many  other  people  would  start  ‘acting  up’  to  the  camera.   Whereas  ''Bowling  for  Columbine''  uses  the  same  type  of  technique  by  almost  talking   with  a  voiceover  throughout  the  footage  of  the  milkman  and  farmer  being  normal   everyday  things  alongside  the  idea  of  America  bombing  countries  ''whose  name  we   couldn't  pronounce''  and  a  half  naked  woman  holding  a  dangerous  weapon  all  being   part  of  ''a  typical  day  in  America”  and  this  feature  being  seen  throughout  with  this   type  of  documentary  also  being  biased  due  to  the  nature  of  the  documentary   matching  only  the  filmmakers  thoughts  and  no  one  else's. Another  thing  is  the  soundtrack  used  for  both  with  ''Tattoo  Tears''  having  no  voice   over's  or  music,  and  instead  relying  on  diegetic  sound's  between  the  interviewer  and   interviewee,  with  the  only  work  done  to  the  sound  is  the  sound  bridge  used  when   there  is  a  cut  from  a  shot  of  the  interviewer's  back  to  his  face.  While  ''Bowling  for   Columbine''  uses  a  voiceover  throughout  the  opening  scene  with  a  sarcastic  yet   casual  tone  of  voice  throughout  stating  a  ''typical  day  in  America'',  with  non-­‐diegetic   sound  at  the  background  and  the  music  being  almost  militaristic  and  patriotic,  trying   to  convey  the  feeling  of  pride  for  USA,  again  continuing  the  feeling  of  ''a  typical  day   in  America''. Also  editing  is  used  differently  such  in  ''Tattooed  Tears''  is  presented  in  a  real  style   due  to  the  long  duration  shot,  meaning  the  filmmaker  wanted  to  the  viewer  to  know   that  it  was  filmed  in  real  time,  making  the  character's  more  interesting  due  to  the   fact  that  they  aren't  being  played  up  and  everything  they  are  saying  being  truthful.   Whereas  ''Bowling  for  Columbine''  is  presented  into  a  montage  with  quick  cuts  to   images  that  separate  don't  mean  anything,  however  once  edited  Michael  Moore   presents  it  as  if  it  is  ''A  typical  day  in  America’’  while  showing  his  opinion,  as  Moore  is   manipulating  the  audience  and  us,  in  that  he  is  trying  to  make  us  believe  his  opinion   (which  is  clearly  biased)  simply  by  the  way  that  he  phrases  certain  words,  particularly   the  bit  about  the  bombing  of  other  countries.  As  his  tone  of  voice  throughout  the   section  is  completely  normal,  as  this  helps  with  the  reaction  of  the  montage  that   included  a  “typical  day  in  America”  which  had  teachers  doing  their  jobs,  people   making  deliveries,  and  the  bombing  of  other  countries  all  seem  normal,  as  his  tone   of  voice  helps  highlight  this  as  a  normal  day,  as  he  uses  this  kind  of  dry  sense  of   humour,  to  make  people  see  his  point,  through  humour  as  people  would  have   laughed  at  this.  And  they  would  agree  with  his  biased  opinion,  without  really   realising  that  they  have.   The  same  here  can  be  said  of  the  scene  of  a  woman  wearing  a  bikini,  handling  a   machine  gun,  as  this  is  also  treated  as  a  “typical  day  of  USA”. Whereas  ''Tattooed  Tears''  is  more  balanced  relying  on  actual  real  time  footage  to   convey  the  feeling  that  is  fair  also  correct  (or  accurate).  ‘‘Bowling  for  Columbine''   also  uses  graphic  match's  to  show  how  the  woman  with  a  gun  relates  to  the  Statue   of  liberty  also  comparing  the  two  characters  against  one  another  to  see  the  

difference  over  time.  As  a  number  of  shots  that  are  accompanied  by  a  voiceover,   adds  more  depth  to  the  scene.  As  the  mise-­‐en-­‐scene,  graphic  match  and  non   diegetic  voiceover  all  add  and  create  the  scene,  as  the  final  bit  of  the  opening  scene,   goes  “Yeah  it  was  just  a  typical  day  in  America”,  next  to  a  clip  of  a  woman  wearing  a   bikini  while  handling  a  machine  gun,  which  fades  into  a  graphic  match  of  the  statue   of  Liberty,  as  here  Moore  is  expressing  his  subjective  biased  opinion,  as  he  is  trying   to  say  America  is  crazy,  via  making  things  that  would  typically  standout  seem  normal   and  such.  As  the  opening  scene,  which  includes  the  farmer,  teachers  and  milkman,   next  to  a  semi-­‐naked  woman  handling  a  machine  gun,  suggests  that  America  is  crazy   once  again.  As  the  image  of  the  statue  of  Liberty  typically  makes  us  think  that  the   main  idea  of  America  being  associated  with  a  gun  bikini  nut.   As  the  whole  sequence  is  told  through  his  droll  dry  voiceover  which  depicts  a  normal   American  day.  All  the  while  he  inserts  two  things  that  are  not  normal  aspects  of   America  (Bombing  of  other  countries  and  Woman  wearing  bikini  while  handling  a   gun).  Yet  they  are  handled  as  normal  aspects  of  America,  as  if  it  has  happened  some   many  times  that  it  is  now  part  of  traditional  America,  as  he  manipulates  us  into   believing  that  America  is  mad  for  their  normal  reaction  and  response  to  guns  and   war.   As  his  voiceover  helps  present  his  biased  opinion  through  the  non-­‐diegetic   voiceover.  As  he  basically  tells  us  what  he  wants  the  audience  to  know,  and   persuades  us  of  this  making  the  audience  believe  his  biased  opinion.  As  the  archive   footage  that  he  uses  shows  us  what  he  wants  to  see,  as  the  footage  is  meant  to   visually  illustrate  what  his  voiceover  is  saying,  which  have  to  illustrate  Moore’s   opinion  on  America,  through  the  non-­‐diegetic  voiceover.   Moore  also  leaves  out  footage  on  purpose  in  order  to  create  the  feeling  he  is  trying   to  present  to  the  viewer,  with  the  footage  being  made  to  look  like  he  can  got  a  gun   in  one  day,  as  long  as  he  didn't  have  any  criminal  charges,  but  could  be  crazy,  when   in  fact  the  gun  was  shipped  in  over  night  from  another  bank  300  miles  away,  while   he  also  had  to  sign  other  papers  in  order  to  get  a  gun  such  as  a  mailing  gun  orders   and  to  have  a  background  check  afterwards.     Conclusion The  main  difference  between  TV  news  and  documentaries  is  that  TV  News  needs  to   be  impartial,  truthful  and  accurate  about  the  information  that  they  send  out,  as  we   as  an  audience  believe  everything  that  they  say  to  be  true.  As  if  it  is  found  out  that   the  news  isn't  telling  you  the  truth  then,  you  will  most  likely  get  sued  or  even  fined   by  OFCOM,  and  your  audience  wouldn’t  believe  anything  that  you  said  after  that.  A   recent  example  of  this  kind  of  situation  is  when  Newsnight  had  broadcast  a  report,   that  indicated  that  a  politician  was  a  paedophile,  and  this  news  was  later  found  out   to  be  false,  and  due  to  this  the  programme’s  audience  didn’t  believe  everything  that   they,  said  and  were  forced  to  pay  the  person  for  compensation,  and  all  of  this  for  a   while  threatened  the  state  of  the  show.  Whereas  Documentaries  are  more  in  line  to   be  subjective,  through  the  filmmakers  opinion,  this  typically  done  in  a  third  person   point  of  view  meaning  the  audience  are  more  in  line  to  believe  what  they  are  seeing.   As  an  example  of  this  use  is  when  a  ‘voice  of  god’  voiceover  is  used  by  someone  who  

is  detached  from  the  subject  matter,  as  this  is  something  typically  seen  in  expository   documentaries  to  be  specific,  even  though  documentaries  are  subjective,  since  it   express  a  point  of  view  in  a  third  person  view,  meaning  we  preserve  it  as  being   accurate.  Another  issue  is  the  representation  that  the  filmmaker  chooses  in  order  to   preserve  the  subject  that  they  are  covering  it,  weather  it  is  in  a  negative  or  positive   (or  a  balanced  argument)  light.  As  the  use  of  the  soundtrack,  the  editing,  mise-­‐en-­‐ scene  and  camerawork  can  all  be  presented  in  a  particular  way  that  controls  the  way   that  it  is  shown  in.  As  a  show  like  News  at  10  has  a  very  different  target  audience   when  compared  to  something  like  Newsround  as  News  at  10  is ��aimed  at  a  serious   audience  of  adults  that  are  interested  or  want  to  know  the  big  news  going  on  in  the   day.  While  a  children’s  programme  like  Newsround.  Highlights  the  less  major  news   events  and  follows  almost  happy  news  programmes  with  it  being  someone  doing   something  semi-­‐successful.  News  programmes  also  rely  on  the  use  of  sound  to  help   indicate  the  authenticity  or  ‘realistic’  nature  that  diegetic  sound  is  used  to  represent   as  if  it  is  ‘actual’  sound.  Whereas  Non-­‐diegetic  sound  instead  how  you  can  change   how  your  subject  matter  is  presented,  as  you  could  add  a  ‘voice  of  god’  voiceover  to   express  a  clear  view  point,  while  music  can  be  used  in  the  same  way  to  help  express   your  idea  or  to  make  the  viewer  feel  a  certain  way  about  something  that  they  are   seeing,  as  non-­‐diegetic  sound  is  traditionally  called  ‘Commentary’  sound.     However  a  filmmaker  can  also  present  their  work  in  a  biased  manner,  as  showing   them  a  one-­‐sided  argument,  and  not  a  balanced  argument,  which  lets  the  audience,   make  up  their  own  mind.  This  is  a  typical  problem  with  a  biased  viewpoint;  the   audience  could  disagree  with  your  opinion,  meaning  they  won’t  believe  what  they   are  seeing  in  the  documentary.  Documentaries  aren’t  the  only  form  that  is  biased  as   the  news  is  to,  as  the  news  typical  presents  the  news  in  the  viewpoint  of  a  certain   country  of  even  a  TV  channel,  an  example  of  this  is  news  of  UK  troops  dying  in   Iraq/Afghanistan,  but  not  other  countries.  Another  important  thing  for  factual   programming  is  all  programming  is  made  for  a  particular  target  audience,  a   somewhat  niche  audience  with  filmmakers  knowing  this  as  they  made  it  to  appeal  to   a  certain  demographic,  meaning  viewers  that  are  not  in  the  target  audience,   wouldn’t  turn  over  and  watch  this  programme  that  isn’t  clearly  aimed  at  them.  But   some  viewers  will  watch  and  disagree  with  the  programme,  such  as  them  noticing   that  it  has  a  subjective  viewpoint,  with  the  filmmaker  only  showing  evidence  that   further  helps  prove  their  point,  however  not  all  audience  members  will  notice  this   and  are  more  inclined  to  believe  everything  they  see  as  objective,  as  they  believe   documentaries  are  something  that  is  proven  to  be  fact  and  accurate,  even  though   everyone’s  opinion  is  viewed  truthful  to  themselves.  

Factual production Essay Improved