There are a number of different types of factual programmes for example: chat shows, magazine shows, talk shows, reality shows and documentaries. A chat show is someone who is a minor celebrity themselves (like Jonathan Ross) who goes and interviews film stars, models and celebrities. A talk show is where there are active audiences who take part in debates within the show to settle an argument followed by a host such as Jeremy Kyle. Magazine shows are where well known channels such as ‘Top Gear’ host hot topics around the world on specific things as Top Gear magazine is predominantly about vehicles. However, reality shows are developed from observational documentaries as there is a camera following egotists for a long time with small fictional scripted bits such as Big Brother. These factual production programmes are broadcasted and consumed in various different ways through TV, Internet players such as BBC Iplayer and 4od, cinema and DVD. Regardless of these specific types of factual programmes my focus will predominantly be on film and TV documentaries and the conventions of its different sub-genres. TV news is a type of documentary which reports daily on the current news affairs and events around the world. It aims to be impartial and objective as it serves an important role to keep all people from different backgrounds informed about what is happening in the world, however it’s impartiality is debatable. TV News usually consists of the following conventions: presenters, news headlines, on location film crews including cameramen, reporters and sound engineers and reporters. Documentaries are somewhat different as they use facts to persuade you to the opinion of the film maker, taking on their point of view to a stronger level. There are different types of documentaries such as Expository, Observational and Interactive. Expository documentaries are known for its voice of god voice overs accompanied with image illustration and interviews. Observational documentaries are known for having no interviews and voiceovers therefore prove to be more real as there are not a lot of edits, whereas interactive documentaries tend to include the filmmaker who narrates the voice over. These three different types of documentaries presents the factual information differently, whilst still aiming to create a realistic programme with conventions of a film with a fixed narrative from beginning to end to tell a story to the audience. Despite the different types of documentaries, there are a number of issues which need to be considered when watching and making all factual programmes. Factual programmes should be accurate and truthful as their purpose as a programme is to present us ‘facts’ which are commonly known to be true. For example, in the documentary Bowling for Columbine it presents facts about the gun laws in America and states how you can legally get a gun from a bank. This is supported by actuality footage of him signing off contracts to obtain a gun, and walking out of the bank with a gun thus proves this fact is true. Regardless, since the programme will be broadcasted to thousands of people accurate information is crucial and should not mislead the wider population. The facts stated in documentaries should also be impartial, objective and balanced. This is expected from documentaries as facts are commonly true and should not be influenced by personal opinions or beliefs. For example programmes like BBC news have to be impartial, objective and balanced as its sole purpose is to inform residences in the UK about current debates and affairs showing the two sides of the argument, rather than their own personal beliefs. This can explain why all news presenters have blank facial expressions when informing viewers about news which is somewhat heart rending, suggesting their impartial nature as they do not show any personal emotion during the presentation of the facts.
However, the biggest issue with all factual documentaries is it’s subjectivity as ultimately they are expressing the opinion of the film maker. As a result of subjectivity, a number of documentaries are open to bias and personal opinions. Although in some types of factual productions like the news bias and personal opinions are not as translucent as in other documentaries such as Bowling for Columbine which is flooded with personal remarks and beliefs. All factual productions are based on a narrative to tell it’s audience facts, however in the way the facts are told it inevitably expresses the opinion of who presents it, or who has given the script for the presenter to perform. News at 10 is a typical example of the conventions a News programme contains. It opens with dramatic non diegetic music which acts like a countdown as the bassline repeatedly beats, giving a sense of urgency. This sense of urgency creates a serious mood to the programme and diverts the audiences attention to the news, suggesting the contents of the programme are important and attention worthy as news tends to cover the latest affairs and debates which may affect home viewers. News at 10 targets a mature, older target audience which explains the formal presentation of the mise-en-scene throughout the programme. It opens with a mid shot of Huw Edwards standing in this firm position with an almost static posture which could be to not detract any attention from the headlines, implying he is presenting the news in an impartial, manner. This impartiality is achieved through his blank, yet serious facial expression as he does not show any emotion when presenting the headlines. Before Huw Edwards speaks, attention is further diverted to his voice with the use of dramatic sounds which are typical conventions of news programmes. This somewhat captivates the audience to his character, whose body language is presented as professional and serious as his he stands in a firm position in a suit, making him look somewhat trustworthy. This non-verbal communication itself presents him as believable as he is portrayed as a prominent figure through sound effects and body language. Impartiality is further implied with the monotonous tone of his voice which keeps a serious tone throughout his dialogue, not only does this show he is being objective it also creates an aura of tension to the headlines presented. As a result, the audience are captivated by his monologue as he presents the most important part of the news with urgent music, which is the headlines. Typically in news programmes, images on screen are used to illustrate voice overs. This is present in News at 10, as when Huw mentions "the economy stalls," a diegetic picture appears illustrating what he is saying in the voice over. The images act as proof of what he is saying, therefore are a source of evidence which proves the accuracy of the news which is expected from such factual programmes. Using images to illustrate voice overs is commonly found in factual programmes especially in interactive documentaries, however News at 10 uses experts to capture actuality footage and illustrate stories. For example, when Huw starts talking about Simon Cowell a pre-edited photo of him comes up in order to illustrate two stories without using any secondary footage. The diegetic voice of Huw Edwards at this point turns into a non diegetic voice over when actuality footage is displayed, therefore inevitably acting like a soundbridge between him and the raw footage continuing to inform the audience further which is a common technique in News programmes. Simple edits are used to structure the different types of media News at 10 presents as it only involves small transitions such as flashes between footage. This could possibly be to not detract attention and keep professionalism by not using abstract transitions which could imply amateur childish news, which is found in Newsround and 60 seconds.
Regardless of how impartial News at 10 portrays to be, one can argue that it is not as impartial as it attempts to be. For instance, as soon as it mentions the economy is stalling, it moves to David Cameron speaking about ways to get around this expressing his views and opinions of the conservative party. This fails to recognize the views of another party, for instance the Labour party and what Ed miliband claims to say about this economical issue; therefore making News at 10 not fully impartial. Another example of bias in News at 10 is during the context of war at another country, for instance the news presenter speaks a lot more about British soldiers dying rather than other ethnic background soldiers dying, keeping interviews only in UK and not somewhere like Gaza or Syria giving an unbalanced opinion to the viewers which manifests its bias. Despite the UK news having an element of bias in what they report and how they report information, Newsreaders and field reporters always present it in an objective way and are not influenced by their personal feelings or opinions. Therefore they maintain the impression of being impartial due to the tone of voice, facial expression and body language. This is because news is concerned with the way the audience will receive the news, without this continued objective and impartial presentation and reporting we would not perceive the news as wholly accurate. If the presenters were to express their bias and opinion too much then we may view it as simply being their opinion rather than a truthful, objective and accurate reporting. On the other hand, if one is to report from a warzone and expresses no emotion during the horrible sights of war, it could leave the audience wondering whether they are being emotionally accurate as it would portray them as being somewhat soulless or heartless. However on the contrary it can be argued that emotion is not the same as opinion. Marie Colvin from The Guardian who lost her eye whilst field reporting states how her “mission is to report these horrors of war with accuracy and without prejudice” thus providing evidence of attempted impartiality in UK news despite the potential danger. Here is the link to the article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/22/marie-colvin-our-mission-is-tospeak-truth Depending on target audience factual production programmes may represent themselves in different ways, being either formal or informal. The representation of '60 seconds' depicts an informal way of documentation through the way the presenter (Matt) is dressed. He is dressed in casual clothes with a comfortable stance a making him seem approachable in comparison to one who is a firm stance dressed in a suit like News at 10. He is illustrating to appeal to his audience through his mode of address by being more friendly hence the way he introduces himself: "Hello I'm Matt" literally representing himself like he knows you in person further making him seem somewhat approachable and friendly. However, it is clear he is representing his subjective opinions as he mentions "that was a good episode off" showing his open representation of bias, therefore does not try to make the news seem impartial. This somewhat allows to appeal to his target audience more, which is aimed at young teenagers who arguably are not as concerned with impartiality in comparison to adults. Techniques such as alliteration is used to appeal towards younger audiences- “from Murry mania to Murry misery” making it seem more simple similar to what The Sun newspaper do in their articles. Therefore it could be argued ‘60 seconds’ tries to represent their news in an infotainment way, this is suggested with the tongue catching alliteration and interesting frames that the news is presented in making it seem somewhat childish, suitable for it’s target audience. However, it could be argued simplicity in the news is not achieved as it moves at a very fast pace with
quick bursts of information due to the duration of the programme ‘60 seconds’ to keep on time. As well as this, the marquee of rolling text displaying news that is not related to the non diegetic sound may confuse and distract the target audience rather than simplify the news for the target audience. Alternatively the short duration of this news could be seen as an ident, as it does break up programmes as well as represent the channels identity. The visual representation has kept loyal to BBC three's identity, consisting using the colours of purple and pink. These of which also can symbolise youth and vitality as these are bright colours, associating this with the desired target audience. Similar to ‘60 seconds’, Newsrounds presenter Ricky’s mode of address depicts a very chirpy, happy attitude allowing his identity to match his target audience who are kids from ages 3 to 5. However, this suggests that the news presented will not be objective like the hard news presented in News at 10, as it is likely the presenter is likely to show his own opinions and emotions to entertain young children and make the factual documentary more infotainment than mere news. The fact that there is non diegetic sound track everytime actuality footage is shown suggests that it serves an entertainment purpose to make the news more infotainment, possibly to interest the younger target audience further with happy music mixed into the background of the news. This means that news from Newsround will tend to be virtually all soft news as they want to represent the news differently to a young target audience. Therefore this suggests that the representation of the programme will reflect the target audience. This could be why Ricky wears a very casual bright lumberjack shirt and has a relaxed body language with happy facial expressions, to possibly appeal to this particular target audience who would tend to like bright colours and an informal welcome. The happy tonality in Ricky’s voice rather than the monotonous voice used in News at 10 gives a personality to the presenter, ultimately making the audience feel more comfortable. There are also similar backdrops of CGI to create a professional news look for children with bright colours, maintaining the professionalism regardless of target audience. The explanation of documenting it in this way is staying local to the CBBC channel which this would usually be broadcasted on. Despite the professionalism, you can tell the news depicted is subjective as the news is very simple and sometimes un relevant. For example there is lots of sport stories and celebrities however as soon as a serious story is mentioned about the fire starting where 200 people died, there was a lack of story. This maybe because they have to soften the harsh content of the news to be appropriate for the target audience. However straight after the serious headline is presented, irrelevant news of someone taking photos under water comes up which really does not mean much to anyone apart from the person who took the photos. The duration of this irrelevant news is longer than serious news therefore showing that soft news programmes like Newsround are not impartial, and do not give equal consideration of different types of news. Again, this is due to the content of News as it would not be appropriate for young kids to learn about people who have lost their lives due to fires. Apart from factual documentaries, there are also other types of documentaries such as Expository. It is common for Expository documentaries to have a voiceover which dominates the narrative, illustrating the content shown on the screen action which is also known as the ‘Voice of God’ voiceover. This is a very common type of documentary, and can be often mistaken for what ‘normal’ documentaries are as it tries to persuade you of the filmmaker’s opinion through different varieties of footage. This is evident on Vice’s YouTube channel which is a leading channel for documentaries on YouTube, covering different issues around the world from serious political issues to mere subjective research. Subjectivity is evident in their documentary named ‘Meet France’s toughest rappers’, as Vice assume they have they have caught
footage with the toughest rappers in an entire country in the title which arguably is not accurate, thus implying this particular documentary is opinionated therefore is biased. As common with expository documentaries, in ‘Meet France’s toughest rappers’ the filmmaker uses a non diegetic voice over to illustrate the different varieties of archive, raw and secondary footage to persuade you to their opinion. This is evident when the voiceover narrator Cleo uses archive footage to call the president of France a “boring bloppy man”, highlighting the subjectivity of the documentary as well as exposing the lack of objectivity, impartiality and professional presentation. Within the first few minutes of the documentary, a lot of secondary statistics and research is given through non diegetic voice overs from Cleo to illustrate the archive footage of police fighting with teenagers, making the issue seem believable and accurate. However, as the voiceover are non-diegetic it proves that such information given is subjective as it is merely a commentary of Cleo’s opinion rather than on-location diegetic information. Editing plays a crucial part in such parts as it allows the filmmaker to express some facts accompanied with their opinion showing bias whilst revealing actuality footage to make it seem not as biased, which is very common with expository documentaries. Cleo plays the part of “talking head” in expository documentaries, as she is the voice over and expert in the field to expose the suburban areas of France with what is happening. The use of raw footage further makes the documentary seem more accurate and believable as Cleo actually goes out and interviews the “toughest rappers” such as Byron in the abused buildings of the suburbs of France. The destroyed, polluted mis-en-scene of the area in which she interviews old gangsters such as Byron and youngsters of the area is significant to create political awareness of what is happening to the suburbs. This is showing that this expository documentary is accurate with the filmmakers opinion due the proof created through the diegetic voices of those who are living in the suburbs, making the audience believe what is being said as it acts as proof. As well as Expository documentaries, there are also other types of documentaries such as Observational and Interactive. Observational documentaries are arguably the most realistic as the documentary makers presence is hidden, thus captures real unedited footage of a subject who commonly is not aware they are being filmed. As well as this, observational documentaries tend to be shot on location to capture the actual environmental situations unlike common news presenters who tend to be shot at broadcast studios, making it more accurate and believable. ‘Tattooed Tears’ is an example of an observational documentary as it uses long duration shots chronologically with no real edits making it have a sense of realism, making you feel as if you are actually there as the filmmakers presence is hidden. The long durational shots prove the objectivity of the documentary as the audience will view it as accurate due to the little editing involved, making it more believable and real as there are no edited interviews. Such unedited footage makes it hard to fake and leave out any relevant information that could be taken into consideration when viewing a documentary, making it less unbiased unlike Vice’s “Meet frances toughest rappers”. However there are still some elliptical edits that majority of people do not notice, making it less objective as it may seem. This is evident during the conversation between the locked up prisoner who is hidden where there is a cut from the medium long shot from behind the character to a medium close up looking at his face from the front. The edit seems to be seamless as the filmmaker uses the prisoner’s dialogue as a sound bridge, making us
believe it to be accurate and real as it seems to be part of the same observational long duration shot. It could be argued that this edit is the subjective voice of the filmmaker as he chooses what to film and what to edit out of the footage. This allows his/her bias to come in as they make most of the audience believe that the prison is a bad place for teenagers to be in through the shots of violence and bad language which ultimately is the filmmakers opinion. In ‘Tattooed Tears’ the camera work is very shaky, which connotes fear from the camera man as they are interviewing a live prisoner who was imprisoned for beating his own mother. At one point the camera zooms in to get a more in-depth view of the prisoner, however it ends up getting out of focus due to lighting problems which ultimately shows realism as commonly during on location shooting it is hard to get a perfect shot. This shows that the filmmaker is trying to show these events in an objective way, meaning the audience will find it more believable and will consider it to be more accurate. This in combination with the mis-en-scene makes it even more objective as the lighting is dark making shadows everywhere presenting the prisoner as a silhouette - such lighting sets the dark mood of this interview, allowing less practised acting to be done and more real performance reflecting realism. This is shown near the beginning where the filmmaker says “check this out” which appears to be natural and not acted thereby showing he is performing rather than acting. Regardless, the fact that ‘Tattooed Tears’ contains all diegetic speaking and sound makes it real despite in a sense there may be some acting. For example when the prisoner is shown as a silhouette, you can clearly hear the diegetic background sound of other prisoners whilst the prisoner boasts about abusing his mother, showing the noisy atmosphere of a prison. The actual diegetic sounds of doors slamming, prisoners and guards arguing with each other makes it feel as if you are actually there witnessing such arguments due to the point of view hidden camera angle. This shows that the prisoner and guard are unaware of being filmed, which is common with observational documentaries making the scene seem accurate therefore more real and objective as there is no non diegetic commentary or opinion involved. As a result, this would reduce bias to a minimum due to its objectivity if the subject is actually unaware of being filmed or observed. However, it can be argued this in some ways disproves the idea of an observational documentary as normally if an individual is aware of being filmed or observed behaviour tends to change. This is evident in the mis en scene of the argument as the body language and performance of the prisoner becomes more verbally and physically aggressive, showing he is acting and expressing his power and braggadocio possibly due to presence of the filmmaker observing and filming the argument, making it not as real as it may seem. It is interesting how Broomfield and Churchill make an observational documentary with long takes, diegetic sound and no interviews making it appear to the audience as objective therefore accurate and true, yet, still manage to manipulate us into believing their subjective biased opinion of prison always being a bad place. This is made possible through selecting certain types of footage and using some elliptical edits, which make the audience think they made up their own mind of how bad prison actually is rather than being explicitly told how bad it is through the commentary of the filmmaker. On the other hand, interactive documentaries differ from observational documentaries as there is a dominant voice over and presence of the filmmaker. It is similar in some ways as both observational and interactive commonly have location shooting with a handheld camera using long duration shots, however
interactive tends to use a lot more archive material and interviews. Bowling for Columbine by Michael Moore is an example of an interactive documentary as Moore dominates and interacts with the narrative and camera with a non diegetic voice over throughout, thus expresses his bias as he is literally telling the audience what he wants them to believe and think. As a result, this means the non diegetic information given in the documentary may be opinionated and not accurate therefore biased. Moore immediately opens up the documentary with a montage edit of archive footage of random citizens of America doing their ‘daily’ things, which is somewhat expected of an interactive documentary. Montage editing is an editing technique in which shots are juxtaposed in an often fast-paced fashion that compresses time and conveys a lot of information in a relatively short period. This can explain why Moore has decided to use montage editing, as his voiceover acts as a soundbridge to connect two completely different clips of a farmer and president together. This is particularly evident when Moore mentions how it was a “like any other morning in America” as the “farmer” did his “chores” and the “president bombed another country whose name we could not pronounce”. By using non diegetic patriotic patriotic music along with non diegetic commentary in a droll tone, Moore associates bombing another country in America as somewhat normal. Although keeping a normal tone when stating such contrasting contrapuntal statement may prove to be humorous to some yet offensive to others, Moore makes it clear that he is using this tone of voice along with the montage edit in order to manipulate us into believing his biased subjective opinion about America’s wrongdoings. Moore further makes it evident that America is crazy with guns in the mise-en-scene of the last shots of the montage as he comments “yeah it was just a typical day in America”, along with the clip of a girl in a bikini holding a machine gun which fades via a graphic match into the statue of liberty. Moore completely expresses his subjective biased opinion that America is crazy for violence and war by treating something a lethal as a gun normally. The girl freely holding the gun in the graphic match allows the audience to associate it with the statue of liberty ultimately showing the line of freedom America have, which arguably has crossed. The fact that the girl is semi-naked, holding a machine gun whilst smiling somewhat portrays America as mad which is what Moore wants us to think by using such archive material in a montage accompanied by his bias commentary. Right after the montage edit Moore uses elliptical editing, where there are lots of important information being left out. This is evident when he walks into a bank where he sees advertisements of getting a gun from a bank. It is clear that Moore has used the elliptical editing as one moment he asks he wants to join the bank to merely obtain a gun, and the next he is signing forms to get the gun ending with him walking out of the bank with an actual gun. During each cut, Moore uses a sarcastic tone of voice to amuse the viewers and make America’s Gun laws seem somewhat stupid as he states if he is “normally mentally defective” but not “criminal” he will be able to still obtain the gun, in which the bank reply “yeah, exactly”. What is to note in this particular scene is that when the lady replied “yeah, exactly” Moore is actually not in the screen action of the camera. This shows how elliptical editing and non diegetic commentary can be used as a bridge to link two different cuts together, convincing the audience to the bias of the filmmakers subjective edit- if the edit is done subtly and unnoticed. For all we know, she could be replying “yeah, exactly” to something irrelevant to being mentally defective and holding a gun. This again shows how the documentary edit and voiceover is biased as a lot of important information given by the bank on rules and regulations are completely ignored as they may disagree with the point of view Moore is trying to portray, therefore is not shown on camera. Instead, a cut of Moore being handed a gun
is shown with him walking out of a bank commenting sarcastically “dont you think its dangerous handing out guns in a bank” to further mock America’s gun laws, exemplifying the subjective, biased use of editing in ‘Bowling for Columbine’ in order to persuade the viewers to Moores opinion. Through Michael Moore’s commentary, it is clear he is not concerned with the informal representation he is showing which is common with interactive documentaries holding informal interviews. In conclusion, documentaries are generally subjective in comparison to TV News as it is expected for TV news to be balanced, true and accurate at all times maintaining objectivity, impartiality and professionalism. Accuracy plays a pivotal role for audiences to have belief and trust in factual documentary programmes, which is why any bias in the News is taken very seriously in comparison to documentaries which tends to be subjective and biased. This can explain why there are legal issues for broadcasting inaccurate information to large audiences, resulting in a training body like OFCOM to be able to sue or fine you as a punishment. Newsnight is a prime example of this, as they broadcasted a report claiming that an ex politician was a paedophile although such news was inaccurate. This resulted in brand and reputation of Newsnight to suffer, meaning previous audiences will not trust it as much as they once might have. As well as this, such inaccurate information could result those who are responsible to lose their roles as evident with the Director General of the BBC, who resigned along with other important members of staff. This exemplifies the importance of objective, accurate and impartiality within TV news as it plays a vital role to inform mainstream audiences about current issues around their own country or the world, whereas documentaries tend to inform smaller audiences about the filmmakers opinion despite its subjectivity and bias.
KEY Red highlighted text =delete this word SP = spelling Yellow highlighted = advice for improving your analysis NS= new sentence NP = new paragraph Where marked up to