Factual Programming Assignment

An Introduction

There are lots of different types of factual programmes - Chat shows, reality TV, documentaries, and TV news bulletins are just a few examples. Depending on the type of programme, they can be distributed on a number of different platforms - like television, the cinema, DVD, and in some cases - the internet.

TV News Programmes and TV documentaries follow quite differed codes and conventions. For example, we would expect TV News to be very statistical, organised, and balanced. Documentaries though, differ depending on the film-maker. They are more laid back, and often more entertaining that factual.

Documentaries are different, in the fact that they are more subjective. Documentary film makers will tend to persuade their audience their own personal point of view with very selective facts and figures. There are numerous types of documentaries; they are Expository, Observational, and Interactive.

Expository documentaries are the filmmakers revealing or investigating something. Much like Panorama. The show will usually give the audience some context into the subject(s) and  then 'dig deeper' into the case.

An Observational documentary just observes. The subjects are aware that they are being watched, but they are mostly natural. There is of course, the possibility of the subjects putting on an act. Observational documentaries do not always have the chance to be subjective, as there are less voice-overs. The audience can make up their own mind.

In an Interactive documentary the film-maker will either be the subject, or spend their time with the subjects. Here, they can be more pushy, ask/answer more questions, share more opinions, and take the documentary where they choose. Just like Louis Theroux does in The Most Hated Family In America.

Although all 3 types of documentaries display real footage and facts, they all do it differently. They all have a 'beginning, middle and conclusive' narrative.

In order to make an accurate film, a documentary film-maker's sources need to be accurate. Ideally, documentaries should remain factual, fair, and objective - However, this is not always the case. Factual films should be factual - not turn into a promotional or hate-fueled film. They should document something as it is or was, not as it is or was seen by the film-maker. The viewers need to make up their own mind. Unlike television or radio news bulletins, there is nothing regulating film-makers into feeding it's audience bias opinions.

Television news broadcasts however, are way more accurate. The newsreaders are contractually obliged to write objective and balanced news queues. There will always be raw footage on screen, and a reporter will usually be at the scene of the event. News bulletins will often show graphics, statistics, and charts. In some stories, they may choose to interview people. Usually someone involved, or maybe an expert - just for their expert opinion. 

The audience expect their factual programmes to be objective and partial because their sole aim is to be accurate and informative. The information must be respectable & trustworthy. The codes, conventions and guidelines of TV news bulletins help fulfil this. 

Documentaries however are usually more subjective or bias - As they express the opinions of the filmmaker on the subject - sometimes subconsciously, but more often than not, they are aware of this. If someone makes a film about something, they must have a pretty strong opinion on it. Some film-makers will go certain lengths to twist their findings to back their own opinion.

TV News Bulletins - News at 10, Newsround, and 60 Seconds

Although TV news bulletins will always give you the information you need to know, different bulletins will deliver it to you in different ways. Here, we'll be looking at 3 very different shows and comparing and contrasting them.

I feel that the BBC News at 10 bulletin is aimed at middle aged, working class males. They are probably politically aware, or at least have a good understanding of politics. I think this because all of the stories in the bulletin have a huge lack in females. The clips in the intro show all male politicians - people in power. The mise-en-scene of the news room, and the language that the newsreader uses is all very formal, and they go into great detail.

The target audience for the BBC News round bulletin is very different in comparison to News at 10. The bulletin is aimed at young children, aged from around 5 to 11. There are many reasons as to why I can see this. First, it is shown on CBBC, a children's channel. They use lively colours and upbeat music. The newsreader is young, and isn't dressed as formal as a bulletin following codes and conventions should be. This is because this would be perceived as boring by the young audience. Every negative story also got twisted to sound positive. (i.e, there's a forest fire, BUT the fire brigade are dealing with it) It's their way of sugar coating everything for kids.

The 60 second Update bulletin is aimed at a completely different audience too - young females. I can tell this because the graphics and the background are purple. A colour usually associated with females. It's also quite fast. Everything is quite easy to remember. The stories covered are quite celebrity and gossip based. Typical girly things.

Comparing and Contrasting Documentaries

The three most recent documentaries that I have watched; The Most Hated Family In America, Supersize Me, and Bowling For Columbine, are all produced in very different ways by very different film-makers.

The Most Hated Family In America has a big problem regarding bias and opinion. Although there is no escaping the fact that every film-maker will always be at least slightly subjective, this film suffers from this just a little bit more than others. The whole world pretty much shares the same opinion of the Westboro Baptist church, and not in a good way. It's quite difficult to find a film-maker who can remain objective on most things, but more-so with this subject. Still, Louis Theroux manages to produce a very balanced documentary, considering.

Louis Theroux has since commented on the church, stating that the younger generation of followers are surprisingly nice, but pointed out his distaste for Fred Phelps in particular. This shows us that although he has an opinion, he tries to keep it out of the film for the purposes of being impartial.

There is minimal editing with this film. Due to the shock nature of this film, Theroux thought it be best to just show us the footage, rather than attempt to explain it. Theroux directly addresses the camera and voices over some clips when necessary. The Most Hated Family In America is just a standard participatory documentary - We are watching to see how Theroux, and outsider, gets along with the family. 

Super Size Me is probably the most balanced film out of the three. Is it Morgan Spurlock just hating on fast food for an hour and a half? No. He states many times in the film that he enjoys it, and eating out three times everyday for a month is fun. 

He visits and receives opinions and stats from many different specialists, doctors, and nutritionists. Spurlock films almost every meal, only 'Super-Sizes' his meals when asked, and takes many voxpops from a range of people. It's quite fair.

Spurlock is very objective when it comes to the subject of the film. Even before he experiences the drawbacks from fast food, he doesn't speak that badly of it, and seems to keep and open mind.

There is an underlying expectation of Spurlock and the audience that something bad is going to happen. It's almost the whole purpose of the film - to showcase what happens if you eat too much fast-food. Spurlock experiences mood swings, fat accumulating in his liver, a decreased sex drive, and heart palpitations. However, eating 3 McDonalds a day for a month is a bit on the extreme side.

To illustrate his points, Spurlock uses a number of different graphics and charts. When eating meals (and throwing them up) he uses a handheld camera, whilst addressing it directly, talking about how the food is making him feel. It's quite personal, and specific to him. It's accurate, but not entirely balanced, as he is the only person doing the experiment.

Bowling For Columbine is hands down the most bias documentary out of the three. Michael Moore very strong opinions on US gun laws, because he's a very opinionated person. Quite an angry film-maker, often passive aggressive. He's very forward with the people he speaks to.

For example, he practically ambushes Charlton Heston into an interview. Moore also has personal beef with KMart for selling gun ammunition. There is a montage showing a number of violent acts the US has committed, (dating back to 1953) concluding with the 9/11 attacks; hinting that he feels America has brought that on themselves. t's edited in such a way to make the audience resent the US. Moore uses selective editing to give the audience context and lean towards his side of the argument, or at least understand it.

Moore's camera crew also zoom in on his interviewee's (like Heston and the KMart ammunitions manager) so we can see their facial reactions.

Conclusion

Generally speaking, it seems that TV news broadcasts are objective, whilst documentaries are more subjective. It's a legal thing - TV news must be true, documentaries don't. TV must be accurate and impartial so we believe it.

The three film-makers - Theroux, Spurlock, and Moore, all approach the balance of their films quite differently. Theroux is the best at this - although his opinions on Westboro is apparent, he puts them aside for the purpose of the film. He's very fair, and gives them their voice and allows them to justify themselves; unlike Moore, who would most likely destroy them with his unconventional interview techniques.

Moore seems to take advantage of the fact that he can go where he wants with documentaries. He's passive aggressive with people that don't see his logic. Moore's makes many conscious efforts to show us opinions, but rather than speaking them like a conventional documentary, he uses wit, sarcasm, and montages.

Spurlock tries very hard to stay impartial. However, he doesn't do it as well as Theroux. During the experiment, Spurlock jokes around a lot. (possibly due to mood swings, a cause of the fast food binge.) His opinion isn't very clear. However, the voice-overs that he recorded afterwards show us that he has a negative opinion towards the subject, especially in the credits.

It's quite common to assume that both news bulletins are documentaries are 100% true. It's a common expectation. After all, that's what we expect from a factual programme. 

Only the more intellectual consumers can tell selective editing apart from a balanced argument. 

Task 5: TV News Broadcast Analysis

Task 3: Write a short essay on the codes and conventions of documentary films

1. 
Louis Theroux was the main man when it came to questioning the Phelps family and producing 'The Most Hated Family In America.' As an interactive filmmaker, Theroux spends most of the film informally interviewing members of the church, often individually.

2.
The main subjects of the documentary are the church members that shock people the most. Like Shirley Rebekah and Fred Phelps, and Steve Drain.

Theroux spends most of his time with Shirley, and she also has most screen time. She is very supportive of her views, and although she finds Theroux's questions and picking quite irritable, she doesn't lash out or react as such. Asides inflicting her views on her children, she seems quite a good mother. Fred Phelps, or as he is commonly referred to as, 'Gramps' keeps himself to himself. He is the leader of the church. However, he is seen constantly shunning Theroux, and goes out of his way to purposely ignore Theroux's questions. This can be quite challenging as a documentary maker.

3. 
Theroux questions the reasoning behind Westboro's actions throughout the film, often touching on the themes of Religion, Homosexuality, Family, and Interpretation. Their off-shoot of Christianity that they follow is the core of their controversial lifestyle. The church as a whole seem very faithful to their religion, and have a very in-depth knowledge of it. Rebekah and Shirley Phelps are seen constantly defending themselves from Theroux and his questions, reasoning with him and justifying their actions.

The Westboro Baptist church have been known to protest and mock homosexuality, as the church is built around an anti-homosexual theology. One of the most common things we see on the picketing signs in the film are 'God Hates Fags.' This is also the name of the church website. Their hatred of US soldiers is also expressed in a way that depicts soldiers having gay sex.

Another theme seem in the clip is the idea of family. Towards the end of the film we see one of Shirley's children get hit by a projectile thrown from a passing car whilst picketing. It's an example of what happens when you cause offence like this. However, we see that Shirley does care about her children. It makes the audience feel bad for the children, as they are likely to live a life of being social outcasts. Theroux points out that this may bring the family closer together, as they only really have each other.

4 + 6. 
From watching the whole film, we can deduce that Louis Theroux's film crew are of a reasonable size. Perhaps 10-20 people on set, and 3 or 4 men on cameras. We can see this by the type of shots we see. Most scenes are filmed on handheld cameras. The shots are up close, right up in the subject's faces. This form of cinematography is used so that we can see their responses to Theroux's questions, and how they feel when they talk about their beliefs.

Like the cameras, Louis is very much in the subject's faces. He is very direct, and quite pushy, but only when he needs to be. We see him use this interview technique with the defensive characters like Fred and Steve, as so he can force an answer, or some form of response. (Mostly Anger) On the flip-side, characters like Shirley and Rebekah are more open, and they discuss their religion in a less tense manner - we don't see Theroux fishing for answers as much.

5.
'The Most Hated Family in America' is a Participatory documentary. Theroux questions the family's beliefs and, to an extent, participates with their day-to-day activities. However, the film does start pushing slightly towards being a reflective film too. Some parts are made to make the audience feel bad for the children, as they are born into a family of outcasts. Certain scenes will have Louis talking to Rebekah Phelps about her love life. She tells him that she doesn't need (or want) anyone. It is also implied that she doesn't have parental approval, and that it is unlikely someone will be accepting of her religion. It's kind of saddening in a way.

7 + 8.
The main goal with ''The Most Hated Family in America' was to expose the church, and provoke a reaction from these people. The way that they explain themselves and their reasoning for this is supposed to shock people. The controversy surrounding the church and it's homophobic beliefs continues to cause controversy. Some parts of the film are there to remind us that the Phelps family are human. Behind the appalling beliefs, we see that they care for each other, and that they might not be 100% vile. especially the children. And this is where the reflexive part comes in. We are supposed to feel empathy for these people. Most of us will not, but this can spark a debate perhaps. Either way, Louis Theroux finds a good un-bias balance of showing us what sort of people are part of the Westboro Baptist Church.

9. 
The subjects of this film are highly controversial. 'The Most Hated Family in America' was produced with this in mind. It makes good TV. It provokes a response, all whilst educating the audience, and giving them a well-rounded inside look of the subjects.

Task 4: Codes and Conventions of TV News Broadcasts?

Codes and Conventions of TV News Broadcasts.

a) Describe (P) the codes and conventions of TV News Broadcasts.

b) Explain (M) how and why they are used by News Outlets.

c) Use Examples (D) from TV news broadcasts to illustrate your points.

• Explain what 'codes and conventions' are
• Describe and explain a 'television news broadcast'
• Remember to discuss: Studio News Presenters, Field Reporters, Contributors, Links to Studio, Actuality Footage, Report Structure & Mode of Address.

-----------------------------------------------------------

In a television news broadcast, there are several codes and conventions that the broadcasters must follow to have a successful show that will educate and/or entertain the audience. There are many, but simple Codes and Conventions.

On Screen Cinematography

The most common conventions we see is the 'direct address to camera.' This is when the newsreader or field reporter addresses the camera directly, making eye contact, and speaking towards it. 

Another convention we see a lot (not only in the news) is cutaways. An example of a cutaway shot is when the newsreader or field reporter is addressing the camera, but is cut-off camera mid-sentence. However, the audio still plays, and they are now voicing-over the on-screen footage.

Title Sequence
Before the show even starts, there is the title sequence. All news intros will usually be quite similar to each other. The newsreader will introduce themselves and the show, and welcome the audience in a direct address to camera. They will then tell us the headlines of the show. This will then transition (As a cutaway) to the reader now having to voice-over some actuality footage. The newsreader does this for each story, in order of news values. (Highest to Lowest) There will be lots of graphics that will usually involve London, the globe, ect. This, and the theme music, will make the stories sound more 'busy.' It adds importance.

The camera will pan around the presenter and their desk. (Maybe as a high angle shot) The presenter will then begin reading the first, and most important story.

 

Newsreaders, & Contributors
Although the above is important to stick to, the most important codes and conventions involve the presenters, and how they deliver the news. Being a newsreader is harder than it looks. It requires you to research the news yourself, gain an understanding of it, and then turn it into a clear, simple, and easy to understand script that will be read later that night. 

Newsreaders need good interpersonal skills, and good communication skills to perfect the mode of address. They need to be confident in front a camera, and deliver their script with good diction. No word-stumbling or mispronunciations. They will directly address the camera, and use personal pronouns like you/your.

Presenters need to be presentable - The news is probably the most serious and formal programme on television. They need to dress extremely formal, and have neat hair. 

Field Reporters Field Reporters are like on-scene newsreaders. Similarly to newsreaders, they will be required to have good interpersonal/communication skills. They will not always be required to be dressed as formally, as they could be in a war zone or a rally. They will be responsible for interviewing contributors (Experts in a relevant topic or witnesses) and reporting back to the studio.

Task 2: What is a documentary/factual media product?

A Film or Television documentary is a compilation of non-fiction clips of a certain topic. Documentaries are meant to document some aspect of our world, like nature, for example. The purpose of a documentary is to educate, inform, and entertain it's audience. Some may be shown to highlight something that the audience might find particularly shocking, perhaps sparking controversy and/or debate.

Most documentaries will tend to have voice-overs, explaining to us what we are seeing on screen in hopes to further educate us in the subject. We would expect to see interviews in a documentary. The interviewee's tend to be people with experience in the topic that can give us an insight, but people with valued opinions and victims of something are common too. The filmmaker will usually wrap up parts of, or the whole film by telling us their observations and conclusions. Different filmmakers will make documentaries about different things, whether it may be nature, a specific culture or lifestyle, history, or someones life. Factual media products are constantly evolving and changing, so it can be hard to put a genre on more recent films. For example, a recent trend is shows like the Only Way is Essex. Products like these can be classed as a Participatory documentary. A Participatory documentary is interacting with the subject(s). There may be minor intervention, and maybe some interviews. There will be a lot of location shooting with a handheld camera. The filmmakers may or may not join in or question the subjects. An Observational documentary's sole purpose is to observe. The subjects are aware that they are being watched, but they are mostly natural. There will be less interviews, less voice-overs, and a direct sound linked to the video.  An Expository documentary is to reveal or investigate something, less like observational and participatory, there will be more interviews and voice-overs, lots of images, good editing, maybe some music. Most documentaries will tend to follow this format.  Reflexive documentaries are supposed to give people an emotional response. The filmmakers may accompany images and clips with dramatic music, perhaps re-enactmenting an event. The more controversial shows will use this mode as they rely on people having a strong opinion. If the audience don't have a love or hate towards the subject, it won't be entertaining to watch.  Performative documentaries will often feature the filmmaker as the subject, similar to video logging. The filmmaker will be opinionated and inclined to make frequent comments.