Codes and Conventions in Documentry & News

What are codes and conventions ? 

Codes : Codes are systems of signs, which create meaning codes can be divided into two categories- technical and symbolic 

Technical codes: The way in which equipment is used to tell a story in media text.

Symbolic codes: show what is beneath the surface of what we see.

Conventions: A generally accepted way of doing something. They are generally connected to a medium.

Codes and conventions are used together in media products- it is not enough to discuss a technical code used such as a camera without saying that it is conventionally used in a genre.

Conventions of documentary

Hand Held camera- This is commonly used to show that the footage is real or on shot on the go.

Narrative Voice Over- This is just as it sounds a clear voice over often telling you about the subjects shown to you. 

Vox pops and Interviews- These are interviews that are mainly used to show someones points on a specific subject.

Diagetic and/or non diagetic sound- This is the sounds that you might be able to hear in the background that can sometimes make the film seem more realistic.

Use of archive footage- This is just old footage that has been put up but still helps prove the points made and can be informative.

Selective editing- This is where the producers chose certain peices of film over the others so that mostly there opinion is shown.

Shot in POV- Point Of View- If something is shot in point of view it means that it is shot to show you that persons point of view.

Establishing shot and close up- This commonly starts with the camera showing you the wider image and then to make a point they will zoom into the evidence. 

Single Stranded( One theme or subject)-  This is the subject that connects the documentry all together for example if you are watching a documentry on the sea it might go onto detail about the life living there but it will always be connected to the sea.

Parellel Ending- This is a split ending that both come to the same or similair conclusion.

Fahrenheit 911 : Documentary or Propaganda ?

Task A

1. Write a brief introduction to the documentary film.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is a full length feature documentary on the government and the corruption that may lie within. Directed by Michael Moore the film details how the government reacted to 9/11 and how they thought fit to fix the issues. These include the war in Iraq and passing the patriat act. They film is really an insightful view into the american government when put under pressure.

2. Who is Michael Moore and what other documentaries has he been associated with ?
Micheal Moore is a Directer, producer and presenter of many documentary films and tv shows the most popular being Bowling for Columbine and sicko. These both tackle popular issues that are often discussed a lot in the media. Most of his documentaries tackle the subject matter head on making them controversial. They all document hard issues such as the gun laws in america and his most recent documentary tackles what makes a hero which has been debated ever since wars have began.

Task B- use examples from the trailer to emphasise your points.

1. Watch the trailer for Fahrenheit 911 again and answer the following questions :
   www.farenheit911.com or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zf2nCiBJLo

2. What is the opening statement? How does this suggest how much influence the government has.

The trailer opens with the one line " you can make people do anything if they are afraid ". This is referring to a lot of things including how it can bee seen that the government helped the Bin Laden family attack the united states. After this clip is shown the trailer goes to documents showing that the president at the time President George Bush authorised flights, while a ban of commercial flights where on , To help the relatives of Bin Ladin escape the country. This makes us connect the two without truing to do so given us the shock reaction the makers of the documentary want because this makes you want to here more. Overall Incuating that the government is not quite as trustworthy as seen as before. This doubt of the government makes you think about how the control us and how much they can hide from us because they have the ultimate control.

3. What information is given about the U.S. Government and the Bin Laden family in the opening segment.

In the opening section we learn that the next day after the 9/11 attacks the U.S government helped fly out members of the Bin Laden family. This is followed by many signed documents that prove that they did authorise flights that the family were on this may make it seem like they are forgiving or even helping terrorists. This is thrown in to open on a shocker because this is a proffesional edited trailer this has been edited to use only a one sided evidence although what they are implying may be made up or seen in the wrong way because it looks realistic we are fooled into beleiving their story.


4. What implied about President Bush in the opening segment ( first 25 seconds) ? Describe how the film implies this?

When the trailer first opens we are hit with information firstly about flights that helped the Bin Laden family retreat from america this is then followed by a segement about confidential files that President Bush signed that may imply that he helped or even had involvment in the 9/11 attack. This implies that the two are deeply linked saying that this link is connected and that he helped terrorism in his country building this conspiracy theory. This evidence makes the whole situation that bit more believable overall purasuading you that this is the truth that you havnt been told yet.

5. What impression is given about the war in Iraq? What evidence shows you who is driving this war and the reasons why?

The war in Iraq in the film and during the speeches we are shown in the trailer seems like it is purely for money because of the oil that is located there and we see people talk about the profit they can gain from it. It also states that they care about the money over the many deaths this is followed by damning word about the goverment and the greed that they have that fueling this large war causing many deaths only for gain of money and oil. This is all edited in a way that they are making you believe what there saying just because many people are stating it to make you feel like they are the experts and you need to believe them.

6. What kind of music is chosen to back this opening segment of the trailer ( Until the words "bad for people") ? And what does it communicate to you? How is this a contradiction to what is being said?

The first piece of music we hear is sort of mystical slightly like its thinking about whats going even to the point where it sounds mystical and light hearted even though the facts we are hearing are not.  This music has connetations that appear childlike and magical this is not what we want to hear we hear hard hitting fact. This juxtaposition between the music and the subject makes it seem that there almost laughing at the subject.

7. What information is given about the patriot Act ?

We are told that this law that most people dont know what it is and what powers it hold was passed without thought so that the goverement could take hold of any information that they want.  We even hear an interview snippet saying that even him as a member of the goverment didnt even look over the patriot act before passing it and they didnt take it seriously even though it is very powerful and even could be abused easily. They could hain any information that they needed and many people didnt realise this till it had been passed and printed in the middle of the night. This act is stated to give the police "almost unlimited power " we are told. They have used this segment to make us think and revealuate the goverment this is almost making you think that they must be telling you the truth.

8. What is communicated about President Bush in the last segment? How does the trailer communicate that?
 
At the end of the trailer we are shown how President Bush appears to be elitest  and how he doesnt care about his job but more about the benefits and having fun. This was at the same time as the war and the attacks possibly proving that he really doesnt care and the implications his choices cause. He is even shown at a posh event stateing that " some people call you the elite I call you my base". This shows him in bad light the trailer does this mainly by showing firstly the war then heading into this very light look at Bush and overall showing how it contrasts possibly proving that he really doesnt care at all.



Task C

1. Summarise using examples that you have seen so far (and any others you have watched) how documentaries can be used to persuade an audience. Are these types of documentaries subjective or objective?

Documentries pursuade the audience using a range of techniques they can use selective editing like shown is the Tv series Benefit Street this only shows the elements that show the charcters or people in a bad light not showing the possitives this also happened in Farenheit 9/11. This is the most populare choice but they also try to make you think about the plan or conspiracy that they are trying to lay out by using eveidence and facts although they might not always be completely true they give a story more realiablity and to people that are watching they make the story seem credible although this is not always true. Overall the documentries I have seen so far are objective they are trying to push there opinion on the subject matter whether this is delibrate or not its not known.

Benefit street analysis

You are about to watch part of the controversial ‘Benefits Street’ documentary; a controversial British documentary series broadcast on Channel 4. It was first aired on 6 January 2014.

Please consider and make notes on the following:

What type of documentary is this and give three examples that back this up.

This is an expository documentary.

i) There was a clear narrated voice over although you did not see his face or hear him interview any of the main characters in the documentary. Throughout the documentary the tape was shown while this narrator told facts and information about the people shown this Is a common reoccurrence in an expository documentary.

ii) There also was a controversial topic in this case benefits and the people who claim them. Most expository documentaries tackle these bigger subjects so that they can cause a statement and make an argument for there point of view. The controversial subject often is in the news at the time so that the programme is current.

iii) There are also clear opinions shown not only shown through the interviews but also through the voice over and chosen video content. The whole show mainly presented videos and images of a bad society filled with drugs abuse and bad parenting although this is most likely not to be true representation of the people but instead is swayed by the opinions of the creators of the show.

Who are the main subjects of the documentary? List and sum up the most important participants.

The main characters seen in the episode I have watched were the young couple Becky and Mark also there two young children Casey and Cammeron. This was a troublesome family shown in the episode as bad parents with a bad attitude towards the government and working this could be completely one sided but this is what is shown to us when seeing there house and how they deal with there day to day like. The second family unit we watched was White Dee and front runner for the show she has some loud opinions about everything inclucing how the street is run and the people on it. Her two children seem to have a street savvy attitude making them seem over grown for there ages. The last person was Fungi the recovering drug addict that had all his children removed from him sue to unknown reasons but instead has a strong connection to Mark and Beckys oldest Cammeron.

How does this documentary make you feel towards the subjects?

This documentary gives a false representation of its subjects but If I was to only go of the documentary itself I would be shocked towards the appalling state of the people and the way that they live. The dark gritty shots of the run down road shows how this world is getting to used to living in poverty and off benefits because that’s all they know. It displays how long family lines are now used to the attitude that we don’t have to earn to make a living because the government will give out free benefits although this may not be the reality it is how it is portrayed through the documentary. These people are made to seem like public enemy number one because of the way they have been shown to slack and have a common attitude towards the benefit system. This can make the audience do one of two thing either they will feel sorry and take pity on the subjects or hate them for having an attitude that has only been shown due to the editing of the program.

What issues are raised in the documentary?

This documentary particularly raised issues of poverty, immigrants and crime. The main issue is displayed in the name its benefits  and how we view people who claim benefits. At the moment employment is at an all time low with more people being layed off each day more and more people are dropping below the poverty band and having to live in the streets like that shown on this particular documentary. This is stereotyping the people on benefits as the issue is so diverse and varies from place to place and the people who are claiming. This shows these issues as sark and dingy who are unsanitary and have an attitude this is giving a bad stereotype to the other people who are facing these issues. 

What codes and conventions of documentary filmmaking are used here?

What style of interview is being used here?

The interviews in this documentry are one sided as you can only hear the answers the main subjects are saying. This might have been done so it seems that the people making the documentry had no impact and the things said were all directly thought from the main charcters. This can be used to fool the audience and helps the directors or producers to create evidence that supports the points made about people on benefits. This create a oppinion based documentry.

What is the purpose of this documentary? Do you think it achieves this?

The purpose of this documentry was to explore the realistic lives of those living on a street that is mainly living off the goverments benefit schemes. These people have been contraversial as it faces real life issues of what can be seen as common people in Britain. This documentry has been edited to give people on benefits a bad reputation as all we see in the program are lazy people who lie around and often have had drug issues or other problems. I think that overall the programme has achieved its goal because it has got people talking about these issues and the people who face them this has mainly been spread due to the media.

This documentary caused a great deal of controversy. Why was it so controversial?

This documentry is controversial due to its opinionated nature. It shows people on benefits in a bad light meaning that others who also claim can be seen as these stereotyped images that are being shown to us in this documentry. You can tell throughout that parts are missing and this is beacuse the creaters would have adited out footage that they saw as not needed and this was the evidence to prove that not all people on benefits are bad.