Ethics are a tricky thing. Typically in the media business, you encounter issues with ethics constantly. Journalists and news reporters, magazine writers, publishers...they all must have a strong ethical core in order to become successful at what they're doing. Me, well, I don't think I will have to worry too much about ethics. Being that I want to become a filmmaker, I don't think that I will encounter issues with ethics that often.
I think the one area where I'll encounter issues with ethics in film-making is when covering topics that are based on true stories (i.e. documentaries, reality shows). I think that filmmakers are held to a certain standard in regards to telling true stories. My personal perception of what ethics in honest film-making is is to make sure that I have gathered the entire story and all the facts possible. I think that sometimes, filmmakers tend to find themselves being critiqued and receiving controversial reception due to their gathering of maybe only "one side" of the facts. While I think it's important for documentaries to sometimes tell only one side of a story, I also do believe that filmmakers hold a certain responsibility to try and not place their own opinions and prejudices in a documentary when telling the story, which some tend to do (i.e. Michael Moore). Not that I think that's unethical, but for me personally, I don't think I would get myself involved in a project where I could take the risk of stirring up controversy by, maybe, telling a story that can be viewed as one-sided. I, myself, am just not interested in being a controversial storyteller. With the projects and industry I'd like to work in, I don't think that other ethical issues will arise.
I think that Michael Moore's controversial documentaries are perfect examples of these ethical issues. If you look back to the release of Bowling for Columbine, Moore came under much scrutiny, mainly from right-wing Conservatives, that he was defending criminals and murderers of innocent people and criminalizing politicians, that they argued, had nothing to do with what the shooters did. In the film, he targets Charlton Heston and while interviewing him and capturing seemingly innocent footage of him speaking at an NRA rally, Moore's formatting and layout of the clips in the film add to his sarcastic, narcissistic tone about the Conservative view. Again in Fahrenheit 9/11, Moore took to the screen to "expose the truth." However, unlike the hard-hitting Bowling for Columbine, Moore came under fire for taking it too easy on his subject...the Bush administration. At the other end of the spectrum, fans of Moore's works criticized the filmmaker for only grazing the surface of the "injustices" of the administration. Ethically speaking, Moore's two films experienced a lot of critical feedback mainly due to the fact that in an attempt to tell a story, he only was telling one side of it. Now, not that that wasn't his original plan, but to me, a true storyteller is someone who can portray both sides of the story and all the facts, and still have an emotionally gripping story.
Some tools that I already have that can help me from experiencing ethical issues in the workplace is simply the fact that I don't want to be a controversial storyteller. While I have a huge interest in becoming a documentary filmmaker, the stories that I would like to tell are not on the same level as Michael Moore's. The documentaries I'd like to make are emotional and gripping, but the stories basically tell themselves. Typically with film-making, it's the politically inspired documentaries that tend to experience ethical issues. Me, personally, I have no desire to cover anything regarding political of myself or others. I believe that I am capable of keeping my own feelings and emotions out of my works, as well as not covering stories that can often make accusations at one side. At the end of the day, documentaries are just a small part of my interest, so I believe that my interest in other projects, most of which are not based on true stories, will lead me down a path where I do not need to worry about ethical issues.
Given my interests in film-making, I haven't really read much course work in this class that can be applied to my profession. However, in my academic past, I have encountered much knowledge of this subject. Actually, in regards to overall ethical consciousness, it was my News Writing and Reporting I class with Professor Kabak that first basically introduced me to the awareness of ethics in my work. And it was there that I not only encountered my first issues with ethics and withholding the standards of a writer, but also learned how to keep my writing objective and unbiased. When it came to writing news articles for The Spectrum about topics concerning the student body and the university, ethical issues were huge. We had to ensure that not only were we telling two sides of the story, not inciting conflict or uprising, but that we had all the facts and that we had them right. In gathering facts and truths, I encountered an unbelievable amount of issues with sources. As we discussed in class, many people want to voice their opinions on topics, but do not want their names published. Well, when it comes to telling a story and exposing facts and truths of one side versus the other, it's almost necessary to publish sources. When printing facts, many people that read them begin to question the reliability of the sources they come from. This can become a ridiculously tricky situation when it comes to being a college newspaper writer. To be honest, this played a large part in my losing interest of becoming a media writer. In my line of work now, I have a little bit more freedom to express certain topics without walking on eggshells or coming under any scrutiny regarding ethics.
One big thing I'd like to discuss regarding ethics is the loose legality around spamming. We discussed it in our discussion group...the idea of spamming with intent to cause harm to servers not being considered illegal. I think that this is an unbelievable topic and is something that needs to be reviewed by the court system. In my opinion, companies like Anonymous that intentionally spam companies' websites in an attempt to crash servers should be shut down. It should be illegal for a company to display intent to cause harm to a company's servers. I understand that they are not illegally retrieving any information, but to me, it is the same as the plotline of the show Dexter. I'm not sure if you're familiar or not, but Dexter takes the law into his own hands, killing criminals and "bad people" in an attempt to get them off the streets. While doing something harmless by taking a criminal off the street, the intent of this is illegal and does cause harm. Just a thought though...
No comments:
Post a Comment