# data[].attributes.body
Ethics

The definition of ethics is “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.”

When filming people, landscapes or animals the filmmaker must always have ethics in mind to protect the subjects and audiences. To be ethical means to be thinking morally that will cause the least harm to people.

Documentaries are a version of reality that is constructed by the filmmaker. This means that consideration of ethics is very important aspect. Ethics are not pre-determined rules, each film maker has to confront their own set of ethics that should align with societal morals

Catfish (tv show that films people meeting up with fake people they have been speaking to online) is an example where the ethical considerations are questionable. The two film makers research where this 'fake' person lives and shows up to their house unannounced, starts to film and interrogate them.

# data[].attributes.body
Evidence refers to facts or information which illustrate the truth.

Expository documentaries are modes of documentary where evidence is usually pulled out as they are heavily researched, focusing on facts rather than opinion or emotion. However, these documentaries can also endure emotion or shape opinions.

The filming of events while they are happening as a” fly on the wall” observer could be received as evidence as it is a real account of what is happening at that exact moment in time. Even if you are there with a camera filming overtly and interacting with whoever is there this could still be considered evidence as one is still filming real life situations as they happen.

Evidence is also intwined with documentaries, not just with the filming element but also through the narrator. For example, In the Attenborough documentaries his voice over is the one legitimising everything that is being shown by explaining what is happening in a social and scientific way, therefore showing that the imagery being shown is evidence for reality. Nicholas calls this “voice of God” and explains that this is used “to build a sense of credibility (Nichols, 2010).

However, when studying documentary, it is always important to point out that when a camera is overtly present, people will change their behaviour, even if this is a subconscious thing they are doing. They would be acting differently if the camera was not there so filming does not always give the most accurate evidence, especially when filming human behaviour. Also the editing of the video can change the version of facts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Incredible Teamwork From Little Clownfish | Blue Planet II

# data[].attributes.body
Observation- the action or process of closely observing or monitoring something or someone.

Bignell (2005), talks about Reality TV and whether observation of participants on shows like Big Brother can lead to surveillance. The way Big Brother is filmed is through surveillance cameras essentially around the house that the participants live in, but this just films them going about their lives, which means that we the viewers are simply observing them while they are in the house a lot of the time. although they may act up to the camera and there are certain things they have to do like games for example, they are constantly filmed 24 hours a day for people to watch them.

Bignell (2005), discusses the fascination of reality tv, which is partly due to the exposure of what would normally be private material, being filmed on surveillance cameras and broadcasted on national television. This was spoken about in relation to Big Brother and the way this is filmed with very few boundaries and next to no privacy.

# data[].attributes.body
S21 KHMER ROUGE KILLING MACHINE

Frosh and Pinchevski (2011) defined media witnessing as 'the witnessing performed in,  by,  and through the media.  It is about the systematic and ongoing reporting of the experiences and realities of distant others to mass audience'.

In the S21 film, the guards perform a reenactment for the camera of their routine when they were working in the prison. These men were reluctant to answer any questions give information, but seemed  happy to perform these actions to show what happened. This form of witnessing felt as though it had more authenticity as you are watching how things worked, rather than just hearing about it. You are bearing witness to an extent.

When going on to talk more about media witnessing, Frosh and Pinchevski mention how the audience are  'bearing witness to the impossibility of bearing full witness'.  Although you can get real accounts from people that experienced a particular event, or see a reenactment like in the S21 film, you are not seeing or re-living the actual event, and there may be a detachment or inaccuracy to an extent due to the time that has passed.

# data[].attributes.body
Nichols (2010) describes spectacle in documentary as "cinema of attractions".
He defines it as the image as document presenting the viewer with sensational scenes of 'exotic' and unusual depictions of the everyday. He highlights spectacle as a tool to "amuse, surprise and shock, rather than deliberate, evaluate or commemorate".

Nichols also points out that reality TV can be thought of as the legacy of spectacle in documentary filmmaking. The particular sensationalism of the weird, exotic and bizarre can be seen in a multitude of modern reality TV shows (i.e. The British Tribe Next Door) as well as in more traditional documentary film (i.e. Nanook of the North, Trance and Dance in Bali).

A key part of the spectacle in documentary film is the exotic and unknown 'other', often depicting a non-Western culture from a Western point of view. An example of this is Mead and Bateson's Trance and Dance in Bali, in which the culture of trance is presented as foreign and strange, highlighting the 'impossibility' of the beliefs of the Balinese. In other words, "if a madman's narrative cannot be history, then neither can that of a Balinese dancer whose body is inhabited by a god or spirit" (Rony, 2006, p.3).

# data[].attributes.body
Bruzzi (2000) defines documentary as a “perpetual negotiation between the real event and its representation… the two remain distinct but interactive” (p.9). This highlights the fact that events as depicted on camera are almost always somehow altered by the presence of a camera and a crew. She highlights the importance of interaction between "text, context, producer and spectator" instead of aesthetic choices as a defining factor in documentary filmmaking. This alteration of events and human behaviour for the camera can be described as performativity.
Ward (2005) defines performative documentaries as films in which people 'play themselves'. This can also be described  as people perhaps wanting to appear different on camera or playing up their behaviour for the imagined audience. Performativity can also be encouraged or even scripted by the filmmaker, which can be seen clearly in a multitude of documentaries. An example of this is Nanook of the North (1922) , which depicts an Inuit population and their 'everyday activities'. The filmmaker reinforced ideas of primitivity through performative scenes, such as 'Nanook' interacting with modern technology, and the Inuit hunting with more primitive equipment than they used in reality. The personalities and actions of the Inuit are played up for a Western audience, and the people are purposefully exoticised and made into a spectacle.

In this scene of Nanook of the North the Inuit can be seen building an Igloo for themselves. In reality, though, this does not reflect the living conditions of the Inuit at the time. The Igloo was also specifically built so it could be filmed from the inside, and therefore was not representative of true living conditions. This kind of performance for the camera is a prime example of performativity in documentary film, and provokes further discussion on the theme of documentary ethics, spectacle and observation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nanook of the North (1922) - How to build an igloo