In this essay I am going to consider the codes and conventions of TV News and documentaries. I will be discussing documentaries which we have watched, for example we have watched Bowling For Columbine (2002), Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism (2004). My main focus however will be on the documentaries The Filth and the Fury (2000) and When Louis Met the Nazis (2003). TV News has a number of recognisable codes and conventions. To explain this I will compare BBC News and Fox News. For example they all have a similar studio set up, in which there is a desk which the news readers speak from. There is also a multi-camera setup so that it stays consistent yet makes the news a bit more engaging. There is also conventionally an opening title sequence which has a recognisable tune so that when someone hears it they can instantly connect with it.
BBC News
Two different news programmes I have used as case studies to compare are BBC News and Fox News. Both take a totally different approach to news broadcasting. The BBC television news has been running since the 5th of July 1954 when it's first ever television news bulletin was broadcast. It was presented by news correspondent Richard Baker, he read the very first introduction. Baker said this "Here is an illustrated summary of the news. It'll be followed by the latest film of events and happenings at home and abroad." The news broadcast was put into two halves. The first half consisting of still photographs, maps and so on. Baker could be heard but not seen on the screen, the second half of the broadcast consisted of pre-recorded film. By 1955 a fortnight before ITN News was launched, newsreaders were appearing on screen. This was something shocking and new for audiences, the news reading duties was shared between what were known as a "young team" and they consisted of Richard Baker, Kenneth Kendall and Robert Dougall. Since BBC television news first started it has progressed a lot since then. Nowadays we can enjoy the news in its fullest colour and high definition, with on screen graphic's and an opening and closing title sequence. As well as 60 second and 90 second updates. By 2000 the millennium brought on a change to BBC News with thirty years of being presented at 9pm it changed to 10pm, saying that it was better for audiences and it meant that they didn't compete with ITN News. ITN soon changed to 10.30pm to please audiences.
The purpose of the BBC News is to stay impartial and not to present the news in a politically biased way, and much of the time the news is presented in a correct way. However they have been accused in the past as being biased towards Liberals. Andrew Marr who was the BBCs political editor argued that it is not the corporation that is biased but the employers who are hired. Therefore making it cultural not political. It has also been said that the Liberal bias that is present is not so much party political bias but more so expressive, cultural Liberal bias. The intended target audience for BBC News is around about 16-70 year olds. It is a very vast age range, the reason for this is because that it is aired at a peak time of 6 and 10pmevery night. And these times are when teenagers, well up to elderly people are awake. The stories they cover are vast and educational, providing something youthful and interesting for the adolescents while sticking to hard news stories which grip adults and the elderly so that they can keep informed with their news fix.
In terms of codes and conventions the BBC News follows a similar pattern in which they adhere to the conventions which audiences would recognise what they are watching, as well as setting them out as different to other news channels. BBC News conventionally opens up with a synchronised tense thumping sound, with the news reader saying all the headlines that will come up in the program. Every headline news story which he/she says will then be followed by the thumping sound. The reason for this is because it is a lot more engaging for audiences, so if they turn over it will more likely attract their attention. After all the headlines which are coming up are read out, the opening title sequence follows, accompanied by a recognisable tune which people can associate with the BBC. An establishing long shot then shows the whole news studio with all the researchers, then a mid shot shows the news readers on a desk. Another piece of the set which is conventional for any news show. The reason they start with the establishing shot then cut to the newsreader is that it looks more professional and it adds a sense of realism to the news. After a couple of minutes once the news reader has introduced the first news story, there will be a video insert which gives a more in depth look at the story. After the video insert, usually the news reader in the studio will cut live to a news correspondent at the scene, the reasoning behind this is because it gives literally all the extra latest information as it is happening. In the video inserts there are always on screen graphics (usually statistics, graphs) so that it can back up the story. The main theme of BBC News is a spinning circle and this could connote the world and how all aspects of their news spreads to all different depths of the world. It also shows comradeship and fairness, something which they try and incorporate.
An example of how a BBC News story is represented would be their story about how Crimea's parliament has formally declared independence from Ukraine and has asked to join the Russian Federation, following a controversial referendum. This story was aired on BBC One at one o clock on Monday the 17th of March. The story opens up the show with the newsreader going into reading the headline along with all the details. He is on the left hand side of the screen, in the foreground, while the television screen with the graphics is slightly in the background on the right. The picture on the screen shows a soldier with a heavy machine gun in a tank, next to a man in a Russian hat and a smirking woman. This immediately represents by the BBC that there is a lot of confliction between these countries and that opposing views are thrown about between the nations. The story then cuts to a news correspondent live in Simferopol - Southern Ukraine. The news correspondent speaks in a tone which is not biased either way but he sounds slightly upbeat, this could suggest that what has happened to Ukraine will bring joy. After he has finished speaking it cuts to a video insert starting off with thousands of people cheering, waving flags and throwing balloons. We get the impression from this image on that the news Ukraine has received is good and that it is being represented like a new future is beginning. The fact that this story was shown first also represents that it is (along with the last story of the show) the most important news story there has been and it's high priority, clearly proving it's relevance as current affairs.
Fox News
The case study I did of a factual news programme asides from BBC News was Fox News. Fox News is an American based news network that is funded through television subscription payments. It was launched on August the 7th 1996 and it was founded by the famous Australian-American media mogul known as Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch also runs the British newspaper the Sun and formerly the News Of The World newspaper. During the 1990s and the millennium Fox News grew in popularity, eventually becoming Americas prominent news network. Fox News promote themselves as being fair and balanced however it is widely recognised that their news stories are highly biased and are only an inkling of the real truth. Making the story seem much worse or much better than it really is. Fox are often accused of promoting strong conservative political views along with biased reports. Often their stories are thought to be told solely to upset Liberals and Democrats. During President George Bush' tenure in America, Fox news was a heavy supporter of the Republican party and his views. However since the current US President, Barack Obama has been elected their stories have opposed him and the Democratic party beliefs.
Fox News sticks to a very similar format as to BBC News or any conventional news programme. It's codes and conventions are the same, wherein there is a desk, a presenter(s) and there are on screen graphics as well as video inserts. However a very definitive difference with Fox News is the way in which their stories are told. As earlier discussed they are biased towards the Republican party, this is a key convention of theirs. Part of the establishment of the Fox studio is the prominence of the colour red. This is significant because it connotes power and it makes the show seem more controlling to it's audience. It also brings a lot more attention to the news anchor, making him/her seem important and that they are worth watching. The voiceover during the video inserts also acts as a narration to the news which they are telling, and considering Fox news is a biased news channel a lot more of their stories are told as loosely based non-fiction narratives so to be more exciting. This acts as the basis of their representation.
In both BBC News and Fox News, multi-camera setups are used because they give a variety in terms of what the eye can see. They keep it engaging for the audience so that they do not grow tedious of what they are watching. In the news a lot of information is said and this can get tiring to watch so a multi-camera setup will help to mix things up. With Fox News, the news readers use a lot more theatrics because the stories they present are real life events but they are overly fictionalised so their use of theatrics helps to tell the news as more like a story and so the use of a multi-camera setup is not as imperative, although a few different angles are used because this helps to tell the news more like a story. However with BBC News, the stories are not biased and they are told how it is, in often a rather dull manner. So with the help of on screen graphics and video inserts this helps to keep it engaging. In the BBC News studio when a newsreader is talking they will usually only ever use one camera angle facing forward. This is because it keeps their tone formal and professional. An example of a multi-camera setup on BBC News would be say on Tuesday the 18th of March on BBC One at 10 o clock. The opening news item is a story about campaigners who are calling for tougher measures to stop female hormone mutilation, a practice affecting thousands of girls. A female mutilation survivor is interviewed, the video insert opens up with her and within the first six seconds three different camera angles are used. One a long shot, another a close-up and the other an over the shoulder medium shot. The effect of this is that it keeps the story engaging as well as showing that there are different sides to the story.
Case studies of documentaries
The Filth and the Fury
As well as examining various factual news programmes, I also did several case studies on single camera documentaries. The Filth and the Fury is one of the two documentaries which I will be taking a look at. The Filth and the Fury focuses on the early lives of 70s rock band The Sex Pistols and how drugs and alcohol turned the band upside-down as well as causing controversy amongst the nation. It was released in the UK on the 12th of May 2000. The documentary is told through the viewpoint of all the band members and the footage is all made up of archive footage of The Sex Pistols when they were younger as well as modern day interviews of them all in silhouette form.
The Sex Pistols are the main subject of the documentary and the way they are represented is in a very negative way. They are shown as being punk rockers who disobey society and go against all British conventions of not staying well mannered. Many opinions are made in this documentary, concerning them and how they caused riots amongst the nation. It is also showed that many people were angry over how they signed their single mocking the Royal Family outside Buckingham Palace. As well as being represented negatively by peoples opinions and archive footage, they are also represented as making a difference to the music industry. Many people say in the interview that they were the stepping stone for modern punk rock bands and they helped establish them as a new brand of musical genre, something which many musicians were afraid of doing as it went against what was usually done by artists. What inspired the band is made very clear in this documentary, for example anger and poverty inspired them, as opposed to art and poetry. Something which culturally bands usually originate their upcoming from and The Sex Pistols have inspired punk rock bands some of which being Blink-182 and Green Day. The effect of the interviews all being just the former band members silhouette is that is creates a sense that what was once there is now gone - for example the band have now disbanded because of various reasons and this is a constant theme which arises in the documentary. Showing that everything has to end and their time has finished, but the documentary almost acts as a reflection of their punk rock lives.
The documentary also seems that it is being represented like a confession and that many of the rebellious acts they committed were wrong but at the time it seemed right because it acted as a part of the punk rock movement. The reason it feels like it is a confession is because of the way that the surviving members of The Sex Pistols tell their story in a dim lit light so that it is just their silhouette. This almost seems like it is a police interrogation room and they are handing over all the information. It also feels that they are getting closure for the fun times they had, but that it had it's downfalls and that they finally need to come to terms with that. You really do get the impression from some of the band members, especially from Johnny Rotten that what they did was wrong and a lot of what they did had repercussions. For instance all the physical attacks from the public, such as having bottles thrown at them, being kicked and punched, being spat and sworn at, amongst many other taunts for what was seen by many as ludicrous behaviour.
Towards the end of the interview the way their life is represented in the documentary is very different to how they are represented at the beginning. The reason I say this is because, the documentary starts off showing the band members happy lives, showing their enjoyment of rebelling against old English society traditions and being young and living the punk rock life. However this completely contradicts by the end as the band members are clearly shown to be upset and distraught by what happened in the end. I.E. the death of Sid Vicious, due to the drugs and alcohol which was caused by the success of the band. It is clearly represented by the band members that their high octane drug fuelled, punk rock lifestyle pays. This shows quite an obvious contradiction, the beginning of the documentary presents their life as being crazy and rebellious filled with drugs, alcohol and women. But towards the end their life isn't shown as great, it mainly focuses on their newer member Sid Vicious and how his addictions to various substances and sleeping with many women ended tragically. His 'girlfriend' at the time was found dead in a hotel room, soon after Vicious committed suicide and this is represented in a very dark way, it shows how an extreme lifestyle in a band is not always great. And this is how the documentary is structured, in a way in which it shows a string of events. For example the documentary is structured in a linear order in which it starts off with when they joined the band and it goes all the way to when they left the band. Also like a structural timeline, clearly pinpointing the turning points in their career.
Towards the end of the interview the way their life is represented in the documentary is very different to how they are represented at the beginning. The reason I say this is because, the documentary starts off showing the band members happy lives, showing their enjoyment of rebelling against old English society traditions and being young and living the punk rock life. However this completely contradicts by the end as the band members are clearly shown to be upset and distraught by what happened in the end. I.E. the death of Sid Vicious, due to the drugs and alcohol which was caused by the success of the band. It is clearly represented by the band members that their high octane drug fuelled, punk rock lifestyle pays. This shows quite an obvious contradiction, the beginning of the documentary presents their life as being crazy and rebellious filled with drugs, alcohol and women. But towards the end their life isn't shown as great, it mainly focuses on their newer member Sid Vicious and how his addictions to various substances and sleeping with many women ended tragically. His 'girlfriend' at the time was found dead in a hotel room, soon after Vicious committed suicide and this is represented in a very dark way, it shows how an extreme lifestyle in a band is not always great. And this is how the documentary is structured, in a way in which it shows a string of events. For example the documentary is structured in a linear order in which it starts off with when they joined the band and it goes all the way to when they left the band. Also like a structural timeline, clearly pinpointing the turning points in their career.
When Louis Met the Nazis
The second documentary case study which I analysed and watched in one of our lessons was Louis and the Nazis. The reason I chose to analyse this specific documentary as opposed to the others we watched is because it is represented completely differently to The Filth and the Fury and the themes portrayed are culturally very different. Louis and the Nazis is presented by famous documentary presenter Louis Theroux and it is about what happens when Theroux visits Neo Nazis in California, America. He visits a man named Tom Metzger who is known for being one of "the most dangerous racists in America" as well this Theroux also goes to a skinhead rally and goes to Mexico. It was first televised on the 21st of December 2003 and it was directed by Stuart Cabb.
The documentary is largely fly-on-the-wall and Theroux presents it in a conventional, down to earth way, portraying their lives in an everyday way, which at times becomes quite dull because not much happens and there is little editing or music. The Neo Nazis are represented as unconventional and naziism is highly looked down upon. Therefore presenting it in a very dry and conventional manner makes it seem obscure and unusual - something which he is clearly trying to portray so his style totally fits the subject. The documentary opens with two (average age) 10 year old sisters who are shown to be singing a Nazi hymn. The effect of this is that it represents their Nazi parents’ upbringing and how they have been indoctrinated to think in an Anti-Semitic way, while believing in the Nazi ways. This clearly shows that the victims are the children and how they have no choice in what to believe in. This yet again adds to the unusualness which is portrayed throughout. When Theroux interview the twins there is only one camera angle, this creates the impression that the interview is more intimate and truthful. The use of single camera has a lot of advantages, for example having just one camera means that there is no need to have a big set up of cameras and so therefore the interview or documentary can be more intimate and honest. Single camera setup also means that there is not an expensive budget to be spent and this can be a bonus for young filmmakers or documentary makers because they can then spend more money on other elements of the documentary.
Documentaries in general are different from the news and fiction film because they show a very up close and personal/intimate account of a story. Whatever the subject and theme of the documentary is it will be portrayed in a very true manner which makes you feel like you have been there. Documentaries are special because they give access to real life and the truth. For example Louis and the Nazis gives a true insight into what Neo Nazi life is like and this is something which fictional films and the news will only briefly cover. Documentaries are often the best way to get the truth out because they have more time to explore an issue in more depth than TV News and the documentary film maker is able to get closer to his/her subject which means that they can get closer to the truth and find out more no matter how controversial or ugly the theme is. For example in Louis and the Nazis when Theroux visits Tom Metzger it feels like we the audience are actually there as the camera setup feels very natural and improvised and not like it has taken hours to setup. Theroux also speaks in a more relaxed formal manner as if we are like the audiences asking the questions. The all helps to give a better view of their life so it seems more just and correct.
This documentary's audience will be aimed mainly at 18-80 year olds, the age range is very expansive. The reason for this is because the themes covered are quite adult as they show the views which Neo Nazis follow, as well as this it is also showing a culture which during the 1940s was very common during World War Two. Hence this will attract elderly people to watch it because they maybe grew up around the time of the Nazis reign in Germany. The audience are not persuaded to view the Nazis in a bad way, it is a matter of opinion how they view them. However saying that, Theroux makes us the audience feel more persuaded negatively towards the Nazis. This is because he regularly asks the subjects of the interview questions about their culture and how he thinks it is not necessarily right and that what they are doing could potentially upset people. Theroux is also Jewish and this adds more bias towards him because when visiting a Neo Nazis household he asks if they would care if he was Jewish. It is quite clear they would be bothered by it and that they would feel uncomfortable. For us we feel that their views aren't specifically right, this is because Theroux quite clearly seems confused as to why they would be bothered and therefore we are persuaded more towards his point of view. Different points of view are put into consideration, as they are given their chance to explain why they want to know if he was Jewish, thus trying to keep the documentary as impartial as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment