- Bias against SeaWorld but has a purpose to it
- documentaries have to be bias to make their point - should they only be informative?
- could argue that SeaWorld has shown their side through police reports etc
- more work could of been done to show other side
- designed to create a debate - inspire debate
- does it break or honour the contract with the viewer to manipulate or not?
Codes and conventions-
- Interviews
- from wide shot to medium close-ups for emotion
- unseen/amateur footage to back up points - still engaging even though amateur (creative) building a narrative
- music - manipulation tool. (example - tension music on shots of whales playing to show them as aggressive, builds tension to make you think danger is coming)
- sub-conciously tells you how to feel (certain tracks make you feel certain emotion)
Representation-
- Didn't over do how bias they were
- Could have made current SeaWorld employers look worse by shots/music but didn't
- showed adverts for SeaWorld - sinister
- Ex SeaWorld employers but no current or statements from SeaWorld
- 'Whale Capturer' is made to feel sorry feel because of how he's represented - crying/sorry for what he's done
- 'Dawn' - represented as a nice person etc but documentary doesn't clearly state who's fault it was
- is this intentional to not seem bias?
- or is it intentional to show that even its human error its still SeaWorlds fault
Audience-
- who is it aimed at?
- audience in there to interact with
- contract with the viewer - assume what you are being told in factual
- uses documentary codes and conventions and format to make you believe it is fact
No comments:
Post a Comment