Sitting in a Landmark theater the other day (my version of holy
ground), I noticed that, thanks to it being just a few months before Oscar
season, we were seeing the last remnants of the late August/September films
hitting theaters in the pre-movie trailers. For
those who live their lives around art house film calendars (this can’t possibly
be just me), I saw a combination of crowd-pleaser films from Western Europe,
future Indy Spirit nominees, and documentary after documentary. As has been noted by myriad critics
this film season, documentaries have had an incredible year. Every time I look at the upcoming
movies list on Landmark’s website, I find myself trying to budget another
documentary into my movie allowance.
In addition to this slew of documentaries, I’ve also been tuning in
more frequently to the news, both online and in particular, on television. CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and others have
had a slew of different topics to cover over the past three weeks coming out of
Washington; in particular, the debt ceiling and government shutdown
debate. This news, though, is so
frequently repetitive and speculative, I had to wonder to myself, “why
can’t the news be as relevant as a documentary?”
I’m aware that this is a liberal hipster style of argument (I have recently been
shopping for Warby Parker glasses, so this might be a guilty-as-charged
situation), but it has quite a bit of credence. Documentaries are able to cover a wide variety of topics in
an in-depth, informative manner that the news cannot. I remember watching Chasing
Ice last year and thinking that if every global warming doubter in the
country could watch this film, we’d have politicians clamoring for climate
change legislation. Documentaries this year covered everything from income imbalance (Inequality for All) to animal cruelty (Blackfish) to the concept of violence (The Act of Killing) to abortion rights (After Tiller). These are all wildly topical issues in modern society, and
yet you would never see such an in-depth, thoughtful discussion of them in a
two-hour format on cable television.
Part of this is because cable television does, in fact, need to have
commercials and breaking news in order to function. No one wants to devote 6-12 months researching a topic and
then discover that during the scheduled airing of the documentary Ted Cruz
announces he’s running for president.
But cable news never has the sort of topical conversations that a
documentary has. It’s not like
someone couldn’t have some of the in-depth reporting that a documentary has and
put that into a thirty-minute segment.
And it’s also not like cable news cannot spur a conversation and promote
the hell out of a documentary if they wanted to do so.
Perhaps cable news, which continues to be a dying organism
(particularly CNN) when it comes to actual meaningful discussions of the topics
of the day, could at least borrow some advice from documentaries. For starters, a proper discussion
doesn’t happen with four different people in boxes talking to a moderator. If you give each person only 120
seconds to speak throughout the segment, all you’re getting is ten minutes of
talking points. You’ll still, of
course, get news, but if all we wanted was news we’d just subscribe to the AP
wire. Cable news has so much potential
as a device to truly connect with audiences and get them immersed in all
aspects of reporting, yet today it’s a series of talk shows and “we’re waiting
on information.”
Look at it from a different aspect. I’ve recently been trying to maximize my outside of work
life. If I have a spare fifteen
minutes, I have a list on my cell phone of things that I need to get
done, and I start in on them. I
don’t just watch television or bum around on the internet
for fifteen minutes. I get
something concrete and tangible done, like a mini-workout or cleaning the
apartment. As a result, I’ve been
wildly more productive in almost every aspect of my life, and I see that every
day-my to do lists rarely have repeat items, I am making progress on projects
that I have been talking about for years and getting nothing done on, and I am
able to feel more fulfilled and proud of my day’s work when I go to bed.
Cable news is brimming with ten minute opportunities to be more
productive. While the documentary
has the considerable advantage of editing, they would never waste ten minutes
speculating on what is about to be included in a speech we're going to hear anyway. The twenty minutes before the president
is going to be speaking about the debt crisis could be spent discussing Syria,
the failed rollout of Obamacare, or the recent batch of Nobel laureates. Hell, it could even be spent discussing the debt crisis, just not postulating what the president is about to say. Instead of bringing back Crossfire, CNN could have more in-depth
reporting from someone like Christiane Amanpour. The world is brimming with new stories and information, and
in a globalized media age, there should be no such thing as a “slow news day.”
I’m aware that this isn’t entirely on cable news-more people watch FOX
News than will ever watch one of these meaningful documentaries, so I’m going
to issue a challenge to us all.
Look over at your local Landmark theater (or HBO cinema, or Netflix
queue, or whatever market you have) and pick three documentaries for the fall
to watch from the past year. And then tell your
friends about them. Challenge them
to see them. Word-of-mouth is the
holy grail of independent cinema, and it’s about time we put it to good use
instead of discussing Miley’s twerking.
I have already picked out three of mine (Stories We Tell, Blackfish, and Inequality
for All will all be discussed on this blog in the next month). What will yours be? And do you feel that cable news could
learn a thing or two from documentaries?
Share in the comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment