free the West Memphis 3

[jimmer]

In the documentary Paradise Lost it presents a case that the 3 boys convicted of a brutal killing of 3 younger boys were probably not guilty and that the step dad of one of the murdered boys is probably the culprit. The only problem is that the film makers used as biased a reporting style as the police did in evidence gathering. Is that acceptable? jim

[WoWo]

Its pretty easy to prove any point if your willing to be a little bias. Is it acceptable. What you have are 2 documenturay styles, one where you simply report the situation and let audience consider what they think and ones such as Michael Moores style which leads a viewer to a particular conclusion, its then down to the viewer to decide. You could however argue that the fact that the other side is so bias that giving your side in a similar style ultimatly gives an overall balance.

[jimmer]

Thanks WoWo you make a good point. I suppose that the best case scenario for a documentary such as Paradise Lost or Fahrenheit 911 is to stimulate further debate and therefore bias, as opposed to factual inaccuracy, is acceptable. Furthermore, it could be argued that the documentary makers set out to be controversial to stimulate interest in a particular cause. However, MM has suffered accusations of poor journalism and self promotion even by respected "left wing" commentators. The problem is that an obviously biased documentary can be viewed as propaganda and so be received well by the target audience but further entrench the views of opponents. Erm...... gosh, its difficult. jim