Legal and ethical issues can significantly impact documentary productions. Legal issues involve breaking laws like copyright, while ethical issues deal with how individuals and groups are represented without their full consent. The document discusses several examples, like Nick Broomfield facing copyright issues and not being able to interview some subjects due to lack of consent. The author notes they tried to avoid negatively portraying someone not interviewed by editing interviews carefully, but ethical issues are more difficult to navigate than legal ones. Maintaining neutrality and showing multiple perspectives can help minimize both types of issues.

1. 6.1
How
did
legal
and
ethical
constraints
effect
your
work?
Legal
and
Ethical
issues
are
involved
in
most
documentary
productions.
A
legal
issue
is
caused
by
film-­‐makers
and
producers
breaking
a
law,
such
as
Copyright
laws.
This
could
ultimately
lead
to
the
documentary-­‐makers
and
Producers
being
arrested
or
sued.
The
laws
which
effect
documentary-­‐
makers
have
a
structure,
therefore
it
can
be
easy
to
avoid
some
Legal
issues
such
as
copyright
by
either
gaining
permission
or
not
using
copyrighted
music
at
all.
Ethical
issues
have
less
of
a
structure
and
are
not
as
black
and
white
as
legal
issues.
Depending
on
the
size
of
the
documentary,
either
the
documentary-­‐maker
or
the
producers
of
the
documentary
will
decide
on
what
is
ethically
acceptable
and
morally
right
to
be
included
in
a
documentary.
This
can
be
challenging
because
documentaries
are
dealing
with
real
stories
and
people
and
it
is
important
that
the
documentary-­‐makers
try
to
find
out
the
real
truth
in
the
topic
whilst
being
conscious
of
the
people
involved.
Copyright: The exclusive and assignable legal right, given to the originator for a fixed number
of years, to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material (Oxford
dictionary)
Copyright causes a lot of issues for documentary-makers. The use of music very commonly
causes copyright issues because documentary-makers want to use a song but they don’t
own it. To gain permission they would have to ask whoever owns the song, usually a fee is
agreed and the music will be allowed in the documentary with no further issues, however
when a small production or an independent documentary-maker decides to use a song
which has been copyrighted in their production it can cause issues if they cannot afford to
pay the fee. The outcome of not being able to afford a song or persuade the owner to let it
be used in a documentary is that it cannot be used in the documentary and if it has already
been used it will either have to be removed or in some cases a law suit will occur. Copyright
does not just apply to music however, it also applies to things such as pictorial, sculptural, and
graphic works and sound recordings. Nick Broomfield had an issue with copyright when he was
making the documentary Kurt & Courtney (Broomfield: 1998). Broomfield was investigating the death
of rock star Kurt Cobain and wanted to use music from Kurt’s band Nirvana, however, Courtney Love
(Kurt Cobain’s wife) wouldn’t allow Broomfield to use any of it as she was the owner and the music
was copyrighted, because of this Broomfield had to remove any music of Kurt Cobain’s and instead
use other artists music. I did not have any issues due to copyright laws because all of the music I
used in my documentary was copyright free from sound cloud. All of my footage was also original.

2. In order to film somebody, the documentary-maker must first have permission. A personal or group
release form can be used, the person/people being filmed will sign the form and then there will be no
issues about whether or not the people in the documentary have given their consent to being filmed
and being involved in the documentary. A personal release form will have details about what exactly
the footage will be used for e.g. A documentary and if signed then the film makers will have
permission to use the footage in the way they have agreed with the people being filmed and they will
not have the right to withdraw they consent. If however, a personal release is not signed or the film
maker uses the footage in a way which was not agreed in the personal release then the people who
were filmed can decide that they no longer want to be involved in the making of the documentary and
will have to be removed. If the film makers do not follow this then they could be sued. In Nick
Broomfield’s Biggie & Tupac (2002) Broomfield uses a handheld camera when trying to film an
interview with ex LAPD detective Russell Poole. Russell Poole’s lawyer tells Broomfield to turn off
the camera because they do not want an interview at that time, Broomfield continues to film until
he is told again, this is an example of somebody not giving consent to being filmed. To avoid any
problems to do with the content of my documentary I met with all the people I would be
interviewing in my documentary and scripted it with them, this would allow me to ask questions
that I felt were relevant in the interviews whilst giving the people who were going to be
interviewed a chance to express any concerns of the questions asked, because of this I haven’t
had any issues with the content of my documentary, however, if I was to make another
documentary I would ask all the people participating in the content of the documentary to sign a
personal release before we started filming
Manipulation through editing links with the issue of Consent, if a person gives their consent
legally to be included in a documentary then depending on the personal release agreement, the
producers of the documentary can use the footage they have filmed how they like and show a
person or group of people in either a positive or negative way. This is why it is important to not
legally give consent to being in a documentary until the final product has been finished
Recently Channel 4 released a series called “Benefits Street”. The image above shows two of
the main characters in Benefits Street and also shows the program synopsis, which says “This
documentary series reveals the reality of life on benefits, as the residents of Britain’s most
benefit-dependent streets invite cameras into their tight-knit community”. However, this show
caused a lot of controversy as it portrayed the street to be full of lazy, drug addicted criminals
who use the tax payers’ money to pay for their habits. The people shown on the program claim
that they are shown like this because of manipulation through editing and that the Producers of
the shown failed to show the positive sides to them, such as the community in the street and
them trying to find jobs and earn money independently. Although nothing can be done legally
about them feeling misrepresented Channel 4 had the option of showing the people living on
James Turner Street in a more positive way and failed to do so.

3. When editing my own documentary I tried very hard not manipulate what was said about
Nathans partner Mia as she didn’t feature in the documentary in person and therefore she
couldn’t express her feelings and opinions on the subject, however, there was one incident in
particular which was difficult to edit, because although I didn’t want to manipulate what was said
about her to sound positive when it wasn’t I wanted to show the truth in the story. Nathan and
Mia had an argument and she appeared to block his phone number and all other forms of contact
with him and Nathan spoke on a Vlog about this, saying his side of the story and how horrible he
thinks she is. I didn’t want to include all of it because it would show her in a negative opinion and
she didn’t have a stage to argue her side of the story, I decided to show the views a part of the
argument and explain what had happened from my point of view through text. This was me
manipulating what had happened through editing so that Mia was shown neither in a positive nor
a negative way.
Keeping a documentary balanced and bias is very difficult because it is easy to form an opinion
and in some cases pick a side in an argument on a topic when filming a documentary about it. A
balanced documentary will show both sides of the story or topic being investigated and will give
arguments a platform in which to argue their case. However, this can be difficult because
sometimes it is difficult to find somebody to argue one side of the argument and normally before
a documentary is made the documentary-maker has already researched the topic in detail and
has formed their own opinion on it. Most documentaries are not balanced as it is difficult to show
both sides of the story in the same light. The same as keeping a documentary balanced, it is also
very difficult to make a documentary not biased as these are similar things, however, whilst a
balanced documentary shows both sides of the story equally, a non-biased documentary will be
more to do with the opinion of the documentary-maker themselves and the producers as it will be
solely up to them what they say and include in the documentary regarding the topic when they
edit it. A balanced and non-biased documentary will allow the viewer to form their own opinion on
the topic from what they see themselves from the people involved in the documentary and not
what the presenter or voice over insists they, the view believe.
The Imposter is balanced throughout the documentary as it gives both sides of the story an equal
platform to argue their side of the story, however due to what is said by the family of the young
boy who went missing and the imposter himself it is clearly biased towards one side of the story
which is that the mother and older brother of the young boy killed him. However, this could just
be manipulation through editing as it shows this side of the story to be true when in fact there is
no evidence. In Nick Broomfield’s Biggie & Tupac it is clear that Broomfield believes that the
LAPD had a part to play in the murder of both Biggie Smalls and Tupac Shakur as he tries to
investigate this more than other conspiracies mentioned in the documentary.
My documentary is unbalanced, this is due to the fact I did not include Nathans partner in the
documentary at all even though she was spoken about, this was because the topic of the
documentary was not about young families or parents but solely on young fathers and how they
have to mature and grow to become responsible teen dads. I tried to not include Mia as much as
possible and I also manipulated an interview so that she was not seen in a negative way.
Legal issues can massively affect the outcome of a documentary, for example when Nick
Broomfield had to remove all of Kurt Cobain’s music from his documentary due to copyright
issues. This completely changed the documentary and made it very difficult for Nick Broomfield
to show his investigations as he wasn’t even allowed to quote lyrics which may have given an
insight into the reason for Kurt Cobain’s death. Consent can also cause disruption in a
documentary because if the film makers don’t have consent then they will have to remove parts
of the documentary with the person they do not have consent to show in it. However, through my
research and producing my own documentary I have decided that Ethical issues are much
harder to avoid and once the issue is made it is much harder to find an alternative to the issue

4. such as when Nathan and Mia had an argument and I wanted to show the audience exactly what
happened but I didn’t want to upset Mia and not give her a platform to argue her side of the story.
I think this is a much harder problem to deal with then having to find a music which fits into a
documentary without copyright issues. However I think from a film makers point of view getting
consent from people in a documentary is much more of an issue than keeping a story balanced
and biased because if a story is not balanced then it will show one side of a story more than the
other whereas if a personal releases are not signed and the people involved are not happy then
they can demand to be removed from the documentary, in some cases making it much different
to how it was before, although I also believe that most legal issues stem from ethical issues
because if a documentary is balanced and non-biased and the people and story in the
documentary is not manipulated through editing then in most cases these legal issues would not
become a problem in the first place. If Nick Broomfield had made Kurt& Courtney a balanced
documentary then maybe Courtney Love would have allowed him to use Kurt Cobain’s music in
the documentary, and if Nick Broomfield had not been trying to involve himself in a legal battle
between the LAPD and ex LAPD detective Russell Poole then he would have been allowed to
interview him on what had happened between the LAPD and Biggie & Tupac. I had no legal
issues throughout the production of my documentary because I followed the law however, I did
have a few ethical issues because I wanted to show the truth in my documentary.