Manipulative Documentaries: Unveiling the Truth Behind the Screens

In an era dominated by binge-watching and endless streaming options, one genre has quietly taken the spotlight: the documentary. Netflix has cracked the code for delivering compelling docu-series, almost pouring them out weekly to become a champion of the burgeoning medium.

According to an Axios article, in 2021 documentaries were the highest-growing genre in streaming. Explorations of sustainability, murders, doping scandals, and social media, pop up on the must watch pages of Netflix with increased frequency. My hypothesis for the documentary’s rising success is its accessibility. No longer are exciting subjects reserved for professors in their lofty towers of academia or in reporters’ complex, wordy stories, they can be accessed and watched by anybody with a subscription account.

Merriam-Webster defines a documentary as “a presentation (such as a film or novel) expressing or dealing with factual events.” Netflix has perfected a documentary formula, filling in the narrative gaps of factual events with creative editing, music, and dramatic inside scoops.

However, their formula has a slight problem – these documentaries often present themselves as objective sources of fact-checked journalism, when they are in fact not. Some indeed achieve and deserve the label of accurate and reliable, but many with their underlying partisan aims project onto viewers an agenda.

“Seaspiracy,” a Netflix documentary released in 2021, was an exposé of the fishing industry's questionable sustainability policies. Viewers were shocked by its alarming statistics: “dolphin safe” tuna labels were dubbed as “fake” and the ocean was set to lose all its fish by 2048. Following its release, qualms were raised about Seaspiracy’s reliability. The statistic regarding 2048 is based on a 2006 study since been revised and Mark Palmer from Dolphin Safe Tuna claimed his interview quotes were taken out of context. Palmer also argued the documentary’s inaccuracies significantly impeded sustainable fishing’s progress.

Callum Roberts, a marine professor at the University of Exeter, raised an interesting point while criticism emerged, saying, “It’s not been made for its scientific rigour. It has used the techniques of film storytelling to make its case.”

I believe that's the crux of the problem. These documentaries are not rigorously fact-checked sources of objective journalism. Documentaries like Seaspiracy, which manipulated statistics, have remained unchanged and accessible to viewers today. In the era of so-called “Truth” media platforms, where opinions are presented as facts, documentary makers set a precarious precedent in wielding this considerable power to shape public opinion.

Filmmakers reframe factual context, consequently influencing public discourse. Documania has birthed numerous captivating productions – Tiger King, The Social Dilemma, Icarus, The 13th – which all garnered critical acclaim for their gripping narratives and ability to convey important stories.

True Crime Podcasts have also surged in popularity, which I also consider falling into the documentary genre. One podcast, “Serial,” even catalysed the early release of Adnan Syed from jail in September 2022. In 2014, the podcast reopened his case in an investigative storytelling style. It culminated in officials reconsidering the details of Syed's case and reversing the conviction. After serving 23 years for a murder he did not commit, he was freed.

Streaming companies and podcasters have capitalised on the growing documentary market and significantly increased their investments in the sector. Unfortunately, the high volume of documentaries produced has caused a diminished quality of production. These films often manipulate viewers to perceive their content as pure fact, despite containing personal opinions and errors.

So the next time you encounter the iconic “da-dum” and big red “N” when starting your next docu-series or film, it is worth keeping a critical eye engaged. What is presented at face value may not necessarily be as truthful as it deceptively appears.