I strongly agree that disgusted, negative effects in political documentaries can lead to the action (LaMarre & Landreville, 2009) or at least to the gaining of knowledge. Although Whiteman argues that mass media has “minimal effects” on voting and public opinion behavior, I think political documentary films can tickle the electorate’s emotion by influencing their action. I believe political documentaries have two sides effect depending on a producer. The first side effect will be producers can manipulate the audience behavior. The second side effect is electorate can gain the knowledge and understand the producer’s intention.
I lack of information about the history of documentaries, but was surprised to know that the Soviet government used the documentaries as a propaganda tool in the beginning of the 20th century (Whiteman, 2004). As a person who grew up during the Soviet time, I can say Russian mass media successfully continue to use documentaries for political reasons. For example, last week the Russian NTV channel’s short documentary film about the opposition meetings in Moscow gathered thousands of protest groups behind the NTV TV’s main office. Protestors were angry with the content of the documentary: NTV journalist presented the fact that active protester have been paid for the meeting by the American government. I think if it were a news report the effect would not be same. In addition the NTV documentary was published on YouTube and new media’s interactive effect played a crucial role in organizing the protest against the NTV channel. This ties governmental control. Оқуды жалғастыру