How Watching 'The Detectives' Affected Me Personally

How Watching ‘The Detectives’ Affected Me

I have watched an episode of ‘The Detectives’, a show that follows a child abuse case in Manchester. It affected me in various ways.

Firstly, watching the documentary, especially the part when the victim starts crying on the interview tape, made me feel quite sympathetic towards her experience and made me feel saddened that she had been abused in such a way.

I also felt sad due to the music that was played at certain parts in the documentary (e.g.: the victim crying on the tape). This specific type of music I felt was really emotional. This music also carried a sense of realism and expressed the harsh reality of the aftermath of this abuse.
 

Secondly, I also felt very angry towards the suspect who had committed the crime because he could be so cold and emotionless about the topic. As well as this, I was also angry that the abuser told her that no one would believe her and how he responded to the questions presented to him by the police.

Moreover, I felt that the music was trying to emphasise the overall dark tone of the documentary and made me feel highly saddened hearing it. This music also carried a sense of realism and expressed the harsh reality of the aftermath of this abuse.

I also felt quite disgusted that the BBC chose to add light-hearted and jovial music from the 1970’s, as the theme of the overall documentary did not warrant this sort of joyful atmosphere and I strongly felt that this was offensive and a blatant attempt to turn a serious matter into a light-hearted spoof.

Thirdly, I also felt quite proud and grateful to live in a country where the subject of child abuse is taken very seriously and where everyone is allowed to have their concerns and opinions about this topic heard by the authorities.

In addition to this, I also felt proud of the unique policing system in this country that deals with this specific topic and how their efforts are helping to bringing these criminals to justice.

Moreover, I felt that this documentary taught abuse victims that there is help and advice available and that it is easy to obtain. It also teaches people that you will be taken seriously and be listened to if you report a crime, especially one of this severity.

How Does 'The Detectives' Stick to BBC Guidelines?

How Does the Documentary Stick to the BBC Guidelines?

The documentary is accurate because it is in a fly-on-the-wall format that follows a major over-arching storyline and nothing that is displayed in the documentary is inaccurate.

The documentary is partly impartial, but at the same it is not. This is because the documentary expects the viewer to feel sympathy towards both the victim and the suspect, so in that sense it is impartial, yet it seems to focus more on the victim’s sympathy and the polices’ attempts to secure a conviction, so in that sense it is not impartial.

The documentary is quite harmful and offensive. The reason for this is that it informs the viewer of in-depth descriptions of a serious crime and then shows the suspect being questioned and the victims in a great amount of distress.

The documentary does seem to respect people’s right of privacy and does not include people who have not been given consent to do so. This is shown in the sense that they censor out the names of the people who have not given permission for their names to be broadcast on television.

This documentary also respects the BBC guideline regarding children and young people and their right to safeguarding and consent. This is demonstrated in the way that they choose not to show nor name the young victim of the crime.

As well as this, the documentary also acknowledges the Reporting Crime guideline. This is because the certain crime depicted in this documentary is in the public interest and also respects privacy. This is shown in the radio extracts that the crime of exploitation gained notoriety as the number of reported victims began to grow.

Also, the documentary respects the BBC's code of censorship because it censors out graphic details of the crime and does not reveal any unnecessary details which could hinder the investigation or damage the BBc's integrity.

Moreover, The Detectives also values the BBC's code of the 9pm Watershed. This is shown by the fact that The Detectives was shown on BBC after 9pm.

In addition, this documentary also abides by the BBC's humiliation code. This is shown by the fact that they do not humiliate suspects and rather simply let the police interrogate them.

As well as this, The Detectives documentary respects the BBC's Audience Expectations code. This is because the voice-over at the start of the episode states that the episode contains scenes and content that may be distressing to some viewers.

Also, the documentary repeats the BBC's Photo-sensitive Epilepsy code. This is because The Detectives does not contain any quickly-changing lights that could potentially trigger someone's epilepsy or evoke a seizure.

As well as this, the documentary also adheres to the BBC’s Editorial Guideline of Accuracy, especially the Misleading Audiences chapter. This is clearly demonstrated by the amount of depth that they go into. For example, with the archive footage and images from the 1970’s and explanation of the suspect’s fate at the end of the documentary.

 

Harm Test Graphs on Microsoft Excel

I created these graphs on the programme Microsoft Excel to show the amount of categories that there are for media classification, as well as how much their severity differs for each individual piece of media.

The Detectives - How is the 'The Detectives" Constructed?

How is the Film Constructed?

I watched an episode of an on-the-fly police documentary called The Detectives. During the course of the episode, I took notes of the codes and conventions of the documentary and the degree of harm and offence that they can cause to the viewer.

Mode of Address

The documentary consists of many various codes and conventions with varying levels of potential harm and offence.

The content is very in-depth and graphic and can evoke different emotions. For instance, the music played throughout the documentary is highly upbeat and vibrant, and some viewers may become distressed by this as the music contradicts the impact and aftermath of the actual crime.

The interviews also express graphic and unsettling descriptions of the crime and the interviews also go into extremely in-depth details about the act. This could upset the viewer and make them highly distressed. Some of the interviews also show or feature the suspects being interviewed by the police and showing no remorse, which could also contribute to the harm and offence.

As well as this, the observational footage, which includes police officers examining a suspect’s house and finding children’s names on the walls, could harm the viewer and make them feel disgusted with the documentary as a whole.

The interviews are stored in the police archives and this can make the viewer feel unsettled and harmed because the victim’s emotion, for example is entirely genuine.

The narration in the episode is very much like a story and provides even further detail into what the police and the interviewees are feeling and how the case is affecting them both emotionally and psychologically. The narration also provides some more details about what the interviewees experienced and what the long-term effects of the experience had on them.

As well as this, the narration also tells the viewer about the various obstacles that the police have to deal with in order to continue a case and bring prosecutions to the suspects. This can also cause a certain degree of harm to the viewer, as they may believe that the victims will not have justice and the case will not be pursued any further.

In addition, the narration adds a certain degree of seriousness to the documentary, as the narrator talks in an extremely seriously and melancholy tone about a traumatic and horrific incident. This may not distress as much as the music, as it follows the tone of the documentary, but it would still prove highly harmful as the narrator talks about such a subject.

 The visual imagery in this documentary is extremely varied and depicts a plethora of images that could disturb the viewer and cause them psychological harm. An example of this would be the emotions on the suspect’s face as he is being charged with the crime, which suggests that he is only concerned about his own fate. This could distress and harm the viewer and make them think that they cannot trust anyone.

On the other, the documentary also uses visual techniques such as cutaways and observational footage in an attempt to make the viewer see more of the case from the police’s perspective and the victim’s perspective to evoke sympathy and empathy.

How Does the Documentary Stick to the BBC Guidelines?

The documentary is accurate because it is in a fly-on-the-wall format that follows a major over-arching storyline and nothing that is displayed in the documentary is inaccurate.

The documentary is partly impartial, but at the same it is not. This is because the documentary expects the viewer to feel sympathy towards both the victim and the suspect, so in that sense it is impartial, yet it seems to focus more on the victim’s sympathy and the polices’ attempts to secure a conviction, so in that sense it is not impartial.

The documentary is quite harmful and offensive. The reason for this is that it informs the viewer of in-depth descriptions of a serious crime and then shows the suspect being questioned and the victims in a great amount of distress.

The documentary does seem to respect people’s right of privacy and does not include people who have not been given consent to do so. This is shown in the sense that they censor out the names of the people who have not given permission for their names to be broadcast on television.

This documentary also respects the BBC guideline regarding children and young people and their right to safeguarding and consent. This is demonstrated in the way that they choose not to show nor name the young victim of the crime.

As well as this, the documentary also acknowledges the Reporting Crime guideline. This is because the certain crime depicted in this documentary is in the public interest and also respects privacy. This is shown in the radio extracts that the crime of exploitation gained notoriety as the number of reported victims began to grow.

Editorial Values of the BBC

Sustaining Citizenship and Civil Society

Sustaining citizenship and civil society means representing Britain's values in a way that coincides with representing Britain's society in a clear and concise manner.

Promoting Education and Learning

Promoting education and learning means broadcasting a programme whose main topic is education in a positive and interesting way.

Stimulating Creativity and Cultural Excellence

Stimulating creativity and cultural excellence means programmes outside of the UK and acknowledges different cultures.

Representing the UK, It's Regions, Nations and Communities

Representing the UK means broadcasting programmes that emphasise the agricultural and cultural aspects of the UK.

Bringing the UK to the World and the World to the UK

 

 

This means that the BBC are reporting stories from the rest of the world to the UK and stories from the UK to the rest of the world.

 

Promoting Communication, Technology and Service



 

 

This means that the BBC will do it's utmost to make the UK aware and new and emerging advances in communication, technology and services.

'Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels' - Harm Test Review

Jordan states that the trailer involves drugs, strong language, violence, gambling and murder.

He also states that the alcohol consumption in the trailer would be unsuitable for anyone under 15 years old and this could encourage children to emulate drinking alcohol and could be sent to hospital, or in extreme cases, even die from consuming alcohol.

I agree that the alcohol consumption is inappropriate for anyone under 15 years old and that this could lead to a rise in emergency admissions and death rates.

Jordan also said that the trailer contains strong language and that the language depicted in the trailer is unsuitable for anyone under the age of 15 years old. As well as this, he stated that this could encourage children to swear and to become anti-social as a result of this and could swear to a teacher, their parents or other members of society.

The trailer does contain some strong language and that the language may be unknown to children under 15 years old. I also agree that the language has the potential for children to emulate the language that is used to the trailer and use it at inappropriate times.

He also said that the trailer contain powerful weapons that have potential to cause serious harm to members of the public (e.g.: guns and machetes). This could encourage a rise in crime and murder statistics by children hoping to imitate the characters in the trailer.

I agree that the trailer does contain weapons that can cause harm to the individual as the people around them. However, I do not believe that murder rates could rise because children would see the harm that they can cause and choose not to use them. On the other hand, crime rates could rise due to children not realizing the full consequences.

Jordan also states that gambling is in the trailer and that it could encourage gambling and can cause widespread gambling addictions and could cause pressures on the overall economy of Britain. It may also cause the viewers to build up gambling debts and could take risky decisions that they would not normally take (e.g.: loan sharks) to fund their habits.

I do agree that the trailer could encourage young people to take part in gambling, but not to the extent that it could cause a widespread gambling issue across the country. On the other hand, however, I do agree that the trailers could encourage more impressionable people to take risks with loan sharks to continue gambling.

There is also a lot of blood and gore in the trailer and this could disturb the viewers or make them ill due to them being sensitive to the extreme violence in the trailer.

I acknowledge that the trailer does contain blood and gore and that the extent that is found in the trailer have profound effects on children's physical and mental well-being.

The trailer also promotes bullying in gangs or groups and this could encourage young viewers to commit crimes or intimidate classmates as a gang.

I personally agree that the age rating of the trailer should be 15. This is because there are implications of crime, gambling and violence, and that these implications do have the potential to cause harm to society, the individual and those around them. The aftermath and effect of blood and gore could frighten and disturb younger viewers.