“Bowling for Columbine” is one of Michael Moore’s controversial documentaries, which have caused remarkable stir in the American society. The artistic means Moore uses to propagate his messages in the asymmetrical sender-recipient relation, require special attention, due to the potential ethical problems they can imply. Moore’s use of both factual and fictitious devices generates a curiosity in the receivers regarding which genre the movie could be characterized as. “Bowling for Columbine” can, seen through Bill Nichols’ theories concerning modes in the documentary genre, be claimed to have traits from both the expository, participatory, performative, reflexive and the observational mode. In spite of Moore’s controversial creativity the movie won an Oscar for best documentary, which could quite possibly resolve in an unconditional trust in the conveyed pieces of information. This led to our examination on whether ethical problems occur in the movie or not. According to Jan F. Mikkelsen the receiver has to be aware of the sender’s use of efficiency techniques, as they indicate when he/she is using means to an end and thereby creates ethical issues. One of the efficiency techniques Moore applies in the movie is selective information, which makes us question whether he is being dishonest or if he has respectable intentions. As Moore’s movie is filled with both artistic devices and political purposes, this project discusses if he mixes genres and tangles with the idea of the factuality of documentary as a genre. With Henrik Juel’s reflections on the genre’s fluid boundaries at mind we found that it cannot be defined as precisely as we thought. The genre is in constant development and the sender himself has the responsibility not to mislead the recipient.
|Educations||Basic - Bachelor Study Programme in Humanities, (Bachelor Programme) Basic|
|Publication date||27 May 2014|
- Bowling for Columbine
- Strategisk massekommunikation
- Michael Moore