The ethics of staged video

(by Allan Vestal)

In journalism, video is all about capturing action. This is beneficial to reporters and audiences alike, as the medium joins others like print (in which the physical can only be described); photography (which captures only a moment visually); and audio (which can be very descriptive but lacks a visual component).

But as in other mediums, there are some constraints to the form; journalistic video should be genuine. Journalist David Wertheimer explores this in his piece "Staged, Staging, Stages."

I largely agree with Wertheimer's main contention: in many instances, journalistic ideals preclude the use of non-authentic footage (video clips in which a reporter, producer or videographer arrange the subjects). When the covered topic demands, however, I feel that such videos might be allowed in the form of a clearly-marked re-enactment (an attempt at re-creating some event) or in the form of a narrated action (a subject's explanation of how some task or feat is accomplished). But in both cases, the non-authentic video must be introduced and described as such in order to maintain journalistic integrity. Such footage must only be used when its inclusion notably extends the context of the report.

An example of this would be in covering an employee at a horse farm. If a reporter (or a team of reporters) were unable to be present to film the employee carrying out a given task, they might ask the subject to walk them through the task while narrating, and then label the piece clearly as contrived.

I would set the bar much lower for this explanatory type of subject manipulation than for other types (such as the example Wertheimer gives of re-enacting a family's reaction to their relative being picked in the NFL draft). While at first this may appear to be splitting hairs, there is a categorical difference between these types of re-enactment: the former is being used to add description and context, while the latter is primarily focused on capturing a fleeting emotion.

A far better technique for the reporter in the latter example would have been to interview several family members together about what happened when they learned of their relative's success. The subjects would likely have expressed deep emotions which, when captured as they happened, could be taken as legitimate.