Documentary and Civic Culture

Abstract

In making documentary available to large audiences, television has rung its own changes on the form. Hybrid types of popular programs, easily emulated and increasing in number, borrow documentary techniques less to explore (and thereby possibly influence) real-life contexts, than to reap their spectacle value. Or they make an exhibition of situations contrived for the program itself, as in 'reality' programs incorporating a game-show element of competition.Whilst it might be argued that this hybridization has sparked new audience interest in documentary, many practitioners and commentators see it as having a negative effect. Russell Porter has claimed, ironically, that it means 'the documentary as a distinctive and readily identified species is in serious danger of extinction'.² On his account, documentaries that grapple with social problems, respond to diverse real-life experiences and test ideas and beliefs, are 'fading from fashion'.³ Then there is the concern that the demand to find the most entertaining story angle, and conform to the limits of the standard hour or half-hour program, makes it difficult to treat subjects with the subtlety they deserve.The problem is not just whether documentaries can entertain as well as inform audiences. It is also a question of how much 'elbow room' there is for well-researched and imaginatively crafted documentaries in the world of broadcasters' schedules and competitive production funding systems.⁴ This article focuses on this problem by discussing the institutional contexts and production histories of some documentaries made for television in Australia that have grown out of wider cultural negotiations or had some distribution beyond this medium. But first, some general issues surrounding documentary form amid institutional changes should be outlined in more detail.