On Sunday, the LA Times ran two major feature articles on the emerging influence and power of documentary film. One article contrasted the works of Michael Moore and Ken Burns. The other feature explores the meaning of objectivity across the many emerging documentary genres.
For anyone who has seen the Speaking Science 2.0 talk, you know that I emphasize in the conclusions the emerging importance of film as a public engagement tool. It's currently an active part of my research program, and expect a lot more to come on the topic here at Framing Science. For the time being, check out the short overview I wrote for a recent report from the Ford Foundation and the Center for Social Media at American University.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
"I think one movie can make a difference; I do believe that," says director Michael Moore. Indeed, speculation over the impact of his new documentary SICKO was the subject of a news feature in the Sunday New York Times:
Whether embracing Mr. Moore's remedy or disdaining it, elected officials and…
Michael Moore is in a class by himself when it comes to generating news attention, advance publicity, and box office for his documentary films. For example, when I was in Canada this past week, I picked up the National Post to read a lead front page story defending capitalism against Michael Moore…
Fronting the NY Times today is a preview of a bold new strategy for engaging hard to reach audiences on science. As the NY Times describes, today's media event that unveils the fossilized remains of the monkey like creature Darwinius masillae features a unique collaboration between the History…
Director Randy Olson's Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy has already shaped the agenda and framed the discussion among scientists and the science media, a key impact of a successful documentary film.
I haven't had a chance to weigh in yet on the blog debate that has been raging over Sizzle. Needless…