Ethics In Roger and Me

The documentary Roger and Me is a very personal account of Michael Moore’s interpretation of the GM plant closings. Due to this the views expressed in the film will tend to lean to the viewpoint that Moore is setting up for the viewer. Now this isn’t to say that the views conveyed aren’t correct, but they are given through a limited spectrum. I believe that for the most part Moore takes advantage of the hardships being suffered by people in his town, and uses them to his own end. The ways in which certain people are seen during a hard time in their life is not a very ethical move on Moore’s part. The film is clearly an expository documentary, relying heavily n the commentary provided by Moore, but the argument could also be made that it is a participatory documentary. Regardless, there are very specific instances where Moore belittles people and exploits a certain personality trait to get across the evil of Roger Smith. There is one shot in which he shows the live human statues at an annual Great Gatsby party. In this instance he shows what type of humiliating work people are willing to do, and the callous attitude of those who hired them. Then in the parade he interviews Miss Michigan and asks of her opinion of the bad economic times. She clearly has no clue, but he keeps prodding at her to answer. Then he contrasts the image of her winning the  Miss america crown for Michigan with that of a family being evicted. It makes it seem as if she doesn’t care at all for the things her state is going through, but really she is just doing her job. Then there are several times when the sheriff went to different people’s houses and threw their stuff out onto the street. Not only is he being showed as a bad guy, but the people going through a difficult situation have to deal with being in the film as just another face of the hard times. The lady who did Amway and found people's colors was made to seem foolish, especially when she contacted Moore to tell him she had been diagnosed the wrong colors. His commentary is what exploited her being in the film. The GM spokesperson he talks to often offers that the lint roller industry is taking off, but Moore’s comment is that if that will replace the auto-industry. The spokesperson was simply stating an industry that is doing well, but he was made out to be a fool when Moore put words in his mouth. The lady who sold bunnies for pets or meat was exploited several times. She was in a “you gotta do what you gotta do” situation and Moore took advantage by showing her and her bunnies, and how she killed them. What Moore did most often is make fun of the never-ending optimism of the community. There were several projects and ideas that went defunct, but it was made worse by the way they were shown in the film. According to Bill Nichols ”They place a different burden of responsibility on filmmakers who set out to represent others rather than to portray characters of their own invention. These issues add a level of ethical consideration to documentary that is much less prominent in fiction filmmaking.”I agree with Nichols, that it is solely upon the shoulders of the filmmaker how his characters are seen by others. In this sense what Moore did was wrong, because oftentimes he exaggerated a certain trait within the people he shot for his own convenience, even if it was to make a bad person look worse.