- Steyerl talks about how the “unbroken belief” of the documentary form is challenged. What does Steyerl mean by this? Certain movies and films are based on a true story. How does truth inform the fiction? How might fiction inform the truth?
What Steyerl means is that documentary form loses its original authenticity. It is no longer a valid record of real events. Like what Steyerl mentions, “it no longer ask whether documentary images correspond to reality or not.” The documentary recently is lack of focus, filled with uncertainty.
To fiction, truth represents the emotional strength. It is only for events that are real enough to approach us through documentaries that we are moved by them and resonate strongly. And for fiction, the meaning of “truth” changes. Regardless of whether the image is real or not, “looking real” is compelling enough. This is why “Documentary forms convey, regulate, and administrate huge emotional potentials”.
Not only that, but for nowadays, “truth” no longer seems to be important in the content, but in the emotional expression. We do not need specific images to convey the corresponding emotions. “Documentary forms create false intimacy and even false presence”, yet what it tries to do, is to simulate the real emotional experience.
As for how fiction inform the truth, not only does fiction show emotion in a more intimate and intense way by changing the content, but fiction itself brings uncertainty and a sense of doubt, in terms of being completely consistent with reality emotional. This is what Steyerl means when he says, “doubt as to the truth-value of the documentary claim is actually part of this series of emotional simulations.”
What’s more, in this day and age, it is full of uncertainty. So in the fiction approach seems to be the existence of uncertainty, but the fact that it is uncertain itself is a true representation of the world. Like what Steyerl says, “those CNN images still vividly and acutely express the uncertainty, which governs not only contemporary documentary image production, but also the contemporary world as such.”
- What is the significance of the authenticity and representation of the truth in the media that you consume on a daily basis? What is the role of a live broadcast?
In everyday use of media, authenticity actually gives viewers the ability to judge by themselves. If the news is completely objective and with authenticity, then the media is simply the medium through which the news is disseminated, and the audience can make their own emotional response to the events. When authenticity and representativeness cease to exist, the media interprets the news and imposes its own emotional experience on the viewer. The saddest thing is that viewers are often unable to tell whether the media has added their own emotional experiences, and therefore cannot make their own value judgments.
The beauty of live streaming is that it is live in real time, which means there is less room for processing at the technical level. But at the same time, live streaming still has a lot of things that can be manipulated to change its realism, such as it can choose the angle, the time period to be shown, what enters the screen and what does not. It is more authentic and representative than video, and has a better chance to prove its authenticity, for example it can interact effectively with the audience, but its authenticity is still uncertain.