First off, I apologize for my late CR response today. I think I was a bit excited after the SAT and lost track until today’s class. However, I do also think that the “lateness” of my essay certainly affected the content of what I would be talking about for the next few hundred words, due to the heated discussion we had in class together with the “Devil’s advocate” today. If you remember (hopefully….;;ㅠㅠ), I had vigorously argued in class that Catfish imposed more harms than good on every party that is involved with the production, release, and distribution of the film. I divided the parties mainly into three; the people who are actually starred in this film, the famous SNS Facebook, and our general society as a whole. And although we had a very fruitful and passionate discussion with the intense participation of both sides+the Devil’s Advocate, and even though the conversation has introduced to me some intriguing, fresh perspectives to think about, I am quite sure that my stance on this motion still stands firm; perhaps even more resolute because of the valuable ideas that were brought up by the Opposition which contributed on the elaboration of ideas of my own.
So, that’s it for the intro, and so let’s jump right into the issue why the creation and release of Catfish was a total disaster for everyone, starting with the individuals who were involved. There are several characters that come out in the film, including Yaniv, Angela, Yaniv’s friends, and so on. Well, even though there are issues that could be discussed with these people as well, since they say that it was OK to disclose the film and since this point was made very clear by the opposing house, let’s just forget about all the rest, and focus on the remaining two, Abby and Angela’s husband.
As for Abby, I think that there is no doubt that the distribution of this film will drastically affect her life, either directly or indirectly; positively or negatively. Yes, I do understand that “Abby” isn’t really the main character who gets the entire spotlight, and therefore it might be true that she won’t receive as much attention as she would receive if she were to be the protagonist. However, 1) still, she nevertheless took a vital role in connecting Yaniv with Angela, and 2) the main character may not be she, but IT’S HER MOTHER! And unfortunately, this is not some happy-high-teen movie where children who act take vigorous and enlightening roles; it’s a “Cyber Horror” documentary that eventually ferrets out the gigantic, creepy fraud of a woman who’s disguised her identity by creating 15 fake accounts in SNS, using multiple telephones and abusing the existence of her 7 or 8 year old daughter, all just to flirt with a man who’s 20 years younger than herself and establish a sexual attachment with him-to escape her miserable, boring life. Now, I recognize the fact that this movie could actually bring in the positive light-perhaps sympathy over Angela and her family. However, it is hard to deny that there will also be radical comments that come from the other side as well, obviously; what Angela did to the seemingly-sexy online partner is not what many people would do in ordinary life. Actually, if we just take out all the sympathy and the humane emotions that we might feel towards the subject family, and just examine the factual whereabouts, Angela’s actions are quite abnormal, insane, freaky, and even psychopathic! What she did was adultery, with a man who perhaps is half her age and even utilizing a fake identity of a woman she has never even met in her life (pretending to be her daughter.) This is, in common sense, beyond social taboos! Many of her actions could be considered illegal and worthy of being prosecuted, under the violation of several legal codes: cyber defamation, the misappropriation of identity, adultery, and maybe even fraud! She must have been deeply ashamed and profoundly embarrassed at the package of outrageous actions she had done, if she even had an ounce of moral dignity or social pride left. And my god, I’m sorry, but I do think she should be ashamed! But because, surprisingly, Angela seems to be ENJOYING the outcomes of this situation (ㅡㅡ; YUCK), I suppose we could let her be. It was her life, her decisions that she made, and the consequences are hers to bear.
BUT WHAT ABOUT ABBY. WHAT ABOUT THE POOR, INNOCENT LITTLE CHILD WHO SHOULDN’T BE HARMED BY THIS SERIES OF CRAZY EVENTS AT ALL. Perhaps right now, she’s not old enough to really grasp the meaning of being televised on an official film is, (and perhaps that’s how Angela cajoled her daughter to agree to the disclosure of the documentary), but undoubtedly and inevitably, the time will come when she understands what “Catfish” meant; about her mother and her family. And I think she will be pretty ashamed and embarrassed at what her mother has done, or even disgusted at such unusual deviations from normalcy of her mom. (I’m sorry, but if it was my mom who appeared and was completely mocked like that for two hours, I would have been undignified, infuriated, and deeply wounded) Furthermore, even if she manages to budge with the truth, what about the environment she would be exposed to in the future? Isn’t it kind of evident that there is a very high possibility of her being mocked, harassed, or even bullied by some irrational group of gossipers just for having Angela as her parent? If you’ve ever lived in a normal society existing in this world, at school, at neighborhoods, or at basically any place you could imagine, there are always those harassing bullies who love to pick on and meddle with the lives of the vulnerable. And often, children from families with “peculiar issues”, such as divorce, mental problems of parents, poverty, and etc. become the easy target for such “social violence”. I can say with 100% certainty, that once in Abby’s life, she will encounter an event where the film will be an issue, hurting her deeply; a person will come up to Abby, in the future, and say “Oh, you’re that kid from Catfish, the daughter of …….” And so on. My biggest problem with the film that makes me outraged is that the film of “Catfish” dug in, investigated, and revealed the very “private” issues that could have been dealt “privately” to millions of people. And because of that, the scars, the mental wounds and psychological stress of the poor little child which could have been minimized was on the contrary, exacerbated and expanded because of the greed of the filmmakers and the thoughtlessness of an immature woman. Abby had no say in this, although she would eventually be the one who would be most affected by this in various ways-probably negatively. They(the filmmakers and Angela), should be severely chastised for that, if nothing else.
Additionally, there doesn’t need to be an elaborate explanation on the emotional injuries Angela’s husband must have received; he witnessed his wife committing adultery, hitting on some guy who’s in the age of his son, and the whole process was televised internationally, worldwide (The movie was pretty popular, so a sufficient number of people must have seen it, I must say). It’s instigating enough to discover your wife to be disloyal to yourself, and SHARING that shocking and embarrassing revelation with millions of moviegoers (with some popcorn and soda, I suppose) seems extremely unnecessary. If I were in his position, I’d say things have gone out of control and beyond the line, and would want to hide myself to someplace isolated from any sort of interaction(of course, with a new wife).
Secondly, putting aside the emotional damages and scars the (ironically) popularity of the movie must have caused, even so, think of the unfair criticisms and biases Facebook would be subject to now. Now, as very intelligent students enrolling in KMLA, we all know that something always has its benefits and defects. This, of course, also applies for Facebook; we obviously notice that it has harms in the dark side, but that it also has beneficial functions that contribute on improving the welfare of the society. However, in Catfish, an extremely unusual, rare incident that radically illustrates the problems of Facebook was refined through the process of producing a documentary; dramatization, exaggeration, and the stirring-up-and-making-a-big-fuss-over-everything. I mean, healthy, constructive criticisms are always welcome, because they tend to be FAIR and OBJECTIVE. And it is always possibly through methods of education, reporting, and etc. However, “DOCUMENTARIES”-don’t you think what they do is a bit unfair? Very often, they usually try to pick out the most radical, extreme cases of the side they want to root for and demonstrate the events with magnificent details and specificity-to draw public attention with sensationalism. Because documentaries have to be shocking, entertaining, and stimulating in order to “sell”, and because many of the issues in reality aren’t that “dramatic” that can match a “fictional scenario”, they often “transform” the real life into something really fun, immediate, alert, and interesting. As for in this case, the Catfish, honestly, how many cases would there be in real life that a psychopath creates multiple accounts to hit on a guy using a fake identity of a model and disguising it as her daughters? Do you think events “THAT CRAZY” would occur on a daily basis? Well, perhaps, once in 2 or 3 years; certainly not very much. Just think of the notorious “Swine Flu” or other pandemics that swept through the nation as hot potatoes. Even before the objective information on the diseases was verified, the media, especially many “social documentaries”, were crazy on leading and claiming and assuming and warning everyone that an imminent, irresistible danger has neared. And the results are…? Less people died from all the infamous pandemics combined than people did from a normal flu. However, tragically, the numerous producers of livestock and restaurant owners who served the related animals experienced an unimaginable degree of decline in their sales, and they suffered greatly to the extent that they certainly did not deserve. What about Facebook? We can’t say he is completely innocent, but does he really deserve THAT PORTRAYAL? THAT IMAGE, THAT PERCEPTION OF USERS ASSUMING MANY ACCOUNTS ARE FABRICATED IN WHICH MANY CASES THEY ARE NOT? As the Opposition correctly pointed out, “Documentaries are all like that”, I think that criticisms through such sources are pointless and only damaging to parties involved (that usually don’t deserve that much of a criticism). They just like to make a big fuss about everything to make more profit.
Lastly and finally, the social impact of the film imposes the greatest threat and causes the largest problem of all. Since it is obvious that some extent of dramatization and exaggeration was included in making the film, the authenticity of the film is being questioned, as it rightfully should be. Taking in to account that the content of the documentary isn’t true so much, not enough to declare itself as non-fiction, we should also consider the detrimental consequences. If we let go of Catfish, this once, because it’s fresh and entertaining, because it’s popular, with the soul of tolerance and generosity, then what about next time? What about the next series of documentaries that would probably rely on the past records to seek for success? If we condone the dishonesty of Catfish this time, it might serve as a landmark that opens up the door for numerous future films to also be untruthful and earn the justification through popularity. And ultimately, if the social trend is directed towards accepting the fraud and lies that exist within films, then many more films that could have been frank with its viewers could choose to lie about events to make it more “exciting”, and that goes against not only the fundamental principle of documentaries-muckraking the problems of the society-but also the trust and the welfare of the massive numbers of viewers who depend on the filmmakers to actually dig on some realistic problems with realistic solutions to address.
So with all these detrimental problems evident, existing and clearly outweighing whatever minute benefits it might have, can we let go of Catfish? Really?
The answer has already been spoken.
THBT social documentaries do more harm than good
THW require all realistic films to attain full authenticity
THW prosecute Angela for misappropriation of identity
THBT Abby also has the right to prohibit the film from being starred (not her mother)
THBT Facebook should allow only one account to be made per person
THBT the media shouldn't portray the embarassing moments of life
THS federal censorship of movies generates unfair prejudice
Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVtIot3tpWE <--This is a video that demonstrates the reason why some children bully others. One of them, as clearly included in the clip, is because they judge the victim to be weaker than himself(perhaps because of family background) http://www.redorbit.com/news/video/health/4/flu_paranoia_sweeping_the_nation/29902/?src=mrss <--This is a video that effectively depicts the crazy paranoia over the swine flu, and shows how people were over-worried about just simply a disease because of the demagoguery of the media
