By F. Miguel Valenti 
(Moving Pictures Summer Blockbuster issue, 2007)

The Issues

The largest, fastest growing and arguably most persuasive export of the United States is not aerospace or military technology. It is media: film, television, video and computer games, music, even advertisements. American media products have become, for better or worse, a pervasive international ambassador, bringing (many would say forcing) American values, attitudes, fashions and trends to the far reaches of the globe. The people who create media are holding the reins of a powerful tool, capable of influencing on a visceral as well as an intellectual level worldwide.

As such, we who create, produce, market and distribute media, collectively, need to be aware of certain immutable realities.

For our purposes here, it is enough to question whether the sort of global access and power that filmmakers and media makers have to influence people brings with it any ethical responsibility. Because so many people consume media and entertainment product, should we, as creators, have to exercise care as to the messages, intended or inadvertent, sent into the world embedded in our product?

This all sounds like more than many of us signed up for when we chose to enter the field: "We are not teachers, we are artists" or "We are business people" I hear you cry.

Sadly, this is our blessing and our curse. Even a casual look around will illustrate that our creations, our content, do in fact teach, even if that is not the intention. Entertainment media can persuade, inspire and teach like few other forces.

I have spent more than 20 years in the motion picture and television production business, in New York, Los Angeles and London. Throughout this time, I have seen many things that make me believe our industry is filled with many good people working in a deeply flawed system, as well as a very few flawed people (as is true in all industries) for whom Sing Sing would be an ideal system.

I have come to the conclusion that we, as an industry, must think more clearly about what we are doing, and about what we are teaching those coming up behind us. We tend to get caught up in the business aspects of our art, which in today's world is natural, unfortunately. We also tend to get so inundated that, too often, we do things the way they have been done by others simply to save time. These are the areas in which the flaws in the system can cause the most harm.

We should consider the broader effects of what we put out into the world, not just the immediate rewards. This may sound a bit odd to an audience of artistic or business-oriented people. However, we do not have the luxury of those in many industries to simply rivet our eyes to the bottom line. We influence society with our work to an enormous degree. We teach and socialize children. We introduce the United States to the world and help mold the world's values, for good or for ill.

Global Impact

Globally, more people form their perceptions and opinions of the United States from entertainment than from any other source. In times past, this was true mostly in the context of manufactured products. I found the ubiquitous Coca-Cola sign tattooed in quantity in many places in the world. Yet this does not, in retrospect, seem nearly as invasive as our worldwide media blitz today.

When I was traveling in South America, for example, I found it sad to discover the indigenous people inhabiting the jungles surrounding Iquitos, Peru, at the upper reaches of the Amazon River, have seen "Baywatch" on blaring old television sets when they come into town (by dugout canoe) to pick up supplies. They have no electricity, nor running water save the river. Iquitos can be reached only by air or river. There are no roads. Yet there is "Baywatch." I spoke to a number of young people in a village 30 miles from Iquitos who believed that life in America was all about tanned, beautiful bodies, beaches, cars and so on. In other words, they believed "Baywatch" was more than simply entertainment. It formed their picture of American life.

In fact, "Baywatch," at its height, was seen in some 144 nations, generating revenues in excess of $100 million per year, with approximately 67 percent of that revenue coming from foreign markets. Not only does the show present a rather skewed vision of life in America, unless you happen to be a Los Angeles County lifeguard, but it creates a desire for material things and for a life that is not remotely possible in the countries in which many of its viewers live.

Similarly, children in the poorest sections of India covet Nikes because they have seen commercials for them in the media.

This phenomenon occurs increasingly all over the world. Critics of the media term it "cultural pollution" and maintain it is one of the reasons why many people abroad resent the United States. Protectionism in foreign film and television industries, in the form of co-production treaties that present a barrier to U.S. market entry and restrict distribution of American product through tariffs and quotas, is a direct outgrowth of this sentiment.

Of course, there is a positive side to all of this, both on the global scale and the specific. Many would argue that the United States exports core values such as a belief in democracy, fair play and independence that are indispensable aspects of the American National Character. This may help to change the world's values, and also perhaps gives hope, especially to the younger generations, that there is a better way to live and that it is not a dream, but a plausible reality.

We should attempt to think ethically about our work and consider the responsibility we have and the power we wield as media makers, while still being passionate about First Amendment freedoms. In other words, with reach and impact comes responsibility.

The Conversation Starter

Several years ago, I decided to put some of these ideas in writing. More Than A Movie: Ethics In Entertainment (Westview Press, 2000) was the result. It is, to my knowledge, the only book about this topic written by a practicing industry insider. I wholeheartedly believed the book would sell only the number of copies my mother could afford. However, the book is currently in its fifth printing, having sold out its first print run in less than eight weeks, which speaks not to the quality of the book or my witty repartee, but to a certain hunger for a discussion of these issues. A follow-up volume on the ethics of the business of entertainment is due out soon. The book features contributing articles from Peter Bogdanovich, Annette Insdorf and Les Brown, and interviews with producers David Brown and Christine Vachon as well as other notable voices from film production and scholarship.

Strange the way things happen in this world, but the book led to an opportunity to put these ideas into practice by creating a film and media production program from scratch at Arizona State University's School of Theatre and Film.

A Unique Program

This program is a challenge in that it attempts to not only teach students how to turn the cameras on but why to turn them on. The program is based on many of the ideas in the book, as well as issues explored at 2005's historic E2 Ethics of Entertainment Conference, sponsored by the Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics.

The Film and Media Production program took in its fledgling class in August 2006 and is growing exponentially. The program is based upon four pillars that, in combination, are unique in the nation.

First, the program is thoroughly integrated with ASU's theater program. This allows film students to draw upon the more ancient traditions of performance practice and textual analysis in theater.

Second, ASU's is not a vocational or button-pushing program. Instead, it focuses on traditions of Western narrative, encouraging students to think about the components of a compelling story.

Third, since the program was being created from the ground up, the focus has been centered in the digital environment, using top-of-the-line, high-definition equipment in order to equate with the realities of the contemporary environment and marketplace in the industry.

Finally, and most importantly, everything is grounded upon principles of ethical decision-making. We demand that our students examine themselves and the choices they make in their media projects. They are free to create any type of content they choose, as long as they have actively engaged in a decision-making process rather than simply taking the path of least resistance. We hope, through this process, to instill a sense that the decisions we make in the everyday pursuit of media creation have repercussions and should not be taken lightly.  

The overall point goes far beyond the panacea of "tell stories that matter," although of course that is a central element. Beyond creating a compelling story, students are encouraged to carefully consider issues such as the potential effects of portrayals of violence and substance abuse; easy stereotyping in writing, directing or casting; and relying exclusively on special effects, or what we term "shock and roll," at the expense of story. Students are provided with the tools for making ethical decisions, both onscreen and off, in the way they conduct themselves in the media industries.

Students are often surprised at the frequency with which their daily decisions in creating media cross into ethical decision-making territory. I have often been asked how ethics can rear its head in cinematography, for example. When I point out that how you light, frame and shoot a human subject can make them look either noble and important or, in the alternative, like we all look in driver's license photos, they understand. This sort of example is replete for any area of film and media creation.

We do not tell students what films to make or what content to create - far from it. What the program attempts to do is give students the broader picture of what it means to be a filmmaker or a media creator/provider. Students will ultimately decide for themselves what they want to create and offer up to the world. They will, however, at least have the ethical decision-making tools to understand the issues at stake. In the end, that is all we can ask. -MPM

F. Miguel Valenti is the Lincoln Professor of Ethics and the Arts at Arizona State University. A Yale-trained entertainment attorney and independent film producer, Valenti has crafted ASU's film and media production program to sit squarely at the center of where media and ethics meet. Valenti has been a guest on CNN and a number of regional and national radio broadcasts, and lectures nationally on the topic of ethics in entertainment. He also serves as a consultant to producers and organizations interested in the topic.

Image, top to bottom:
The Coca-Cola bottle received intense scrutiny in The Gods Must Be Crazy.
The perfectly tanned team at "Baywatch."
Peter Bogdanovich helmed The Last Picture Show; What's Up, Doc; and Paper Moon in the ′70s.