|
|
| Roy Bedard on Cops Productions: "To Film Or Not To Film" 
| Cops on camera. You might love the idea or hate it. Obtaining permission to bring camera crews into the otherwise closed world of policing can be an uncomfortable task. There are generally two opinions amongst administrators about the television industry when it comes to broadcasting scenes of the police doing their jobs. The first, the Preventionist, is a person who is often encumbered with fear and doubt for what might happen if cameras are left running to capture events that have not yet unfolded. The unfiltered process they say, can lead to embarrassment, lawsuits and other nasty outcomes. This person may have good reasons for having this opinion, and sometimes might even cite bad experiences or bad Officers who are responsible for closing the door to outside production.
The second type, the Pragmatist, is eager to tell the story of policing. He understands the power of broadcast television. All of the department’s money spent on recruiting, public awareness and community relations cannot measure up to a single broadcast of a police department being showcased to millions of viewers. He feels good about the agency and its employees, and knows they do a good job. He wants to be completely transparent, to let the cameras capture the tenuous and difficult job that Law Enforcement Professionals experience daily. He justifies his pragmatic opinion as a measure of better educating and informing the public of the interesting, yet uncertain role of a police officer. His door remains open to responsible production, and he welcomes a showcase opportunity.
As a co-producer of two reality police television series, I have come to know both the Preventionist and the Pragmatist quite well. I spend a lot of time speaking to administrators as I look for new production opportunities. My opinion is a bit of an amalgam, a blend of both prevention and pragmatism. Having been a police officer, I understand both sides; making it easier to mediate between the agency featured and the production company who will ultimately be entrusted to tell the final story. It’s no secret that Law Enforcement has, well, its secrets. It isn’t prudent for some things like sensitive police tactics or confidential criminal intelligence to be presented to an anonymous audience. Certainly public audiences are filled with both the good-of-heart watchers and the nary-do-wells, each watching for their own personal reasons. But there are some things, like the role and functions of a Police Officer, which are secrets, which need to be let out. It’s not that these things were ever meant to be secrets, or that Law Enforcement has intentionally hidden their duties from the pubic. It’s that for decades, the public has often been too afraid to look, or too intimidated to ask questions. Rather, they have only caught glimpses of police work as they’ve gone about their daily lives; a crime scene where they were quickly pushed away by a perimeter Officer, or a traffic stop where they were issued a citation. Their personal experience with the police has often been mostly negative, and it’s natural for them to fill in the rest of the blanks with more cynicism and hyperbole to be shared amongst their friends and neighbors. Negative opinions are infectious .We learned in the 1980’s that demystifying the occupation was the first step in true community oriented policing and the most important step in forming a trust between officers and the communities they serve. The profession dumped millions into developing community programs like the DARE program, School Resource Officer (SRO) program, Problem Oriented Policing (POP) program, and a dozen other acronyms, all designed to target better community relations. We put police on bicycles to bring them closer to the public and started “Broken Window” campaigns to create partnerships between police and citizens. I see our productions as community relations campaigns, designed to serve a similar purpose. In our recent series “ROOKIES,” a lot of viewers have commented that they were completely unaware of how difficult it was to become a Cop. They had no idea of the extent of training, that there was a formal field-training program where Officers are taught street smarts that went beyond the academy. They didn’t realize the complexity of decision-making, or appreciate all of the factors that must be considered in every single decision that an Officer makes. Our cameras caught new Officers making mistakes, but they also caught experienced Officers correcting them. In a couple of episodes, the viewer was made aware that certain Officers were even “washed-out” of the program, unable to meet the high standards of the profession. ROOKIES exposed a negative side of policing, one that our Preventionist would rather avoid: the realization that not all people are cut out for the job, and that not everyone in uniform always makes the best decision. But on the contrary, ROOKIES also exposed a very positive side that was embraced by the Pragmatists, namely that not all people are cut out for the job and that people in uniform face so many variables that it is ok to not always make the right decision. Obviously, paradigm dictates. In my experience, what the production company really wants to see is somewhat opposite of what those in the profession want to show, and this is the constant balancing act that I face in mediating between the two. Police administrators typically want to show Cops as people, but the production company is far more interested in seeing people as Cops. In other words, the production company, representing the larger public audience, recognizes police work as a job conducted by a variety of different people who come together from different walks-of-life. Cops share some common features it’s true, but they are also made up of different religions, races, ages and educational backgrounds. Just like members of the public, they play multiple roles in their communities. They are mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. They go to the movies, to dinner, and play with their kids in the park. They struggle with money, relationships, and family issues. They make many, many decisions, some important, and others mundane. They can be hard or softies, depending on the circumstances. In short, they are just like the rest of us – fallible, imperfect, often marred by life’s experiences and yet they forge on. This is a powerful message to send to a public audience. We have taken Cops and allowed the public to identify with them. Allowed them to see a bit of themselves in the characters who fill the television screen. In my opinion, personal attachment is the missing link in police and community relations.
We took this one concept one step further with our Production of “FEMALE FORCES” when we followed women police officers on and off duty in the City of Naperville (Illinois). What we hoped to show is that: women, one of the most under-appreciated segments of law enforcement, now making up around 12% of the profession, have the grit to not only be mothers, wives, and friends, but also Cops. They didn’t have to sacrifice their feminine values for the sake of the profession. They could don a polyester uniform, strap on a gun, and get down to the business of policing, while still maintaining their identities as women. Once again, rather than showing these Officers as people, we showed these people being Officers. We focused on them personally as we tracked them through their professional lives. Viewers got to know the ladies of the Naperville PD and they could identify with them as they went home to their own kids, out with their husbands, partied with their friends, competed in sporting events and discussed “beauty secrets” from the front seat of their patrol cars. Making reality series such as these is not always easy. It takes a certain gift to tell a story that is both honest and appealing. The power of production comes in the edit and it is here that an agency has to have confidence in the storyteller. Responsible producers will tell an honest story by capturing the realism of an event as it unfolds. They won’t invent “facts” or create “characters” in order to sensationalize the mundane. They will use the tools of the trade, angle, lighting, music, sound effects, etc. to enhance the presentation or make it more appealing in order to capture the eye and attract a larger audience. That is after all, the scorecard on whether a television show is considered a success. When an agency decides to become the focus of a production, the details of the relationship are worked out in a formal contract. Though the agency is always a partner in the production they should not expect to assume full editorial control of the final product. Rough-cut edits are generally limited to maintaining agency integrity, policy issues and assuring the safety and security of the characters. The reason is simple. Agencies are not in the business of entertainment and the lack of an artistic eye can turn an otherwise exciting episode into an instant channel changer. Production is a serious business and producers are acutely tuned in to consumer interest. Television shows succeed and fail with the cyclic uncertainty of audience demand. What we have discovered is that there is no magic formula to create a successful television program. It changes continuously. Sometimes an audience wants drama, sometimes comedy, sometimes they want to focus on events, other times they want to focus on individuals. It is how the show is executed that fills the demand element and execution is a skill that agencies simply do not possess.
So what’s next for the production team of ROOKIES and FEMALE FORCES? You can be sure that we are always looking for new interesting ideas and characters. We have recently returned from South Florida where we shot footage for two new police reality series. Though it is too early to let the proverbial “cat-out-of-the-bag”, viewers should start looking for these new exciting shows to hit the air around summer or fall of 2009. Check out the Greif Company website for updates on all of our Productions. http://www.greifcompany.com/
About the Author:
Roy Bedard is a Consulting Producer for ROOKIES (A&E) and FEMALE FORCES (The Biography Channel) He has consulted on the “The Eddie Griffin Show; Going for Broke” (VH1) and a variety of industry productions involving police defensive tactics and use of force. He is currently working on two other police reality series expected to air in the Sumer of 2009.
Roy can be reached at rbedard@rrbsystems.com or Ph. 850.980.7729. See more at www.roybedard.com
|
|
|