Have Documentaries Lost Their Ethics?

Lately, I’ve been thinking a lot about the way documentaries are made and whether they’ve lost their way. Beckham, Drive to Survive... are these really documentaries, or just expensive PR campaigns? Should there be some kind of disclaimer telling us, “Hey, this has been carefully curated to make the subject look good”?

The Beckham documentary was nothing more than an expensive PR video and was simply just… a load of Golden Balls.

I watch quite a lot of documentaries, probably more than regular tv and film because I am always looking for inspiration and want to keep up with new industry storytelling techniques.

There’s no doubt that these documentary films (such as Beckham etc) are put together by incredibly talented teams. They’re entertaining, they’re polished, and they hook you in. But are they fundamentally different from what documentaries used to be? Are we just being snobs about it, or is there a real divide between access-driven projects and filmmaker-controlled ones?

The line between documentary and PR campaign is getting blurry. Indeed, all the top broadcasting stations such as CNN, BBC, and even Japan’s NHK have branded documentary companies in their media machines.

Branded documentaries are extended video content created by brands to tell a compelling and often emotionally resonant story. Unlike traditional commercials, these documentaries focus less on promoting a product directly and more on creating a narrative that aligns with the brand's values, mission, or customer aspirations.

More and more, we see “collaborative” documentaries where subjects are not just involved but actually shaping the final cut. If someone being documented has the power to cut footage they don’t like or frame themselves in a certain way, can we even call it a documentary anymore?

Where do we draw the line? It’s one thing for an athlete or a musician to have a glowing retrospective, but what happens when controversial figures start producing their own “documentaries”? Melania Trump is listed as an Executive Producer on her upcoming Amazon project. Will that change the way people watch it? If a politician or business leader controls their own narrative, is that a documentary or just long-form image control?

Streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon have played a huge role in shaping this shift. They push character-driven, access-heavy storytelling that has completely changed sports, entertainment, and even political documentaries. But at what cost? If filmmakers give up editorial control just to gain access, are they still making documentaries or just marketing pieces?

This issue goes beyond just entertainment. Governments, corporations, and even religious organizations are now using the documentary format to shape their public image. When a major company produces a “documentary” about its sustainability efforts, is it really investigative filmmaking, or just a PR stunt? The same goes for political figures who commission friendly documentaries to rehabilitate their public image.

Another aspect of this trend is the increasing reliance on reenactments and dramatized storytelling. True crime documentaries, for example, often use heavily stylized visuals, ominous music, and scripted narration to guide audience emotions. When the lines between fact and storytelling blur, are we still engaging with reality, or are we being manipulated?

This brings up another question. Are audiences being conditioned to accept this? Are we getting used to perfectly packaged, inoffensive stories and mistaking them for the truth? And what happens to the harder-hitting documentaries, the ones that actually challenge power, if people just want feel-good, polished content?

Documentaries have always been about choices. What to show, what to leave out, how to shape a story. But those choices used to belong to the filmmakers. If the subjects themselves are taking that power, we’re heading into dangerous territory. A documentary isn’t supposed to be a commercial. It’s supposed to tell the truth, even when it’s uncomfortable.

This is something I’ve had to think about in my own work. My last documentary, The Ones Left Behind: The Plight of Single Mothers in Japan, was about struggling single mothers trying to survive in a country that doesn’t do enough to support them. I made sure they had a voice, but I never let anyone dictate the story. The responsibility of a filmmaker is to show reality as it is, not as someone wants it to be.

Now, I’m working on a new documentary about youth suicide in Japan, The Ones Left Behind: When Tomorrow Never Comes. This is a subject that people in power would rather ignore, but that’s exactly why it needs to be told. If we only focus on documentaries that make their subjects look good, we risk ignoring the stories that actually need to be told.

So what do you think? Have documentaries lost their ethics? And should we be concerned?