Documentaries can now show animal cruelty--and that's a good thing

By Sarah Sluis

Documentaries have to be one of my favorite genres. I love feeling like I've learned something new, and seeing something that "really" happened makes the subject that much more engaging. Because their movies are based on facts and events, it can be easy to forget the type of challenges documentary filmmakers are up against.

Like what happens when filmmakers show unsavory sights. On April 20th, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in United States vs. Stevens that documentary filmmakers are allowed to show animal cruelty in films, overruling a 1999 law barring its depiction. Surprise! This is actually a good thing. This is a classic case of a law passed for a specific purpose that was applied by prosecutors in an overextended manner, leading the statute to be struck down.

The 1999 law was targeted to prevent a gross genre of sexual fetish videos involving women stepping on small animals. It had a clause allowing depictions of animal cruelty for "serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value." So movies like The Cove and Food, Inc., which show animal slaughter, were in the clear. But a prosecutor can charge someone based on their own definition of "serious," so anyone on the cusp of violating such a law would end up in court as the case was decided. Most media are against such laws for that reason--it can dampen freedom of speech. Though the defendant in the case, Robert J. Stevens, made a questionable film called Pick-A-Winna: A Pit Bull Documentary, which some said was a guise to show off fighting, the case definitely has some gray areas. Stevens claims to be a pit bull lover and owner, and says the documentary was created because of his fascination with pit bulls. He also was sentenced to more time than that football player who had a dog fighting ring. Interestingly, the decision made numerous comparisons to hunting videos, which are popular niche videos that show killing of animals. Even if they're made in states where hunting is legal, if shown in an area where hunting is illegal, they would violate the animal cruelty statute. That kind of inconsistency was a major reason the law was struck down.

So it's good day for documentary filmmakers. Now it's back to getting their subjects to open up to them and be honest.