Credible (peer reviewed) documentaries are a new genre of information, with a clear narrative which shows all the facts, raises all the questions, and brings all the resolutions about a topic.

No sound effects, unless they are an attempt at reconstructing the actual sounds. And if so, are clearly marked as such.

No illustration images or illustration videos.

Full footage shown or links to the raw footage.

Any anomalies in the sound or video should be accounted for.

All theories should be dealt with, nothing eliminated.

It will be a genre that truthers and conspiracy theorists won't like, but debunkers will crave. Extremely boring for everyone else.

Like wiki sites, new parts can be inserted into the video, as new facts are learned or new questions are raised.
-- pashute, Sep 17 2014

No comment http://www.euronews...ependence-in-spain/
[4and20, Sep 17 2014]

[+] No comment
-- 4and20, Sep 17 2014


//All theories should be dealt with//

Ah, this is where it falls down.

You'll have to select from a limitless space of possible theories - and, as soon as you have framed the discussion by making such a selection, you have already fallen into bias.

Thucydides had a good go at this, but even he couldn't attain the kind of perfection you're casually stipulating here.
-- pertinax, Sep 17 2014


//All theories should be dealt with, nothing eliminated.//

Change that to 'all hypotheses,' and you'd have more credibility. But of course, conspiracy theorists, (should be called conspiracy hypothesists), suffer from the same failings as set theory in that you cannot create a set containing all sets, because they'll always default to 'oh, that's just what 'they' want you to think.'
-- RayfordSteele, Sep 17 2014



random, halfbakery