Meaning: The quote by Bruce Jackson, a prominent figure in the field of documentary studies, highlights a crucial aspect often overlooked by social scientists when using documentary films as a source of data. By emphasizing that documentary films are not merely found or reported things but rather made things, Jackson raises important questions about the nature of documentary filmmaking and the implications for using documentaries as sources of information in social science research.

One of the key points that Jackson's quote underscores is the constructed nature of documentary films. Unlike traditional forms of data such as statistical reports or observational studies, documentary films are crafted and shaped by their creators. Filmmakers make deliberate choices about what to include and exclude, how to frame the narrative, and the overall portrayal of the subject matter. This inherent subjectivity challenges the notion that documentaries can be treated as objective sources of data, as they are inherently shaped by the perspectives and intentions of their creators.

Furthermore, Jackson's quote draws attention to the role of the filmmaker as a "public servant" in the creation of documentary films. This characterization suggests that documentary filmmakers have a responsibility to the public and to the subjects they depict. It implies an ethical dimension to the filmmaking process, as filmmakers are not simply passive observers but active participants in shaping the representation of real-world events and issues. This raises important considerations for social scientists who seek to use documentary films as sources of data, as they must critically assess the motives and intentions behind the films they analyze.

In the context of social science research, the quote prompts scholars to consider the implications of relying on documentary films as primary sources of data. While documentaries can offer valuable insights into social phenomena, they are not devoid of bias or manipulation. The selective nature of documentary filmmaking means that certain perspectives may be privileged while others are marginalized, potentially leading to a distorted or incomplete portrayal of reality. Social scientists must be cognizant of these limitations and approach documentary films with a critical eye, acknowledging their constructed nature and the potential impact of the filmmaker's choices on the representation of the subject matter.

Moreover, Jackson's quote raises broader questions about the relationship between truth, representation, and power in the realm of documentary filmmaking. By emphasizing that documentaries are "made things," he challenges the assumption that they inherently present an unadulterated truth. Instead, documentaries are complex artifacts that reflect the interplay of multiple factors, including the filmmaker's perspective, the influence of funding sources, and the dynamics of audience reception. This insight complicates the notion of documentary films as transparent windows into reality and underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of their production and reception.

In conclusion, Bruce Jackson's quote serves as a thought-provoking reminder of the nuanced nature of documentary films and the implications for their use as sources of data in social science research. By highlighting the constructed and subjective nature of documentaries, he urges social scientists to approach these films with a critical lens, recognizing their inherent biases and limitations. Ultimately, Jackson's quote encourages a deeper engagement with the complexities of documentary filmmaking and the implications for understanding social phenomena through this medium.