In documentary production, selective reporting and editing are powerful tools that can influence audiences’ perceptions of particular viewpoints. To package extremist views as acceptable social commentary, production teams may adopt the following strategies: 1. **Selective interviews**: Selecting extremists who can clearly express their views and seem rational and persuasive, while reducing or avoiding showing the extreme and unacceptable parts of their views. 2. **Contextual presentation**: Presenting extreme views in a seemingly reasonable social or economic context to make them look like reasonable responses to current issues. For example, highlighting social injustice or economic difficulties to provide some explanation for extreme views. 3. **Contrast editing**: Contrasting extreme views with more radical or violent images to give the audience a false impression of being “better” and make the packaged viewpoint seem more moderate and acceptable. 4. **Expert support**: Inviting scholars or “experts” to provide supportive comments and using authoritative voices to add credibility to the viewpoint, regardless of whether the views of these experts are widely agreed upon in the academic community. 5. **Emotional appeal**: Introducing personal stories or emotional narratives to make the audience emotionally resonate with extreme views, thereby reducing critical thinking about the content. 6. **Call for action**: Ending the documentary in a positive way, calling on the audience to take action on the established issues, which can shift the focus from the extreme views themselves to the solution of the problem, making the whole film appear constructive. 7. **Selective facts**: Selectively presenting data and facts, highlighting the parts that are favorable to extreme views, while ignoring or downplaying those contradictory information. These strategies manipulate the audience's emotions and cognition to make extremist views appear more reasonable and acceptable in a carefully planned and edited document. However, this practice is ethically controversial because it may mislead the audience and have a negative impact on society.