Kid Can Paint That Media

¶ … Kid Can Paint That

Media and Perception: The Question of Authenticity in Bar-Lev's

My Kid Could Paint That

The role of the mass media in the creation of public perception is a matter of near constant controversy, and has been ever since the concept of mass media first came to be a part of civilization. The printing press was actually objected to by many specifically because it would allow for the dissemination of views that they did not approve of, with the belief (correctly held) that such dissemination would necessarily produce more like-minded thinkers. The technologies of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have made mass media much more present in the daily workings of our lives, with the television, radio, and internet all providing access to the font of the world's information and events. What these outlets choose to tell us -- and not tell us -- can have a huge impact not only on what we know about the world we inhabit, but also on how we think about it and interact with it. Such issues are rarely as clear-cut as they might seem either, and the question of responsibility in journalism has never been more pressing.

One excellent case that represents the difficulties (though not the necessities, to any hugely practical degree) of navigating a compelling story through the narrow channels of journalistic integrity is the story of possible child-prodigy painter Marla as told in Amir Bar-Lev's documentary film My Kid Could Paint That. Though ostensibly about the controversy surrounding this little girl's painting abilities, or the authenticity of her works, the film is perhaps more easily read as a commentary on the effects of media. It is the various incarnations of the media that shape the real story of My Kid Could Paint That, and their irresponsibility is also the only reason that Marla and her paintings ever became any sort of story in the first place.

The first media figure to have exert influence over Marla's life and story was Elizabeth Cohen. Cohen was only writing a local human-interest piece and had no way to predict the size that the story would become, or the scandal that would ensue. Still, this shows the importance of responsibly checking the facts of every story, no matter how much of a fluff piece it might at first seem. Had Cohen not written her article, it is possible -- likely, even, unless Marla's parent were even more ambitious concerning their daughter than is currently thought -- that Marla's painting would never have gathered any real attention. Cohen needed to do a little digging and ascertain from the outset whether or not Marla was actually painting the works attributed to her, and the level of coaching and prompting she received if she was indeed the artist. Her failure to take full responsibility for her story led to bigger disputes later on.

But though she was the first journalist whose fairly innocent lack of responsibility started the domino effect of Marla's story in the media, Elizabeth Cohen was far from the worst transgressor in this area. The segment Bar-Lev shows of the television newsmagazine 60 Minutes' coverage of Marla's painting was even more inflammatory, and just as shoddily researched. The story quite blatantly suggest that Marla's parents might be fraudulently representing their daughter's talents, but there is no real evidence of this. They show a child psychologist -- not an art expert, it should be noted -- who is initially impressed with the quality of the paintings attributed to Marla, but is surprised to see on a video of Marla painting that she paints like any child her age. It is after this that the child psychologist begins to possibly detect a difference in the quality of the paintings attributed to Marla and the one she was videotaped painting.

A comparison of one painting to a body of work by a non-expert is certainly not conclusive evidence of authenticity either way, but this is the evidence presented by Sixty Minutes. Suggesting that anyone might be behaving fraudulently is a story that requires a great deal more evidence than suggesting someone might be a genius, but 60 Minutes made exactly the same mistake as Elizabeth Cohen in running with a story before truly verifying the facts presented in it. This story was instrumental in creating the national debate over Marla's worth as a painter and the authenticity of her attributed works, and given the long-standing prominence and wide audience the program, the journalists and producers at 60 Minutes should have known better than to have gone with this story. Even presented as a possibility rather than as complete fact, which it was, raising the suggestion without any real evidence is simply irresponsible journalism.