Illuminagents and the Importance of Outreach
The moral case for knowing how to reach people.
Editor’s Note: Season 2 will be released to streaming shortly after its theatrical premiere in Toronto.
Trying to please everyone is already a losing battle, but it's even harder when writing about a controversial topic. There's always the chance that you'll antagonize a critical mass of people in the audience, and that could take down your series and possibly you with it. What's the best way for writers to create something that will resonate with an audience despite sensitive subject matter?
One strategy involves authenticity, that is, to assemble a team that knows the subject matter intimately. Some people will refuse to accept a show's premise unless there are genuine voices behind it. For example, it's reasonable to expect a show about a blind person to come from someone who knows firsthand about living with blindness. Of course, this mindset can go too far. Should the people behind police procedurals be experienced in murder and other crimes? Probably not. There's also the danger of homogenization: even if a story comes from an authentic experience, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's universal and that nobody else has contradictory stories that are equally authentic.
Another approach is to avoid difficult topics altogether and stick to something palatable. Plenty of productions tone it down to draw maximum viewer numbers. This strategy is vital for companies seeking global reach across widely different cultures - things one country's audience wouldn't even notice might be taboo for another. But while this tack might work as far as the balance sheet goes, it tends to produce bland, generic entertainment. Shows that are too safe won't generate as much buzz as something with an edge.
Before writing the script for Illuminagents, I gave myself time to ponder different approaches. After all, conspiracy theories can be a hot topic, and those who believe in them can easily be set off. I already knew I wanted to have a comedic take on it, but even within comedy, there are different ways to go. This led to the creation of my episode guidelines:
First, I wanted to use real conspiracy theories. There are a huge number to choose from, and from a legal standpoint, they're public domain in most cases. I also felt that making up fictional ones would be copping out and take the bite out of the concept - if this show were going ahead, it would tackle the actual conspiracy theories head-on.
Second, the stories were allowed to mock the conspiracy theories, but not the people who believe in them. It would be overly simplistic to reduce believers to comedic dolts and I wanted to be better than that. Ideally, we would have genuine, complex characters making their way through funny stories that might make even a believer smirk once in a while.
These guidelines we followed seem to have worked well, as the first season of Illuminagents reached #7 in the 2023 Web Series World Cup, an accomplishment that the whole team is proud of. Here's hoping we can maintain the momentum with the second season.
You can watch Illuminagents on SeekaTV.
That is so cool that conspiracy theories are public domain.
Especially from a storytelling point of view.
"There's also the danger of homogenization: even if a story comes from an authentic experience, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's universal and that nobody else has contradictory stories that are equally authentic."
A recent example of this is Gadd's BABY REINDEER on Netflix.
"Second, the stories were allowed to mock the conspiracy theories, but not the people who believe in them. It would be overly simplistic to reduce believers to comedic dolts and I wanted to be better than that. Ideally, we would have genuine, complex characters making their way through funny stories that might make even a believer smirk once in a while."
This makes me think of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's PREPPERS - especially the comic element. There was some sadness and frustration in there too.
People believe in conspiracy theories because they are serious and serious things are not being taken seriously or proportionally.
And the "wanting to be better than that" puts you into the Moral Philosophy world so much.