Passage Summary: A filmmaker argues that their movies are better because the subjects don't know exactly where the camera is, so they act like themselves instead of performing for the lens.

Conclusion: Documentaries filmed with hidden cameras are more valuable than those where subjects interact directly with the camera.

Reasoning: Hidden cameras allow subjects to behave naturally, whereas awareness of a camera's specific location causes people to alter their behavior.

Analysis: The filmmaker is operating on the assumption that 'natural' behavior is the gold standard for documentary quality. While this sounds reasonable, it is a subjective value judgment that the argument treats as a fact. To justify the conclusion, we need a principle that explicitly states a documentary's worth is determined by the authenticity of the subjects' behavior. Look for an answer that bridges the gap between 'acting naturally' and being 'worthwhile.'