So much of Milgran has been debunked
1)he noted and edited out expressions of disbelief by subjects.
A second was “animated and alive” but couldn’t be used in Milgram's film because he told the experimenter that he didn’t believe the experiment was real, and that the moans and groan sounded phony
2) In fact Milgram's experiment was never successfully duplicated the obedience success rate he claimed. In fact since he varied his own controls an conditions with each subject , he himself did not even duplicate his own results.
3) We also know he picked a man for supervisor (the man who was telling the "teachers" to continue) who was financially dependent on the job. We also now know that man, did not chose "teacher" subjects at random, but included many of his friends, acquaintances and family members. the only man who went to "5" (intense shock) on the meter was a friend of the supervisor. this points to interpersonal trust of a known person rather than blind obedience authority
4) We now know many of the "teachers" (subjects who asked to administered the shock) expressed disbelief at the time
50 We also now know that Milgran would himself intervene with disobedient "Teacher" subjects and subject them much more strident pressure than claimed in the experiments. And the supposed consistent low pressure "script" of the "observer" (the person telling the "teacher" to continue) varied as well
6) We know for certain that fully 2/3 of the subjects did in fact refuse to go beyond the second shock level (defined by machine label as "slight," "moderate," "strong," very strong" and "intense"), while milgram has been shown by the later scholarship to have manipulated the data to indicate 65% went to level 3, 4 or 5. In fact 2/3 the subjects discontinued administering shocks after the first expression of pain by the "learner."
What milgranm showed is a portion of people were obedient in administering harm. We know now he manipulated and exaggerated how many and that his control were sloppy,
There are similar findings with problems replication of Zimbardo, which has also been criticized as exaggerating the results.
I suggest anyone interested read Gina Perry's excellent, meticulous (and very well reviewed in peer reviewed Psychology Journals) shredding and dehoaxing Milgrams work: Behind the Shock Machine
or get a taste here: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/10/02/the-shocking-truth-of-the-notorious-milgram-obedience-experiments/