August
2002
Video
Activism: Those With Eyes Shall See
The Satya Interview with Ronit
Avni
|
|
|
 |
|
From the video Forgotten People,
by Mental Disability Rights International |
Ronit Avni is Program Associate of
Witness, a human rights organization that helps activists document the
abuses they witness with video cameras. Catherine Clyne recently spoke
with her about the group and some of its projects.
Tell us about Witness.
Witness was co-founded in 1992 by musician Peter Gabriel and the Lawyers
Committee for Human Rights. Initially, the idea was to disseminate video
cameras to human rights activists around the world who didn’t have
access to the media or whose voices were silenced by either government
or local power-holders. Peter Gabriel had come up with the idea in 1989,
but it only really came into being after the beating of Rodney King
because I think that’s when people got wind of the power of the
video camera as a tool. A year ago, in June, we incorporated as an independent
organization. The idea had been that we would incubate at the Lawyers
Committee until we were ready to stand on our own.
Over the course of ten years we’ve worked with 150 groups from
some 50 countries—including the U.S.—on a broad range of human
rights issues.
I think the technology has finally caught up with the idea of Witness,
in that now, with the digital revolution and the Internet, and the accessibility—or
relative accessibility—of non-linear editing software on computers,
it’s really a new era for video advocacy. We’ve evolved from
just handing out cameras to activists to working with them from the
very beginning.
Aside from production, what are other ways
Witness assists activists?
I think one of the main lessons that we’ve learned over the years
is that a video in isolation is ineffective; the video really has to
come with a plan in terms of how it’s going to be used, how it’s
going to be multi-purposed to really leverage the footage and to effect
change.
We provide footage to journalists or broadcasters, which has been used
on BBC, CNN, “Oprah”, “20/20”—a whole range
of television stations. We might also work with partners to produce
video as evidence before courts or tribunals. We might create edited
pieces for broadcast on local TV—that might be a production in
a different language. We might do a shorter version which appears online;
and sometimes we’ll create a piece for grassroots mobilizing, for
local communities to use to educate themselves or other communities
about a certain issue.
When you say that you teach people how to
use video as evidence in a court, what do you mean?
There are some commonsense rules when shooting or submitting video as
evidence. We encourage our partners to keep it basic, to avoid any kind
of fancy editing or styles, to capture the date and time, to film geographical
markers and landmarks to establish where they are. Partners are encouraged
to keep a very clear chain of ownership or guardianship of the footage
itself, meaning that we preserve the raw footage and are able to refer
back to it and identify who shot it, when and where, where it’s
kept, and how many hands it’s passed through.
Can you give a few examples of the kinds of
abuses that have been documented and how Witness has helped advocates
use or—as you say— “multi-purpose” the footage?
One example of multi-purposing material would be how Joey Lozano, an
indigenous rights activist, works with a coalition of indigenous communities
in the Philippines, called Nakamata. Over the past year they have been
taking peaceful legal steps to file their ancestral land claims; and
in the process, have come under attack. Since August of last year, a
chieftain and other Nakamata members have been killed, 14 homes have
been razed, houses have been riddled with gunshots. Recently, Joey was
on location training coalition members to use video, when he heard gunshots
nearby. He had the presence of mind to take out a camera and start to
shoot. He filmed one of the members of Nakamata as he died and documented
the crime scene. The local police failed to investigate immediately.
So a campaign was launched to pressure the authorities to open an investigation.
The footage was shown on national TV, Joey published an article in a
major Philippine newspaper; and we broadcast an edited piece online
that generated letters to the Philippine government. So the National
Bureau of Investigation is finally looking into the matter and this
video will be used as evidence of the crime scene.
Another example is a partner group called Mental Disability Rights International
(MDRI), which documented conditions in psychiatric facilities in Mexico.
This footage was used to pressure the Mexican government to shut down
those facilities, and they’ve actually relocated all of the patients
into the equivalent of home-care or community-care. Some of the material
is being incorporated into a training video for U.S. State Department
officials to report on abuses of people with psychiatric illness and
mental retardation.
According to MDRI, the footage really helped to shift the debate from
whether or not it was abusive to how to deal with it. It puts faces
to issues and elevates them to a more concrete level, where people can
see what’s going on, they can understand why it’s wrong and
are more inclined to act.
Do you have some sort of ethical guidelines for filmmakers, like for
when it’s appropriate—or inappropriate—for a filmmaker
to stop filming and try to stop what’s going on?
Nothing formal at the moment. Just to make a distinction: our partners
tend to be from the communities that they’re working in, so they
tend to have real connections to the people and a sense of respect and
an understanding about the priorities. It’s not so much the parachute
in and parachute out model. Our partners are much better suited to know
when to turn off the camera, and when not to shoot, than we are.
I think that’s a really necessary issue to be discussing with filmmakers.
We are working on training materials with basic ethical guidelines for
how to be truthful and appropriate when filming. We’re also drafting
guidelines in terms of knowing the community and understanding their
experiences with video, that they really have the best sense of what’s
dangerous and what isn’t. It may not just be the immediate act
of shooting, but what are repercussions down the line.
Do you approach professional filmmakers to
get involved with projects?
Generally, we don’t solicit applications. We get far more applications
for partnerships than we can handle. Organizations that apply have to
have a clear reason for applying for a video camera; it has to be clear
that video can in fact enhance their advocacy. We usually evaluate applications
on a yearly basis, and now we’re forging between five to ten new
partnerships a year. Then there’s a wait-list of about 40 groups
of potential partners.
This year we had a couple of exceptional situations where—both
as an experiment and because a real opportunity came up to produce some
important pieces—we teamed up professional filmmakers with partners
and produced three videos. One is Operation Fine Girl: Rape as a Weapon
of War that was a collaboration between filmmaker Lilibet Foster and
Witness partner Binta Mansaray, who is a Sierra Leonian activist. Since
that was commissioned by Oxygen television, it was an opportunity to
do a film that we could otherwise never make, about a very painful and
pressing issue that’s hard to raise publicly.
The second was on sweatshop labor in the U.S. territory of Saipan, called
Behind the Labels. That was a collaboration between the Global Survival
Network, which had hidden camera footage of garment workers on Saipan,
and filmmaker Tia Lessin. That was also commissioned by Oxygen. These
were exceptional because the funding was available, and we wanted to
see whether this would be a model to perpetuate or not.
The third collaboration was between the Oakland-based Ella Baker Center
for Human Rights, Columbia University’s Human Rights Institute
and Witness. We produced a 23-minute documentary called Books Not Bars
which profiles the youth-led movement to reform the prison industrial
complex system and to stop the growth of juvenile detention centers.
So far, we’ve had a lot of success with these pieces. So we’re
going to see—these were all pilot projects.
One thing that our readers will be interested
in hearing about is how you and other members of the staff, and other
partner members, deal with looking at such atrocities every day?
We’ve had some ongoing trauma counseling—not recently, but
certainly in the past. It’s definitely difficult. The editor, Sandrine
Isambert, is probably exposed to the most trying footage on the most
sustained basis.
I can’t speak for the rest of the staff, but I can say that I’ve
changed as a result of it. I can’t watch movies anymore that have
deliberate cruelty in them. I can watch a fantasy movie that’s
completely unconnected to reality, but I can’t watch a violent
movie that’s somewhat realistic; I see it all the time and it’s
not pleasurable. And my thoughts have changed in strange ways, like
if I see somebody running down the street, I’ll have a thought
like Wow, this person has all their limbs—which is kind of morbid.
But at the same time, we meet activists—people like Joey, who has
seen it first-hand, and is such an upbeat, loving, person with such
a generous heart—really, he’s so inspiring. I think the fact
that we see movement and we see results enables us to do this.
Another question that will interest our readers
is: Have you ever thought about working with groups that document animal
abuse?
I think that we are supportive of efforts to promote animal rights,
but we are so stretched at the moment. We have to turn down so many
incredible projects that have to do with human rights abuses—which
is immediately within our mandate—that I can’t even begin
to imagine us stepping beyond that, even if we wanted to. We get requests
daily for really important projects and we just don’t have the
resources or the person-power to meet those needs. I get emails everyday
from people saying, “Help me.”
Finally, how can people learn more and get
involved?
Our Web site is a good resource because we have links to all our partner
organizations. Every month to six weeks we launch a short video online
with background information and ways for people to take action. There
are other ways—hosting screenings within local communities, letting
festivals or other institutions know about these resources, donating
equipment or funds—either to our partners or to us—and volunteering.
We’re often looking for translators. Although we have a small staff,
we have a phenomenal team of interns and volunteers—people from
all over the world—and we could not survive without them.
To learn more, get involved, or to watch Witness videos, visit www.witness.org
or contact: Witness, 353 Broadway, New York, NY 10013; 212-274-1664,
ext.201. To volunteer for translations or with other skills, send resumes
to witness@witness.org.
