Hi Kristin,

We haven't managed to make them non-language specific, but we worked with a great team at Magic Lantern to produce these short visual guides to video advocacy (before filming, filming and then 'after filming'): http://hub.witness.org/en/toolkit . They could be onekind of model to consider? They are roughly five minute long animations with voiceover and text (can be easily switched to other languages) and an accompanying pdf that can be easily shown, shared and burnt to CD or DVD to introduce people to the idea of video advocacy. I definitely think animation either of this kind or like Commoncraft is the way to go. And make them Creative Commons licensed so anyone can take and use (and translate).

Sam Gregory, Program Director, WITNESS (www.witness.org/hub.witness.org)

Hi Kristin and everyone,

Telling about torture and ill treatment video and more

Greetings from Louis Frankenthaler at the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI)

The act of telling about torture and ill treatment is multi-dimensional: it is textual and designed to engage the public. It happens when we write and publish a report. (Our newest report on soldier violence, “No Defense: Soldier Violence against Palestinian Detainees” focuses on a large number of incidents of violence against Palestinian detainees after they had been arrested, bound, and no longer present a danger to the soldiers, www.stoptorture.org.il/en/node/1136 and our most recent reports: www.stoptorture.org.il/en/publications) The reports are based on PCATI's daily legal work on behalf of victims and are characterized by filing complaints to the authorities, accompanied by the victim's testimony/affidavit and by filing petitions to Israel's Supreme Court. Now we are expanding and using video, for the first time. This video that I want to share with all of you is our newest effort to demonstrate to Israelis that torture and ill treatment are still being used by Israel both in interrogation at other stages in which Israeli security forces encounter Palestinians. We will continue to use this medium both specifically in relation to torture and as we expand discourse in Israel to explain how the issue of torture is so integral to how we, in this society relate to the protection of civilians, both from an International Humanitarian Law perspective and from a moral/philosophical one.

The next link, www.stoptorture.org.il/en is to our homepage where the video that PCATI co-produced with B'tselem another Israeli HR NGO can be found. The video is in Hebrew and is designed to draw the Israeli viewer into an understanding that torture is not a 'foreign' issue that happens only to the Other. It makes it clear that the torture victim, in the eyes of his tormentor is the classic Other, removed, in that situation, from all contact with the outside world: no lawyer, no judge, and no family member just the victim and perpetrator. It is a classic situation in which darkness and the feeling, as expressed by the victim, of having no future are overwhelming and indeed are part of the atmosphere that the victimizer seeks to create.

Although the video is in Hebrew and in Arabic it is effective in many ways, if you have a little bit of information. The lead up text explains the significance of 26 June as the UN International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. It further explains that 145 nations have signed the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT) including Israel yet in many of these countries torture and ill treatment continue, including in Israel.

The video then proceeds with two testimonies from two local torture victims. We start with Dr. David Senesh, an Israeli who was tortured by the Egyptian security forces as a POW during the 1973 Israeli-Arab War. His narrative speaks of the horror of torture that is in the physical and the beyond, the not knowing about what is to come. You can read more about his experience here, in these essays:

1. From a speech at PCATI's event on 26 June 06, “Imprisonment, Interrogation and Torture” www.newtactics.org/sites/newtactics.org/files/u613/Senesh_David_Torture_26-6-06.pdf
2. from "A Former Prisoner of War as Therapist" (page 9): www.voiceagainsttorture.org.pk/publications/rmj/february_04_v2_i1.pdf

The second testimony comes from a Palestinian victim, Amjad Abu-Salha, who was tortured by the Israeli security forces in 2005. He also speaks of the brutality inflicted on him, and the dehumanization that he felt, going beyond the physical to the point in which the torturers succeeded in destroying him only in the present but in the future. You can read more about his experience here, starting on page 56 of PCATI's report, "Ticking Bombs" http://www.stoptorture.org.il/en/node/69

Amjad's narrative is juxtaposed with David's and together they create a blended narrative that is both universal, in that any other victim, a Chilean victim of Pinochet's regime, a Sudanese refugee or victim of Pol Pot from Cambodia, could easily join this joint act of telling and fit in yet it also remains within the possession of the individual victim who, by telling his story is able to draw the listener into this process and actually cause him or her to be come a witness. It is then our role if not our duty to use this to bring about social change. Thus their stories resonate and the impact of their stories, together is, we hope, magnified more so than if we had offered them separately.

The purpose of this video then is to serve both a strategy, to bring about an end to torture and ill treatment in Israel and as a tactic, to cause Israelis to understand that torture is not a 'foreign' experience and that the torture we inflict on others can be read as the torture inflicted on ourselves.

Feel free to contact me:

• Louis Frankenthaler, Development & International Outreach Director
• louis [at] stoptorture [dot] org [dot] il
• Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI)
• Tel. +972-2-642-9825, Fax.+972-2-643-2847
• www.stoptorture.org.il

Louis Frankenthaler Development & International Outreach Director Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) "The most powerful weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." (Steve Biko)

I agree that many times videos come out and often create a
stir and then are soon forgotten.  I think that what is sometimes missing
is follow up.  Simply raising an issue is not enough to create
change.  Speaking from a viewer's perspective as well, I think that I am
always inclined to do more when there is an action component that comes out of
the video.  Whether it is an encouragement to simply sign a petition or to
become a volunteer, I see the video as a starting point and everything else as
necessary components to effect change.  Video advocacy efforts definitely
do an excellent job of raising important issues, but for a world that is ever
complicated and where people have multiple and pressing demands, I think that
clearly outlining or specifying what individuals can do to combat a certain
injustice would be helpful for activists along the spectrum.  To summarize, I think that
video advocacy coupled with action components can continue to raise awareness
of the issue in question while at the same time producing some sort of tangible
change.

Hello everyone,

I have a question that I think is similar to Lily's but a little different as well... I feel like all too often we (media consumers) are so bombarded with horrific videos of violence or poverty that the shock value disappears and we become almost accustomed to seeing these types of videos.

Do you think that desensitization is a problem with using video advocacy? Do you think using shock value is an effective way to reach people? and how can we prevent people from becoming desensitized?

Thanks,

Alexa, New Tactics Intern

This video is indeed very inspiring - it draws you in by evoking the connection that seems quite universal - to find that place where you are truly free to be yourself - before you realize that it is telling a story about domestic violence. It is especially inspiring as a woman to see the multi-generations depicted in the video.

It seems to me that this is effective messaging no matter what medium but the power of this video is that the music and words are very liberating while you're watching images of both the past (domestice violence), present (the transition from the old place), to the futre (that also includes a new hope and vision of tomorrow through the young girl.

Is this past, present, future aspect important in developing videos or does this depend on the overall message you want to provide?

Nancy Pearson, New Tactics in Human Rights Program Manager

Madhuri Mohindar, Breakthrough

The correct link for Mann ke Manjeer is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsFha77l3RY 

Hi Sam

There is a lot of displacement happening because of development in India, because of all the Special Economic Zones the government is setting up. For instance it's happening in a very bad way in West Bengal with the Tata plants going up there. One of our trainers, Projit, made a film about that that was shown on CNN IBN but I'm not sure it went much farther. Then of course ther's the whole Narmada dam thing from a decade ago. I'm sure there will be interesting impact stories of the use of film in that struggle.
Stalin may know, I'm cc'ing him.

We'd love to do some cell phone video campaigning experiments with the Hub. We got a donation of 40 nokia cell phones (part of pangea day) and are thinking of interesting advocacy campaigns the community producers can do using them. Ruchika (whom you introduced us to) has just started working with us full-time on our ch19.org website where we are showing the community producers films. she's coming in towitness to talk to Sameer next week,
maybe they can discuss some intersting cell phone campaigns we can do with the hub, uploading directly from some of our field areas.

Jessica

Hi Brandon,

We have all seen movie trailers rumbling, "The latest film from the Director of  - - - insert previous popular film here  - - - ." Regardless of the storyline, these films have been marketed a bit like the latest software upgrade: same quality product, but with new features. Whether it is a marker of success/quality or simply a marketing strategy, when a Director, for example, becomes the story, instead of the story itself, I think the purpose can blur out of focus.

Similarly if a film is governed by the need or ambition to make profit, the subject matter may be compromised. The distribution strategy could put more effort towards how many people see the film, at the expense of who sees the film and when. In the end the story should push for a specific, desired change as it's main goal, not simply revenue. 

Ryan

hub.witness.org 

I agree that the motivation of profits should be considered in reference to
video advocacy. While some may question the motivation of those films which
gross large revenues, I think it is helpful to examine for one, what the filmmaker
is doing to advance the cause for which the film is advocating on behalf. If
the filmmaker is a committed activist then a large revenue would be great to
advance the cause which they are promoting.

Another point that I think is helpful to consider is that in the end, even
if the film is motivated primarily be making profits, it can nonetheless
encourage others to take action and then as you said, it could be a means to an
end.

Maha Hilal

Although risk can never be completely eliminated, careful planning and preparation can help reduce the risk of using video. Even simply having a good understanding of what shots are needed, who should take them and who should be in them, can limit the amount of unnecessary and potentially risky footage being taken.

The political landscape and personal linkages of a given area can change quickly and may not be clearly evident to everyone among the community itself. Therefore, to get a clearer picture of the local risk, before filming it’s always good to connect with a few different sources about the local realities.

Also, imagining the worst-case scenario of what can happen, for example, if the footage is confiscated by police and used against you in court or if members of the film crew are detained, can identify the potential hazards of filming and set safer boundaries about what is filmed and who films it.

Hello Everyone,

I think that the ethics of video advocacy are very important. As
human rights defenders who use video as a tool for change, it is
important that the same ethics that guide an activist in their work
also guide their use of video. In particular, it is important that
the information be accurate, that the editing not be misleading, and
that the safety and security of all those featured in the video not
be compromised by its viewing. For a video to create change, it must
be credible, thus the information must be factual and presented
accurately. This is particularly the case when video is being used
as evidence in a legal case or in a quasi-judicial forum. Further,
with video, unlike with other documentation, it is very difficult to
limit or contain the distribution and dissemination, especially
through the web. While this makes video a powerful tool to get your
message out, it also means that you have to think about safety and
security in terms of the most widespread dissemination.

In terms of showing one side of the story, it may in fact be the
'point' of the video - eg. in cases where the government voice has
been the only voice heard on a particular situation and you want to
expose the voices of the people whose rights are being violated
rather than that of the State - and I think this is fine as long as
it is also stated clearly as the objective of the video and presented
as such to the audience.

Hakima

One option for sharing video with a select group of people is to use a tool like Flixwagon (for adhoc video shot on a cellphone) or Blip.TV (which in its Pro account settings allows you to have a private or hidden video). I'd caution however that with digital media it's incredibly easy for video to leak (there are plenty of tools online to download videos from sharing sites), and there's no way to reverse that. That's part of the reason we encourage a 'worst-case scenario' model of informed consent since you have to assume that once digital media is out there it could circulate and be seen by anyone, including your worst enemy.

On the broader question of privacy online with video it basically relates to i) people uploading ii) people filmed. On the Hub we tell users if they are in a high-risk country for surveillance, have tips on protecting privacy of uploaders including using anonymizing tools, clearing history, and making sure to use a dedicated email addresss. On our end, we don't keep IP addresses, so we can't be sub-poena'd to reveal the identity of people uploading (which has been an issue with other video sharing sites).

In terms of protecting people filmed I think the issues on the internet are the same as with distribution of the video offline - make sure to ensure that people filmed understand the risks and the benefits and make an informed choice, and offer them opportunities to disguise their identity, voice or appearance. We have a free downloadable chapter on safety and security in our Video for Change book - also available in Russian, French, Spanish and Arabic at www.witness.org/videoforchange.

Sam

Sam Gregory, Program Director, WITNESS (www.witness.org/hub.witness.org)

Madhuri Mohindar, Breakthrough

As you stated it yourself, the style of the film depends upon what you are trying to say. Firstly one doesn't only need to restrict oneself to documentaries for advocacy, this can range from music videos to documentaries to PSA's and animations. It can funny or serious or moving. In many ways the message determines the style.

I think its very important to highlight stories that arent being told. Particularly when one is using online video. We live in a media saturated environment but nevertheless, viewers are able to quickly sift between what they know and do not know.But when you tell a story that hasnt been told, most everyones attention is caught. Sometimes, it could even be about highlighting another angle of a story thats out there.

For example, at Breakthrough, we highlight the lack of due process and human rights affecting immigrants in the United States. Current immigration laws detain immigrants indefinitely, tie judges' hands and force them to deport immigrants without a hearing or minor offenses. We use video stories, animations and music to highlight this lack of due process affecting immigrants, particularly those facing detention and deportation.

One of our latest video stories, 'death by detention' is about Sandra Kenley, a 52 year grandmother who passed away in detention. Sandra's sister narrates this story passionately, as she demands answers from Immigration authorities. We used a documentary style to speak of this story, because it was important to personalize her voice. But the issue of medical mistreatment in detention is an extremely timely one, with the NY Times and Washington Post doing series of articles on the issues and a bill being passed in Congress. This is only one story of the 67 people who have passed away in detention since 2004, but its a timely and untold story.

http://www.breakthrough.tv/product_detail.asp?proid=114&id=7

In another case, we wanted to highlight that human rights is not just an international issue, but is something that affects the United States as well, to counter the notion that human rights happens elsewhere, outside its borders. In this instance, we believed a music video would deliver a more powerful message, especially as it drew on historical movements in the American past, rather than interviews or a short PSA.

http://www.breakthrough.tv/product_detail.asp?proid=59&id=7

At the end of the day, the way the content is delievered is dependent on two things - the storytelling, and the editing. While editing as a technical skill can be mastered, the storytelling is a vital aspect, and finding those contradictions in stories, and the stories that are not known is invaluable. The second aspect is distribution which is another theme altogether!

Heres a good link to a storytelling tips.

http://www.storycenter.org/cookbook.html

Lucy,

These are great questions! To which I don't have an answer. From my understanding, and Jessica - please correct me if I'm wrong, Video Volunteers provides this type of service to community based organisations in India in partnership with Drishti.

However, Lucy's question has inspired me to think about how, as resource persons on this dialogue, we could set up an international database of persons willing/able to volunteer their time and energy in order to facilitate the use of video and other media for social justice organisations and activists around the world. Almost like an international craigslist of vidoe activism. Does this already exist?

I know that many of the organisations featured in this dialogue have a extensive networks of video activists around the world. But, I think it would be great if we could set up a dedicated, public and accessible space online for video activists to post their details and skills and for organisations or social justice activists to post their needs. We could also include an area for organisations/activists to upload their videos for review by professionals (now it's becoming a wikipedia of video activism!).

Anyway, I'm running with my ideas, which may already exist and, if so, I would very much like to hear about. But, if they do not, it may be something for us all to consider as follow up to this dialogue.

Best,

Hakima

Hakima Abbas, Fahamu www.fahamu.org

I'd suggest three steps to think through:

- Is video the right choice to use right now in advocacy?

- How can we assess the audience's take on the advocacy issue?

- How do we distribute or screen the video in order to exert leverage?

I wouldn't rule out hostile audiences but I'd think very carefully about what will be effective. Obviously first I'd want to make sure that video is the right choice for a setting. Then I'd assess the audience's take on the advocacy along three - what's their level of awareness, what's their attitude/perspective and what's their level of investment in the issues? You can have hostile audiences who know nothing about an issue and have very little vested in it , but have a very strong negative perspective, as well well-informed , heavily vestedhostile audiences. You then want to craft your video to respond to this - probably the best you're often going to be able to do is to try and at least change the level of information a hostile audience has on an issue. I.e on the activism curve from informing to engaging to activating you're just trying to inform.

The other point where you can work a hostile audience is deciding whether it is the carrot or the stick you're going to use when it comes to a screening, or a combo of the two. One tactic is to threaten that you are going to do widespread public screenings or mass media distribution of material if a hostile or unreceptive audiences does not sit down at the negotiating table with you. Another tactic is to offer to show a hostile or unreceptive audience the video before public screening and to give them a chance to do the 'right thing' and have that incorporated into the final video release.

I'd love to hear others experiences on this.

Sam

Sam Gregory, Program Director, WITNESS (www.witness.org/hub.witness.org)

I'd like to bring up something of personal interest to me - the use of mobile phones for video advocacy. Not only are unexpecting 'human rights documenters' using mobile phones to create videos of human rights abuses, but some have speculated on the future capabilities to send video to email straight from a mobile phone! 

"Although the Hub doesn't specify which videos are from a mobile phone, Sameer said that many of the videos were shot on a mobile. He wrote, in an email to MobileActive, "Most of the videos from Egypt and Burma have been filmed on mobile phones, for example. In the case of Egypt, the videos were filmed by policeman either perpetrating or participating in the abuse, and we have seen this in a number of other cases over the past year, Chechnya, Saddam, for example. In the future, you'll be able to see what was recorded and sent from mobiles." He said that within a few months people will be able to upload videos directly from a phone. Although the Hub hasn't decided exactly how mobile uploads will work and has yet to address some security issues, staff are considering a system where users send video to an email address via MMS."

(found at http://mobileactive.org/hub-using-mobile-phones-advance-human-rights) 

How have you used mobile phones to create video and/or disseminate video? How do you hope to use mobile phones in the future in your video advocacy work? 

Kristin Antin, New Tactics Online Community Builder

Online, I think one of the most interesting opportunities is tapping into participationa, and into distributed, networked video advocacy (bearing in mind all issues of digital divide, so this only applies in settings with access).

Contests are one great way to do this - another interesting one here in the US done on a very low budget and using YouTube was done by the animal rights organization, the Humane Society of the USA and was around dogfighting. Supporters of the Humane Society were able to post 'reply videos' on YouTube (a useful function built into YouTube) to a video produced by the H.S. with the celebrity-wrestler Hulk Hogan challenging dog-fighting, and then a winner was selected for wider distribution. To give people a headstart, Humane Society provided some graphic footage of dogfighting (that most people wouldn't have access to) for participants to use. Here, the organizers could draw on the creativity of many supporters, and give them a way to get more engaged. There's more info on it here. I imagine there are some interesting possibilities to do this around hot-button public human rights issues.

You can take this a bit further and provide the capacity for collaborative editing online - for example, there is a tool called Kaltura that allows individuals and groups to share footage and collaborate on edits. The video advocacy applications are around drawing on potential volunteer support for human rights causes that otherwise can't be tapped (ie. the thousands of amateur and professional film-makers out there who would like to support human rights), and also in producing locally-specific advocacy videos. I.e. imagine you're conducting a national campaign in the USA against a particular abuse, and can draw on the support of activist groups in cities across the country. How about sharing some specific footage of a human rights abuse that the groups wouldn't have access to, and some ideas on how to structure a short video, then encouraging the groups to add in interviews with people trusted in their heir own community (because we often listen to our priest, local official etc more than we do to a distant politician) and create videos to use in the campaign at a very local level to mobilize support for legislation. The best videos and video clips can be 'cannibalized' by others for their own use, since they have access to them on the shared editing platform. We've been exploring this idea with the US Campaign for Burma, around passing selective purchasing resolutions around buying from companies that do business in Burma, at the university level in the US.

Sam

Sam Gregory, Program Director, WITNESS (www.witness.org/hub.witness.org)