Digital Storytelling Expert Roundtable

Editor's Notes

1. The Cancer story is a uniquely personal one. Every individual patient, care giver, and survivor goes through their won experience in a unique way.
2. Individual relationships to cancer shape the experiences people have in profound places emotionally and physically. Telling the Cancer story presents a true challenge, because you are faced with crafting something the acknowledges the individual nature of the experience while not homogenizing it with blanket statements.
3. Many teens are experiencing “gray” areas of abuse, which are are what we call incidents that are sometimes hard to define as abuse or violence. Whereas teens feel that physical abuse is clearly wrong, many don’t know if emotional or verbal abuse is okay or not. Similarly, because the technology is new, many teens don’t know if digital abuse is okay or not. -Teens don’t separate the digital world from their real world. They are connected to their cellphones and profiles 23/7. -Relationships—particularly among older teens—can range from serious/committed to casual, “friends with benefits;” common across various regions and cultures. This can make it hard to define what’s okay and not okay in whatever type of relationship a teen is in. -Teens are experiencing and perceiving digital dating abuse as a problem BUT don’t have any urgency around the issue. Teens are not connecting digital abuse to other forms of abuse.
4. Video after this
5. Good morning, my name is Priscila Néri, I work at WITNESS and I’m also a student here at Hunter’s IMA program.
6. WITNESS was founded in 1992 by musician and activist Peter Gabriel. Our mission is to use video and new technologies to open the eyes of the world to human rights violations. In the 17 years since we were founded, we’ve trained and supported over 250 partner organizations and thousands of human rights defenders in 70 countries on how to document, expose, and end human rights abuses. You can go to witness.org to learn more about our work and I can also talk more about that later, but for today’s topic I’d like to focus on a new project we started about 2 years ago.
7. That gets into how we work with our partners… We’re harnessers of technology – not technologists. We provide them with equipment – so far that has mainly meant different kinds of video cameras, [although, back in the day, we used fax machines too…] There’s a powerful process of empowerment – we train our partners to use these tools to document human rights abuses, to edit, to tell their own stories And we help build enabling environments for advocacy - linking up our partners and ourselves with other human rights advocates also using video through building networks
8. [FINAL V/O TBD] From 2002-2007 we’ve been partnering with this group working in burma in the eastern part of the country, collecting footage of the attacks Instrumental to getting access to key platforms and agendas that gained access to UN, heads of state, etc Internet was instrumental in illuminating the this and wider problems within the country. Hybrid approach – creating momentum Undeniable Segue out = of the four campaigns we’ve highlighted today, the best known issue is almost certainly Burma – and this has a lot to do with YouTube. New tech is changing how things are done, how we work… the things that we can do are now way beyond what we imagined in the early days. Tools When Peter Gabriel first had the idea for WITNESS, an affordable, portable camera looked like this [CLICK TO NEXT SLIDE] ---- Human Rights Issue: Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), Refugees Partner: Burma Issues Background on the Problem: Burma's military junta, known as the State Police and Development Council (SPDC), seeks to assert absolute control over ethnic minority border areas and uses relocation, forced labor, torture and arbitrary execution to systematically destroy the capacity of rural civilians to live independently. As a consequence Burma has the worst internal displacement crisis in Asia, and is gripped by a silent humanitarian crisis following thirty years of brutal military campaigns. Over 3000 villages have been destroyed or forcibly abandoned in the past decade - an average of almost one a day. Over half a million people have been compelled to leave their homes and become internally displaced persons (IDPs), living homeless in forests, temporary settlements, or government-controlled relocation sites after attacks by the military. Lacking anything but the most minimal humanitarian aid, denied the stability of a home and livelihood (not to mention essential services like medical facilities and education), they are never at peace. A million more people live as refugees and undocumented migrants in neighboring countries. Target Audiences: Burma Issues' recent videos have targeted international audience including UN representatives, key donors supporting aid to refugees and IDPs, officials and parliamentarians from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states, the US, the UK and other foreign countries, as well as activist and lobbying groups and the mass media. Advocacy Goals of Videos: Burma Issues aims to make the situation facing IDPs and rural populations in Burma a critical issue on the international agenda -- alongside discussions of political prisoners and the nation's democracy movement -- and to increase appropriate aid and support to vulnerable IDP populations. Most recently, Season of Fear, produced in 2005, presses for action by the United Nations Security Council -- the only UN body with the authority to compel international action -- to support an immediate end to attacks on civilians and adequate humanitarian aid. Shoot on Sight, the follow-up to Season of Fear - produced in 2007 - complements and builds on Season of Fear and the lessons learned in advocacy with that video. It provides arguments in support of the movement within ASEAN pushing for a tougher regional stance on Burma. Distribution Strategy: The videos have been used in lobbying at UN for Security Council action, and in parallel briefings at the UN Human Rights Commission and the ILO, presented at US Congressional and UK Houses of Parliament briefings, key donor conferences and at press launches at Bangkok's Foreign Correspondents' Club, distributed to individual policy-makers, and used by grassroots activists in their campaigns for action. Typically they are shown alongside speakers who provide clear guidance on what to do, and are used to draw attendees into the day-to-day realities of life as faced by displaced civilians and to provide the calls for action voiced by the IDPs themselves. Burma Issues' latest video, Shoot on Sight was used in lobbying and activism by advocates in Asia during the ASEAN Civil Society Parallel Summit in December 2006, at a public forum in Indonesia and screened for parliamentarians from across the world attending the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting in Bali in 2007. Burma Issues' footage is also leveraged for broader press use, where possible in targeted support of advocacy. Images and testimonies from civilians on the ground have been screened on CNN, PBS in the USA, on Canada's "The National" evening news broadcast as well as on BBC's premier current affairs program "Newsnight." In addition the videos have been used in support of multiple e-action pushes for Security Council action and for renewal of the sanctions on the SPDC imposed by the US government. Advocacy Results: From 2002 to 2007, WITNESS worked with Burma Issues to support the movement to internationalize the systematic repression of civilians by Burma's military government, and to place footage documenting that issue in front of activists and government officials worldwide. The rising profile of this crisis helped lead to the introduction of a first-ever resolution at the UN Security Council on Burma, as well as significant increases in funding for displaced civilians from the US as well as the UK. December 16, 2005 marked the first-ever UN Security Council briefing to consider the situation in Burma, a pivotal moment in the campaign as the US and other nations pushed for more international action, and finally in September 2006 Burma was placed on the permanent agenda of the UN Security Council. These movements followed extensive activist mobilization and the release of a report from Vaclav Havel and Desmond Tutu demonstrating that Burma is a threat to regional security. One criterion for the report's call to action is the massive level of internal displacement. The videos were also used to support pushes for increased funding in the US and the UK, including screenings and individual distribution of DVDs to key Congresspeople in the US in advance of the review of a significant rise in funding. Footage from Burma Issues was also used to buttress a critical BBC "Newsnight" item in June 2006 that criticized the current Labor administration in the UK for its minimal levels of funding, and helped push the government to conduct an official review that, in July 2007, recommended a four-fold increase in aid to internally displaced persons. Today: The campaign for UN Security Council action continued throughout 2006, culminating in September when the Security Council placed Burma on its permanent agenda for the first time ever. Although a resolution proposed by the USA was vetoed by China and Russia in January 2007, Burma is now firmly on the international agenda, and the concerns of internally displaced people in Burma are being responded to with increased attention and funding. Burma Issues and its allies continue to press for action on the treatment of IDPs in Burma, calling on the Security Council to move beyond words and into action by issuing a resolution on the military junta's abuses. Burma Issues is also focusing attention on supporting the movement for change in the region - distributing Shoot on Sight to regional allies, and translating it into key regional languages including Indonesian and Japanese.
9. [FINAL V/O TBD – staying with youth, this time in one of the world’s worst contemporary disasters…] [community screenings] Calling for justice and an end to the impunity in Eastern DRC that has led to some twenty thousand children being recruited and used as child soldiers in the DRC, some as young as eight years of age Tens of thousands of child soldiers have been recruited as combatants by all parties to the conflict, which has been described as Africa's world war systematic outreach and communication with the local population before, during and after prosecutions. The International Criminal Court has investigated war crimes in the DRC as one of its first cases. The recruitment and use of child soldiers is a war crime as defined by the Rome Statute of the ICC Lubanga is currently being tried at the ICC in the Hague. Over 30,000 people in the eastern DRC have screened the video and AJEDI-Ka/PES has noticed a significant decrease of the voluntary recruitment of child soldiers in some parts of the eastern DRC demobilize child soldiers and reintegrate them into their communities. Partner: Association des Jeunes Pour le Développement Intégré – Kalundu/ Projet Enfants Soldats (AJEDI-Ka/PES) Background on the Issue: The widespread recruitment and use of child soldiers in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is unparalleled throughout Africa. Tens of thousands of child soldiers have been recruited as combatants by all parties to the conflict, which has been described as Africa's world war by observers given the widespread involvement of both continental and international actors. The conflict has claimed some four million lives to date. The International Criminal Court is investigating war crimes and crimes against humanity in the DRC as one of its first cases. The use and recruitment of child soldiers is a war crime as defined by the Rome Statute of the ICC under article 8(2). Advocacy Goal of Video: A Duty To Protect advocates for an end to the impunity that reigns in Eastern DRC and for accountability for crimes committed against children including the use and recruitment of child soldiers. A Duty To Protect calls for increased support for the ICC within the international community and, particularly, in the United States. The campaign also recommends specific measures to strengthen the work of the ICC in the DRC by calling for a local presence of the Court in the East and the creation by the Court of systematic outreach and communication with the local population before, during and after prosecutions. Target Audience(s): A Duty To Protect is directed toward the ICC, US decision makers and the international community. Distribution Strategy or Action: A Duty To Protect was launched in New York and D.C in April 2005 to audiences of civil society organizations, UN representatives and Congressional staffers, amongst others. The campaign garnered media attention in the US on “NOW with David Brancaccio” (PBS), “American Morning” (CNN), “The Leanord Lopate Show” (WNYC), as well as internationally on the German television series “Kulturzeit” (3sat), and Voice of America Radio and Television programs broadcast in Africa,. In November 2005, the video was screened at a public event in The Hague during the Assembly of State Parties to the Rome Statute and in private meetings between AJEDI-Ka/PES and key personnel at the ICC such as the Office of the Prosecutor, the investigations team for the DRC and the Office of the Registrar. In May 2006, the video was screened to the Congressional Children’s Caucus. Advocacy Results: In March 23, 2006, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was arrested by the ICC for his alleged involvement in the commission of war crimes, namely enlisting and conscripting child soldiers. The arrest warrant follows a major advocacy drive by partner AJEDI-Ka/PES and WITNESS with A Duty To Protect at the core of the campaign.
10. The Hub is basically a video-sharing community built exclusively for human rights media – it’s designed for those who produce this sort of media as well as those interested in it. We launched the Hub about two years ago and since then we’ve received more than 2000 videos from all over the world that cover a range of human rights issues. Some of the key factors we had in mind when we built the Hub were: 1) social media trends like citizen journalism – more people around the world now equipped to get their voices heard, tell their own stories, produce their own content, which creates a new level of coverage as well as helps shape and influence the existing mainstream coverage, which has been trying hard to keep up. Today there are more words in Wikipedia than Britannica, more bloggers than international correspondents, which has significantly broadened the spectrum of voices participating in global conversations as well as in local/regional discussions about daily life as well as about public policy and policy-making; 2) the need for context – 15 hours of footage are uploaded to YT per minute! Think about what a drop in the ocean that is for an activist somewhere that may be uploading a really important clip that shows a human rights violation or testimony, Many videos are uploaded without proper contextual information, which leaves viewers often without a full understanding of why, when, and where what they’re seeing is happening. If he does understand, he often is without option on what to do next – how to take action? How to do something about it? And let’s not forget the very tough competition of the dancing cats, talking dogs, and laughing babies (love the babies). 3) last but not least, we felt there was a big gap in the way video was being viewed, produced and distributed online today and we felt there needed to be greater dialogue and shared learning about themes like consent, safety/security – how do activists protect themselves (and the people portrayed in their media) from things like government persecution, harassment, detention, torture? We also thought there could be a lot more learned and discussed about the ethics of this kind of media – how do you produce and promote human rights media that doesn’t restigmatize, devalue or go against our basic values as a human rights organization. Now, we’ve done a lot of work on these issues over the past 17 years in video for change. More recently, we’ve started to dip our toes in the oceans of mobile video for change. Here are a few:
11. WHEN VIDEO ENDS: What Peter Gabriel recognized was that video is a powerful tool - it help us see with another's eyes, feel what they are feeling, to understand their reality - and it can move people to action. When placed in the hands of human rights defenders, with the right training and support, video can change policy - and can be a decisive factor in stopping and even preventing human rights abuses.