Back in September I posted that the new MSF ‘Starved for Attention‘ series of videos made in collaboration with VII were well worth a view. However, I’m not so sure about the latest offering, ‘Kenya & Somalia: Why do we have to wait for a crisis?‘ We are subjected to a series of choppy edits throughout (the narrative reasoning for this is rather lost on me) consisting of image after image of people queuing for food, naked kids in desolate landscapes and the occasional dried animal carcass. Not that these scenes don’t exist, but it is a rather tired approach (that their other pieces seemed to avoid). It is not until halfway through, when the piece has moved its focus from Kenya to Somalia, that we hear from any of these people themselves. And then only for about 30 seconds. We don’t hear from anyone in Kenya.

Instead we have a narrative from an MSF expert on nutrition. Not that this isn’t interesting – I certainly learnt something about the inappropriate food supplied in such emergencies, and the new alternatives MSF is trying to push. As a technical lobbying piece it has some merits, but as a public engagement tool I wonder if a stronger emphasis on the people pictured would have helped us understand what it meant to be in need of such support? Just because the solution is technical – switch from this suppliment to this more effective one – doesn’t mean you have to tell a bland, technical story. As a result I wonder how engaged viewers will be by the end? Enough to click through to the petition?

</object>

More good stuff from Duckrabbit. Good to have the voice of the mother. Would like to have heard from the local doctors too. More here.

Obviously, some countries are more attractive than others as places to live, though much will depend on where you are from and what you like. However, some are not predisposed to peaceful, easy living. But even in the most economically destitute places on the planet the picture is far more nuanced than is often represented in the media. Case in point, Foreign Policy’s ‘Postcards from Hell.’ The piece takes an ever so fleeting look at 60 of the world’s top ‘failed states’ (they even get a numerical rating ranking how fucked they are). For each we get one photo and a paragraph describing the country’s wows. Mainly focussed on African and South Asia in includes some places that currently have or have had in the recent past some troubled times. But rather than shed light on under-reported conflicts and poverty it just slaps a huge ‘FUCKED’ label on a host of vastly different countries and situations (sometimes even whilst admitting things are on the up).

But the problems don’t end there. Some of the countries included on the list are highly questionable – Bhutan? Exactly how is this a ‘failed state’? If you are going to list it then at least mention the 100,000 people who were forced to leave and have now lived in Nepal as refugees for 15 years. Or Bangladesh, admittedly not without problems but has made good progress in recent years. And Nepal, experiencing post-conflict political difficulties, but at least they are ‘post-conflict (and FP, no serious analyst on Nepal at the moment thinks the Maoists will go back to war). I could list more – the point being, what is this list trying to achieve? Show people in wealthy countries that despite the ‘Great Recession’ that things could be a lot worse?

In this piece FP have demonstrated exactly how NOT to do a foreign correspondent photo piece. It provides just enough info to add to the over simplified images perpetuated by much of the media on these parts of our world, but not enough to show the complex, and often positive, side of things. Certainly, individuals who feature are characters, composites of poverty and violence. No lives are explored and revealed. I am surprised there wasn’t an accompanying map with big red crosses just to show us where not to go. Nonsense.

The BBC article today on Rob Crilly’s new book, ‘Saving Darfur, Everyone’s Favourite Africa War‘ reminded me of how NGOs sometimes over simplify issues and in doing so run the risk of unintended negative consequences.

Crilly argues that, as a journalist sent to cover conflicts in Africa, he was predominantly told to focus on Darfur as to outsiders it appeared to be simpler to understand (good guys vs. bad guys) than other conflicts in the region (Somalia or DRC). However, as he explored the issues and country he found things to be far more complex – nuances that were not communicated in the celebrity led campaigns.

Campaigns are designed to change the world for the better. But anyone who works as a campaigner will tell you that what looks simple on paper becomes a whole different proposition when you unleash it into the noise and alternative outcomes of real life. This is an accepted risk. What you don’t want to do it add to this risk. This can happen when you either rigidly pursue ideological or principled positions or over simplify a complex issues as a means of communication. The former often happens in human rights campaigning, predominantly driven by lawyers working in the incomplete realm of international human rights law or in countries where the rule of law remains weak. The latter is seen more in environmental campaigns, particularly regarding global warming and its impact of those living in poverty.

The corporatisation of INGOs – rolling out ‘international campaigns’ on broad themes – demanding strap lines, promotional videos and celebrity endorsement – means that detail can be easily lost. In fact, it raises the question of whether INGOs wish their supporters to be truly informed of the nuances at all? On-line campaigning and fund-raising allow ‘light touch’ activism and giving – almost time commitment free. Rather than invest in products that communicate the complexities of issues – crediting their audience with the intelligence to understand and digest issues that are far from black and white – INGOs appear to bank on short promo pieces that are focussed on extracting £25 from you.

There may be no easy answers – NGOs need money to function as professional organisations and people are perceived just not to have time – but over simplification, such as ‘Climate Change = Poverty’ or ‘Human Rights = Less Poverty’ illustrated by a celeb photographer’s shots may sound good in the brain-storming session at HQ but are unlikely to generate a sustained level of engagement that will contribute to long term positive developments.

NGOs will obviously put forward one side of the argument. The trust levels they enjoy are based on the perception that they are ‘objective’ or ‘independent’ enough to be giving us a balanced picture. In the main this remains the case, but this should not be taken for granted. It is not easy to produce nuanced and compelling audio-visual communication tools on what can be complex issues. It can be expensive too. But in the long term this will be an investment that NGOs will reap in the future, with a truly informed constituency to mobilise on issues that require a sustained and committed response.

Filed under: Campaigning Tagged: Africa, Sudan ]]> http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/06/22/over-simplifying-the-world-can-be-bad-for-its-health/feed/ 0 buddhasbreakfast Darfur http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/02/27/hold-the-sun-in-your-had-greenpeace-solar-project-in-kenya/ http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/02/27/hold-the-sun-in-your-had-greenpeace-solar-project-in-kenya/#comments Sun, 27 Feb 2011 05:36:06 +0000 buddhasbreakfast http://therightsexposureproject.com/?p=2206 ]]> When I first saw this set of photos by Stanley Greene for Noor I felt some affinity as they deal with the challenge of securing electricity in poor communities. At this time of year Nepal is in its darkest days (literally) of ‘load shedding’ – or more accurately – power cuts. The cuts last 14 hours per day at the moment, but will undoubtedly go up to 16 or 18 hrs before the monsoon arrives to power the river-fed hydro projects. In 1996, I spent 4 months in a village here that was yet to be connected to the grid – thus no refrigeration or electric light (have you ever tried reading by kerosene lamp?). Solar would work here but most community projects look to micro-hydro due to initial installation costs.

Projects like those shown here run by Greenpeace are not going to address the state’s failure to keep up with the power demand of the country. The resulting economic impact of such a huge short fall of electricity, or for that matter the slow pace in connecting remote communities outside major urban centres (or informal settlements within) will not be dented by solar power running a few lamps or computers. However, for the communities they may make all the difference in being able to study or keeping produce fresh for retail. The solar lamp scheme pictured by Greene – where members of the Kibera Community Youth Programme (KCYP) were trained in assembling solar powered lamps is the type of initiative Greenpeace should be spending its time promoting (rather than its boys-with-toys adventure activism nonsense).

Now, lets hope there is enough power for me to watch England vs. India in the Cricket World Cup this afternoon…

JOHN MACCAULEY, 20. John was 10 years old when he made the staggering decision to leave his family and join ‘The House of Jesus for the Disabled’ – a community of around 50 disabled men and women that life on a small plot of land in the middle of Freetown. As a child he would play with the children in this community, and as a result of the friendships he forged he decided that he would like to dedicate his life to helping them. He was the first ‘healthy’ to join the ‘The House of Jesus’, and is now an invaluable member of it. He spends his days there repairing wheelchairs and making new ones out of old prams. John is also an adept tailor, and teaches many in the community this skill. The ethos of ‘The House of Jesus’ is to move away from a culture of dependency, and to move towards a level of self-sufficiency. By learning certain skills, such as tailoring, they can earn an income to support themselves and their families, instead of being completely reliant on aid and the generosity of others.

Sierra Leone is one of the poorest countries in the world, with terrible rates of infant mortality and one of the lowest life expectancies in Africa.  But these stark statistics should not define the region, or its people. I could have so easily turned my lens to the inhabitants of Kroo Bay (one of the worst slums in the world), but that would have been too easy, and too reductive a view of Sierra Leone.

‘This is the first time in over 20 years that I have studied. I work very hard, but I don’t mind because I love what we learn here…….one day I would like to set up my own salon’. HALIMATU KADIA CONTEH, 34.

Ultimately I feel very ambivalent about the kind of ‘shoot and run’ tactics employed by some photographers that sees them profit from someone else’s hardship. I also question how helpful these snapshot images are in promoting the cause of LEDCs. I feel that we are so often bombarded with media images of poverty that we have become almost desensitised to such sights.  I think it’s now time we start to represent those in the third world as individuals, not as victims.  Perhaps this change of tact could have a profound effect on the way we view the developing world, and the lives of the people that live there.

“Political tolerance, further education and civil liberties – without these things our country cannot move forward." Andrew Koromah brought the concept of independent journalism to Sierra Leone. In the early 1990’s he set-up Kiss FM and Sky Radio, the country’s first independent radio stations. These were instrumental in linking Sierra Leone throughout the civil war, and importantly they gave each faction a public voice during the conflict. His efforts have been recognised internationally, and he has won a number of awards including the Knight Press Fellowship from the International Centre of Journalism in Washington. Andrew tirelessly ploughs all his energies into the development of Sierra Leone, whether it is the creation of community radio stations, or the lobbying of government for the ratification of treaties, including the Convention of the Rights of Children. “Sierra Leone is still a deeply polarized country... we need to cultivate a greater level of unification in order to progress.” ANDREW KROMAH, 53.

This at least was my aim – and so I set out to photograph and interview as broad a cross section of Sierra Leonean society as possible. I met everyone from musicians to village chiefs, civil servants to dollar boys, hairdressers to taxi drivers, soldiers to schoolgirls.  Consequently I came away with a very rich understanding of what Sierra Leone is like today, and I can tell you that it is a country that is characterised by so much more than its poverty and sad history. It has fully moved on from the civil war that defines it in so many people’s imaginations, and it now stands as a nation steeped in optimism and hope.  The country still has a long way to go, but if the opportunities on offer could match the motivation of its people, then Sierra Leone would be positively thriving by now. As it stands there is a dearth of employment in the country. Aid still floods in, a lot of which is channelled into education, but without jobs this education is not capitalised on.

“What do I love about this country? Take a look around you...what’s not to love? MARLENA BANDU, 29.

Today Sierra Leone has a huge amount to offer; it’s rich in minerals, has a climate perfectly suited to agriculture and has some of the most beautiful beaches in Africa. What Sierra Leone would now benefit from alongside aid is foreign investment, better infrastructure and sustainable tourism.  All of this would provide much sought after jobs, which in turn would bolster the economy and allow Sierra Leone to flourish independently of aid. However these things will not start to happen until outdated perceptions of the country are changed.  It is my hope that this project has gone some way to doing this.

Sophia Spring

To see the full set of photos and stories go here.

Development organisations have swung from pushing on us images of pot-bellied kids with flies buzzing round them to bouncing, smiling groups of people getting on with life in rural utopias thanks to a goat or water pump donated by rich benefactors. But anyone who has lived in an LDC knows that, like any where else, there are rich and poor, successes and failures, enterprise and stagnation. Spring’s photos certainly would benefit from more context – the captions just aren’t explanatory enough for me. But it is refreshing to see more photographers refusing to take the easy route and honing in on despair when the picture is far more complex. Time for the development sector’s communication staff to step up?

Check out this article by Jonathan on PhotoPhilanthropy.

Filed under: Photography Tagged: Africa, East Africa, international aid, Kenya, poverty ]]> http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/02/10/the-base-of-the-economic-pyramid-project/feed/ 0 buddhasbreakfast BoP http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/01/08/food-and-water-from-media-storm/ http://therightsexposureproject.com/2011/01/08/food-and-water-from-media-storm/#comments Sat, 08 Jan 2011 07:05:44 +0000 buddhasbreakfast http://therightsexposureproject.com/?p=2056 ]]> I like Media Storm, in that they are slick and appear to know what they are doing. There have also been a couple of pieces on their website that I rather liked (particularly ‘Love in the First Person‘ and ‘Undesired‘). As such I always look forward to viewing a new batch of material produced by them. So, barely into 2011 a few new pieces appear.

‘How Will We Feed Them?‘ was produced for the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), a UN agency. It focusses on a family in Madagascar who were assisted by an IFAD funded organisation, the Rural Income Promotion Programme. All well and good. We are given (very brief) context on the country and the situation of the family. We hear from the family (though the narration tends to dominate). However, I have two problems with the piece. One, is that Media Storm appear to have flown in Brad Horn to shoot it (he is even the narrator). No local talent available? As such the piece feels like a CNN product, and the barriers between the camera and subjects never really breaks down. Not that I advocate always using local professionals, but just to put it out there.

My second quibble is the content of the piece. The people of Madagascar are immediately defined as ‘poor’ – all of them? OK, I accept the need to simplify, but the central proposition of the film seems flawed – that a growing world population combined with a migration trend from rural to urban areas means ‘we’ will not be able to feed ourselves (the line ‘how will we feed them’ makes me think of the rich word suddenly having the poor turn up for dinner and wondering if there is enough to go round?). Surely wrong? Whether the world can feed itself is down to the amount of land given over to food production and the productivity of the land due to fertility and inputs (not to mention cutting down wastage by having better storage and transportation systems). Whether there are more or less people farming is not really the issue, or at least not the only factor (after all in most developed countries only a small proportion of the population are involved in farming yet they have managed to avoid mass starvation). And this comes out in the film – the family featured become better off due to improved inputs – better seeds. Surely, it would have been better to focus on how to make small holders (subsistent farmers) more productive so they can feed themselves, rather than extrapolate this problem up to feeding the whole world? There is a whole debate about the productivity of land holding side, inputs etc. that I am sure they didn’t want to get into. But the idea that the historic tide of people moving from rural to urban areas will be addressed by giving them better seeds seems naive. This is again demonstrated in the film, where the extra cash made by the family (due to the better seeds) is used to educate the daughter – who will then likely want to use that education to get a good job…in the city! Anyway, I digress.

The second new piece is ‘When the Water Ends‘ made for Yale Environment 360.

This is a more compelling piece, putting forward a more complex picture with multiple voices. Personally, I would like to have heard more from the tribes people (rather too many still shots that added little information about their daily existence towards the end of the piece). Again, like the first piece the photographer has been jetted in (Evan Abramson). Media Storm regularly run multi-media workshops, which makes me wonder if they do or could invite photographers from developing countries to take part (providing a grant scheme to cover their costs)? Using US based photographers is surely not the future (especially when you are doing pieces about climate change yet your photographers carbon foot print is bigger than necessary).

The final piece is actually a website – ‘Crisis Guide: Pakistan‘ – made for the Council on Foreign Relations.

This is a rather snazzy product consisting of text, images and video (including interviews). It is full of information, and I spent a good length of time  surfing the site. However, it is not immediately clear who the audience is? If you didn’t know anything about Pakistan it would be a good intro, compiling historic and contemporary stats and facts. But if you know a bit about South Asia it does not add too much that you would not already know – certainly you would expect investors and governments to be briefed on this kind of stuff already. Good format though.