Next month, I'll travel to India as part of my masters program in intercultural and international communications at Royal Roads University, based in Victoria, British Columbia. Among other things, I will spend time with an NGO called Drishti in Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
Drishti promotes health, social justice, peace and economic development throughout India by giving voice to both urban and rural poor. It teaches people how to use video to tell their own stories. Drishti has helped several Indian NGO partners to set up community video units to deal with a variety of issues such as domestic violence, economic injustice, poor sanitation, and lack of access to health clinics.
The community video units hold public showings of the films on screens set up in a community or neighbourhood, often outside. The showings give community members a chance to tell their own stories and the community as a whole the opportunity to discuss the issues raised in the videos.
A Newfoundland connection
There is a connection of sorts between Drishti and my home province of Newfoundland, which was the birthplace of an approach to participatory community film making called the Fogo Process. In the mid-1960s, the National Film Board of Canada and Memorial University Extension Services joined forces to make films about Fogo Island, which was at that time undergoing a serious downturn in its main industry - the fishery. More than half the island's population was forced to go on welfare (Quarry and Ramirez, 2010, p. 72). At the time, the government of Newfoundland under Premier Joey Smallwood had a policy of resettling many isolated communities to more prosperous parts of the province. But the Fogo Islanders didn't want to move.
What began as a straightforward documentary evolved into a process of making several short films in which Fogo Islanders told their own stories. Public showings allowed people from different communities on Fogo Island to see their problems more clearly and to discuss those issues together openly. As well, the film was shown to the premier and his cabinet in the far-off capital of St. John's - and it facilitated more communication between the people and their distant leaders. Many credit the Fogo Process (participatory video, public showings, public consultations and viewings for leaders) as a turning point for Fogo. The fishermen of the island formed a cooperative, unemployment all but disappeared and the government became more responsive (Quarry & Ramirez, 2010).
One of the men responsible for the Fogo Process, Don Snowden, went on to champion the Fogo Process approach in Bangladesh and India, where he died in Hyderabad in 1984. Among the films he was instrumental in making was Eyes See, Ears Hear, which documented how rural people in the village of Taprana, near Delhi, used video and public screenings to discuss their issues and motivate themselves to take action. Similar to the experience of Fogo Island fishermen, milk farmers in the village established their own cooperative.
The Forest People: "This camera is our weapon."
The Forest People: "This camera is our weapon."
Drishti has been doing work that echoes the Fogo Process. It too enables people to tell their own stories and holds public screenings to facilitate discussion of important issues. For example, the video training it provided villagers in Addateegalaj, Andhrapradesh, enabled the people to advocate for better health services. Manyam Praja Video (The Forest's People's Video), a video unit of the NGO Laya, produced one video about substandard treatment of malaria in its region.
Here's a description provided by Drishti:
"The film on health and ignorance named Malaria, Manyam Praja's first video magazine, dealt with ignorance regarding diseases prevalent amongst tribal people and about their exploitation by health care officials. This film aims to inform the villagers about diseases such as malaria and also provide them with the basic knowledge regarding natural alternatives that are easily available to the community people.
"The screening of this film made a huge impact. People questioned doctors about their failure to process malaria samples on time. This made the doctors more responsible toward their duties.
"After seeing the film, the government ordered that action must be taken to clear water from a group of 20 submerged houses. Most of the villagers don't know that blood samples of those suspected of having malaria have to be checked within 72 hours. During the monsoon season, they are marooned and flooded with water everywhere. If government promises to give samples within 72 hours, then local people questioned the health care centers near by to provide them with this facility and methods to make this happen. Generally this procedure of examining takes a fortnight or 1 month and even the community producers didn't know that within 72 hours blood sample is needed to be examined.
"By the time they send the report back, the person is dead. At times they wouldn't get it back in time. It was like a black hole. People didn't know what happened. People would find out about a month later they have malaria."
The film Malaria, embedded below, is powerful when you see the denial by a health official that malaria is a big problem, contrasted with the reality of the village. The public viewings helped mobilize the villagers into taking action and, according to Drishti, led to better, more timely testing and treatment of malaria in Addateegalaj. The words spoken by one of the villagers in the Manyam Praja video about malaria ring true: "This camera is our weapon."
Drishti plans to soon launch a new online video platform. It would like the community videos to reach a wider audience - especially those who might have more power to affect change at the higher levels of government. It will be interesting to see how the establishment of an expanded online network will complement the public viewings. I hope the community screenings will continue. Many of the people most affected by the issues covered by the community video units do not have access to the Web. Community screenings still provide them with an opportunity to learn, discuss and spark action.
I wonder if the community screenings have an advantage over social media such as YouTube in one respect: They are an experience that the villagers can share together in a real physical space. The screenings and the ensuing discussions are immediate and intimate. I believe in the power of Web 2.0, but I'm not sure it possesses these qualities in the same way.
I'm looking forward to seeing what Drishti does first-hand. Perhaps I'll get to see a community screening and then compare the experience to watching the video online.
Reference
Quarry, W. & Ramirez, R. (2009). Communication for another development: Listening before telling. London: Zed Books
The write-up is full of insight and the way you mentioned about the work of Drishti and the film 'Malaria' is truely commendable.The title "This Camera is our weapon" is very appropriate. Thanks for crediting Drishti and Manyam Praja Video for their work.
ReplyDelete