Well-Founded Fear: A Case Study
By Barbara
Abrash, Center for Media, Culture and History, NYU
December 6, 2000
The Berlin Wall came down, the Cold War
ended, and all of a sudden, it wasn't just information and money
and images that were zooming around the globe. Real people were
on the move like never before, and too often not for happy reasons....We
wanted to make a film about all this. Michael Camerini and Shari
Robertson, producers, Well Founded Fear.
INTRODUCTION
In 1993, documentary filmmakers Shari Robertson
and Michael Camerini decided to make a series of films exploring
the global movements of people across borders in the post-Cold War
world. Noted for their well-crafted, densely researched films on
political and social themes, the filmmakers obtained seed funding
from two foundations, and set out to establish the feasibility of
such a series. By 1995, in the absence of interest from PBS or other
broadcasters, they reluctantly concluded that the series they envisioned
was unlikely to attract funders. But a chance meeting early in 1996
drew their attention to the asylum offices of the U.S. Immigration
and Naturalization Service (INS), where the fate of applicants for
political asylum depends on a single interview, in which they have
an opportunity to convince an asylum officer that they have a "well-founded
fear of persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership
in a particular social group, or political opinion" if they return
to their home country. "We had been struggling with how to get Americans
to think about the world," said Camerini. "And suddenly it was clear
that here was the place where the world collided with America. We
simply turned our original idea inside-out." (NY Times, June 4,
2000).
On June 5, 2000, Well-Founded Fear, a two-hour
film set in the offices of the INS and centered on dramatic interviews
between INS officers and applicants for political asylum, was broadcast
on the PBS documentary series, POV. "It's a docusoap maker's dream,"
said one reviewer. "But extraordinary access has led to extraordinary
filmmaking." The well-orchestrated broadcast rollout included a
national press campaign, a website, and strategic outreach plans
to engage educational, advocacy, and community organizations. The
buzz had begun the preceding January at the Sundance Film Festival;
CNN would later broadcast a 49-minute international version. By
putting a human face on abstract policies, the film succeeded in
opening the subject of immigration to a new kind of public discussion.
The process by which Well-Founded Fear moved
from idea to broadcast and beyond is a story of skill and serendipity
that highlights the crucial network of individuals and institutions
that made it possible. This report traces this process, with special
attention to:
- the institutions and individuals who funded
and supported the project
- the process by which it was made and circulated
to public audiences
- the impact on general audiences, policy-makers,
and specialists
MAKING THE FILM
STRATEGIZING THE LAUNCH
BROADCAST AND RECEPTION
OUTREACH: POV and TRI
IMPACT
CONCLUSION
MAKING THE FILM
Shari Robertson and Michael Camerini are veteran
documentarians who, separately and together, have made films on
subjects ranging from the education of girls in sub-Saharan Africa
to the American drug wars in Peru. In 1994, they began research
on Tempest Tossed, a proposed series on the post-Cold War world
of collapsed states, economic globalization, and vast movements
of economic and political migrants and refugees. Camerini and Robertson
customarily start a project by seeking out the community of experts
in the subject, including, says Camerini, foundation program officers
who are "plugged into the front lines, who can be helpful in working
with filmmakers, suggesting who to learn from." Mary McClymont,
then Ford Foundation program officer for Migrant and Refugee Rights
(now Senior Director of Peace and Social Justice at Ford), was such
a person. She connected them with Demetrios Papademetriou, Senior
Associate of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and
research began.
Seed funding from the Ford Foundation ($75,000)
and the Spunk Fund ($75,000), enabled the filmmakers to assemble
an advisory group of twelve senior policy specialists, and to travel
abroad to research this complex and highly charged subject. Late
in 1995, they delivered treatments and work plans for a $3,000,000
multi-part series. The missing element was broadcast (PBS turned
away the project, on the grounds that their viewers are not interested
in international subjects), which made foundation funding unlikely.
The project seemed to be dead.
In January 1996, they rediscovered an old friend,
a longtime activist in refugee settlement ("a guerilla fighter against
the INS"), who, it turned out, had joined the Asylum Corps of the
INS at a time when the newly-reformed asylum program was recruiting
advocates. [Note: In 1989, a formal system was established by the
INS for dealing with asylum. The program was removed from the district
INS offices, to be directed from Washington; with input from advocates,
the system was restructured. Reforms were instituted in 1995.] It
was, she said, both interesting and surprising. Suddenly, the filmmakers
realized that the whole series they had envisioned was encapsulated
there in the asylum office. But how to gain access to INS offices,
where confidential asylum interviews take place behind closed doors?
With the help of Demetrios Papademetriou and
others, they submitted a letter to INS Commissioner Doris Meissner,
requesting unprecedented permission to film asylum interviews. In
October, Meissner ordered her staff to cooperate with the filmmakers:
they would be allowed into asylum offices and had full control of
filming, but they had to guarantee releases from whomever they filmed,
and no one was required to agree to be filmed. Soon after, they
began visiting the Lyndhurst, New Jersey asylum office. Their timing
was fortunate. Late in 1996, Congress passed restrictive laws, narrowing
the asylum process. Camerini and Robertson began filming after these
laws were passed, but before they were implemented.
Armed with a proposal for a revamped project,
the filmmakers returned to the Ford Foundation, where they met with
Taryn Higashi, who had replaced McClymont as program officer for
Migrant and Refugee Rights. They were awarded a $320,000 grant.
Between October 1996 and June 1997, as they waited for their grant
money to come through, Camerini and Robertson (without cameras)
made daily visits to the asylum office, absorbing the tensions and
dynamics of the terrain, getting to know asylum officers, translators,
and immigration lawyers, and searching for likely subjects. Shari
Robertson, a trained anthropologist, likens it to a classic ethnographic
film shoot. "We entered a world in which there were several quasi
tribal groups (asylum officers, asylum seekers, lawyers and advocates)
that had their own internal politics and strong kinds of projections
about the other groups. We had to gain the trust of all the sets."
The challenge was finding applicants (who only appear once for the
interview, and return to hear the results) and asylum officers who
would agree to be filmed. They were working in a bubble of time.
The filmmakers also returned to two other early
supporters, Marianne Gerschel at the Spunk Fund (which ultimately
provided $200,000), and Antonio Maciel at the Open Society Institute
(OSI). Back in the days of Tempest Tossed, Maciel (then at the Joyce
Mertz Gilmore Foundation) had been drawn to the project. His foundation
didn't fund film, but Maciel volunteered to help in other ways,
including co-convening an advisory board meeting. When he reconnected
with the filmmakers in early 1997, he was heading the Emma Lazarus
Fund at OSI. [Note: The Emma Lazarus Fund was a one-time $50 million
initiative to help immigrants affected by welfare reform.] To Maciel,
this was a rare opportunity to actually see the process by which
asylum decisions are made. Both the final film and the outtakes,
he felt, would constitute an important policy research archive.
They could also be used to train pro bono lawyers, by providing
a literal "inside look" into the asylum process. In June 1997, the
project received a $350,000 grant from the Emma Lazarus Fund.
In July 1997, 16mm filming began, with a small
crew. (The crew consisted of Camerini (camera), the associate producer,
a sound recordist, a film loader, and Robertson. Offices were so
small, Robertson often stood outside the interview office, listening
on a headset and communicating questions to Camerini by microphone.)
By September, Camerini and Robertson felt the need to know whether
a general audience would be interested in their material. They cut
a teaser for the International Feature Film Market (IFFM), which
was seen by Lisa Heller, then executive producer of POV. She immediately
wanted the film for POV. Heller welcomed the fact that it pushed
the boundaries of POV programming (which tends to feature smaller,
more personal stories), and she saw a chance to start the project
early enough to lobby effectively within the PBS system--a rare
opportunity for POV. It was too early to tell exactly what the final
form of the film would be, but there was potential for a special
broadcast. Although it was far from complete, she took the unusual
step of bringing it to the POV editorial committee for consideration.
In April 1998, having filmed 50 cases in 26
languages, with 85 hours of footage and 15 additional hours of audio
in hand, the filmmakers began editing. They approached this as an
American story, one that could make viewers think about immigration
as a human experience, deeply embedded in the ethos of the United
States as a nation of immigrants. They meant to be even-handed,
and to put viewers in the shoes of both asylum officers and asylum
seekers and ask, "What would you do in this situation?" The film
was intended to reach general audiences, including those with anti-immigrant
sentiments. The goal was to raise consciousness about immigration
policies in a complicated world.
By mid-summer, rough edits were ready to show
to foundation officers and advisors. The filmmakers welcomed tough
criticism. They knew that their film would not please all parties
invested in the subject. "It was important," says Camerini, "to
make the film bullet-proof. Mistakes can divert attention. We didn't
just want to please insiders. We wanted to serve their possible
audiences, too." Roger Winter, Executive Director of the U.S. Committee
for Refugees, Frank Sharry, Director of the National Immigration
Forum, and Marianne Gerschel, Director of the Spunk Fund, as well
as Taryn Higashi, Antonio Maciel, and Demetrios Papademetriou were
among those who viewed rough cuts. Their responses began to frame
the discussions that would emerge around the film, and engaged key
individuals who introduced the film to opinion-shapers. They would
later be helpful in garnering national press coverage and arranging
screenings for advocates and policy-makers in foundations, government,
and human rights organizations. It stimulated the process by which
the film circulated to many viewers and venues, which would come
to include lawyers, judges, libraries, schools, civic groups, advocacy
organizations, and the INS itself.
Top
STRATEGIZING THE
LAUNCH
"POV has a mobilizing mission, to place
film in a larger set of ancillary anchors, before, during and
after broadcast. Independent work requires this. To present a
good social issue film without this apparatus is irresponsible."
Lisa Heller, HBO, Director, Original Programming, Documentaries
In response to Heller's presentation, the POV
editorial committee committed $90,000 toward completion and acquisition
of Well-Founded Fear. (Heller also suggested that the filmmakers
send a tape to Alyce Myatt at the John D and Catherine T MacArthur
Foundation. After meeting with Camerini and Robertson, and viewing
a four-hour assembly, Myatt recommended a grant of $148,000, although
it is unusual for the foundation, which is a major funder of POV,
to fund POV films. Regret to Inform was another POV film that received
funding.) In 1998, Heller began to lobby Well-Founded Fear at PBS
national meetings. According to Heller, this film gave POV a new
presence at PBS: in 1999, for the first time, POV was asked to make
a presentation at a national PBS meeting. With the luxury of an
unusually long lead time, she was able to negotiate a 9:00 pm PBS
broadcast slot, a hard feed on June 5, 2000.
POV's mission as a broadcaster is to use independent
media to build audiences and jump-start public conversation about
social issues. Plans in this direction were being prepared, with
somewhat different emphases, by POV and the Television Race Initiative
(TRI)--two related projects of The American Documentary, Inc., the
umbrella organization for both. On a parallel track, Camerini and
Robertson were planning active promotion and outreach, with their
national network of experts. The filmmakers joined together with
Ellen Schneider (Executive Director of both The American Documentary
and TRI) and Lisa Heller, both of whom Camerini describes as "vital
strategists" in project planning overall. In a crucial move, Schneider
agreed to hire a publicist specifically for Well-Founded Fear (POV's
new Director of Communication had not yet come on board), and plans
were jointly made for broadcast, publicity, sneak previews, festival
showings, insider screenings, a website, viewer guides, and community
outreach.
Camerini and Robertson locked picture in June
1999, and with the help of their "insider" network, began to preview
the film for members of the legal profession, government agencies,
and immigration advocacy organizations. The first showing, in Chicago,
was a benefit sponsored by the Midwest Immigration Rights Center
for victims of torture. Frank Sharry arranged a screening in Washington,
D.C. for the national convention of the Office of Refugee Resettlement,
which funds refugee programs throughout the country, including NGOs,
non-profit organizations, and government agencies. Sharry also organized
a workshop at the the National Immigration Forum meeting, which
brings together community leaders from around the country for training
in public speaking. Participants were asked, "What if you were to
show this film in your community, to talk about the issues?" (Many
took cassettes to use in their training programs.) Through Demetrios
Papademetriou, the Carnegie Endowment hosted a screening for policy-makers
and press in Washington, D.C. TRI project director, Yvette Martinez,
arranged with Senators Kennedy and Abraham to show the film to Senate
Subcommittee on Immigration staffers and PBS representatives. Longtime
supporters of the project, including foundation program officers
and project advisors showed the film to their boards of directors
and professional colleagues. On December 19, 1999, "Cracks in the
Facade of Refuge," a feature article by Susan Sachs, appeared in
the Sunday New York Times. (Frank Sharry had helped to place this
opening salvo in the press campaign for Well-Founded Fear.) The
article describes a film "that reveals for the first time a process
that is based on law and on instinct and that operates, as one asylum
officer puts it, like Russian roulette." The article presents a
detailed summation of the asylum process, anticipating the tone
and substance of widespread press coverage to come.
In January 2000, Well-Founded Fear came sharply
into public view, with six highly-praised screenings at the Sundance
film festival. The period between Sundance and national broadcast
in June, was crucial for establishing the film. While Camerini and
Robinson worked closely with TRI and POV to organize station and
community campaigns, they also independently hired festival publicist
Susan Norget, who orchestrated festival screenings and worked with
press to bank articles for later release. Connections made at Sundance
led to a 49-minute version of the film, for satellite broadcast
on CNN International (which was aired at least six times in each
global time zone, each time to a potential 151 million viewers).
PBS has given permission for CNN broadcast of a shorter version
domestically, next year. In January, too, they joined the PBS press
tour. It was the first time POV had been included in the tour.
In March, POV hired publicist Tim Fisher, who
teamed up with the filmmakers on the press campaign. Well-Founded
Fear had been positioned by Lisa Heller for broadcast a few weeks
earlier than the usual start of POV's summer season, which meant
it could be highlighted as a two-hour special event, while also
anchoring the series. Tim Fisher's campaign produced outstanding
results: from Esquire and People magazines, to the Los Angeles Times,
the Austin Statesman and the Miami Herald, over 100 articles appeared
in national, regional and local papers, in specialty press, weekly
and monthly publications. The filmmakers were interviewed on NPR's
Fresh Air by Terry Gross and on Morning Edition by Alex Chadwick.
On the night of the broadcast, PBS newscaster Jim Lehrer plugged
the film on The News Hour.
One of the notable aspects of press coverage
was the way in which the stories were framed. Following a dramatic
lead-in ("Imagine you were....") about a life-or-death encounter
in the INS office, most articles went straight to content, giving
background on asylum policy and providing statistics and other hard
information. They discussed what asylum policies reveal about the
gap between American ideals and tough realities. And many keyed
into the film's basic dramatic trope: what would you do if you were
in the asylum officer's shoes? in the asylum applicant's? What would
you, as an American, bring to this fateful interview? This press
focus can be attributed in large part to an exceptionally well-prepared
press kit, which introduced those questions. The reporting echoes
the way the film itself works: it skillfully uses television's storytelling
strategies to move the viewer directly into the dramas of people
in jeopardy, while introducing substantial information about what's
at stake and why. It is the issues embedded in the film that rise
to the top, gently moving the focus from entertainment to content,
while still delivering a gripping story.
Top
BROADCAST AND
RECEPTION
The long lead time that allowed for ample promotion,
combined with the 9:00 pm hard feed (instead of POV's usual 10:00
pm time slot) and a strong press campaign, contributed to good ratings
for the broadcast. It was carried by 254 stations, with 96.5% U.S.
geographical coverage. The average rating in the top 50 markets
during the week of the premiere was 1.3; in Portland, OR, Greensboro,
NC, Louisville, and Las Vegas ratings reached 2 and over. (Each
rating point is equivalent to 1.1 million households.) Press coverage
was exceptional. Articles ranged from a feature in the Arts and
Leisure section of the New York Times (the Times carried three different
stories on Well-Founded Fear, remarkable for a documentary film)
to local coverage that connected the film to issues close to home.
But, partly because the broadcast coincided
with June PBS membership drives, in 22 of the top 40 markets the
program was either moved or did not air at all. Miami station WPBT,
for instance, programmed Well-Founded Fear on June 24 at midnight.
Frank Davies, the Miami Herald Washington correspondent, had attended
the press screening organized by the Carnegie Endowment. He wrote
a paean to the film, which he said was "riveting drama with a special
interest to South Florida, where asylum disputes about Cubans, Haitians
and others make this film particularly relevant." Following complaints
from angry viewers about the scheduling, and a newspaper editorial
that said, "If WPBT didn't wait till midnight to air quality programming,
it wouldn't need to spend so much prime time fund raising," the
program was rebroadcast, with apologies from the station, at 10:00
pm on a Friday night. It preempted Antiques Roadshow and Evening
at The Pops.
Davies praised the film, saying, "The mysterious
process in which a refugee is granted or denied asylum...is never
seen--until now." The single most frequent comment about the film
was that it made a hidden process visible, and opened it up for
discussion. Many viewers and journalists commented on how "putting
a human face" on immigration stimulated people to think beyond media
stereotypes. Others said that having some context helped them understand
the realities more clearly. One human rights advocate said, "Just
having the subject shown on national television was a huge boost
for us."
Website
In January 2000, Cara Mertes became Executive Producer of POV. Picking
up on plans begun by Lisa Heller, she applied for PBS Online funds
to create a special Well-Founded Fear website linked to the POV
Interactive site. POV Interactive is a portal to information about
TRI and POV, and to its High-Impact Television (HITV) activities.
One special feature is "Talking Back: Video Letters to POV," that
invites viewers to weigh in with their opinions. Some stations open
their doors to viewers who want to videotape their responses, which
may later appear in a nationally broadcast "Talking Back" segment
on POV. (POV Interactive is expected to receive over 10 million
hits during the year 2000.)
After delays and disappointingly modest funding
from PBS Online, Camerini and Robertson produced a handsome and
innovative site. It features a "serial", in which asylum cases appear,
and are described from the point of view of various players. It
is designed as a game, in which the viewer-player can play an asylum
officer, with information about immigration laws, INS procedures,
and other things that might influence the final decision. There
are also local and global maps that link to legal services, refugee/immigration
organizations, and ways to become involved. It offers opportunities
to post opinions or to talk with the filmmakers. (As of October
27, 2000 Well-Founded Fear drew 463 "Talking Back" responses, and
45 video letters.) This is an effective and and intelligently designed
website, but in the opinion of some people close to the project,
delayed and sparse funding from PBS Online ($30,000), has prevented
it from achieving its full potential.
Top
OUTREACH: POV
and TRI
Public television, with its public interest
mission, its relationship to independently-produced, sometimes diverse
programming, and the unique infrastructure of local stations, seems
an ideal platform from which to convene and engage the community
around hard-to-discuss issues... Ellen Schneider, Executive Director,
TRI
POV and TRI devise self-replicating programs
that can maximize the impact of broadcast and continue after broadcast.
In the case of Well-Founded Fear, their outreach was enhanced by
the participation of strong and well-placed advocates. Through its
HITV initiative, POV conducts "Tune-In" and "Tie-In" campaigns to
stimulate active viewership. HITV publicized the broadcast of Well-Founded
Fear through the publications and listservs of national and local
non-profit organizations, encouraging viewers to log onto websites
or call 800 numbers for more information and to express their opinions.
HITV forms partnerships specific to each broadcast, but also has
ongoing partners like the American Library Association (ALA), which
tells local libraries how to create events around broadcast, and
encourages people to use library computers for access to POV Interactive.
The ALA prepared a facilitators' guide along with a list of related
books, websites, and videos.
There was outreach to schools: PBS TeacherSource
alerted over 2,000 educators to the broadcast and lesson plans,
which were prepared in collaboration with PBS Educational Services
and the National Council of Social Studies Teachers, with the assistance
of Amnesty International. (K-12 teachers could tape the broadcast
and use it for up to one year.) The American Bar Association Program
in Education sent 30-minute videotapes to 30 colleges and universities,
where they were screened and discussed by 600 students. The faith-based
community was also important. The National Conference of Catholic
Bishops sent immigration fact sheets and the facilitators's guide
to 100 local groups.
POV event-driven activities are designed to
work both for POV and its host organizations. Stations use them
to build audience and connect with local communities. For example,
in San Antonio, public station KLRN partnered with the public library
and the local Documentary Film Project, for a sneak preview of the
30-minute tape and a panel discussion with INS officers from Dallas
and two immigration defense attorneys. The event was videotaped
for POV's "Talking Back" segment, and videostreamed. In San Diego,
the public library, in partnership with Amnesty International, hosted
a panel moderated by a local immigration lawyer and professor. The
San Diego public television station partnered with the San Diego
Human Rights Festival for a similar panel, which was videotaped
for "Talking Back." These are examples of how television broadcast
can foster social networks and create spaces for the discussion
of public issues, and how multiple technologies--radio, television,
web, and e-mail--can be used to amplify the effects and possibilities
of broadcast.
TRI, which grew out of POV's HITV project, is
spearheaded by Ellen Schneider, Heller's predecessor as executive
producer of POV. It was launched in 1998 with Ford Foundation funding
(later funding was provided by the John D and Catherine T MacArthur
Foundation, the Surdna Foundation, and The James Irvine Foundation),
to develop a national media strategy to enable local public television
stations to "use provocative programming to engage communities around
critical social issues." According to Schneider, TRI's job is to
create an infrastructure that "opens media as a site for public
exchange and information, and creates off-broadcast opportunities
for screenings and conversations." TRI is currently working with
six public television stations: Austin, Boston, Minneapolis, Norfolk/Hampton
Roads, Raleigh/Durham, and San Francisco. In its first seasons,
TRI bundled a strand of programs dealing with issues of racial injustice,
and established links with national partner organizations, public
television stations and, through them, to community organizations.
(1998-1999 films included Family Name; Africans in America; Beyond
Black and White: Affirmative Action in America, a Fred Friendly
seminar; and Facing the Truth with Bill Moyers.) In Well-Founded
Fear, Schneider saw a challenging opportunity to introduce immigration
as a natural extension of TRI's focus on race.
The Bay Area, TRI's home base, is a center of
human rights and immigration activism. In light of Proposition 187,
as well as conflicting priorities among activists, it was clear
that Well-Founded Fear was moving into controversial territory.
Camerini and Robertson and their network of advisors had given considerable
attention to this potential problem. In Camerini's words, "If you
look at a field in a new way, it is important to be sensitive to
the issues and place it carefully." TRI set out to position the
film by holding two "braintrust" meetings, bringing together funders,
community leaders, advocates, academics and the filmmakers, to launch
discussion to drive national broadcast. It was a contentious meeting,
in which the film became a lightning rod for criticism. Braintrusters
raised questions that inevitably came up in other contexts as well
(questions, Antonio Maciel points out, that are not altogether unreasonable
to anticipate from activists who sometimes feel beleaguered): Is
the film, with its even-handed approach, too soft on the INS? Isn't
it damaging to suggest that some asylum applicants don't tell the
truth? Why show the relatively rational asylum process when extreme
situations, like expedited removal, need to be addressed? (The simple
answer to the last question is that Camerini and Robertson tried
and failed to get access to detention centers.) In the opinion of
the filmmakers, while the TRI team is very knowledgeable about public
television and its own networks, they would have done well to tap
into the knowledge and advice of the film's advisors, to better
frame open discussion, especially in the advocacy community. But,
despite the bumpy start, many groups that were cranky at the outset
have nonetheless ended up using the film.
TRI's flagship station is KQED. For Well-Founded
Fear, TRI staff worked with the station to create a context for
the broadcast and to respond to some of the hot debate that had
been aroused in the advocacy community. Forum, an FM-radio public
affairs show, highlighted issues raised by the film; Bay Window,
a TV program that "localizes" national programs, produced a half-hour
segment, "No Turning Back," to follow the national broadcast (attracting
14,400 viewers); and Shari Robertson and Michael Camerini appeared
on the local show, Independent View. In other typical ventures,
TRI project director Yvette Martinez set up sneak previews for KQED
staff, advocacy and faith-based groups. TRI teamed with the World
Affairs Council for a screening at the San Francisco Public Library
attended by 50 people. A panel discussion at the San Francisco International
Film Festival screening of Well-Founded Fear, organized with Amnesty
International (AI) for three school groups, as well as the general
public, drew 200 people. AI used the 30-minute version, the facilitators'
's guide, and informational tool kits prepared by TRI in other programs
it sponsored in the Bay Area. (The tool kit includes easy-to-use
factual information, and suggests ways to get involved.) There was
a ripple effect. According to the local AI coordinator, "Amnesty
[national office] didn't have time or money to promote the film
as much as they would have liked. So we sent them copies of the
guide and tool kit. They sent out toolkits to six regional offices
and encouraged them to do screenings."
In North Carolina, TRI partner station UNC-TV,
arranged a mini-braintrust of local Hispanic leaders, to explore
ways to use the film in their communities. There was a sneak preview
for 100 people at the Davie Street Church Sunday School in Raleigh
(an all-black church). The station arranged a panel discussion (attended
by 80 people) after the film was shown at the Double Take Documentary
Festival in Durham, which stimulated interest in pro bono legal
work. In Minneapolis, KTCA/Twin Cities partnered with the main St.
Paul newspaper, Pioneer Press, on a series of articles about immigrant
issues. The station held sneak previews of Well-Founded Fear for
the editorial board of the paper and the League of Women Voters;
and there was a special screening for a group of 135 community figures
including lawyers, INS staff, representatives of advocacy programs,
funders and others serving immigrants and refugees.
Camerini and Robertson were impressed with the
high level of local involvement and cross-community conversation
they observed during their visit to Norfolk/Hampton Roads. They
were featured on a live public radio broadcast, in which they were
joined by an asylum expert. At the Old Dominion Film Festival, a
panel discussion sponsored by the Mexican-American Club, Multicultural
Alliance, and local chapter of the National Federation of Filipino
American Association was attended by 50 people, who participated
in a lively cross-cultural discussion. Austin was another high point.
The Austin Film Society screening, co-sponsored with the Asian American
Alliance and The Austin Chronicle, drew 275 participants, including
immigration/asylum service providers, some of whom rose with personal
testimonials. An interview with the filmmakers on public radio,
articles in the Texas Observer and Austin Chronicle, and videostreaming
by local station KLRU-TV contributed to high visibility in the community.
During this period, while Camerini and Robertson
were visiting TRI and POV sites, they were also travelling with
the film to INS offices, universities and colleges, and film festivals.
The advocacy and professional networks through which they were circulating
complemented and intersected with the network of public interest
and educational organizations that TRI and POV were linking with.
Both efforts were designed to use broadcast as a springboard for
introducing immigration issues into public discourse and creating
opportunities for face-to-face exchange between filmmakers, advocates,
specialists, INS, and community groups.
Top
IMPACT
Well-Founded Fear is a stunning example of documentary
filmmaking, beautifully crafted and brilliantly structured to allow
viewers to enter into a realm of human experiences and political
facts as witnesses, citizens, family members, decision-makers. It
is as art, not propaganda, that it finds its great power, entering
the social imagination which is so heavily informed by television.
It reached three principal groups: the INS, the advocacy community,
and general audiences.
The INS. Camerini and Robertson screened
the film at six INS offices. It was also seen by Commissioner Meissner.
Officers had varying reactions to the film--some were pleased to
see their difficult work represented so respectfully, a few felt
disappointed that their stories had ended up on the cutting room
floor. But it was generally agreed that the film had captured the
culture of INS offices in a way it had never before been seen, and
that it foregrounded the threat of "officer burnout" in this high-stress
environment. The film is being used in staff training, and steps
are being taken to counter burnout. In response to the translation
problems that the film showed to be so damaging to some applicants,
INS now offers translation services. Anecdotal reports abound about
idiosyncratic changes: i.e., an immigration judge in Boston has
made Well-Founded Fear required viewing for his entire court, from
judges to clerks to secretaries; another immigration judge, after
seeing the film, ordered that his hearings of rejected applicants
be conducted on a true de novo basis (as required by the law), rather
than accepting an asylum officer's notes, as had become customary.
Finally, the INS has asked Camerini and Robertson to produce training
films. While the filmmakers are unwilling to accept payment from
INS, at least one foundation has expressed interest in funding these
films.
Legal and Advocacy Communities. Well-Founded
Fear gave national visibility to immigration and asylum issues that
are rarely seen on television, except in cases that are politically
dramatic (Elian Gonzalez) or extreme (smuggled Chinese workers stranded
at sea). It provided legitimacy and support to the work of advocates,
like the San Francisco Amnesty worker who said the film would help
her organization's efforts, saying, "The refugee experience is so
complicated and hard to convey to the public." Broadcast and local
events have produced pro bono volunteers among law students and
lawyers, and the film is used in training asylum workers. Amnesty
International, the American Bar Association, and refugee rights
organizations are among those who have incorporated the film into
their programs. Foundation officers like Marianne Gerschel have
shown it to groups in Turkey, Israel, and Denmark, who find resonance
in the political and ethical issues raised by the film. Antonio
Maciel applauds the film for giving the subject visibility and providing
materials for advocacy. In his opinion, however, the single most
important contribution the film has made is in showing immigration
advocates how to most effectively advance their cause, demonstrating
how persuasive an even-handed approach can be.
General audiences. The PBS broadcast
of Well-Founded Fear was seen in over a million households in the
U.S., bringing serious asylum and refugee issues into public view.
This was compelling television: by drawing viewers into intimate
stories of personal crisis, it put a human face on abstract issues,
and countered familiar media stereotypes with a range of lived experiences.
Invited to become participants in these life-and-death dramas, viewers
were offered many paths for connecting emotionally, or for tapping
into more information, expressing opinions, or becoming involved.
In a significant but less measurable way, the film introduced political
asylum into public discourse, providing images and language that
enable conversation and debate.
Impact was enhanced by a sophisticated pre-broadcast
rollout strategy which was timed to engage movers and shakers first,
followed by press, and then civic groups and advocacy organizations.
In addition to television broadcast, the film reached general audiences
through well-planned events at festivals, libraries, schools, and
churches, often with the filmmakers and subject experts present.
The synergistic convergence of radio, television, print press, websites,
listservs, screenings, and word of mouth produced a vibrant public
presence for the film, which is continuing. This is a clear example
of how technologies can be used to enhance broadcast and promote
on-the-ground activities.
In terms of potential long-term impact, this
project has succeeded in opening new public spaces and pathways
for civic dialogue; forging relationships between groups willing
and able to use and sustain those spaces; and providing language,
information, and opportunities for conversation around public issues.
Thanks to strategic planning the film has been the subject of informed
(often heated) discussion in libraries, schools, foundation offices,
television stations, film festivals, living rooms, community meetings,
and cyberspace. Links have been established between television stations
and their communities, between advocacy organizations and civic
groups, and among viewers. Taken together, these spaces and relationships
suggest the outlines of that public space for civic life that is
said to be disappearing in a market-driven society.
While the dissemination and impact of Well-Founded
Fear is impressive, some impediments deserve mention. Despite generous
support from major foundations (the final budget was just under
$1,000,000), the project was considerably undercapitalized (it was
frequently the filmmakers' credit card debt that substituted for
cash flow.) And there was pitifully small funding for outreach.
Commenting on a lost opportunity, Frank Sharry says, "Putting wheels
under the film before and after broadcast could be to immigration
policy what The Burning Bed was to domestic violence." Sharry used
resources available to him: he and other advocates organized screenings,
encouraged activists to use the film, and shared press contacts.
But, he says, "It's nothing compared with what we could and would
have done with a little money." With limited time, staff and money,
Camerini and Robertson worked with TRI and POV to produce an extensive
data base, effective educational packets, a website, and press materials.
But it was impossible to realize the detailed plans they had prepared,
which reflected the experience, networks, and organizational strength
that had been mobilized. (One relatively inexpensive idea, for which
they never found funding, was to place ads in, for instance, the
Chinese-language press, on Latino radio, and on Rush Limbaugh's
show.)
Top
CONCLUSION
Well-Founded Fear should not be considered as
a "stand-alone" documentary, but rather as part of a carefully constructed
package of plans and relationships designed around the linchpin
of broadcast. The group of institutions, organizations, and individuals
assembled by the filmmakers as they went about their work, came
to constitute an effective, if improvised, infrastructure that sustained
the production and circulation of the film, and catalyzed its many
uses. This might be regarded as a serendipitous and transient grouping,
but the foundations, associations, local television stations, community
groups, POV, TRI, and others who came together have substantial
resources and long-term goals. In this project they have formed
a nascent alternative network for the production and circulation
of public interest media, which has enormous possibilities in an
otherwise heavily commercialized media landscape. [Note: Public
broadcasting was key, but also problematic. Until Lisa Heller's
intervention, PBS was consistently negative, and there is no evidence
that, without POV, it would have accepted or promoted the broadcast.]
This infrastructure supported the film, and
the film contributed to strengthening the infrastructure. For instance,
while POV offered the film crucial broadcast access, Lisa Heller
was able to use it to establish a stronger presence for POV within
PBS. Audiences drawn to this broadcast were introduced to the larger
array of POV programming and outreach. It provided an opportunity
for experimenting with ways to link electronic, print, and face-to-face
relationships. Foundation funders and "insiders" have used the film
to inform professional communities about immigration and refugee
issues, and the film circulated in multiple venues, nationally and
internationally, in ways that fulfill the confidence of funders
and suggests how future films might benefit from this model. Through
Camerini and Robertson's extensive network of specialists, TRI and
HITV have established relationships with new national and community
partners and audiences, who see ways that television can be adapted
locally. The press campaign provides a model for future documentaries,
acknowledging the need to work with television's entertainment genres,
while nudging viewers to information and discussion. The viewer
guides, facilitators' guides, educational packets and tool kits
provide content for library and school programs, supporting and
enriching public institutions.
The nascent network of institutions and programs
that formed the infrastructure for the production and circulation
of Well-Founded Fear can be seen as a model for public interest
media, one that positions media as a spring board for public discourse,
community organizing, coalition-building, and the creation of spaces
for vigorous public life. It gives PBS a genuine public mission,
and contributes to building a constituency for public television.
Top |