Documentaries Won't Save Democracy, but Maybe Documentary Filmmakers Can.
TikTok Anyone?
Over the last week, I’ve hosted/programmed highly emotional screenings of political documentaries that powerfully and convincingly show the dangers of the fascistic, cruel, and harrowing policies of the Trump Administration, previewing what could come next if his band of misogynistic, White Supremacists come to power once again.
In “The Last Republican,” which follows former Congressman Adam Kinzinger, filmmaker Steve Pink bracingly and wittily shows how the G.O.P. establishment has gone dangerously astray in its support of Trump and attempts to give conservatives permission to vote against him; in Errol Morris’ “Separated,” the Oscar-winning filmmaker offers a riveting, indispensable chronicle of Stephen Miller’s inhumane and immoral child-separation immigration policy in irrefutable detail; and in “Zurawski v Texas,” co-directors Maisie Crow and Abbie Perrault follow the heartrending and enraging stories of women on the frontlines of the battle for women’s reproductive rights.
At these screenings and post-screening Q&As in deep-blue Chicago, audiences were engaged, crying, furious, frustrated, and wanting to do more. And while these three films and other films like them (see “War Game,” now streaming) continue to play at select film festivals and screenings across the country, as corporate-backed wide-releases remain elusive, can they really make any kind of impact, preaching to the 100-200 already converted people at each event? Sure, it helps to activate the base, which is maybe the main purpose. It’s good news that MSNBC, which helped produce “Separated,” will broadcast the film to its largish audience, but it won’t be until December, when it’s too late.
Should all these great documentary filmmakers be making convincing viral videos or TikTok content instead?
I keep thinking that one of the main reasons that Trump is currently favored to win the election next week is because of the way the media works these days: Everyone is existing in their feedback-loop bubbles, and I doubt any undecided voter is going to be seeing these films. So should all these great documentary filmmakers be making convincing viral videos or TikTok content instead? Obviously, there’s something in the extraordinary power of 90 minute narratives that suck you into their stories, as you root for heroic subjects who are speaking truth to power and fighting for what’s right. But I don’t believe this cuts through the media noise. All those voters brainwashed by Fox News and other propaganda are certainly not watching documentaries in theaters. The days of “Fahrenheit 9/11” might as well be ancient history.
When the “Zurawski v Texas” team decided to nationally stream for free their film last weekend as part of a Weekend Watch Party on Eventive to get it to audiences before the election, I thought it was a bold but important decision. I was also happy to see that they chose to geoblock the film (it’s not that hard, folks) in any city with an in-person screening in order to preserve the exclusivity and eventfulness of those screenings. While I wonder if this decision may hurt (or help?) their eventual licensing deal to an online distributor, it was probably the best thing to do to make an impact during this crucial week before the election because festival screenings can only get you so far.
And yet, even with this plan, I am not sure a feature doc has any kind of shot of popping in the crowded media landscape, unless, of course, it’s about a celebrity or true-crime in the Netflix Top Ten. (Can someone make a Netflix true-crime doc about Trump in the next two days?)
If you know me, you know that I love and champion feature documentaries. But I’d also love to see these kinds of powerful, illuminating and provocative stories going viral on TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube to actually reach a broader audience. If you’re making a political doc in an election year, should you also be creating 10 to 20 short clips aimed at reaching the masses in the most crass or blunt way possible? Should you hire an online social influencer to talk about your film and the issues in the most compelling or flattering way? Filmmakers need to go where the viewers are, and if we want to make change and make an impact, which I know is the goal for lots of documentary filmmakers, that means going where audiences live. Right-wing agit-propagandist Ben Shapiro has 7.13 million followers on his YouTube site—which is one of the most popular political channels in the world—so we on the Left have a lot of catching up to do.
I tried! I made a short - likely not short enough - https://youtu.be/m7jM9o4sIco?si=G6Ir809tlS_3yYk6
Yes to it all you suggest that can actually reach people: influencers, Tik Tok - bite size only, social media and all the dollars, razzmatazz and know-how it takes to reach people there.
Yes good thoughts here. Definitely reaching people on different platforms where audiences are is smart reality that filmmakers will want to continue to explore and add to their toolkit. Also there’s a need to seek distribution that reaches beyond the already converted audience if you want to change hearts n minds. Will separated on msnbc allow that film to reach people on the opposite side of the aisle. Probably not. Activated filmmakers need to look at how the storytelling can reach across the aisle and bring in the otherside. Finding advocates who can act as a bridge and make it feel safe for viewers with differing opinions and backgrounds to want to see the film, be open to the message is also really important. I recently worked on a film about reproductive rights seen through the lens of the evangelical church and it was an important part of the director’s approach to make a film that didn’t demonize and allowed a safe space for exploring a differing perspective. A film like ours if it was on msnbc that alone would turn off potential viewers. There’s so much to consider to improve reach and it’s also exciting (and overwhelming) the possibilities becoming available to reach people.