One Last Farm

One Last Farm tells the story of the last working farm in Bristol, Yew Tree Farm, and the difficulties it continues to face to survive. The small family farm in south Bristol is a haven for biodiversity with its SNCI (Site of Nature Conservation Interest) status. It is also a big part of the local community, providing organic food and wellbeing support for so many locals.

Director and Cinematographer, Nikki Dodd, captures the tale of Catherine Withers, the third-generation farmer as she battles growing pressures from Bristol’s shifting land demands as the urban population grows. Drama, determination and resilience, this short (under 20 min film) takes audiences on a journey. One of fear and hope, as we watch Catherine fight against council plans for a cemetery expansion.

You can find more about the film, watch the trailer and find a screening near you on the film’s website here.

Audience’s reaction

Despite the film’s short length, it was clear from the discussions that the audience’s were captivated and deeply moved by the messages the film contained. And by Catherine’s bravery and resilience.

As a farm that is farmed in a very different way, one that protects and encourages biodiversity alongside the organic practices, Yew Tree Farm is rare. It is also at the heart of many intersecting issues. Audiences pressed Nikki for more information about this, as with so many potential topics to highlight in the film, how and why did she decide to focus in on biodiversity?

Nikki answered by sharing that to her, at that moment of time, with the proposed cemetery expansion that was putting some of the land at risk, protecting the farm’s biodiversity and highlighting Catherine’s love and deep connection with the land was the most personal and true story that the film could tell.

Valuing nature

Many other issues arose in our discussions such as the issue of land ownership and how to measure the value of the farmland with its abundant biodiversity. How can we prove the invaluable nature of the farm and its long term contributions to the surrounding ecosystem’s health and human wellbeing. Audiences questioned whether we could collect more data and carry out more ecosystem surveys to prove the lands worth in terms that weren’t monetary. Others asked, whether data would ever be enough for people to give the land and its thriving ecosystems a high “enough” monetary value not to destroy it through development initiatives.

The film highlighted a conflict between humans and nature that is deeply embedded in our culture. A story that pins humans against nature and above the value of these natural spaces. This type of thinking revolves around economic decision making and focuses exclusively on short term gains. We couldn’t come up with an answer to this massive dilemma in our short session, but it got us all thinking. It encouraged a need within many of us to develop our own relationships with the natural world, to help us feel just how important it was in our lives and the need to prioritise nature in our own decisions.

The audience loved how the film captured the slow pace of the natural world and a sense of season’s changing. Watching the delicate shots of complex ecosystems and insect close ups, highlighted Catherine’s own connection to nature and how it enriched her life. Audiences shared how they gained a real sense of stewardship and felt close to the farm and its many wonders after taking part in Catherine’s personal journey. This nurtured a curiosity and appreciation for Catherine’s ongoing fight and clear determination on her mission to protect and keep the farm going.

It left many of us wanting to find our own ways of nurturing that connection with our own local green or blue spaces. We too are wanting to notice the seasons change and the beauty in the life that surrounds us, even here in urban Bristol.

The power of art and hope

Art is powerful. A tool that helps us to empathise across great distances, across species divides and motivate a sense of awe and desire to care for others. The audience recognised this within themselves after watching the film’s scenic and spectacular shots. What this also facilitated for us, was a sense of awe for Catherine’s clear dedication and resilience.

As even after everything she has been through, she admits:

“I am not broken quite yet.” Catherine Withers

The powerful effect of the film became evident when Nikki shared that the film was sent to the councillors featured in the film to help them understand just how valuable the farm was. This had an impact on their way of thinking and consequently, on their political decisions. It resulted in their agreement to protect the farm for that little bit longer.

However, many audience members shared their own frustrations in not knowing how they could make a change. Or how they could act on the hope that the film instilled in them. Transferring that hope into action is tough. But seeing Catherine’s power as one individual really did show us that we too, as individuals, can make a powerful change. And together, as a whole film club audience, we hold great potential.

These problems are not unique to Yew Tree Farm. This film portrays the struggles of just one of many farms and natural landscapes across the UK, that are all threatened by land development. What this film successfully does, is raise awareness of an incredibly important problem. One that is underlined by societies’ constant need to expand and grow, a rather unsustainable short term goal.

So, I leave you with some of the audiences final questions:

How do we decide what has the right to exist?
How do we act as a group, as a part of a much wider collective, to protect and value that right?
How can we nurture our own sense of connection to nature and to other humans, so we can act on this inspirational film and participate in making meaningful change?

A big thank you

As the last film club for a while, I want to say a MASSIVE THANK YOU to all of my phenomenal supporters, audiences and cheer leading team who help me to get the word out there! Some of you I will miss terribly as you move on after this year, and I can’t thank you enough for making this club a real joy to run!

A quick mention too, to UWE’s Student Union Experience awards! It was an absolute pleasure to be nominated for the “Sustainability” category. And so very happy to celebrate with all the other nominees (and the phenomenal person who won) and the fantastic work that everyone is doing at UWE. Lets keep making UWE a bit more green step by step.

Until next (academic) year….

Want to watch One Last Farm or set up your own screening? Easy! Take a look at the website and get in touch with Nikki here.

Are you looking for a film club near you? Here are some recommendations:

• https://www.99pfilms.com/
• https://kinema.com/
• https://www.ecoflix.com/

This beautiful documentary weaves together a story, that as described by the director Liberty Denman, is told…

“through the eyes of different stakeholders from Scotland to Cornwall. This film reveals how we are more connected to the Ocean than we realise. We all want to see our beautiful British marine life thrive for decades to come. This is not limited to those better known species but also to ones, such as the spurdog, which are often overlooked. [This film] follows the story of this small species of shark through the eyes of every community linked to it.“

We were lucky enough to be joined by some of their fabulous filmmakers afterwards for a Q&A session. They were drilled with many questions by our audience about the film, conservation storytelling and the process of filmmaking. We all learnt a lot about sharks too.

Before I begin to unravel the themes from the discussion, I want to encourage all shark and fish fanatics, all lovers of the sea and anyone with any hint of interest in conservation, to support their amazing initiative. Either find a screening near you, donate to the project or spread the word! Whatever you do, take away the message of the film in Liberty’s own words:

“Look for those underrepresented voices in conservation and facilitate a way for them to be heard in a non biased fashion.”

The film and its filmmakers really encouraged the audience to engage with the stories we hear in news, science and general life. Consider, whose perspective is missing? And how can we create a space for connection, for all of these voices to be heard, valued and connected together? This could enable future decisions for the beautiful spurdog species (and others) to be made collaboratively, by working-with others rather than excluding them.

If anyone has any questions or wants to follow the project, here is a link to where you can find them on social media @one__kai and on LinkedIn. If you want to get in touch with Liberty, with questions or to set up a screening, find her @libertydenmandives.

Stakeholder identities

Stories told by science and conservation can be one sided. Documentaries, such as conservation campaign films, often lean into the traditional heroes journey storytelling technique. This technique casts one character as “good” – often in wildlife films it is the conservationist hero who is trying to save the day. But, it frames their “opposition” as “bad”. In the case of Fighting for the Underdog, using this framing would have vilified the fisherman as evil-doers trying to demolish the seas and the fishing stocks.

The documentary film highlighted that in reality, the situation is not so black and white. Its not a binary tale of good vs evil, but actually a complex mesh of different stakeholder’s perspectives and lives. All of which are equally valid, but don’t necessarily have a platform to speak out or people who will listen. Their stories are, therefore, often oppressed or erased from the narratives that we, the public, hear.

With the fame of “Seaspiracy”¹ and other dramatic documentaries, the filmmakers shared that many of those interviewed initially did not want to be involved. They held the assumption that this film, like the others before it, would take the same biased stance on the fishing industry.

Fisheries depend on the sea. They have a relationship with it and a desire to protect the it and its fish in the long-term. At the end of the day, their livelihoods rely on there being a sustainable supply of fish and this relationship is deeply embedded into their local culture.

This storytelling bias is not specific to the fishing industry. The same lens is often applied to farmers and other industries or cultures that live with and depend on the produce of their local environment.

For us, as an audience full of budding conservationists, science communicators and filmmakers, this was an important message. Through their interviews, we saw the humanness at the heart of the fisherman, those in the fishing industry and the conservation organisations. It was not hard to notice that the stakeholders represented on screen may not all see eye to eye, but they were all connected by a love and respect for the sea.

Take away message

From the film and the filmmakers fantastic Q&A, we learnt to look beyond the veneer for the powerful stories hidden underneath. We were encouraged to question the one-sided stories in our own lives and to seek those other perspectives.

What the documentary demonstrated, was that the fisherman and those whose lives and work were connected to the spurdog shark, had a respect and understanding of the sea based on their lived experiences. To us, the audience, their experiences are very different to our own. It is through the power of personal storytelling and film that we can learn about these experiences and begin to empathise with them. For many filmmakers and conservationists alike,

Film, therefore, creates an opportunity to share these stories widely. By educating many, film can have an impact by not only raising awareness but by intentionally using these films as vehicles to encourage collaborative stakeholder engagement in policy making and the management of ecosystems, such as these fisheries.

Fighting for the Underdog‘s informative and creative storytelling pulls out the emotional heart of each of the character’s interviewed. Crafting a journey that all of us in the audience could empathise with and begin to understand. The film helped us value the opinions of academics, fisherman and local people equally and recognise these stakeholders’ care for the sea, as they all have a stake in its future health and prosperity.

The One Kai team have done an amazing job at raising awareness about the spurdog shark and the sustainable fishing practices around it. But, they also promote a powerful message, the need to listen to all sides of the story and to question which ones are missing.

I personally really encourage everyone to find a screening near them and spread the message about this brilliant project. And I want to say a massive thank you to the filmmakers for all of their support and for joining the little film club to help tell their own stories too.

Find out more about the film and watch the trailer here: https://www.onekai.org/fighting-for-the-underdog

1. For more information about the controversy around the narratives in Seaspiracy see here: https://academic.oup.com/fisheries/article/47/4/154/7816492?login=false ︎

Alongside the other events that are happening at UWE throughout the week, I decided to screen the recent documentary Fashion ReImagined to open up conversations about practices in the fashion industry. Choosing this film felt really apt, following Amy’s decision this month to set up her own “purpose-driven” brand that focuses on transparency in the supply chain, natural materials and more sustainable practices within the fashion industry, according to her interview in Vogue.

The film follows the journey of Amy Powney, Fashion designer behind the Mother of Pearl brand, on her mission to challenge the exploitative, wasteful and extractive practices of the fashion industry. Starting from the very beginning of the clothes lives, the farms the materials are grown in through to the spinning, dying and sewing, we watch as Amy challenges the industry by sourcing materials, designing and making products for a completely sustainable fashion line.

Reflecting on fashion industry

We really enjoyed the film! It left many of us feeling curious about the origin of our own clothes and, though several of us never wanted to buy new clothes again, it didn’t dissuade fashion lovers from enjoying how they express themselves with their outfits.

We all felt a little shocked by having revealed to us the hidden process and long journeys of our clothes. None of us had any clue all of the stages that each of the fabrics went through before we ended up buying them. And each of us expected people in the industry to know a lot more too! We found it even more shocking what the brands and designers had no awareness of. Included in that was knowledge of (or care for) what happens after their clothes are purchased.

The film contained many interesting facts, figures and infographics, but something that dug its nails into me (one of many) is realising that each item of my clothing is better travelled than I am. No one in the audience realised how many countries are involved in the processing or how many chemicals and harmful activities are used to make our clothes appear more “fashionable”.

One of the messages we did know, was about the child and slave labour involved. It is something we were aware of and saddened to realise the scale of injustice. From the fast paced rat-race on top, where designers are under high pressure to churn out ideas to compete in the slit throat industry. To factory workers who risk diseases from the chemicals used. It was upsetting to learn of the lack of understanding there was of the people behind each of these processes.

But, we were super inspired by Amy’s mission! And the amazingly dedicated members of her team! One of the audience described how hopeful they were seeing her “give the industry a kick up the arse”. It showed that there are people who care and who work according to their values. It left a clear message, that challenging big industrial systems is hard, its full of mistakes and lots of learning, but it is not impossible!

And that we are not alone in the fight! There are many out there who support the same causes and want to make change. It just takes one person to pull up their socks and start.

Looking forwards

What happens now that sustainability has become fashionable? It’s brilliant that it is now a feature of many brands’ designs. But are they actually making the changes needed to shift the industry towards less extractive, wasteful and exploitative means? Or are they just ticking the ethics box to keep consumers buying more clothes?

Asking questions, was actually where we finished off our discussion. Knowing what to do next after watching an environmental or campaign film is hard. Without films leaving the audience a set of instructions of what they can do next, film club members often admit feeling a bit lost. Or hopeful but unsure of what to pour the hope in to.

That’s why I really like that the film ended on the #FashionOurFuture campaign which gave 9 options of pledges that we can take over the next year to reduce the impact of our clothes. These included the below, from a screenshot of Amy Powney’s instagram page, which give us all a good idea of what we can do next!

It was the act of actively questioning and reflecting on our actions and purchases, that our film club jointly agreed was something we all need to do more of. Asking our brands where clothes are sourced, whether child laborers were involved in making it and whether the brand stands against animal cruelty. As if enough people ask these questions regularly enough, if we make decisions by our values and hold those (brands and people) accountable for their unethical actions or greenwashing, we may be able to nudge these systems into changing.

But don’t stop there, take a leaf (or thread of yarn) from Amy’s book, we need to push the system until it looks more like one we all feel proud to be part of. Good luck!

Find out more and watch the trailer here – https://www.fashionreimaginedfilm.com/

Want to know what you can do to tackle the issues brought up in the film (before you read below of course)? Here is a way you can take political action by getting your local MP to sign the ‘Repair and Reuse Declaration’. Take a second to fill it in now and know that you used your clicks to make a change.

Buy Now! The Netflix documentary, released in November 2024 in time with Black Friday, tackles head on an issue which faces almost everyone – consumption. Or more specifically – over consumption. It cleverly weaves a spectacular and brutal story that guides audiences through the marketing lies and techniques that we are all subliminally subjected to, revealing the hidden disastrous impacts that our shopping habits are having on communities and environments around the world.

Gorgeous, enticing, shocking and mildly intimidating. It gets your emotions going. At least it did for the amazing film club audience that came to see the documentary. But I am not here to pull apart or echo critique that can be found elsewhere on the internet. I am here to talk about feelings, thoughts and reactions. And not my own, but from the film club’s amazing open audience members.

So I have to thank the filmmakers! The documentary started many difficult and honest discussions. By opening our eyes it has vividly made clear the need to spread the word. So hear I am!

Now go watch the film! And share it widely! But first, maybe continue reading.

Emotions

Created using the marketing techniques that brands use to lure us in, it is an aesthetically glorious and overstimulating film. Colours, sound effects, overpowering narrative given by an AI-like being who knows all, the film is absorbing! And these techniques that get you to click the “Buy Now!” button are obviously rather successful at getting your emotions going!

We felt everything. The audience commented on how some felt disgust, rage and overwhelm on learning the truths the film uncovers. There was anger and blame targeted at the ‘invisible powers that be’, that seemingly have no morals in deceiving the masses into distracted states of constant want. ‘Fault’ was accusingly used to target the lack of responsibility these people in positions of power expressed in their decisions. You get it, they seem evil.

The overwhelm for some was laced with all-consuming guilt from our own consumptive actions, as we assessed our mistakes and struggled to find alternative ways to live without causing the harm depicted on screen. This level of guilt when tinged with shame can lead to a sense of powerlessness. A need to escape the system. Perhaps we should all go and live in a self-sustaining hut in the middle of nowhere? Exciting yes, but what does leaving the system achieve, if we already live in a world where 2.5 million shoes are produced every hour and 15 million unwanted clothes are sent to Ghana each week?

What was interesting was watching the teetering balance of all of our emotions in the discussion, watching as people swayed between guilt over their own individual actions (I was definitely stressing about the waste plastics that obviously are not getting recycled) into outrage. And somewhere there was a spark of hope, of the speed of change that is possible and the creative opportunities that we can engage in now that we are aware.

Hard truths and lessons

The film is full of them! Hard truths and lessons that is. And I am not going to summarise them for you here. Go watch it… And yes, I know I am encouraging consumerism. This was one of the things our audience picked up on. Isn’t it ironic that the film is streamed on Netflix, a platform that is not accessible to everyone and is producing ever-more entertaining content tailored to appeal to audiences and entice them into binging and watching more.

Just like the fact that not everyone in the world is able to watch Netflix, the audience spoke of how not everyone has the agency and ability to act up against the system. The people who work in the factories depicted on screen are in very different places to those who were interviewed on screen. Though there was great appreciation for the whistle blowers who are making change, it was acknowledged that they are in places of privilege. Those in the room who had worked for some of the companies depicted on screen shared that they experienced similar wasteful scenarios. What was clear was the level of injustice that the film clearly visualised and the need for a much wider systems change.

Audiences discussed how there wasn’t much information that was new in the film. Much of it they already knew or where vaguely aware of. (Apart from the light bulb story, that was appalling.) Somehow seeing these issues in this film made us feel differently about these issues. Yes, that does encourage guilt for not having considered these issues before, or potentially done anything about them. But, it does talk to the persuasive power of the storytelling techniques used in the film. By playing with our emotions it riled many of us up and the outrage powered our conversations of disgust. It led to our questioning of what we can do next.

What can we do next?

There is hope! At least we did find our own sources of hope in the room as we reflected on the influence and agency we all had. There are many options out there of things we can do to engage in this problem. But the audience observed that the film hints at at a few of these options at the end of the film but provides very little information about what we can actually actively do next. What action should we take? How do I learn to fix my stuff? Which brands do we trust? There were no resources suggested or invitations to take that next step at the end of the film. There is nothing to capture our will to act at the point when we are most anxious, outraged… or guilty.

So here is what we settled on:

1. Spread the word!
2. Change our behaviours: buy less and learn to fix more.
3. Challenge the system. Can we lobby the powers that be?

The first is easy and harmless, but tough nonetheless. We need to start talking! Everyone in the room had such different backgrounds and networks. Though they all decided to come to the screening of their own backs, so must have had pre-existing interests, not everyone in our lives does. So there was encouragement to continue our film club discussions with our friends and families to spread the word.

A big message that came from the film was about greenwash and the brands pushing the responsibility of the need to change onto the consumer. Making it our problem, our responsibility. Here is where some of us felt a push back towards where our guilt came from. As these woven lies encourage us to feel it. But we are not victims nor are we powerless. We can change our shopping habits and we can reduce our waste. And these are really empowering to do. With our limited energy and attention, unless this is just me, we have to be understanding of the fact that we do exist within a much wider system and our behaviour changes may only reduce the impact by so much. So we need to share our attention and efforts between personal change and systems change.

Challenge the big fish! This is not as easy to do as changing to a reusable water bottle I admit. It is not as clear and obvious as the “buy now with one click button”, therefore not quite as convenient. But to have a larger impact, it is necessary. Putting some time into a google search to find local community groups and initiatives that already exist that we can engage with is a place to start. There are policies and politics that we too can campaign around about tax and imports that we can rally against. As one of the audience members stated, if we want our political systems to represent us we have to engage with them. Whether that’s working with them or pushing against, these systems shape the world we live in. So its our responsibility to shape them.

Finally. We can do all these things to change, and we must change, but it was pointed out that we also need to practice self awareness and care in whatever we decide to do. These stories that appeal so strongly, persuade so easily and distract us from what we think is right and what we care about, they run deep. We need to be aware that the need to buy new things is often linked to deeper personal issues, like a fear of the judgment of others. Or the willingness for distraction and escape which may be caused by an uncertainty of change and risk of losing the comforts that ignorance grants. There is an underlying need to challenge ourselves while we challenge the system. To do that sustainably and to play the long game, care must come first.

Thank you everyone who came and contributed to the film club. And to everyone at the MAKERS Project who made it all possible. Please do one thing today and sign email your MP about this declaration to contribute to a political systems change. I challenge you, after signing that form, what else can you do to help tackle over consumption?

But, before I start to waffle, I just wanted to say a massive thank you to the group for their openness, intrigue and true kindness. I felt so welcomed and supported by everyone who gave up their time and offered so much help. And thank you also for letting me partake in your Christmas activities too. You are a truly fantastic bunch of super interesting people, I really hope to bump into you again soon.

I had met Professor Gregory Maio after he appeared on a panel at the recent Wildscreen Festival. The panel was put together by Wendy Darke, founder of True to Nature, and explored the topic of young audiences and asked: how do we connect with them and inspire and engage them with the natural world. It was fascinating to hear the science of values and behaviour change which explained the role of awe and curiosity in facilitating nature connection. As a topic for a panel, it validated the importance of filmmakers working with academics and social scientists when wanting to make more impactful films targeted at children and young people. As you can imagine, the invite to meet Professor Maio’s research group to learn more about studies really excited me.

And they didn’t disappoint! After delivering my small (over enthusiastic and waffly rant) presentation and finishing with a plea for any recommendations, they kindly offered much advice and poignant questions which got me thinking. I wanted to share a few of them below. Warning, they come with no answers as I am definitely still learning!

Long-term bi-directional relationships

What does that even mean? Or refer to?

So, when thinking about audience impact of watching Natural History documentaries, there are several different responses that can be considered. Some include the effect on audience’s emotions, behaviour, attitudes, values and interest. These can be short-term, like instantaneous disgust or fear from a hunt scene, or long-term, like feeding a life long interest in nature. The variety, complexity and temporal effects are very hard to measure. Therefore, in a scientific study they can often be missed or go unrecognised. Particularly as these effects then inter-relate with different areas of the audience’s wider lives in ways that may increase or diminish them. For example, interest in nature may wain if there is a large thunderstorm that prevents them from going outside to experience it in person.

It is this wider, or contextual, relationship between these effects and other parts of the audience’s lives that made my ears perk up. As it may be a two way system. An external love for nature could make people turn on the TV to watch a Natural History series, but it may also lead to an increased likelihood that they would change their behaviours in response to watching one of these series.

Complexity of audience impact

This journey of an audience member is not something I can map out as part of my research. But, it raises interesting questions when thinking about the role of the genre in maintaining or increasing a long-term love and interest in nature. As this may lead them to take more sustainable decisions and actions in the future.

However, as mentioned by one of the lecturers, the impact of that interest in influencing nature-related behaviours is complicated. As they may encourage them to participate in local conservation initiatives, or it may encourage fuel-intensive behaviours such as long-haul flights and travel. But if that tourism then supports the funding of community initiatives and the protection of habitats, the measurement of impact and whether they are “good” or “bad” for the planet becomes rather difficult.

At this point, it was also questioned: who are the audience of the series? As who can benefit from the impacts of awe and nature connection from watching these series? With more content moving onto paid for streaming platforms, virtual nature in the format of Natural History documentaries, is not universally accessible. And which geographical countries may not have access to watch these series? If thought about in the context of potential impact of the series, who in the audience has local access to green or blue space and who can afford to travel elsewhere to experience the type of environments these series present?

I was given many other fascinating questions to think about such as the role of narrative persuasion, to the connection between novelty and awe, the difference between awe and curiosity and the impact of these series on the audiences openness to new experiences. These I will save you from reading and admit I need to go away to read more on as they are new and exciting opportunities for my project.

Before I finish, I must apologise for the lack of photos. I definitely enjoyed the Christmas and night time views of Bath with my eyes without thinking to enjoy with my camera. Trust me. It was beautiful.

Finally, I want to say thank you. I was inspired by everyone’s own projects and very excited by my own. And I was very bruised from the amazing time ice skating with everyone. So I wish them all a great winter break and lots of luck, I look forward to seeing where their feedback and recommendations take me.

In the recent COP29, UK broadcasters released an updated pledge to increase the climate content on TV and to measure its impact. This goes beyond their previous pledge made at COP26, where they acknowledged broadcasters’ “crucial responsibility to help our audiences engage with these challenges” and set out to collectively to communicate climate and inspire audiences to act in their media outputs. But, communicating climate issues without unleashing fear and despair through “doom and gloom” stories is hard. To combat this, genre-mixing is an increasingly popular method used in media to communicate and make entertaining climate. An issue that at the end of the day is complex and anxiety-inducing. Genre-mixing in practice, mostly means mixing different genres with drama formats. This makes stories entertaining by using techniques that are known to attract audiences and increase bingeability. As being “bingeable” means it works on streaming platforms.

So I was keen to show this series as I wanted to hear the audiences thoughts and reactions to:

1. The new climate-drama format
2. The representation of Greenpeace as a well known activist organisation
3. The climate crises messaging

And I wanted to watch the series myself!

I try to be careful to step back from the discussions to see what opinions and debates are risen. This is something I am still learning and it meant that not all of my personal thoughts were discussed. But, as always, I was fascinated in the audiences reactions and really humbled by what I learnt from everyone else. So here are some of my key learnings from the film club audience.

Audience feedback

Here are a few themes from the post screening discussion that often came up:

• Media responsibility – filmmakers and communicators of science and news are accountable for the messages they include in their content. Audience members stated these messages should be truthful to reduce the risk of spreading misinformation which can have a harmful impact on audiences who may not critically engage with their content.
• Good vs Evil storytelling tool – typical to dramatic and suspenseful television, this narrative framework often plays off two characters or causes (in this case Putin and Greenpeace) against each other. This tool often frames someone as “hero” and the other as “villain“, therefore taking an ethical stance by marking one as “good” and the other as “bad”.
• Media persuasion and influence – [SPOILER] sort of. There was a very clear message in the episodes of the immense value of footage as ‘proof’. Media is a powerful platform for communicating true stories that may otherwise go untold. It is an important tool for informing societies of events that might otherwise not be believed. It gives people a voice.

Good vs Evil

This is a dramatic and divisive storytelling tool. It creates tension through battles and often unites groups in the audience who root for the same character. Audience in the film club explained that in the case of “On Thin Ice”, the storytellers built on the current geopolitical stance on Russia and the everyday news coverage of the Ukrainian war. The series therefore utilises existing tensions to create an entertaining story.

However, as a storytelling tool, some audience members discussed how this technique creates two definite and binary sides. The divisive tool, depending on how it is used in dramatic storytelling, reflects and enhances existing divides and differences in society. It is divisive in how it can be used to alienate a proportion of the public, depending on which side of the split the audience relate with. Therefore, it risks contributing to existing polarisation between different communities.

Students who had studied science communication and had an understanding of behaviour change, emphasised the risk this creates when used in climate communication. To affect successful behaviour change, it is important to try and build bridges between groups in society. Not drive wedges. One audience member commented that the hard work of bring people together and encouraging communication across these divides is what is needed to bring about transformative change. And a change that is just and values different peoples’ perspectives and experiences.

This critique of the storytelling technique does not say it is “wrong” or “bad”. But that it must be used carefully and practiced with awareness of how it may impact audiences. It is a very effective tool in for dramatic storytelling, but is it the best if you want to leave a strong climate message that can lead to effective and positive social change?

Media responsibility and influence

The “shock” tactic is one that we in the Western world are all aware of. Whether it is clever marketing techniques getting us to consume more products, media outlets and/or click bait, we are somewhat used to being shocked. But, footage of events around the world that we may not see without the platform of the media is very valuable. It is an effective way of amplifying voices and sharing necessary stories. In some cases this can be an important way of increasing awareness and can lead to meaningful action to attempt to prevent injustice.

The film club audience spoke to both the importance of sharing new and shocking content to reveal hidden truths, and to the fact that our media drenched society are highly desensitised. They commented that the stimulus required to shock us is now a lot higher than it may have been in 2013 when the story of the Arctic 30 broke out, that this documentary series is based on. The audience discussed how the highly oversaturated social media lives of today have developed a much higher level of tolerance and have much shorter attention spans. Therefore, the dramatic framing of the story may be what is needed to trigger a response.

Despite our desensitised society, the audience pointed out “without the footage, nobody cares”. Footage makes a story believable and often emotionally relatable. But how the story is framed, how the footage is edited, can effect the framing of it’s “truth” and the message the audience take away. This linked back into the theme of “responsibility” as the communicators/filmmakers have the power to influence what the audience believe. The accuracy of the storytelling and the reliability and trust in the platform communicating it, affect the believability of the content. Therefore, the audience felt very passionate about the responsibility thus the accountability of the media. Particularly because of the very real and current threat of misinformation.

The recent trend to make content more entertaining through dramatic telling, to encourage bingeability so to gain viewers, was debated in the discussion. This technique both can be culturally impactful as it appeals to an audience that may not hear or choose to watch that content otherwise. So it expands the audience diversity. But, by making the stories more entertaining it encourages a sense of “perceived learning” where audiences believe they are learning more than they actually are. It also builds awareness, but not critical engagement.

Some film club members explained that a responsible media platform should offer truth and let the audience develop their own perspectives so they can engage in the content however they feel they have capacity to within their lives. This way you encourage a diversity of perspectives and empower audiences in making their own informed choices. But others questioned whether this limits audience reach as you may only be preaching to a choir of already converted who would already choose to watch the media content.

Those from a behaviour change background questioned, if the purpose of this content is to increase awareness of an audience, what happens next? What makes audiences want to act on that awareness and engage with what they have learnt in practical ways? This feels like a particularly important question for a documentary series about activists engaging in direct action to practically act on the urgent climate crises. The film club audience questioned, what is the impact of entertainment and encouraging audience awareness? So I question, what is the impact the filmmakers and broadcasters wanted the series to have?

My response

I want to clarify, this is not all of the themes that came out of the discussion. There were many. But it felt like these were important ones (from my perspective) to share. The film club audience may feel otherwise. Some of the others included climate action and activism and the role of the individual and governments in change. Also, the conversation could have easily gone on for a lot longer. If it had we may have reached different conclusions.

But, my overall response, is just massive appreciation for the people who come to these screenings. Who share their valuable perspectives. And who seem to enjoy it too. I love holding this club and I learn so much. So, I end 2024 by saying thanks to everyone who helps and comes along. And, I will end 2024 by finishing the rest of the episodes of this series too!

“In every action there is a success as people see it and it makes them thing”

“There are so many ways to make change” was one of my favourite pieces of feedback. The film’s overarching narrative is about a tree occupation in the Altdorf forest in Southern Germany. Where a group of activists built a community settlement to prevent the forest from being cleared for a gravel pit. The film captures a great number of stories of different people responding in different ways to interconnected issues that they all cared about. At its heart, the film invites you to share a space with this community of activist who all hold similar values and a deep rooted care for people and our planet.

From bin diving to save food thrown out by supermarkets, then cooking it up for community meals or giving it away at market stalls. To marching through towns dressed as historical characters. To hanging banners off of massive cathedrals and trees in public areas. The diversity, creativity and joy behind their actions is clear. These characters felt so human and easy to relate and empathise with. You can’t help put support their efforts and want to take part, despite its challenge, as the film truly illustrates the joy of this community.

The pride these activists take in educating themselves about the law and their rights, so they can defend themselves when arrested or in court, was something we all found inspiring and motivating. It highlighted how important it was to understand and question the policies and systems in place that don’t work to protect us. Don’t protect our future. And don’t protect our planet.

The film club members commented on feeling encouraged by the activists’ creativity and courage. But also by their long-term approach to their protest activities. No one action will fix the massive interconnected mesh of problems, but each one plants a seed and is part of a sustained effort to continuously work towards a better future.

“Voting is important. But direct action is needed to sway the trend that becomes the change.”

The struggle of feeling frustrated and not knowing what to do to effectively make change is a relatable one. Particularly in the case of the past few weeks of news. The problems feel so vast and complex, its easy to get lost in the unknowing and feel clueless about where to put your energies towards. But that is what I found great hope in the message carried by the stories at the heart of this film.

The audience members were keen to find out the response of the filmmakers and activists to the global politics and conventions, such as COP, to hear how effective they felt they were. And their responses echoed the need for community, long-term efforts and continued grassroots response to challenge the broken global systems. As these conferences will not make the changes that are needed fast enough. And they need direct action to “sway the trend”. Alone these political systems are not enough.

It was clear that the community’s actions shown in the film and those that have taken place after, were hard but galvanizing. Bringing a deep sense of agency and connection with others in and out of the movement, and with their environment. This idea felt a little contagious, in a good way for me and others watching.

What’s next?

The audience managed to fit in the final important question before the nights end: what’s next? Whether as part of the film project or in another campaign, each of our guests showed clear dedication and passion for continuing their activist efforts. What I found inspiring was how they described the impact the film and the conversations they were having with audiences. It demonstrated how positive of a vehicle the film was for telling stories, encouraging empathy and planting seeds. It also highlighted the great value of conversation, in bridging gaps across unlikely divides and fostering new relationships. And, I want to add, in making people feel less alone and a little less lost.

To follow the activists or find out more about the campaign and film please take a look at @baumbesetzung.ravensburg and @menschenaufbaeume.film

All photos are stills from the film, as thanks so the directors Christian Fussenegger and Bernadette Hauke.

And (not so secretly) I wanted to go in see how we felt about the role of the adventurer – the classic explorer and hero. A story or mono-myth that is often discussed to be problematic, but informs many of our traditional and favourite myths and modern tales.¹

So, for my second Reel Nature environmental film club of the academic year, I screened Chasing Ice (2012), directed by Jeff Orlowski. The film is about famed photographer, James Balog, who traveled and photographed remote areas of the Arctic with his team in his mission to capture undeniable evidence of how the changing climate is changing our planet. This film documents Balog’s dangerous journey and his efforts with his team to photograph the melting glaciers, which is all part of his Extreme Ice Survey project. Aesthetically breath taking and emotional, this film had a big impact across media and society and my film club audience too.

“Inspired.”

When asking audiences how they felt after watching, it was rather unanimous that the audiences’ main response was that they found the film inspirational. Many commented of the sadness they felt when they watched Balog’s journey and when they were faced with his bleak and picturesque photographs of the melting glaciers. They spoke of the power of these images to shock and engage audiences, beyond that of facts and figures, and how they effectively capture emotions that enabled an audience to engage and empathise with the issue at their heart.

Despite the widespread emotional impact, not everyone was able to resonate and connect with the main characters – a small group of white, Western, upper/middle class males which isn’t relatable for many audiences. Furthermore, the topic of the melting Arctic is so far from all of our lived experience, so it was hard to feel a personal connection with that unknown natural landscape. The group acknowledged that the film may impact global audiences differently due to its lack of relatability and the amount of science and scientists included. However, the emotional journey and the strength of the final message seemed to translate well within our film club with each member personally feeling impacted by the film.

Role of the explorer

It was Balog’s personal sacrifice and the risks he took that many of the film club’s audience quoted as their main source of inspiration. They saw this sacrifice as a demonstration of deep care for the planet. And it was this, alongside his photographs, that helped to communicate the true urgency of the mission.

Balog’s commitment seemed to communicate and make accessible emotions of fear and grief that where reflected by the risks he took within the landscape to get his desired footage. It is his physical and personal ‘heroes journey’ that created an arch that the audience members felt they could relate and empathise with. In this form, the film provided a space or container for the audience to feel like they were part of something larger than just them. A community of like-minded people who held similar values and cared for our planet. A space where they wouldn’t be judged or have to justify and explain themselves. They knew that the film club was a bit of an echo-chamber and the self-selecting audience members would belong to the same bubble. But they questioned if he was able to use the film to target wider audiences, they too might feel the same connection.

Despite my questioning of the heroes tale, the role these stories play as vessels for audiences emotions, for making them feel less alone in these complex interconnected global crises, is something I learnt from the screening. And something I will consider more in my future film clubs and research.

What will you do next?

As a campaign film, it is created with a key purpose, one to create impact in some way. Impact is notoriously hard to measure as it can happen in a diverse range of areas, such as the communities and landscape you film in, the audience that watch it, and the policy surrounding the main topic. This is just a few possible options. But without some way of measuring these changes, it is hard to prove any impact actually took place².

There is evidence in the film itself of the impact Balog’s project impacted different audiences. And there is evidence across media that people really enjoyed the film, it has won a lot of awards and been screened at many festivals. But the only way I really have to see what impact it has on audiences is through the discussions in my film clubs. So I asked them: what will you do next?

There was a very mixed variety of responses! From going further into environmental science education to learn more about the issues in the film. To making a film or their own media campaign to spread the word. Some commented about wanting to go and see these locations and travel the world, which they admitted was a strangely ironic reaction – the wanting to “see these places before they disappear”. It ignited a love to travel and explore the world, it is “now or never” as when we are older many of these places will no longer exist.

One of the responses, which I must admit resonated with me, was wanting to talk about the climate and ecological crises more in every day life. It was brave what Balog and his team did. And through their bravery they found a way to tell an important story. It feels like a brave thing to create an open conversation with people outside of our bubble, in a place we know we will be judged and where we might judge others, about what we care about. As if we create a space for open conversation with other bubbles, they might find an emotional connection too. One that can help to bridge a gap between different groups communities that haven’t yet heard a story they feel they can relate to.

1. Here is a helpful overview, but worth a bit of research if you are interested: https://bigthink.com/high-culture/monomyth-heros-journey-campbell/ ︎
2. To read more about Impact Production in film, television and media I recommend you look at this brilliant resource from the Doc Society: https://impactguide.org/ ︎

Main picture credit: https://ryanmariotti.com/chasing-ice/

I run a monthly environmental film club at UWE for students and staff to talk about the issues of climate change, environmental crises and social justice. I use the films as spring boards for group discussions, which question:

1. What impact these films have on all of us as audiences?
2. How we engage with these crises-based stories?
3. What (if anything) we feel we want to do next?

But really, these film clubs are just ways to talk about stuff that is big, scary and not always easy to discuss with friends and family. And that’s what they ended up becoming last year when I ran them, places to chat and be sad sometimes but to find hope through connecting with others.

“Things already exist!”

From seaweed¹ (my personal favourite), to local solar energy grids in Bangladesh, to farmers in Australia diversifying their crops to increase the health of their soils – 2040 captures the stories of different climate and environmental solutions. And as summed up beautifully by an audience member, “they already exist!”

Determined to tell a more hopeful story, one where we have fixed these complexed problems, Director Damon Gameau travels around the world to learn about about the solutions to these crises that already exist. Addressing the film to his 4 year old daughter, Gameau uses VFX and animation to visualise the world he wants her to live. He uses a technique called fact-based dreaming to create a world where humanity has made the changes needed to mitigate and adapt to these crises. What better film to start the year with.

But how did the audience react?

The response was overwhelmingly positive and incredibly hopeful! Students discussed how the film had empowered and engaged them with its informative and inspirational message. Many seemed energised by the positive message that contrasts the ‘doom and gloom’ crises narratives often pasted all over media. There was also surprise, particularly from those studying environmental topics, that there were so many new stories or solutions out there that they had never heard of. The variety of initiatives that were community-led and the innovative descriptions of the science and theory behind these potential fixes left us all really motivated – me included.

However, it was rather dreamy. Despite the variety of solutions that Gameau managed to film, we were all left curious about some topics that we were personally concerned with that were briefly mentioned or not covered at all. A big one missing was waste.

If we are to replace all of our old cars and tech with new eco-friendly alternatives and if we are to live in shiny new insulated houses, what happens to all the old ones? There was a big focus on all the technology that can replace what we already use. But a lot of us questioned what waste systems will be introduced to reuse or recycle the old materials. With debates around landfill vs incineration and the environmental damage inflicted by both, is it realistic that we can just replace everything? And what about the resources needed to make all these new materials, mine all the minerals and the equity of the labour behind it.

Energy was a large focus of the film. With beautiful demonstrations of the potential local networks of renewable energy grids for transforming and empowering rural communities, but even urban ones too. This requires massive changes in infrastructure, if houses and roads are being adapted or removed to build new sustainable alternatives, which generates a lot of new green jobs. Here the film mentions the need for training engineers and fossil fuel workers to ensure a just transition for the labour force too. Though, like waste, the education and policy needed to ensure climate justice in this area are lightly touched upon

Community was a key theme that ran throughout the documentary. And one of the topics the film club felt quite strongly about was sharing. There was a lot of support towards public ownership of things like transport and energy systems, but as described in the film, independence and personal ownership is a big part of modern society. It is deeply entwined with our identity, pride and egos too. To own a car, phone, shoes, watch – they are all symbols of status in a capitalist society. Though we agreed that a lot of objects spend most of their time going unused – like my hairdryer – the logistics and practicality of sharing these items didn’t always feel so straight forward. This is are also deeply tied into ideas of safety, access, privilege and trust.

Would these shared items need rules and regulations? Would people be punished for not following them? Would these items always be cared for and respected?
And would they put additional strain on individuals who have less access or are time poor?

Several students pointed out how rich Bristol seemed as a location for community and sharing. With services to repair or donate old items and lots of local initiatives they could engage with. This knowledge and awareness (especially at the beginning of the student year) was extremely encouraging and others found it empowering to realise that some of these fixes already exist in our local areas. We just have to engage with them.

Here I must acknowledge that this film was most likely targeted at an audience similar to the community that Gameau and his 4 year old daughter lived in. It focused heavily on the lives of those who would live in areas that may not suffer as much from the impacts of the climate and environmental disasters that we would face even if we did make all these changes by 2040. I do question whether a hopeful message could be too strong if not rooted enough in the realism of the devastation these crises will cause. Is there such a thing as too much hope – delaying change with the message that we don’t need to do anything as everything already exists and others are already doing the work of change.²

I am not being realistic. As an hour and a half documentary that aims to showcase hopeful solutions that “already exist” and offer inspiration, it does a very good job. It is not there to provide the answers. That is, in a way, what it tries to engage audiences in with its online platform and hybrid format – encourage audiences to participate in climate action.

What will you do next?

Trying to give my group discussion its own narrative flow, I ended by asking the group what will they do next? What is the impact of the film on them? It was amazing hearing the students feedback about how they planned to incorporate some of the solutions into their lives by eating less meat, getting involved in urban vegetable planting projects and local community initiatives.

However, there was a final comment that threaded through the discussion that I want to share here, to leave others to reflect on. We as a group agreed with the film and its message, many of us shared the same core values, but how do we authentically work and live a life guided by these values? This requires critical reflection, slowing down and sometimes going against the grain of what we consider normal in todays society. And this is the challenge that we were left with at the end of the film club.

Overall, I want to say a MASSIVE THANK YOU to everyone who attended and my wonderful crew who support me with the running, organising and spreading the word. I feel very lucky to be able to do this and a little bit less alone every time I do. I hope that this film club can provide a place to share experiences and knowledge from our diverse backgrounds, and find connection with others as together we explore the uncertainty created by the complexity of these crises³. Where there is no right answer or single solution, but there are many individuals and communities working to build and reimagine a more hopeful future.

Thank you.

To finish this on a hopeful note, here is the toad I saw when cycling home. Hopeful as I hoped I didn’t run it over by accident (it was very well camouflaged as a leaf), then I slowly ushered it off the cycle path.

1. Here is a link to the seaweed farm project featured in the film https://www.climatefoundation.org/ ︎
2. Interested in ways we risk delaying climate action? Here is a scientific paper on climate delay https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/global-sustainability/article/discourses-of-climate-delay/7B11B722E3E3454BB6212378E32985A7
   And here is the cartoon version! ︎
3. Want to find out more about the role film clubs can have in inspiring and empowering students? Here is a great article – https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504622.2024.2314044?s=09#abstract ︎

Maybe not completely.

But, this years Critical Studies in Television Conference really made a strong case for online conferences, reducing travel and increasing accessibility. Run by Edge Hill University’s Television Research Group, this slow conference was scheduled over two weeks and mostly recorded, allowing speakers from all around the world to take part. This slower layout also allows those with differing time commitments and responsibilities to take part. Opening the door to audiences who can’t afford to travel or aren’t able to with the care or other commitments.

TV saves the world!

Themed on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, the 2 week conference really did explore the potential of a large variety of Television productions to inspire change and make an impact that may help ‘save the world’. With each paper themed on one or more of the 17 goals, researchers explored the ways their projects or chosen series interconnected with targets like ‘Climate Action’ and ‘Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure’ that aim to create “peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.”¹

One of my favourite panels was ‘Representing Climate Change: An industry perspective‘² – which I have to admit is where I borrowed the ‘save the world’ theme from (thank you). This panel linked beautifully with my own project with its focus on the commissioning and filmmaking practices of the television production industry. Here I was introduced to ideas such as ‘trojan horse’ storytelling that are story-led rather than issue-led – as the topics of climate justice can be beautifully interwoven into almost any content. But it also opened my eye eyes to the mind and decision making process of commissioners, as I began to question what would be considered ‘worthy’ content or what was the commissioning ‘norm’ for Natural History documentaries? And how could the desire to commission hopeful messages be balanced with creating space to discuss reality – without messages becoming overly ‘doom and gloomy’?

This panel has also sent me on my own journey exploring what does it mean to empathise with the main character (also if they happen to be non-human)? How does it affect our ability to remain critical of the message? And what is the impact or the hero or anti-hero character on the audience’s engagement with behaviour change? What is our agency as audience members embedded within our human communities and much larger ‘ecosystems’? And how is this influenced by what we see on screen?

All are questions that are prodding and shaping my own research, and there are no answers I can pretend to have yet. But I can say a massive thank you for the seeds of inspiration all the presenters planted! My mind was truly boggled. And the magic of a slow conference is that you have the time to reflect afterwards!

I save the world?

I really don’t.

And this is me in the past trying to (not at the conference!)… with empathy and slowing down. I must have predicted I was going to write this blog…

As the first conference I have presented at, it was an amazing opportunity to consider how the topic I research, Natural History documentaries, might help to nudge people in the right direction!

The conference’s theme got me thinking about how the impact of these blockbuster wildlife series and their filmmaking process closely links with goal 12 ‘Responsible Production and Consumption’.

This could have gone in many ways, and I could have easily written an hour long ramble, but I was tied to 20 mins! Just briefly a few of the topics I considered discussing:

• The impact of BBC’s final episode of Blue Planet II – This episode changed how audiences thought about disposable plastics and encouraged the start of new habits – like reusing plastic bags. This example of sustainable behaviour change shifted consumption patterns and caused companies to change their production patterns too.
• Carbon calculators – Broadcasters and production companies are increasingly practicing more climate aware filmmaking practices trying to cut down on their carbon footprint and their waste. With organisations such as BAFTA’s albert creating amazing resources and training to help production calculate and cut their CO2 emissions, sustainable practices are now becoming the norm.
• Impact production – Amongst filmmakers, there is a growing interest in Impact production. This covers all from the impact a production has on its filming location, to the impact it has on its audience, and the wider socio-political impact of its message. It is very hard to concisely define ‘impact’ but Doc Society’s toolkit does a really good job of providing the practical steps filmmakers can take.

Overall, it encouraged me to question – what does it mean to responsibly produce television content and how/can audiences responsibly consume what they watch?

My presentation was far from perfect! I was ill, I had a big nervous sweat on and I needed a 2 hour nap afterwards (thanks to the magic of slow conferences yet again). But, I had some truly phenomenal questions in response! I was so relieved and excited by the engagement of others and their interest – particularly in the role of Sir David Attenborough!

Gratitude saves the world!

This one I believe a little more.

I want to say a massive thank you to Edge Hill University and the amazing organisers from the Television Research Group for the fantastic and eye opening two weeks. And the beyond brilliant organisation and communication! It was a joy to attend and a real pleasure to present at.

Thank you for making my first experience of presenting such a good one!

1. Want to find out more about the history of the 17 SDGs? https://sdgs.un.org/goals#history ︎
2. Here are links to find out more about the speakers of this brilliant panel: https://www.gcu.ac.uk/aboutgcu/universitynews/work-starts-on-climate-change-tv-drama-phds
   https://www.brown.edu/academics/college/swearer/programs/royce-fellowship/48/fellows/zo%C3%AB-fuad ︎