MediaStorm publishes Marcus Bleasdale's Rape of a Nation

Year ago I was teaching African Politic,Economic & Social matters in Abidjan, at the National School of Administration.

I did gave to my students a geological map of Africa, asking them to point the future zones of conflict according to minerals ressources : they did foresaw what we do see today.

Just got the email from Marcus this morning. I had the priviledge to see this in December when Marcus was in town:

5.4 million people folks…

THIS IS REQUIRED VIEWING, PLEASE!

b

incredible good story, photography and multimedia! good job!

A must see for sure, check out Marcus’s website for more great work!

I drove a round trip of 760miles this weekend just to see this exhibition in Newcastle (UK) a day before it closed – worth every minute of the long drive. Marcus’s narration on this further compliments a brilliant photo essay.

Highly recommend anyone with the opportunity to see this work to make the effort, go see and be inspired!

A mighty tour de force. VII are so lucky to have him.

An excellent production with brilliant photos and a strong narration.

Though I have to say I found the couple video clips distracting and pointless, the cuts to him talking were well done. They even added to the overall power of the work by connecting him to it but the few scenes of people walking around et cetera detracted from the excellent quality of the photos.

One understands the idea of less being more when it comes to photographs so why throw in the video just because its possible, is it just because Brian Storm is so adamant about video that he is trying to force it upon people? As I said the narration scenes were well done and they did not take from the photos.

Anyway, an excellent work but it confirms my feelings that video can not replace stills.

Thanks guys, much appreciated. In response to Sascha, I value your feedback, but I must say Brian did not force video on me or anyone else. I have been shooting video for many years in DRC for clients who have requested it. Multimedia allows us the flexibility of all mediums. I feel that video gives us that “sense of place” sometimes that it is difficult to represent in stills. Sound is so much of a valuable experience of my life in DRC that I wanted people to hear what it is like when 25,000 people run from fighting in the hills, or when fear during an ambush limits your life to the sound of your breathing, or when a women whispers her experience of being violated constantly for months. All impossible tasks with stills. They do not replace stills but they varnish the experience and hopefully, therefore, our understanding. We are journalists with many tools and I say lets use them and use them wisely.

Just know listening to the BBC when I came across this post.. The BBC is reporting 45 thousand people per month are dying in the DRC. Marcus, a powerful project. It is awesome to see the force of a project like yours in it’s education and impact in the world we live.
Heart Pounding!

My God.

excellent work…heart-pounding indeed.

i just read the piece about Darfur in the Alerts section. why is there a Save Darfur campaign but no “Save the Congo” campaign? it’s worth a read.

Marcus, this is an extraordinary piece of work – congratulations! I must say i also found the video inserts disrupted the flow a bit. the rhythm of b&w stills creates a certain mood of its own and i found myself having to change gear when it switched to video – almost like hearing another language. nonetheless, a brilliant piece on this nearly forgotten war.

The Congo is one of the great tragedies of modern Africa, from the horrors of Belgian occupation, the deeply cynical american disposal of Lumumba in favour of Mobutu – you can see the disastrous cycle of violence being repeated over and over through the generations – a country thats been raped again and again and again. I’m curious to know if you’ve read The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver, and if you found it an accurate portrayal?

Yeah but he’s right in so far as hearing the rounds whizz by and being able to make out the “crack thump” makes you feel a little “nervous”. :)

Marcus, thank you for being there, your heart wrenchingly powerful imagery well conveys the horror of the situation.

A great and deep work.

marcus:

i finally picked up a copy of “one hundred years of darkness,” powerful stuff. keep taking pictures of the story no one seems to care (or at least do anything) about…but should.

best,
dave

Amazing! I too was surprised by the transitions from still to video and from b&w to color… But, for me, it rings true for the message—gives a more rounded perspective… Not very different from the transitions in Dupont’s powerful submission that won him the ‘07 W. E. Smith Grant.

Sad, deep, crying, story, congratulations Marcus!

It’s highly produced, and if anything, it’s a bit creepy to watch such a clearly scripted and performed “interview” with the photographer. Towards the end, it really seems to degenerate into an infomercial for huge NGO clients like UNICEF and UNHCR. The advice to “consumers” to ask questions of “the retailer…when you’re buying gold and silver” to pressure “an industry that is sometimes not as diligent as it can be” comes off as a not very confrontational stance that sounded like it was written by a corporate lawyer. Beyond that, the montage of flower photos with the piano music is really tacky, as is the “african” drumming that opens the piece.

All that said, it will probably do very well with the consumers.

The images are stunning and important, my jaw dropped.

I agree on a few points most certainly the interview; I sometime feel that the image should speak for the photographer and not the other way around. This is not to say the Mr. Bleasdale comes off arrogant or ridiculous, he most certainly does NOT, it is more a commentary that often the photographer comes off as too subjective, controlled; an instrument of punditry. Much like the commentary towards Nachtwey’s narration in the “War Photographer”, I believe there has been some discussion about the “witness” comment and has lead to some heightened cynicism with regards to the work we photographers do; is it all ego or really an attempt to catalyze change.

A bit off topic, but I really dig what Mediastorm has created by merging elements of media into a “new style” of publishing. I think that complex visual shorts are an excellent means of telling a story; incredible potential for mobile media and the web and new audiences.

It’s not a criticism of the images, which are quite good. To a “sophisticated consumer of photography”, they can sometimes come across as Salgado imitations, but that’s not a fatal flaw. The criticism is of the presentation, in which the photographer comes across as an actor, and the package comes across as less journalistic than advertorial. Hearing the photographer earnestly praise the “great work” of Human Rights Watch, then watching Human Rights Watch appear in the production credits has the effect of undermining the credibility of both parties. Again, it’s not a fatal flaw, as the contemporary standards of journalism are relatively low, and many people don’t expect it to be more than a “style”, or a product, made to be consumed.

Regarding Mediastorm, whether you like their work or not, its a stretch to claim that they have “created a new style of publishing by merging elements of modern media”. Combining video, photographs, music, and talking head interviews isn’t a conceptual breakthrough, it’s called television. Marketing it to cellphones or ipods, or playing it on a computer monitor instead of a television is just that – marketing. That’s why Mediastorm bills itself as a “multimedia” production studio rather than a documentary production studio, or an audiovisual production house – calling oneself a multimedia producer sounds more innovative, and more marketable than saying “I make slideshows for the internet”.

I thought that the photographs were excellent and the presentation portrayed the situation as horrible but I share the same views of the above that the advice directed to the consumer to ask questions about the gold and silver they were buying was a letdown. of course it isn’t on mr bleasedale to tell anyone how to act or feel, the pictures say enough themselves, but i just felt that the advice fell short. stunning photographs as usual.

i just saw a documentary covering UN activity in the congo during ‘02-03 and I feel the frustration of members of the organization as to how the international community and it’s major players cover their eyes and ears as to what is going on, as well as the majority of major media’s compliance in largely ignoring the region. maybe in another 10 years hollywood can make a great movie about it…

Dor, the only thing cheaper than human despair is cynicism. You can quote me on that. Your comments seem to me typical of the reactionary backlash that so often shadows any humanitarian initiative in these oh-so-bored and blase times. It’s easy to snipe from the sidelines, anyone can do it, no great talent required.

You actually think these images are “quite good”? Damned with faint praise if I ever heard it. What high standards you must have. “Salgado imitations”? after Serra Pelada, anyone photographing an open cast gold mine will be seen as referencing Salgado, but apart from that I dont see the connection. The work here is much darker, more visceral and – to my eyes – devoid of the self-conscious aestheticism that Salgado is often accused of.

You think having HRW in the credits undermines the credibility of both parties? The way you write, you’d think he was plugging Pepsi or Microsoft. “less journalistic than advertorial”? Advertorial for what I ask you? Human greed, despair, torment, brutality, corruption, unspeakable tragedy … ? Just the sort of ‘product’ that does “very well with the consumers”, I’m sure. Good Christ, did you really write that?

If you find it relevant to level these sort of comments at Mediastorm, what is there left to say about CNN? Or perhaps you’re just so post-modern-cool that you no longer believe anything can be said about anything, that there’s no ground left worth standing on?

Dor, and for that what you have written, you needed to create a new LS account?

Journalism does not, not ever, mean (a priori) indifference. Documentation, Reportage does not, not ever, mean (a priori) indifference. The act of reporting, the act of witnessing, the act of articulation and the act of producing real and uncontestable artifacts of a moment in time, particularly a legacy of atrocity, becomes, A PRIORI, human advocacy. Since when have we forgotten that. In our anemic and sterile and superficial understanding of what “documentation”, “reporting” means?

The human tale is one of speech: language to set the gapping silence ringing, to speak of those who, returned back to soil and sand and bone and dust, who have not. we are a creature of speech, even with tongue-cameras silence: that of speaking out against the flat and often unbreachable silence around which all meaning and matter of things are. The moment we utter our first syllables, the moment we dip the berried-stain of our alphabet against the peeled wood of paper, the moment we knot a camera around our noosed-necks and snap, IS the moment we begin to speak on the nature of things. There is NO INDIFFERENCE, NO OBJECTIVITY, NO ADVOCACY-LESS-NESS, not ever.

Forget about the “photographic strength” of Marcus’ photographs (Marcus’ work is as far from Salgado’s as one photographer to another can imagine, aesthetically, visually, spiritually, and I am surprised that another photographer could have made this connection, other than the obvious that certain topics and the photographic relationship to them are tethered forever; ironically, i experienced the photo above of the man who was tortured as being a sibling image to those taking during the American civil war, and they reminded me of images that had been made of lynching images: does this vitiate the substance of either Marcus’ remarkable work or the story?) for that is a non-issue.

The issue raised about awareness and the introduction of HRW within this presentation is also an erroneous one. This is a presentation, a “film” of what has occurred in the DRC: a long, howl of a speech into the dark of our collective ignorance, an ignornance that is more concerned with the death of a few Gorillas (Yes, National Geographic, wake the fuck up!) than of 5.4 million people. There is NO INDIFFERENCE when speaking upon things. That Marcus has chosen, in this presentation, to utter his experience and the experience of those with whom he has spent the last 8 years (including discussing the work of HRW) does not at all vitiate the “standard” of reporting. To the contrary, all those who are involved are part of the story and that is what this presentation details, in still (photos), voice, in name.

In fact, all the “cheeky” elements that were so derisively detailed above by Dor, to the contrary, further bespeaks that which is so troubling: our amnesia, our indifference, our capacity for saddling our own definitions for that of which we are not a part. All the “imperfections” of the presentation (and i agree there are) BETTER BESPEAKS the plight of the Congolese and the life lifed as well as Marcus, as a photographer (he is NOT a reporter but a person that has dedicated his life to that forlorn nation) and a person deeply involved…

this isn’t some slick job produced by a photographer who went in shot gorgeous pics and that pell-mell produced a slick promo to show how smart/great he is, it is much much simpler, much more sloppy, much more broken, much more humane, much more damning:

it is the, as best as can be managed, controlled rage of a man who has tried with all the resources he has to bring light to the death and carnage and destruction that he has witnessed and has dedicated his life to help…

Revisit Shoah and tell me what constitutes support of people who attempt to speak about the onslaught of the gaping darkness that engulfs….

That Dor has seen and viewed and nibbled upon the exterior of the presentation without having understood the reasons behind the decisions made in this piece is an indication already of how lost we’ve become in our sophistication:

we’ve squared ourselves by a 1/3….

that’s pitiful….

there is NO OBJECTIVITY, there is only the attempt and the hope to peel back the dark, Marcus’ brave, committed and profound Story of the people that he has dedicated his life to is critical and important and, for me, beyond reproach…not perfect, but Essential….

.that’s more infinitely and humanely important…
b

I should say, also, that I know Marcus personally and while his “appearance” in the interview might look “performed”, i can tell you that it is not, Yo: that
’s Marcus!!! (sorry bro, ‘gotta spill the beans): he’s a crazy-intense man with a river-wide stare and a gallop-clip to the stammer of his words (laughter and rage simultaneously butting in the cave of his expression: if you can hear that: think of George Best the footballer, shaggy beauty of words and awkward strength): and what may look like “performed” is in fact not, but I would say the “awkwardness” of Marcus: he’s an amazing, overthetopferocity that digs and for people who dont get that or dont feel comfortable around that (i do), it mayb appear that way…let me tell u: that aint “performed”...that’s, dig it or not, the nature of his buzzed-up bones :))!!

b

very powerful. All respect to Marcus and his dedication to people of DRC, who seem to be otherwise forgotten by most of the world.

For me it is not how the pictures feel or how the viewer of photography is visually stimulated by what they see, it is about the message they collectively carry with them. Making an image appealing increases the chances of someone noticing it and in turn them being moved to some sort of action.

Philip Jones Griffiths once said

‘To me, there is no point in pressing the shutter unless you are making some caustic comment on the incongruities of life. That is what photography is all about. It is the only reason for doing it.’

Those words are why I do what I do. They make me constantly think about what I want to say with my work.

I do want discussion and allowing people to view your work will, inevitably, draw criticism. That is understandable.

But, I challenge anyone to go to DRC and not be moved, angered and disturbed, by what they experience there. So much so, that you want to change it, immediately.

But, that is impossible.

Instead we show our work, anyway we can, talk to those responsible for some part of the problem. Be an advocate.

If making people aware of where their natural resources are coming from changes their behavior, which in turn means less children are dying in eastern DRC then, I will tell people to be aware. I am not preaching, I am simply stating facts. It is surprising how many do not know what is going on there and if they do, they want to know how to alter their behavior in order to change what is going on there.

HRW reports together with these images have forced gold mining companies to cease their purchases of gold from Eastern DRC and therefore stopping the flow of ready cash to buy weapons, that in turn played a large part in stopping the the conflict in Ituri Province. Is that a bad thing?

I make no apologies for working together with organizations like Human Rights Watch, MSF, IRC, UNICEF in order to enhance their message, because it is my message also. Who does not want to:

-Be dedicated to protecting the human rights of people around the world.

- Uphold political freedom, to protect people from inhumane conduct in wartime, and to bring offenders to justice.

-Investigate and expose human rights violations and hold abusers accountable.

-Challenge governments and those who hold power to end abusive practices and respect international human rights law.

If I can be a part of that then sign me up! And anyway I can use my work to further that aim, I will use it.

I don’t care what people think of multi- video anything. Marcus has done a great service to the world by his photographic work in the DRC. I recall when his book first came out. The subsequent articles and photos of the DRC and its cruel inhumane environment, is a prime example of mans poor stewardship of this world.

Thanks Marcus!

your project is important for photography history… as important as Minamata by Eugene Smith…

hope you reach your aim in the end….so there will be peace forever in our world…

A

I appear to have hurt some feelings, which wasn’t my intention, so my apologies if my tone was unduly severe.

Marcus – you don’t have to apologize for your client list. I happen to share your view that Human Rights Watch does good and important work. I also think that it’s in poor taste to plug them in the presentation, and that’s what makes the piece feel “advertorial”, and detracts from its impact. UNICEF and UNHCR on the other hand, are notorious for wasting staggering amounts of money in their operations, so I did find it strange that of all the NGOs you could have mentioned, that you chose them to promote. In the aid and development community, they actually are considered to be the “Pepsi and Microsoft” of the disaster industry, and with all your time in the region, it’s odd that you’re not aware of that.

I offered a critique on two levels – photographically, the work is very good, and I think it’s the best presentation that either you or Mediastorm have made so far. At moments, some photographs do look like versions of more iconic images by Salgado. If your work evokes a more established photographer without taking it further, then it falls short, and all photographers have the simple task of building on the work that previous generations, rather than repeating it. Other photos, more for subject matter than aesthetics, recall recent work by Kadir Van Louhizen in his Diamond Matters project. I don’t know whose work came first, and there’s room for both, but his multimedia piece certainly predates yours, so as a photographer and a journalist, these are things to be aware of, and I’m sure you are. As a multimedia piece, targeting a larger audience than photographers, neither of these issues are critical. Regarding the other issues I pointed out, you can take the advice or leave it as you wish. Probably most of your fans won’t be put off by the ethno-appropriate drumming music that announces “Africa”, (or the sitar music that other producers seem to find necessary to accompany pieces on South Asians, etc), but some exotic ethnic types like myself find it a bit annoying.

This is a critique of your work, not a condemnation, and it certainly doesn’t follow that because I see flaws in the work that I’m “indifferent” to the DRC, human suffering, or that I’m dismissive of advocacy. On the contrary, the people who have questioned this work haven’t criticized advocacy or the goals you listed (challenging govts, holding abusers accountable, etc), they’ve pointed out that your advocacy is surprisingly passive. You don’t name a single responsible corporation or government (aside from the DRC’s perhaps) or call for any concrete action. The extent of your call to action, as far as this media piece goes, is suggesting that people do their shopping for precious metals more carefully. That’s just not very “caustic”. For those of us who aren’t buying a lot of gold and diamonds, do you have any advice beyond sending a check to UNICEF? That’s where a piece like this could/should have some impact, beyond allowing people to indulge in 10 minutes of sympathy/moral outrage, before going back to the comfort of being “consumers”.

What all of us, as photographers, journalists, aidworkers, or advocates, need to do is to push ourselves out of the comfort zone of believing that by reporting on issues, that we are changing them. It isn’t a lack of awareness of the suffering in the DRC that’s the problem, any more than it is in Darfur, Iraq, Guantanamo, or countless other places around the world. People know that they are surrounded by horrific acts, they just don’t believe they have to power to stop them, and you yourself describe immediate change as “impossible”. The conventional notion that our role is to talk about the problems, and that someone else will fix them isn’t holding water. This is the inconvenient truth that all of us have to grapple with – not just you. So Marcus, I’m not suggesting that you should be silent – I’m suggesting that you should speak louder, and with more detail. You’ve done good work, and the potential of “multimedia” is not to do more of the same, but to do better, and I’m sure you will.

David – you seem to have taken my comments very personally, and I’m not sure why you’re so offended at the suggestion that Mediastorm is a commercially driven entity trying to market a product. It’s a business: media production for hire, and its staffed by players from Corbis, Getty, NBC, and Microsoft. I’m not sure how it’s reactionary or cynical to observe that, but if you think Mediastorm’s ambitions are anything short of following CNN’s model of dominating a new marketplace and becoming a media giant, then you definitely don’t know Brian Storm. I’m not sure how successful they will be, and their product isn’t always good, but that certainly didn’t stop CNN.

Bob – you seem like a very nice person, and I’m sure your heart is in the right place, but you need to pull your head out of your ass. Your posts might be therapeutic, but they’re unreadable, and your hero-worshipping is really tiresome, not least of all to your heroes. The kindest thing you could do for your close personal friend Marcus Bleasdale would be to stop talking about him, because he probably finds it really embarrassing. Seriously, you’re a good guy, and I wouldn’t say these things if I didn’t believe your sense of humor was strong enough to handle it.

“running”

D

Yawn.

Fuck me. Lightstalkers really has gone to the dogs.

To present a body of work that simply ends is a little luxurious. It is a good thing sometimes to offer some hope and try to answer the question, which would inevitably turn up, “Shit, looks bad there, what can I do?” One could dedicate hours to answering it, I simply try to lead people to the right places where they can inform themselves and find solutions that fit. Each person will be different. I admit it may not be perfect, but nothing is.

This piece is not meant to be an in depth investigation into the world of NGOs.
UNICEF, UNHCR certainly have their problems, I am the first to criticise them over their high salaries and fleets of white 4*4s. But, if you listen to the piece again, you will find they were mentioned in relation to education and the work they are doing with the children in DRC, to try and give them some future. In this they and their partners are doing a great job. They are the only ones providing that service in that region, along with Save the Children, who are also mentioned.

There is a “How Can I Help?” link provided in the piece, in order to inform people about organizations who are doing great work. Those interested can click and learn more about the many ways they can get involved, over and above “sending a check” Which I certainly did not ask anyone to do. Those mentioned are:

Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières, The International Rescue Committee, Save the Children, The Coalition to stop the use of Child Soldiers and Global Witness.

People could go work for these organizations if they want, they could click the link to Global Witness and find out exactly how they should behave when purchasing precious metal and stones, they could inform themselves and have discussions like this one, so the message is passed on. How you help is much more complex than simply sending a check. Which I am sure you are aware.

Lightstalkers is not the only forum where this work is getting feedback. There are many around the world that have seen this who don’t know what steps to take, some are quite young. They are hopefully the next generation of the concerned. So plugging HRW or any other NGOs is meant to educate them and give them some direction if they feel the need to learn more. You seemed like an informed chap so you perhaps don’t need that, but many do.

With any body of work a process of editing must be undertaken and decisions made about what to keep in and what to leave out for people to personally investigate for themselves later. Sitting on screen and ranting about Anglo Gold Ashanti or Metalor Technologies is not going to persuade them to change their actions.

I am sure you are also aware that in order to get these companies to change their working practices you must enter into dialogue with them and with those who have the influence over them. That includes their financiers and shareholders. Public rants do not help in that process. Intelligent discussion, awareness about what the actions of mining companies are doing and how it is affecting the population does help the process.

That is another reason why this piece was created. It will compliment ongoing work maintaining awareness. It will be shown to governments, mining companies and the investors behind those companies to allow them the chance to be informed and take decisions which take account of the human aspect of exploiting natural resources in areas like DRC.

I apologise now for stepping out of this discussion as I am off to Somalia and will be offline for sometime.

Apart from Dor’s last paragraph on his latest post there are elements of truth in what he is saying. Has anyone really digested what he has written?

I am not talking about his criticism of Marcus’s work(which is Dor’s subjective view BTW) but his analysis on the workings of some NGO’s, aid agencies and the UN.

Now Marcus should know better than me on how the NGO’s in the DRC conduct themselves but I have witnessed in several countries during a refugee crisis, the re-settlement of IDP’s and post war situations how aid agencies and particularly the UN operate.
For the most part you can only see with your own eyes how much money is wasted by the UNHCR and UNICEF and why I am at it UNRWA.

It is also well documented on how much money is wasted by these agencies in bureaucratic red tape.

There are some local people who benefit from these UN agencies and they are the ones who are employed by the UN and even then the disparity in salaries from a “Western” UN employee and a local employee is obscene. The amount of 4×4’s roaming around is astounding.

Your not convinced right? Let me tell you a little story.
When I was recently in Afghanistan I went to a leaving party in Mazar e Sharif for a girl who worked for some aid agency.
I had a conversation with this Lawyer who was working for some charity. I asked him what he did. He told me his job was to investigate the legal procedures of the Afghan government in Balkh province. So I pushed for more info. He “advises” the local government on human rights and how detainees are treated. So I asked if he is allowed access to detained persons. Yes he was. So how are they being treated? A short pause and then…I don’t visit the jails.
Why not? Because it is not in my remit to do so. But your job is to investigate and advise, how can you do your job properly if you are not doing it properly? End of conversation.

I then spoke to another person and asked what they did. Umm not much! No really what do you do? Well we do lots of parties! This was more like it! I asked my journalist friend who was at the party and who was based in Afghanistan if there were always parties going on. “Yeah all the time”.

It was not a revelation as I have seen it all before. It’s no wonder in certain countries where there are UN operations the locals look upon the UN with derision and are often despise them.

I have to say that there are exceptions. Anyone who has worked in conflict zones, post conflict, natural disaster zones will know the work of Medicine San Frontier and the ICRC is top drawer. They don’t piss around.

I think Marcus took the criticism well and acted professionally. I am not saying whether or not the inclusion of the credit’s is right or wrong but Dor has a point regarding the UN and it’s many agencies.

There was no need for either Dor or anyone else to get upset and verbally abuse another and this is coming from someone who has in the past let his guard down and bitten when prodded.

Well done Marcus for dealing with it in the right way.

M

Out of curiosity, I wonder if “Dor Jehan” is a real name (certainly a real person), since it appears his/her membership and post (which of course is within his/her right) was initiated simply to comment upon this thread. It’s a bit disingenuous too, given the nature of the anonymity. Im also wondering if the name isn’t a funny play off of st. jehan bouche d’or?? (dor jehan): golden mouth….anyway, it’s this kind of silliness that also waters down any interesting dialogue that might emmerge…

Mark: i will not add anything more with regard to the essay/presentation for Marcus’ response is target-on perfect and eloquent. I have to say though that the discussion of NGO’s is an ancillary one and not germaine to this presentation. If I have, for example, an exhibition and in the interim i’ve received funding from the Canadian Council for the Arts and I acknowledge and thank that organization, I fail to see how that is an “advertisement/promotion” of the funding agency? Again, it comes down to advocacy and testament (not trying to load this word with too much meaning). At some point, it’s critical for us (as people) to see the forest for the trees: to understand the more important issues of why someone produces, creates, offers, speaks upon that which is happening in the world…..

b

Dor, first of all, I am not ‘offended’ by your comments nor have you ‘hurt my feelings’. Angry and irritated yes; offended no.

I find your comments a willful distortion of what’s in the actual piece. There is no ‘plug’ for UNICEF or UNHCR. As Marcus has pointed out, they are simply name-checked in the context of EDUCATION. The plug is for EDUCATION. HRW (which you now seem to approve of) does not “appear in the production credits”, but only as a link for anyone to follow if interested. There is no link for UNICEF, nor any appeal to send them money (as you claim).

This is what i find astoundingly cynical. Its as if you’ve gone out of your way to find holes to pick at. And when you dont find any, you invent some. You’re scrabbling around on the surface trying to discredit someone who has gone into more depth on this issue than anyone else probably ever will.

And while you obsess about details of form you seem to completely miss the content. The wise man points to the moon, the fool sees only the finger that points. Perhaps you object to nuclear war because you dont like the way the bombs are painted?

Final note: Bob Black certainly doesn’t need me to leap to his defense, but I know I’m not alone in loving the way he thinks and writes and I always look forward to his posts – precisely for his singular and off-the-wall turn of phrase. I dont agree with everything he has to say, but here again, you seem to see only the surface, the form, and not the heart that’s undoubtedly behind it.

Bob I doesn’t matter who Dor is. There are various characters masquerading themselves on Lightstalkers at the moment who have nothing tangible to say.

Dor has written something interesting. The point about the NGO’s is ancillary but worth mentioning because they are a big player in how the DRC operates.

Lets not forget how totally incompetent the UN was in dealing with the genocide in Rwanda, it’s failure in Bosnia during the civil war etc etc.

Bob because something is ancillary it does not make it unworthy of comment.

With regards to Marcus work. I know of this work from his book Heart of Darkness.
It is probably the defining work from this forgotten conflict. The fact is the DRC is continually being raped of it’s resources and it’s big business. Side note: I did not know Coltan is a major component in the manufacture of mobile phones. The irony is the exploitation of this mineral is used in a device for communication.

Maybe we should also think about that the next time we go shopping for a new Nokia or a Sony Ericson.

Hiya Mark. Hey just one thing. There’s good and bad NGOs and aid organisations, but it’s important to remember that most are good, and even those that have slid some distance down that scale in the bad direction, are still doing more good than harm. I fear that it’s become fashionable around the traps to ridicule them for spending all of their time in cafes (where they exist) or living it up generally, and misspending donor money. Yeah, it happens, I know, but I think this could be compared to how fashionable it’s become to ridicule journalism and the likes of you and I, assuming we’re all paps, and that we’ll do and say whatever it takes to get “that shot” of Brittany’s cellulite. Not many bother to inquire as to the truth or to assess you on your own merits. The stereotype permeates and we’re “defined” before we even turn up. Know what I mean?

Bob – regarding anonymity – I think you’re onto something. He’s clearly not legit.

I think fake IDs serve no benefit to Lightstalkers (except maybe the humour value of Stupid Photographer some of the time). But for the most part, and entirely in cases where it’s not immediately clear at first that they’re fake, they devalue this place.

I think a lot of problems disappear when you add the accountability that comes with having to use your real name. It’s a little bit closer to engaging in real conversation with real consequences.

Anyway, whatever. :)

I personally appreciate to read posts as Dor’s one as they raise and wide the level of critique on the forum

I have to run, and i’ll try to leave a more thorough explanaiton as to why the issue of NGO’s in Marcus (specially HRW) is an irrelevancy in THIS context and why that issue is a total red herring, but more about that later…

also, my concern for “Dor’s” anonymity is this: his/her right, but the right of speech is born from the idea that one must not hide, but also that one’s critics (and I mean this is the “good” sense) have an obligation to be forthright, otherwise their own critique is suspect. this is particulary evident in this case, since some of the criticism leveled at this piece (and at Marcus and Mediastorm) imply explicity a paucity of journalistic ethic, accusing this as a promo piece…the problem is that the issues of good/bad ngo’s and funding and reporters relationship to that, while an important topic, is not relevant in this case, as i wrote above (my first long post),...the problem with Dor, for me, is that his critique is not credible without full disclosure, because perspective comes from orientation and this perspective also sheds light on the strategy and use of speech: that’s why i made it clear that Marcus multimedia piece is born of a certain relationship he has with that troubled nation. I hope to make more sense later…but I find Dor’s comments hypocritical given his/her anonymity…

running
b

I also find interesting the post of Dor. Marcus is completely right in almost everything he says in the video and he has done a great job, working on DRC for so many years. You can like his pictures or not, but you can see that he is really interested in what he is doing and that’s is really important in our job.
However, what Dor says about UN and NGOs is pretty correct. MONUC is the most useless UN mission I’ve seen in Africa (I’ve been based in Africa for almost 4 years) and the most of the NGOs do more harm than good under my point of view and not only because the cars, salaries (which usually are not very high for NGOs), etc, but for many other things regarding their western philosophy and the way they spend the money. You just need to go to Darfur for example to see the big and ridiculous circus they have set up there between NGOs and the useless UN agencies. For the UN, I just have no words… they are the most incompetent people I’ve seen in my life and the ones who are not they can’t do much working for such a useless organization.
We could also talk quite a lot about journalists who I think are not very useful either…
By the way, HRW is one of the few organizations I respect working in these contexts.
About DRC, I worked there a lot during two years and I love congolese. Like I said Marcus is completely right in what he says but at the same time a big problem of DRC are congolese themselves. I can’t go deep in this matter cause I don’t have the time but I mean, for example the corruption is amazing and sadly I don’t see any hope to finish that situation. I don’t want to be missunderstood, I am not saying that congolese are bad people or something like that, I just think that the solution for Africa must come from the Africans. The Western countries are just interested in this continent to get profits, and it’s easier in a country at war than in a peaceful one. What would happen if the congolese managed to exploit themselves the natural resources?? A lot of western companies don’t want that…
Sorry, don’t have time for more today. Sorry for the messy post, but I wanted to say too many things in a little time.
Anyway, I think is good to have people like Marcus in this profession.

Cheers

Ok: i’ll try to be precise (i know, not my talent ;) and succinct.

1. Issue of the reference to HRW in the piece and later a credit to HRW is in fact not a question of credibility, advertisement or subterfuge. HRW (as well as other organizations) has contributed to the funding of this project (HRW was a sponor for the remarkable Photo Exhibition of Marcus’ work that has been traveling internationally) and that is no secret to anyone familiar with Marcus’ LONG Term project. Moreover, that organization has not only helped the project and continues to work vigrously in aid and communication to disseminate information/aid to that broken nation. That, as a photographer and a “activist” (i use this work without a pejorative connotation or politics) for that nation, Marcus has spoken of the work of that organization is not a conflict of interest. To the contrary, as a person who has documented and attested (yes, this work, as well as marcus’ speeches and presentations are Testimony)to the events and lives of what is happening in the DRC, Marcus actually should speak upon and out about his relationship to those events and people. That he speaks of the good work of the HRW in congo, rather than hypocritical, is an exacting example of his frankness and his openness: in otherwords, he’s vetting his own relationship to that NGO and what he has observed. Now, if there were others in the DRC who’d experience an alternative point of view, than the discussion would be interesting. It is akin to a writer writing about their life covering a nation and elucidating about those people and groups of which she encountered. Furthermore, I know Marcus well enough to say that no matter how much funding this project enabled him to continue to tell the world about the DRC, if he felt that that particular NGO was not committed and helping, yhe’d be the first to speak about this, loudly. Moreover, the obligation of a criticism is to seek a center: what is the basis for either a point of view or a critique. What is the basis for the discussion about HRW in the piece. Is it to “promote” that NGO or to promote what is happening in the DRC? That is very clear when watching the piece. All is pointed toward the events of the DRC.

Good/Bad NGO’s are one thing, but be suspicious of His discussion of the role that HRW has playe in his relationship to the DRC is to misconstrue. We interpret language, we interpret information within the framework of our own suspicion and what seems odd to me is that the questioning of Marcus’ piece speaks more about the questioner than the actual piece itself.

We all have consequential relationships to things: and if the statement about buying gold offense, that, again, let that be. Each of us, though we seldom ask these difficult questions (including myself by the way), but that doesnt mean that the person who’d offer the insight into the relationship between events between lives.

I think the critique of relationship between piece and effectiveness is legit and one that is important to think about (each of us), as to our roles and obligations to the events we witness and speak about (incidentally, i just watch the Susan Meiselas documentary Pictures from a Revolution (about her time and work in Nicaraqua): a remarkable and complex and difficult film, and she too has had to struggle with this difficult relationship…but, i think the application of a legit concern (role of ngos, reporters, writers, all of us in the events of a nation’s life) in a way that is not directly a questioning of a piece tends to confuse the issues by melding them…

shit, i cant write today, sorry for the gop…need a rest…
b

Bob…the point is that by someone hiding behind a rock and shouting things from there, instead of standing up and saying them proudly, so much doubt should be cast on what they have to say that we really shouldn’t be treating them with the respect that we already have.

Dana – I reckon you’re right. It’s good to see criticisms, especially when in our game there can be a tendency for a lot of backslapping and applause for the heavy hitters. The problem here though is in my first par.

That’s why Lightstalkers should ban obviously fake user names.

Cheers.

Wade.

….from heathrow, my last post, promise. Also it is slightly off topic but it is an interesting exchange so I’ll carry on.

Mark, you raise a good point but I feel with any organization working in these areas it is difficult to generalize. It all comes down to people and what they are doing in the field. I have had experiences with UNICEF where they do an amazing job on the ground. I have vivid memories from Goma of children skipping through a camp of 40,000 displaced proudly clutching a white plastic bag with UNICEF on the outside and probably their first ever text book and pencils on the inside. That makes me happy. There is hope. I have also had the most frustrating moments with them where I can see that they are quite simply fucking up.

UNHCR the same. It comes down to who is on that mission at that time. The same goes for MSF. They would be the first to admit that not all their missions are providing the help they hoped for