Environmental film-makers call for ethical framework

Film makers and television journalists covering environmental issues and wildlife should evolve their own code of ethics. The need for such a framework is increasingly felt by professionals across the world.

Film and TV crews from developed countries who regularly travel to developing countries – the global South – should also be called upon to behave in more a more ethical and less exploitative manner.

These were two key points emerging in a wide ranging discussion involving film makers, television journalists, media researchers and environmental activists in New Delhi, India, on 22 November 2005.

The occasion was the annual congress of the International Federation of Environmental Journalists (IFEJ), which this year coincided with Vatavaran 2005, the national environmental film festival of India. Both events were held at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi, from 21 to 24 November.

The festival, organised by the Centre for Media Studies (CMS) with support from the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests, attracted 244 entries from film makers all over India, of which nearly 50 short-listed ones were screened. The IFEJ Congress, held in India for the first time, ran as a parallel event to the film festival, focusing on different aspects of the nexus between environmental communication and the audio-visual media.

Both events attracted a large number of TV and film professionals, environmental activists, media researchers and students.

‘Does TV do a better job on environmental reporting?’ was the topic of a panel discussion chaired by TVE Asia Pacific Director Nalaka Gunawardene. It involved Bahar Dutt, special correspondent for CNBC India, Swati Thiyagarajan, senior special correspondent for news channel NDTV, and Damandeep Singh, a senior manager with National Geographic Channel in India.

The panellists offered different yet complementary perspectives of TV journalists either reporting or scheduling environmental content for India’s increasingly diversified and fragmented TV audience.

In his opening remarks, Nalaka said TV has emerged as the primary source of environmental information for the non-specialist public across much of Asia. This provides both opportunities and challenges for environmentally conscious journalists and film-makers to use this powerful medium to communicate messages of conservation and lifestyle change.

Nalaka drew attention to the variety of formats available on television: it includes not only documentaries and news, but animation, drama with social messages, public service announcements (PSAs) and talk shows. “Each of these formats offers us different paths to engage various segments of our mass audience, and these can be used effectively to raise awareness, advocate for specific changes, influence behaviour and lifestyles, and support environmental education,” he said.

The print media has been doing a better job at covering complex environmental stories in India, and TV is still lagging behind, said Swati Thiyagarajan. The audio-visual medium’s inherent nature does impose some limitations on duration and level of detail in coverage, but these can be taken up as challenges, she said.

“One major constraint most TV journalists face is the lack of visual material to illustrate their stories. Sources are often unable or unwilling to talk to our cameras. Without pictures, we can tell compelling stories on television,” she added.

Bahar Dutt, trained as a conservationist later switched to working in television as she realised the potential of this medium to reach out and influence people. She lamented that there is not enough coverage of the science of conservation in many environmental stories appearing on Indian television.

“We need more resources, time and reporters to engage in more in-depth and sustained coverage of issues as they evolve,” she said. “We also need to move environmental stories away from being treated as soft, feature stories to hard news. There are serious turf wars being fought over environment and natural resources.”

Damandeep Singh said that media practitioners need to be aware of commercialised media being exploitative of situations, people and issues they cover. “The public interest is not necessarily what drives the media’s agenda. There are many pressures – including political and commercial – that play on media organisations,” he said.

“We need to find or create new space for more positive stories. But let’s be clear that it’s not media’s role to educate; that’s only a by-product of the media playing its principal roles of investigating, reporting, analysing and informing,” he said.

The discussion covered aspects as diverse as the political economy of the mass media and ethical considerations of environmental coverage to the impact of new media technologies and outlets on how environment is covered in the mainstream media.

Pankaj Sekhsaria, who works with the environmental action group Kalpavriksh, raised the issue of foreign film crews visiting India engaging in bribery and corruption to obtain filming permits and to gain access to restricted areas such as wildlife sanctuaries and national parks.

“In the end they might get a good story, but it spoils the chances of all others who come after them,” Sekhsaria added.

Bahar Dutt recalled how a park ranger had once offered to dig up buried eggs just so she could film it. “I immediately turned it down, but someone else might have been tempted – it was a chance for a good visual.”

The ethics of using hidden cameras was also discussed. There was broad agreement that it was acceptable when engaging in investigative – sometimes hazardous – reporting on illegal activities that damage the environment. These include smuggling in endangered species of wild animals and plants, or poaching in protected areas.

Nalaka Gunawardene cited the experience of London-based Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), which regularly uses hidden cameras to catch environmental criminals in their act. “But they always flag hidden camera footage as such when it is used in films,” he said.

An environmental educator lamented how too many good films that are made for television remain beyond the reach of those engaged in awareness raising and education. Too often, there are copyright restrictions, language barriers and other factors that prevent these material from being used, she said.

The efforts of organisations like WWF India and Centre for Environment Education (CEE) were cited as exceptions to this rule. Panellists said their TV networks would always be willing to allow non-commercial and educational use of their material.

Nalaka said TVE Asia Pacific clears the rights of many films on environment and development from around the world and makes them available to educators, activists and other users.

Darryl D’Monte, Chairman of the Forum of Environmental Journalists of India (FEJI), was also associated with the panel discussion.

See Vatavaran Film Festival and IFEJ Congress schedule