The Why Poverty? evaluation report Final Report
10.12.2013
Submitted to: Don Edkins Executive Director Steps Internationl 7 Glynnville Terrace, Gardens, 8001 Cape Town South Africa Tel: +27 21 4655805 Fax: +27 21 4655806 Email: [email protected]
www.whypoverty.net
Presented by: Dena Lomofsky, Cathy Chames, Tiffany Mugo and Kathryn Davies With information from case studies by Nana Davies, Helga Jansen-Daugbjerg, David Elliott, Marit Erdal, Laurie Jones and Laura O’Shea Southern Hemisphere
Phone: 021 422 0205, Fax: 021 424 7965 Email: [email protected] www.southernhemisphere.co.za
FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Executive summary Background to the project
The Why Poverty? project achieved a global launch in November 2012 with 8 long films, 34 short films and an online website and social media engagement. This project of Steps International (Steps) was an unprecedented collaboration between 69 broadcasters1. The main objectives of the project were to make a high quality documentary series with a new narrative on poverty, to raise awareness and understanding of poverty the world over, to inject knowledge and passion into the global debate about how to tackle poverty, and to engage audiences with the subject. According to the brief for film directors, “… the series will be a forward-looking approach to one of the great issues of our time – looking for genuine answers to the question the title poses, and providing the food for thought that will bring about solutions. .. films will be selected that combine intellectual rigour, great characters, strong narratives, and, above all, an ability to engage with a massive international audience.2” The key intended objectives were to:
• involve filmmakers, broadcasters, civil society and influencers/campaigners as voices from different backgrounds and societies in shaping the project
• create films capable of affecting audiences worldwide • distribute the films to broadcasters globally and online • develop an online strategy and cross-media platform to continue reaching people • develop and implement an outreach and audience engagement process • develop emerging filmmakers from developing countries • develop a monitoring and evaluation system for the project.
The key purpose of the evaluation was to establish the extent to which the above have been met (effectiveness) and to identify how audiences have engaged with the films (outcomes). Through the identification of lessons learned and recommendations, the evaluation contributes to strengthening future projects that Steps may implement. The evaluation includes this main report, and four accompanying case studies. It took place after the global launch, between January and May 2013, and social media figures were updated in November 2013.
1 Co-producing broadcasters were DR, BBC, SV, NRK, VPRO, YLE, NHK, ZDF/ARTE, ITVS (PBS). Others involved were the European Broadcasting Union, the Open University U.K., the Communications Initiative, and funders, namely the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Bertha Foundation, the Bernard van Leer Foundation, the Swiss Agency for Development & Cooperation, Danida and the Danish Ministry of Education. 2 Why Poverty? Directors brief 06.04.10
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | i Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Methodology
The findings are based on a participatory mixed method evaluation comprising in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, online analytics, survey data and document review (primarily of monitoring data generated by the project, but also by project partners and other stakeholders). The data was gathered based on a monitoring and evaluation plan and system that was developed for the project. The evalution plan included both outputs and outcomes, and the framework for measuring outcomes covered shifts in social norms (knowledge, attitude, awareness); strengthening organisational capacity; strengthened alliances; strengthened base of support; and improved policies (at least the attention of policy makers at this stage.)
Findings
Effectiveness Overall, the findings highlight that Why Poverty? was an impressive collection of long and short documentary films and educational resources, which drew the attention of television and online audiences, and sparked an online interest through Facebook and twitter. The series has helped to popularise a discourse on poverty moving from charity to justice, making poverty accessible to a global audience; this is the power of storytelling.
• Development, production and editorial vision The final 8 long films were selected from 85 proposals obtained from film-makers, based on a brief that was developed following targeted consultations in the sector. This process of identification and selection of long films was viewed positively by all those interviewed. The short films were commissioned from filmmakers from around the world, with a specific focus on filmmakers from developing and transitional world countries. A total of 346 submissions were reviewed, and in the end 15 of the 34 short films were made by filmmakers from the developing world. Feedback from emerging film makers has been positive, and they appreciated the opportunity to contribute by sharing developing world perspectives, which enhanced the complexity and nuances of the stories they were telling. The work undertaken with developing world filmmakers has led to improved knowledge and skills in film making and has increased their access to professional networks of filmmakers, as well as establishing links to broadcasters. The recruitment and selection process involved a number of innovations including workshops held on the margins of film festivals and a filmmaker development workshop that focused on helping emerging filmmakers to develop their story and pitch.
• Distribution - broadcast The distribution of the films through 69 broadcasters is an unprecedented broadcast collaboration. All the licenses are owned by Steps International, which means that the films can be used extensively online and in outreach processes. The EBU was a central partner in the broadcaster collaboration, and the project was attractive to EBU members because it allowed
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | ii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
broadcasters to be part of a global event, have access to high quality international films and still produce their own national content for their viewers.
It is difficult to calculate the total reach of the project because data submission by broadcasters was limited. The participation of Latin American broadcasters through the TAL network brought a new target audience to Steps.
• Distribution on-line The most successful way of showing the films on-line was through YouTube. The YouTube channel attracted 1,538,430 viewers during the period 1 November 2012 – 31 October 2013. The number of viewers has tripled since the broadcast period. Viewership has an English-speaking and Northern European bias, and an older demographic. Subscriptions to the YouTube channel continue to grow steadily, and the number currently stands at 41,000 subscribers. In April 2013, large groups of channel subscribers came from India (7,288), the UK (3,855) and Saudi Arabia (2,615). The film Education, Education, went viral on Chinese video-sharing sites, and was shared over 700,000 times in March 2013. It was still attracting about 1000 views per day in April 2013, until it was blocked by the Chinese authorities.
• Marketing and strategic communications According to TopsyPro, the project had an estimated reach of 34,531,169 on Twitter by April 2013. The most active countries on Twitter were the US, UK, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Brazil. Often the response on Twitter reflected an engaged broadcaster presence on twitter. Most of the tweets were praised or promoted the films or other related content and websites. Those broadcasters that combined their own programming, marketing and educational activities with the screening of the films had the most success, and the ones who did this well included TVO, ITVS, VPRO, and DR. On-line engagement provides an important global networking element to the project, although many countries had their own hashtags and language is still a barrier. The marketing and strategic communications efforts of Why Poverty? would have been strengthened if they were underpinned by a more defined marketing strategy.
• Educational outreach and audience engagement The findings of the evaluation highlight that the Why Poverty? films stimulate audience engagement and motivate people to do more. Social media engagement tends to focus on praising or promoting the films, but do not facilitate depth of discussion and debate. Online discussion forums (e.g. the ITVS on-line symposium) or off-line screenigs and panel discussions are better for stimulating quality debate. The screening data shows that the films are effective in stimulating deep discussions and for helping people to think about appropriate responses to poverty for the 21st century. They can be powerful mobilisation tools, and they are good educational resources. While the films can inspire people to action, the avenues for action can be provided by NGOs or campaigns to ensure that
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | iii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
this enthusiasm to take action is harnessed. The outreach phase extends the life of the films way beyond broadcast; for example, the films will be used for 8 years as part of the Development Studies courses of the Open University.
Outcomes The films have sparked a strong emotive and intellectual response from different audiences. Responses to the films and engagement in outreach activities provide evidence that there have been shifts in knowledge and awareness. People are thinking differently about the structural causes of poverty and solutions to poverty. They are speaking more to others about poverty and inequality. In addition, there are examples of how the films have moved people to take action and get involved in anti-poverty activities and activism. Participation in the series mobilised broadcasters to produce additional content and educational activities around poverty. The films have also been used for organisational strengthening when organisations use them as part of their programming activities, curriculum or for staff development. The case study of the screenings in Botswana highlights how a network of organsations who use film for social change can be stimulated. There are also some examples of how the films, when combined with outreach activities and strategic communications, could influence policy change. However, this evidence is limited because it is too early in the project life cycle to determine this type of impact. Themes emerging from the screenings of Solar Mamas, Miseducation, Land Rush and Stealing Africa are:
• Increased understanding of the structural causes of poverty • Connecting the local issue of poverty and inequality to the global • Power, corruption and exploitation of Africa’s resources • Development and the participation of people in decision-making • Connecting land and natural resource ownership issues to poverty • Empowerment
• Gender issues • Child rights and child protection
Lessons learned
Lessons learned that emerge from the findings are presented below.
• Development and production • Consultations ensured the relevance of the project, including people in the development and educational sectors and broadcasters.
• A very clear editorial vision was important as it provided a strong thread that ran through the series. This ensured that the diverse films worked well together as a series; looking at
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | iv Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
the same issue in many ways, but with one narrative, described by the Peabody Awards as a ‘Parallax’.
• A diversity of filmmakers enriches the series by bringing different perspectives and ways of storytelling, access to people or communities, and deeper understanding of the complexity of the issues being covered.
• People are attracted to viewing films from their own countries. It would have been beneficial had there been a long film from Latin America.
• The short film series presented an opportunity to get more global stories and more diverse filmmakers, and to highlight issues raised in the long films. They are also good for use in training or workshops as triggers for discussion, and for online viewing.
• The filmmaker development workshop that was held in Brazil was a good formula and could be repeated in the future.
• Distribution and broadcaster engagement • A key lesson learnt with regards to mobilisation of broadcasters is that those who combined the international films from Why Poverty? with their own programming and strategic communications and activities were most successful in reaching audiences. For this, buy in of senior management at the broadcasting corporation is crucial.
• Online digital • One of the key lessons learned is that there is a need to build a following or community long before the broadcast. This needs time, a marketing strategy, unique content and a well-functioning cross-media platform.
• The conclusion drawn by the online team regarding the website strategy is that building a simple site, using free platforms such as YouTube and putting more resources into social media and working with partners is a good strategy. Sharing content with broadcast partners and decentralising on-line engagement is better than trying to do everything oneself, since broadcasters tend to direct traffic to their own sites. Further, using simpler technology makes the films more accessible to people in countries with slower bandwidth and less sophisticated technology.
• The online strategy needs to support the overall project goals, not only digital goals, and must be underpinned by a marketing strategy.
• It was difficult for the digital team to work remotely away from the core production team. Online represents very closely what an organisation does and is – and it proved difficult to work that out at a distance.
• Social media platforms, with their low barriers for production and emphasis on brevity, are perhaps not the ideal forum for detailed discussion of the complex structural issues underlying global poverty. In general, 'professional' and blogged reviews of the films and discussion of their issues in newspaper articles and on radio and TV, and online discussion forums, symposiums or webinars tend to be more nuanced. Social media have been great for sharing information, e.g. to let people know about the films, broadcast times and news
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | v Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
for information sharing, marketing and awareness raising about the series and the theme. Social media are also useful to keep the films alive after the main broadcast period, and for distributing educational resources.
• Outreach and audience engagement These lessons learnt focus predominantly on the use of the films in screenings.
• Building strategic partnerships with organisations specifically involved in the subject matter dealt with by the film (i.e. food security, land and agricultural investment) can increase the likelihood of mobilising for social change and influencing policy makers. The tax justice movement was very active online the day after Stealing Africa was screened on BBC and this caused a spike in the number of likes on Facebook.
• If a media project such as Why Poverty? wants to encourage local or global action, then it needs to work together with NGO’s and the structures, programmes and networks that they provide. • Targeting organisations with facilitators who are already trained in the STEPS SA methodology for facilitated community screenings means that existing networks can be successfully re-activated and resources mobilised for upscaling outreach activities, as demonstrated by the Botswana case study.
• The majority of requests for the films (62%) came from people in the education sector and therefore this is a key target group which can be brought on board to scale up distribution and outreach activities. This should include, for example, universities which have development studies courses in both the North and the South.
• The interest generated by the global launch could have been better capitalised if the outreach strategy and materials were ready and available when the films were launched. In order to achieve this, the films would have to be ready between 6 – 8 months before broadcast. Work could also have begun with NGOs or social movements ahead of the broadcast to absorb the energy and goodwill inspired by the films amongst the audiences.
• Monitoring and evaluation of cross-platform media projects • The Draft Media Measurement Guide3 proved to be a useful framework for analysing audience engagement, and should be used upfront when planning projects and designing M&E tools. The continuum for audience engagement is a useful tool for both planning and evaluation purposes.
• In order to get standardised data from broadcasters, it is best to engage specialist companies that track viewer data for marketing departments of broadcasters ahead of the broadcast schedule. However, this requires significant funds. The main indicators
3 http://chrisrosenthaldesign.com/downloader/gates-knightIframes/index.html supported by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Knight Foundation, and developed by LFA Group and POSSIBLE worldwide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | vi Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
that would be interesting are 1) average market share, 2) reach to individual viewers, 3) knowledge of the Why Poverty? series, and 4) whether it has changed the way people think about poverty. The DR survey conducted can be used as a framework for future audience research.
• Twitter tracking tools such as TopsyPro cannot be used retrospectively and need to be enabled before the launch, since they tend to cover a limited time span retrospectively. Tools for online analysis also need to be purchased because the capabilities enabled for the free versions are limited.
• NVIVO 10 has been a useful qualitative analysis tool for housing all the data. It is particularly good for a cross-media project since data can be audio, visual or text.
• The second main limitation has been the lack of analytical tools to deal with the huge amounts of online data that is mostly qualitative, such as tweets, Facebook comments, blogs, opinion pieces and so on. A tool for social network analysis has now been developed with the support of the Ford Foundation, and Why Poverty? should pursue this option in 2014.
• Facebook is difficult to analyse in terms of social networking because of privacy settings.
Recommendations
The recommendations below are informed by the lessons learned, based on both the strengths and the challenges of implementing a cross-media global project that intends to contribute to social change.
• Development and production • Filmmaker development is something that has emerged from this project as a positive process and Steps should take the lessons learned about making and distribution of short documentary films and apply these to future filmmaker development workshops and processes. These workshops can also be expanded to include considerations for contracting arrangements, thinking clearly about whom the audience for the film is, how the films can be marketed through the filmmaker’s networks, and how the film should be used in outreach processes.
• Steps should continue to work with a diversity of filmmakers to bring in voices from around the globe, including gender diversity.
• Distribution and broadcaster engagement • A marketing and strategic communications strategy needs to underpin all elements of the social media in the run-up to broadcast and thereafter.
• The relationship with broadcasters needs to be re-thought. So far the primary relationships have been through commissioning editors, with some broadcasters having senior management buy-in. In the future, broadcasters should buy into co-operation not just on a television broadcast platform, but also to working with the digital platforms, as
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | vii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
well as engaging their education or social engagement departments and their research/marketing departments.
• Continue to encourage broadcaster collaboration and especially around something like the Why Poverty? day which the EBU organised. It has good potential to peak the focus on the project.
• Co-operation between “richer” broadcasters and “poorer” broadcasters could be developed, for example skills transfer or co-productions.
• Online digital • Projects must be planned as a truly multi-platform initiative by people who really understand the digital space, early on. It is important to see online on a long time frame, beginning way before broadcast and then continuing thereafter.
• Focus on building a simpler site, using free platforms such as YouTube, and put more resources into social media.
• Make sure that the social media strategy is underpinned by a marketing strategy, which it in turn supports.
o The core content needs to be planned and commissioned with an eye to how it works online (from practicalities like online rights to how subjects fit together as a whole).
o Online has a completely different time-scale to broadcast. It’s about slow growth and longevity. There is a need to plan for the period before and even more importantly, after broadcast.
o Even if online remains primarily as broadcast support, it needs earlier thought about what platforms to use and what these involve. For example, @whypoverty should have been registered on Twitter when the project was first planned.
• In order to improve the management of the digital side of the project, two alternative approaches are recommended. One would be to hire a company from the start and make them responsible for and in charge of all digital platforms. Or if the preference is for someone in-house, it would be beneficial for them to be located closer to the Production team.
• More effort and resources need to go into working with broadcast partners and sympathetic organisations, including educational institutions, to encourage them to take up the content that is offered.
• Social media must be used to encourage ongoing engagement with the films and the online strategy needs to be re-thought and formalised. Can the website encourage activism? Can people be asked to share their change stories? Can more of a community be built around Why Poverty?
• It is also recommended that in order to use the online space to generate debate and discussion, more online forums/seminar/webinars could be convened.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | viii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• Outreach and audience engagement • The focus now in the outreach phase should be to build strong relationships with existing organisations (NGO’s, educational institutions or even broadcaster education/outreach departments). Local screenings linked to existing social movements (local and international) can be a strong combination to provide people with avenues to deepen their engagement with the issues.
• Design and implement training in the use of the STEPS SA facilitated screening methodology and conduct training-of-trainers courses as well.
• The Open University link could be given more prominence on the Why Poverty? website. • In the future, outreach materials should be ready to be distributed as the films are launched. In order to achieve this, the films will need to be finished at least 6 months prior to broadcast to allow for accurate time notations, language versioning, focus groups and analysis which go into the facilitator’s guide.
• Monitoring and evaluation of cross-platform media projects • Continue to implement the monitoring and evaluation processes for the outreach phase using the tools developed for the process. Ensure the M&E tools are part of the facilitator’s guide.
• Continue to build relationships with organisations that can provide technical support for monitoring online data, such as the Norman Leer Centre Project at the University of Southern California (USC).
• Consider conducting a further evaluation on the outreach phase in at least one year’s time.
• Consider purchasing a license from TopsyPro to ensure on-going analysis of twitter data. • Engage the broadcasters market research departments or identify a market research company ahead of time and include this in project budgets. They should track viewer figures and conduct viewer surveys in selected countries if there is not enough budget for all. The broadcasters could also be asked to collect data and report on certain indicators as part of their participation in the project.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | ix Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Acknowledgements
There are many people who made this evaluation possible. Firstly the Steps team who participated in the design of the M&E system and the planning and feedback workshops, and who gave valuable insights and guidance - especially Don Edkins for his leadership and commitment to the evaluation process. Much of the data was generated by the monitoring system and was supplied by Theresa Hill, Don Edkins, Linda Titus, Sophie Theunisen, Catherine Kelliher and Kari Peters. The Steps board members, Mette Hoffmann Meyer and Nick Fraser engaged in the evaluation planning phase and provided interviews. Many people generously gave of their time for interviews and for completing online questionnaires, including broadcasters, Open University, various working group members and members of the NGO sector. We would also like to thank all the broadcasters that provided detailed reports on their activities, and data that they had gathered. This evaluation was made possible with the dedicated support of the Southern Hemisphere evaluation team of Dena Lomofsky (lead evaluator) and Cathy Chames, and the support of our interns Tiffany Mugo and Kathryn Davis. The case studies were prepared by Nana Davies, Cathy Chames and Dena Lomofsky, and Helga Jansen-Daugbjerg (of Southern Hemisphere); David Elliott, Marit Erdal, Laurie Jones, Laura O’Shea, Paul Gready (University of York) and Gase Sengwaketse (STEPS trainer in Botswana).
Special thanks also goes to Joaquin Alvarado, who provided much enthusiasm and technical support on the social media analytics and the Cape Town outreach process on behalf of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. We would also like to thank the LFA Group for supporting the development of the Cape Town outreach case study. The evaluation was made possible with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Ford Foundation.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | x Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Contents
1 Introduction...... 1 1.1 Context ...... 1
1.2 The Why Poverty? project ...... 2 2 Objectives of the evaluation...... 4 3 Methodology and sample...... 5
3.1 Methods...... 5 3.2 Sample ...... 6 3.3 Data analysis...... 7
3.4 Coding, monitoring and evaluation ...... 7 The qualitative feedback and key project documents were coded in NVIVO 10...... 7 3.5 Limitations ...... 7
4 Effectiveness...... 8 4.1 Conceptualising the project...... 8 4.2 Long films – development and production...... 9 4.2.1 Identification and selection of Long Films ...... 9 4.2.2 Production and editorial process of long films ...... 10 4.3 Short films– – development and production...... 11 4.3.1 Working with filmmakers from the developing world and emerging filmmakers...... 12 4.3.2 Opportunity to contribute to the project by sharing developing world perspectives. 13 4.4 Post-production ...... 14 4.5 Distribution...... 14 4.5.1 Broadcast distribution ...... 14 4.5.2 Online distribution...... 19 4.6 Marketing and strategic communications ...... 30 4.7 Educational outreach and audience engagement ...... 39 4.7.1 Facilitated screenings and educational resources ...... 40 4.7.2 Online campaign strategy ...... 43 4.8 Conclusion – effectiveness...... 43 5 Outcomes ...... 44 5.1 Shifts in awareness and social norms ...... 44
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | xi Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
5.1.1 Evidence from emails and social media responses...... 44 5.1.2 Evidence from outreach activities ...... 46
5.2 Organisational strengthening ...... 53 5.2.1 Strengthening programme activities ...... 53 5.2.2 Strengthening educational activities ...... 54 5.3 Networking and mobilising...... 56 5.3.1 Networking and mobilisation through outreach activities ...... 56 5.3.2 Mobilisation of broadcasters...... 58 5.3.3 Impact of broadcaster activities ...... 62 5.4 Policy outcomes...... 63 5.5 Outcomes for developing world filmmakers ...... 64 5.5.1 Benefit from knowledge exchange – what they learnt...... 64 5.5.2 Access to professional network ...... 65 6 Lessons learned ...... 66 7 Conclusions...... 69 7.1 Effectiveness...... 69 7.2 Outcomes...... 72 8 Recommendations...... 73 Appendix 1: Overview of broadcaster participation and additional content and educational/outreach activities (outcomes) ...... 76 Appendix 2: Screenings captured for the evaluation ...... 80 Appendix 3: Compiled broadcaster data ...... 83 Appendix 4: M&E concept maps and tools...... 86 Appendix 5: Case studies (attached separately)...... 92
List of Tables
Table 1 Sample for the evaluation...... 6 Table 2 Reach per country...... 15 Table 3 Reactions to the various content elements of Why Poverty? in Denmark ...... 19 Table 4 Web statistics – 19 November 2012 – 31 October 2013 (cumulative totals) ...... 20 Table 5 Audience engagement on the top 10 films on YouTube (October 2013) ...... 28 Table 6 Number of views per film on the different video-sharing sites in China ...... 29 Table 7 Audience responses to films (N=88) ...... 47
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | xii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Table 8 Summary of activities conducted by broadcasters ...... 76 Table 9 Conceptual map for the outcome evaluation ...... 88
Table 10 M&E tools developed for Why Poverty ? project ...... 90 List of Figures
Figure 1 Unique visits to whypoverty.net (December 2012 - October 2013)...... 20 Figure 2: Total number of unique visits: Monthly Figures (November 2012 – October 2013)...... 21
Figure 3: Website views – top 20 countries (December 2012 – October 2013)...... 21 Figure 4 Visits, unique visits and page views November 2012 – October 2013 ...... 22 Figure 5 No. of subscribers to the YouTube channel...... 23 Figure 6 YouTube views 19 Nov – 10 Dec 2012 ...... 24 Figure 7: Further YouTube Statistics (October 2013) ...... 24 Figure 8: YouTube statistics (Demographics, discovery and traffic sources) (October 2013) ...... 24 Figure 9 Top ten films on YouTube during 19 November – 10 December 2012...... 25 Figure 10: Top 10 films (October 2013)...... 25 Figure 11 No. of views for long films on YouTube October 2013 (total =781124)...... 26 Figure 12 Short films, number of view, November 2013...... 27 Figure 13 Demographics of social media engagers in China (by sex, age, profession, education)..... 29 Figure 14 Overview of Why Poverty ? Online Social Media 1 December – 1 February 2013 ...... 33 Figure 15 Geo-location heat map of online engagement , 1 December – 1 February 2013...... 34 Figure 16 Number of Twitter followers (December 2012 – October 2013)...... 35 Figure 17: Most Active Users...... 37 Figure 18 Increase in Facebook likes from 19 November 2012 – October 2013 ...... 38 Figure 19 Why Poverty? meme ...... 38 Figure 20 STEPS Action Learning Cycle ...... 42 Figure 21 Audience engagement with Why Poverty? project – trend line...... 48 Figure 22 Response on future engagement with the Why Poverty? project ...... 48 Figure 23 Requests for films by sector...... 54 Figure 24 Screen shot of some of the results of a tag search “Why Poverty?” on the Open University site ...... 55 Figure 25 Infographic from TVO ...... 58 Figure 26 Canal Futura's plans for Why Poverty? outreach...... 60 Figure 27 Series of awareness raising posters produced by VPRO...... 60 Figure 28 Example of visual meme sent out by ITVS the week prior to broadcast...... 61
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | xiii Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 29 Why Poverty? Logic Model ...... 86 Figure 30 Why Poverty? Project Map, 2011 ...... 87
Figure 31 Why Poverty? Results chain (theory of change), May 2011 ...... 87 Acronyms
ABC – Australian Broadcasting Corporation Arte – French/ German broadcaster ARTV – Chilean broadcaster BBC: British Broadcasting Corporation (British broadcaster) BNT – Bulgarian broadcaster Campus TV – Honduras broadcaster Canal 22 – Mexican broadcaster Canal U – Colombian broadcaster CCN Turk – Turkish broadcaster Colsecor – Argentinian broadcaster CSO – Civil Society Organisation CT – Czech Republic broadcaster CyBC – Cyprus broadcaster DR – Danish public broadcaster EBU: European Broadcasting Union e.tv – South African broadcaster e.tv Ghana – Ghanaian broadcaster eBotswana – Botswana broadcaster eNCA – e News Channel Africa -satellite broadcaster across Africa ERR – Estonian broadcaster ERT – Greek broadcaster FBO – Faith Based Organisation Futura – Brazilian broadcaster HRT – Croatian broadcaster Human – The Netherlands broadcaster IBA – Israeli broadcaster Ikon – The Netherlands broadcaster ITVS - Independent Television Servie Knowledge Network – Canadian broadcaster LRT- Lithuanian broadcaster LTV – Latvian broadcaster MBC – Broadcaster to 22 countries in the Middle East MexicoSTV – Mexican broadcaster MTV – Hungarian broadcaster Mobi TV – Zambian broadcaster NBC – Namibian broadcaster
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | xiv Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
NGO – Non Governmental Organisation NHK – Japanese broadcaster NRK – Norwegian broadcaster Nuevo Mundo – Canadian broadcaster NTV – Kenyan broadcaster ORF – Austrian broadcaster PBS – Public Broadcasting Service (American broadcaster) PTS – Taiwanese broadcaster RAI – Italian broadcaster Roya TV – Jordanian broadcaster RTHK – Hong Kong broadcaster RDU RTS – Serbian broadcaster RTVSLO – Slovenian broadcaster RUV – Icelandic broadcaster Señal Colombia – Colombian broadcaster SER TV – Panamanian broadcaster Sinart TV – Costa Rican broadcaster SJRTV –Slovakian broadcaster SVT – Swedish broadcaster TAL – Television Latino America Telemedellin – Colombian broadcaster Tempo TV – Indonesian broadcaster TG4 – Irish broadcaster TV 10 Chiapas – Mexican broadcaster TV Ciudad – Uruguayan broadcaster TV Cultura – Peruvian broadcaster TVE – Spanish broadcaster TV3 – Catalonia - Spanish broadcaster TVO TV Ontario – Canadian broadcaster TVP – Polish broadcaster UCT – University of Cape Town UWC – University of the Western Cape Universidad de Valle – Colombian broadcaster VIVE TV – Venezuelan broadcaster VPRO – The Netherlands broadcaster VTR – Chilean broadcaster Wattan TV – Palestinian broadcaster YLE – Finnish broadcaster ZBC – Zimbabwean broadcaster ZDF – German broadcaster
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | xv Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
1 Introduction
1.1 Context
“Quiet acceptance – by the victims and by others – of the inability of a great many people to achieve minimally effective capabilities and to have basic substantive freedoms acts as a huge barrier to social change. And so does the absence of social outrage at the terrible helplessness of millions of people. Thus the social evil draws not just on those who positively contribute to keeping people down, but also on all the people who are ready to tolerate the thoroughly unacceptable predicaments of millions of fellow human beings. We have to see how the actions and inactions of a great many persons together lead to this social evil, and how a change of our priorities – our policies, our institutions, our individual and joint actions – can help to eliminate the atrocity of poverty.”4 Although poverty reduction at home and abroad is a major goal of almost every government in the world, supported by billions of dollars of public and private money, poverty persists and the inequality gap is growing. It is clear that the search for new strategies and initiatives to reduce hunger, global poverty and the gap between the poor and the wealthy, needs to be embarked upon in an urgent and coherent way5. The impact of the current economic crisis, climate change and rising costs is that far fewer people will escape poverty. Recent progress in addressing some of the world’s most complex and dire problems gives cause for optimism about the possibility that people will someday be able to lift themselves out of poverty and hunger. Success stories can be found across many sectors, but often projects or people lack the resources or know-how to scale up their interventions and have a broader impact. Public sentiment in support of aid is changing. A 2012 study by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) in England, found that ‘there is considerable appetite for a greater understanding of development’ and for more complex stories of how change and progress happen. While people generally view development as positive, there should be a greater focus on results and not just value for money6. The Why Poverty? project was intended to address this need for more complex narratives on poverty and how it can be addressed.
4 Sen, Amartya, Forward in the book Green, D “From Poverty to Power, How active citizens and effective states can change the world.” Oxfam International, Practical Action Publishing, 2008. 5 Poverty is defined as living on less than $1.25 a day (World Bank). 6 Glennie, A; Straw, W; Wild, L “Understanding public attitudes to aid and development.” Institute for Public Policy Research, 2012 http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/6651-aid-development-uk-public- opinion-attitudes accessed on 22.05.2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 1 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
1.2 The Why Poverty? project
Why Poverty? is an international documentary series of eight full-length films and thirty-four shorts, screened by an unprecedented number of public broadcasters around the world, with accompanying online, mobile, print and radio material, much of which was produced by the broadcasters themselves. The project sought to inspire critical thinking and action to address poverty. To date, it is the largest documentary film project addressing issues of social justice and unpacking the structural causes and solutions to global poverty. The broadcast took place with 69 broadcasters reaching over 200 countries between the 25th November and 30th November 2012. The project will have a long life beyond this initial broadcast, due to continued education and outreach activities, including the films’ use in the British Open University Curriculum. This was a project of Steps International, based on the successful results of the previous projects Why Democracy? (2007) and STEPS for the Future (2001). Both were documentary film projects along with accompanying materials that managed to produce increased knowledge, dialogue and action on the themes they addressed. The expectation for Why Poverty? was that these films would make a real contribution to the global effort to reduce poverty. Of course, no media event could reduce poverty by itself, but the combined expertise, creativity and reach of the multinational team of broadcasters and directors, combined with online and mobile strategies, was to be used to connect with a large global audience. According to the brief for film directors, “…the series will be a forward-looking approach to one of the great issues of our time – looking for genuine answers to the question the title poses, and providing the food for thought that will bring about solutions. Eight films will be selected that combine intellectual rigour, great characters, strong narratives, and, above all, an ability to engage with a massive international audience.7” The long and short films cover a range of key topics. A facilitator’s guide produced for the series highlights the following themes: gender and women’s empowerment; education; reproductive health and rights; inequality; land rights; children’s rights; food security; governance; aid and charity; resilience and solutions; foreign investment; and natural resources. The intended outcomes of the project were to:
• raise awareness and understanding of the structural causes of persistent poverty the world over;
• inject knowledge and passion into a global debate about how to tackle poverty, and to share a sense that poverty can be overcome; and
• change the narrative from charity to one of social and economic justice.
7 Why Poverty? Directors’ brief 06.04.10
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 2 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
The key intended outputs were:
• Development and production o Involve filmmakers, broadcasters, civil society and influencers/campaigners as voices from different backgrounds and societies in shaping the project.
o Create films capable of affecting audiences worldwide; produce a series of 8 long documentary films and 30 short documentary films, all dealing with the subject of poverty and inequality. A range of issues were to be dealt with in the films, including human rights, social exclusion, political power, access to capital, the food crisis, health, education, climate change, globalisation, conflict, corruption and apathy.
o Provide an opportunity for emerging filmmakers from developing countries. • Distribution
o Distribute the films through television broadcast and online. • Marketing and strategic communications o Reach decision makers and citizens with positive and challenging messages through an online strategy and cross-media platform.
• Outreach & education o Develop and implement an outreach process predominantly through targeted screenings and working with civil society organisations and institutions through their engagement/education departments.
o Materials development. • Project Management o Develop a monitoring and evaluation system for the project.
Management structures were put in place to manage the project and to drive ownership through participation of key co-producing broadcasters in collaboration with Steps International. A long- film editorial group8, a short film editorial group9 and an online group10 were established and
8 The Editorial Group included Nick Fraser (BBC Storyville, commissioning editor), Mette Hoffmann Meyer (DR Danish public broadcaster commissioning editor), Axel Arnö (SVT Swedish public broadcaster commissioning editor), Barbara Truyen (VPRO Dutch public broadcaster commissioning editor), Hans Robert Eisenhauer and Martin Pieper (ZDF/Arte German public broadcaster commissioning editors), Claire Aguilar (Vice-president of programming, ITVS, US documentary fund for PBS/USA), Ken-ichi Imamura and Tomoko Okutso (NHK Japan public broadcaster commissioning editors), and Don Edkins (Steps International Executive Producer). 9 Members of the short-film editorial group were Iikka Vehkalathi (YLE), Claire Aguilar (ITVS), Don Edkins (Steps), and Brian Tilley (Steps). They were supported by Theresa Meyer-Hill ((Steps) who was the short- film production manager. The group also co-opted Matthijs Knol from the Berlinale Talent Campus.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 3 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
worked to various degrees of success. The project was managed and implemented by a small core team of three - ‘the working group’ - supported by the broader editorial group, and dedicated personnel.11 This evaluation reports on the outputs and outcomes achieved up to May 2013. The objectives of the evaluation are highlighted below.
2 Objectives of the evaluation
The evaluation was conducted between January and May 2013, with social media statistics updated in November 2013. The evaluation was conducted by Southern Hemisphere, using a mixed-method participatory approach. An evaluation planning meeting was held in January 2013 in the Steps office in Cape Town, and conversations were held with certain board members before an evaluation plan was finalised. This draft is now out for comment amongst key stakeholders.
The objectives of the evaluation were to: 1. Assess the effectiveness of the project outputs to date 2. Ascertain the profiles of the people/organisations most engaged in the project 3. Assess the outcomes of the Why Poverty? project in terms of shifts in social norms on poverty-related topics, organizational strengthening, mobilization, networking and policy influence (see evaluation framework below) 4. Identify lessons learned for Steps as an organization, for the unfolding outreach process and for future project design 5. Make recommendations based on the above lessons learned.
The evaluation made use of a conceptual map for evaluating outcomes 12; and the Draft Media Measurement Guide for exploring audience enagement.13 See appendix 4: M&E concept maps and tools for the logic models, theory of change and outcomes concept map, as well as the tools designed for the evaluation.
10 Membership of the online group varied. The first meeting was attended by team leaders from the BBC and VPRO digital platforms, Dutch digital content producers, VPRO commissioning editor and the STEPS executive producer. Its role was to develop the online strategy. Sophie Theunissen was hired in April 2012 as the Head of Digital Content for the web-site, and hired her own team to assist. 11 The project required many dedicated hours for certain broadcasters, over and above their day jobs of being commissioning editors. 12 from the Harvard Family Research Project, The evaluation Exchange XIII 1, page 22 accessed: http://www.hfrp.org/var/hfrp/storage/original/application/6bdf92c3d7e970e7270588109e23b678.pdf on 09.10.2012 13 http://chrisrosenthaldesign.com/downloader/gates-knightIframes/index.html supported by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Knight Foundation, and developed by LFA Group and POSSIBLE worldwide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 4 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
3 Methodology and sample
A mixed-method evaluation which comprised of both quantitative surveys and quantitative data analysis, and qualitative methods such as case studies was proposed as the framework for the methodology. A monitoring and evaluation system was designed at the start of the project and data was collected on key indicators through various means such as feedback forms, reports, and other project documents. Further data was collected expressly for the evaluation. Many organisations working in media for social change are currently searching for the best ways to monitor and evaluate outcoms and impact, going beyond usual quantitative statistics on reach and market share. At the time of conducting the evaluation the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation were supporting the development of the Draft Media Measurement Guide, and used this as a basis for measuring audience engagement. In this way, the monitoring and evaluation of this project has been experimental.
3.1 Methods
1. Desktop review A desktop review was conducted from internet research and project documents. www.whypoverty.net, Facebook and storify (http://storify.com/askwhypoverty/) all provided good sources of information on the project, as did the websites of many of the participating broadcasters. An extensive review of project documents was conducted including reports (e.g. social media report, broadcaster reports, reports from field visits), and project records such as minutes of workshops, meetings, proposals and situation analysis research).
2. Qualitative in-depth and semi-structured interviews Qualitative interviews were conducted with key project stakeholders. Interviews with key stakeholders were conducted (such as the project team, long film editorial group members, short film editorial group, NGO’s, filmmakers and other role players (EBU, Open University). These interviews sought to get insights into the effectiveness of the production and editorial process, and learn lessons about working with multiple broadcast partners. The interviews also covered the aspect of filmmaker development. The interviews covered both effectiveness and outcomes.
3. Screening and workshop feedback forms (quantitative) These forms capture audience responses after participating in a facilitated screening. They have now been adapted an included in the facilitators guide and will be available online.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 5 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4. Monitoring tools Monitoring tools were developed as part of the monitoring and evaluation system for the project. These included a set of feedback forms for workshops as well as analysis and report writing.
5. Online survey An online questionnaire14 was set up to facilitate feedback from broadcasters, predominantly to establish the reach of the broadcasts and what other supplementary activities or materials broadcasters created for the project.
6. Email data An analysis of emails that were sent to [email protected] in response to the broadcast was also conducted.
7. Case studies Four case studies were written up as part of the evaluation process. The case studies covered the following in-depth, and provided useful lessons learned for the main evaluation report: 1. Outreach and facilitated screenings conducted in Cape Town between November 2012 and February 2013 2. Outreach and facilitated screenings conducted in Botswana between December 2012 and March 2013 3. An analysis of Solar Mamas in 5 countries 4. An analysis of screenings conducted with the film Land Rush 8. Online analytics The online or digital analytics were measured through TopsyPro (Twitter), YouTube and Google in built analytics, and Facebook insights. This allowed for a measure of the effectiveness of the online strategy and understanding of the social media space for distribution, marketing and outreach.
3.2 Sample
The sample consisted of a total of 34 interviews, 88 individual feedback forms, 6 filmmaker development workshop questionnaires, feedback from 11 broadcasters and 5 filmmaker feedback forms.
Table 1 Sample for the evaluation Method Stakeholder group Number Qualitative interviews Funder 1 Production and editorial team, 8
14 Conducted through Question Pro.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 6 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
including co-producers Civil society organisations, 12 parliamentary groups Filmmakers 10 5 (Developing World) 5 (Developed World and Long Films) Partners 3 Total 34 Screening feedback forms Audiences 88 Broadcaster feedback Broadcasters 11 Filmmakers feedback forms Developing world filmmakers 6 Filmmaker assessment form Filmmakers 5
3.3 Data analysis
All the data was housed in NVIVO 10. A coding structure was developed. The codes developed will be useful for tagging data for further research. The analysis of data was informed by the Draft Media Measurement Guide,15 namely setting goals, understanding community, audience engagement and measuring impact. This framework was applied more closely in the case studies where applicable. The feedback tool was designed to measure the extent of people’s commitment to becoming involved in the issues raised by the films following the screenings, based on their level of contribution. This was fortuitous as the Draft Media Measurement Guide was not yet available when we designed the M&E tools.
3.4 Coding, monitoring and evaluation
The qualitative feedback and key project documents were coded in NVIVO 10.
A M&E plan and calendar was developed which included indicators, means of verification, time frames and methods for data collection, analysis and reporting. The monitoring tools that were developed can be found in Appendix 4. Social media analytical tools included: Twitter Topsy; Google analytics, YouTube analytics, Facebook insights.
3.5 Limitations
A key limitation has been the lack of standardised viewership data from broadcasters. A lesson learnt has been that it is best to engage specialist companies that track viewer data for
15 http://chrisrosenthaldesign.com/downloader/gates-knightIframes/index.html supported by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Knight Foundation, and developed by LFA Group and POSSIBLE worldwide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 7 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
broadcasters’ marketing departments, ahead of the broadcast schedule. However, this requires significant funding. The main indicators that would be interesting are 1) average market share 2) reach to individual viewers 3) knowledge of the Why Poverty? series, and 4) whether it has changed the way people think about poverty The second main limitation has been that we did not have analytical tools to deal with the huge amounts of on-line data that is mostly qualitative, such as tweets, Facebook comments, blogs, opinion pieces and so on. A tool for social network analysis would be useful. Facebook’s privacy settings mean that it was not as good a way to measure social networking as we had anticipated it would be. The third major limitation is language barriers that result in a large bias towards English-speaking countries and data. In order to overcome this we did have some translations done, but more of this would have been valuable. Another limitation is the low response rate to on-line questionnaires and feedback forms, although we are not making any claims to generalisation in this report to the entire viewing population - all the outcomes reported are specifically for the target groups that provided feedback. The final limitation which is a culmination of a few of the above, is that there is so much data, that we are sure to have missed some of it.
4 Effectiveness
This section covers the development, production and editorial process, distribution of the films, marketing and strategic communications, and outreach and audience engagement. The response from the viewing audience, the online community, film industry specialists, NGO’s and the educational community about these aspects has been overwhelmingly positive.
The people who drove the project were extremely committed to it and dedicated significant amounts of time over four years, over and above the requirements of their jobs, to make it happen. Interviewees indicated that they were excited by the project because it tapped into their value systems and they believed that it could make a positive contribution to addressing global poverty and inequality. This is what motivated people to continue to work on the project even when the circumstances were challenging.
4.1 Conceptualising the project
The Why Poverty? project evolved out of discussions which began in 2009 following the success of the Why Democracy? project The process began with stakeholder consultations which informed the design and relevance of the project, and culminated in the brief for filmmakers. A number of meetings and workshops were held with key stakeholders from the broadcasting community, filmmakers, civil society, and with development experts concerned with issues of poverty.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 8 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
The key messages that came out of these consultations were that there was a need to change the way that people affected by poverty are depicted in the media, and to make films that challenge stereotypes of people as helpless victims - films which provide hope, and which depict possibility and change.
4.2 Long films – development and production
4.2.1 Identification and selection of Long Films
In total, 85 proposals were received and evaluated by the Editorial Group, nine were selected for development funding, and eight films were commissioned in the end. The films were selected by consensus following rigorous debate and discussion, which was reported by most as being a constructive process. “The editorial group is crucial because it is the group that makes the selection, all 6 people. Where one of the commissioning editors feels that a project submitted is not sufficiently developed, then the group will decide whether to send it back for further development.” (Editorial group member). The process of identification and selection of filmmakers took one year, with day-long meetings of the editorial group held periodically. Still, some respondents thought that there was not enough time for selection. Another respondent recognised the reasons for the lengthy process: “If you involve broadcasters and they put in money, even small amounts, they want to determine what is being shown. We had to have a ‘democratic’ process in the selection of the films, but it was bound to be cumbersome.” (Editorial group member) A critical component when making films for social change is understanding the audience. This was complicated for Why Poverty? since the primary audience was global and diverse, and changed depending on the context. For the global broadcast, for example, it included both developed and developing world viewers. The films also needed to appeal to a wide online audience and to those in remote areas, for instance in Lesotho, who would watch the community screenings planned for the outreach process. Because of this, and because the editorial group wanted different perspectives in the films, there was a concerted effort to bring developing world voices into the films.
For example, the editorial group requested that the British “Land Rush” director (Hugo Berkley) work together with an African filmmaker (Osvalde Lewat from Cameroon), in order to get a more African perspective into the film. While it was challenging to co-direct, Hugo comments that: “I am proud of the film. There was lot of the collaboration with Osvalde the co-director - it made the film a lot better but it was difficult a lot of the time. We gave lots of space to farmers – to get their voices. … I had to respect her input and her reason for the film – to bring an African viewpoint and vocabulary to the film – I wasn’t willing to do window dressing, so I wasn’t going to ignore her input. This was a difficult thing to do.” The Peabody award which described the series as follows:
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 9 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
“This collection of eight films, each distinctive in tone and style, give us parallax views of poverty today and through the ages.”16
The films covered a range of topics and were a mix of strong personal stories, journalistic-style films and animation. They covered most of the continents, besides South America17. In general it is felt that the series as a whole reflects a discussion about the structural causes of poverty. As one filmmaker explained, “the series reflects these perspectives in really unique ways because people are describing things in their own voices, and this is the strength of these films”, (filmmaker 1).
4.2.2 Production and editorial process of long films
Recognising the production process would take longer than planned, the original broadcast date of February 2012 was moved to November 2012. The production team was of the view that the production aspects of the project were well run, and that the project ran within the revised time frames and budget. “We produced the films well, they were high quality (as a series we had to run all 8 films), brought them in on time, in budget, and I would follow a similar path with that”. (Production team) Documentary films are particularly challenging to make and hence required a lot of dedicated support from the principles in the project; there are so many unkowns and unpredictable factors in making documentary films, such as whether a key interview will be secured or whether external conditions remain stable (e.g the coup in Mali necessitated a change in the finalisation of Land Rush.) We interviewed two filmmakers about the production process. Both were positive about the support received throughout the production process, and enjoyed working with the production team, as reflected in the following quote: “They were extremely supportive and helpful through difficult times. They were always available to discuss and figure out what we could do, helping us to expedite decisions regarding the editorial process and keeping cash flow and budgetary things straight – they were always up on anything. I would love to do it again. From concept stage what we submitted was not well received by the panel and they worked with us to make it better received. They helped the whole way through.” (Producer, Long Film)
16 http://peabodyawards.com/past- winners/award/?pbaward=1649&pb_search=1&pb_title=&pb_year=&pb_porg=&pb_query=why%20povert y 17 This is one of the main laments by many stakeholders, as one stakeholder commented “People are first attracted to their own realities and that is why we tried to have a South American film.”
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 10 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Challenges
Challenges included tight timelines for some of the films, especially the difficulties of filming in a foreign country and language issues, such as translation. Cash flow was also mentioned as a challenge by one filmmaker, caused by delays in production. There are different views on the effective functioning of the editorial group. The respondents agree that having so many people giving editorial input was both rewarding and challenging. Both directors of long films that we spoke to highlighted that too many people having editorial opinions made it difficult to identify what was expected of them. However, they agree that this also resulted in carefully thought through films. “You have 10 different commissioning editors saying different things. I didn’t mind that, I find on the whole they had good ideas regarding what to do with the film and filtered the bad from the good” (Filmmaker). “They were having different views and … we managed to produce a good film as result of the interaction of different people who got me to see things a different way.” (Filmmaker) Most of the challenges arose from differing expectations about the extent of participation of members of the editorial group, coupled with a lack of clearly defined roles, responsibilities and reporting lines. It was difficult to strike a balance between inclusion in the process and editorial control, and the reasons for and effects of this were differently perceived by respondents.
4.3 Short films– – development and production
The primary objective for the short films was to make high quality, engaging short films that fulfilled the editorial objectives of the project, and that would also work on the internet. The primary distribution channels for the short-films were to be online and screenings. This was the first time that Steps had focused on online distribution to this scale18. The inclusion of short films was also a strategy to include a variety of voices from each continent, and to provide cameo insights into the key issues raised by the long films. In order to inform the project and to get clarity for the vision, Tampara University film students researched short documentary films which had won awards at film festivals, including the Tampara Film festival, which is primarily for short films. They found very few applicable documentary short films, but identified lessons for short films in general, and for online distribution. These were used to inform the identification, selection and editorial process for the short films. As one short film group member commented: “I felt the exceptional thing here was that these were original edgy films on the subject and really putting an effort into creating quality for films that are also shown on the internet is important – often films are made that are just not good enough.” (Short film editorial group member)
18 The success of the online distribution is discussed in section 4.5 distribution.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 11 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4.3.1 Working with filmmakers from the developing world and emerging filmmakers.
The short films presented an opportunity to work with more filmmakers from around the world, to develop the skills of emerging filmmakers and diversify the profile of filmmakers for the series. The short film editorial group undertook a number of activities to promote the Why Poverty? project to filmmakers, and focused their efforts on accessing emerging filmmakers, including people from developing world countries. Each individual member of the short film team used their networks to access emerging filmmakers from Africa, Asia, Latin America and South America. There was close collaboration between Steps and the Berlinale Talent Campus which has satellite campuses around the world (Buenos Aires, Sarajevo, Durban, Tokyo and Guadalajara). An open call was made through the Berlinale Talent Campus alumni of 4000 filmmakers from 150 countries, and they facilitated Why Poverty? to use their applications software with a Why Poverty? interface. The team also undertook the following activities during 2011:
• Presentations at the Durban film festival in July 2011; the Istanbul Documentary Days in December 2011; and the Buenos Aires Talent Campus in April 2012, followed by individual meetings with potential filmmakers to assist them in honing their ideas.
• Work with filmmakers on potential proposals at DocEdge, Calcutta in January 2012 which is a documentary event in India - five of the short films came from this process.
• A workshop for emerging filmmakers arranged through TAL was held in Sao Paolo, Brazil in May 2012. A brief was sent out and filmmakers were identified based on the strength of their stories and reputation. This filmmaker development workshop was a very beneficial part of the process, and four of the short films emerged from this gathering. The workshop was described as follows by one member of the short film editorial group: “The process of working with filmmakers was very creative which involved clarifying the idea and vision of the Why Poverty? project and unpacking conventional NGO perceptions of making movies about poverty” (Short film editorial group member 3)
Two of the interviewees had attended the workshop held in Brazil and provided positive feedback on the process and expert input they received. As one of the participants explained: “The workshop was excellent – it was very good and their comments were excellent. On the one hand they had the goal related to human rights but on the other hand they are also filmmakers and into telling a good story and they were able to share the balance of both with us”, (filmmaker 4)
The workshop feedback forms reveal that all participants felt the workshop was well-organised; that the facilitators were knowledgeable; and that they would participate in another Steps project in the future.
Although time consuming, the overarching strength of this process was that the clear vision of the Why Poverty? project was clearly communicated to emerging filmmakers. This was seen as a critical aspect which added to its success, as one team member explained:
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 12 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
“I felt the aim and idea of the series and the concept behind the project was very strong and original and could lead to new and surprising films in very different ways…..I liked the ideas of people talking about poverty and not showing people as victims – we were very clear about this approach and we connected different themes and causes to make a whole picture about poverty, its causes and how it can be changed sometimes, quite unexpectedly, and I was very curious to see what filmmakers would come up with” (Short film editorial group member 1) The result of these activities was that a total of 346 submissions were received from all over the world with 210 (60%) of these being from developing countries. In the end, of the 34 short films that were produced, 15 were by filmmakers from the developing world.
4.3.2 Opportunity to contribute to the project by sharing developing world perspectives
The evaluation focused on understanding the experience of the filmmakers from the developing world. In interviews they were asked about their ability to contribute to the project by bringing their perspectives as people from the developing world, into the films. By participating in the Why Poverty? project, transitional and developing world filmmakers agreed that they had been given the opportunity to share the experiences that people in their countries face every day. The fact that they were from the South/East themselves means that they had a good understanding of the complexity and nuances of the stories they were telling. This is captured in the following statements: “I am from the place where I made this film and I have witnessed and experienced some of the things appearing on the film on a first-hand basis”, (Filmmaker 5) “My film speaks about prejudice….when you come from a poor neighbourhood, hang around the streets, are black and ride a motorcycle, this is the worst combination in Colombia, it means you must be involved in drug trafficking. I wanted to say something about this. I understand the complexity of this situation like no other person could”, (Filmmaker 3)
Understanding the local culture and language also makes it easier to gain trust and access into people’s lives and homes, which would be much more difficult to achieve as an outsider: “The stories are small, local issues which a foreign director would never get to, or if they do get to these stories, it is because they spent many years in a small village living with people and had to abandon their first world perspectives”, (filmmaker 3) Furthermore, being female made it easier for some of the filmmakers to build trust with female children and young people, which resulted in a very intimate portrayal of the female protagonists in the short films - as was certainly the case for films such as Miseducation and Girls Day.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 13 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4.4 Post-production
Achievements
Final post-production for the long and short films took place in Cape Town. The films were delivered in accordance with each broadcaster’s requirements, either on tape, external hard drive or uploaded to FTP sites. The relevant press kits, including transcripts, photographs, music licences, synopses and other information were also delivered to the various broadcasters during the second half of 2012.
Challenges
The final post-production was complicated due to the various formats and requirements of so many broadcasters across the world. It was made more difficult due to late delivery on the long films, as all films went into extended post-production in order to reach the standard required for the project. As this meant a delay for broadcasters to version the films into local languages, a system was devised to send out the locked-off pictures with transcripts before colour grading, sound mix and final credits were completed. This helped make it possible for the films to be broadcast to schedule in the many different languages of participating broadcasters.19
4.5 Distribution
4.5.1 Broadcast distribution
Process of securing broadcasters Personal relationships, networks, the reputation of people with many years’ experience in the broadcast and film industries, and the reputation of Steps with the success of its former series, were all factors that helped with pitching the Why Poverty? project to broadcasters. Every opportunity was used to market the series to broadcasters, such as at international film markets (e.g. MIP and MIPDOC, BBC Showcase). Broadcasters who had not yet signed up were strategically targeted. The status of the initial co-producing broadcasters included the BBC, DR, VPRO, YLE, SVT, NRK, ZDF/ARTE, also helped to convince others to come on board, and not to miss out on the opportunity. “I pitched the project everywhere and then we got the initial broadcasters, who helped with the developing money, and then we got more targeted – e.g. Arab countries and I contacted the people I knew in the Arab world and then we got MBC on-board. I built on the relationships established with Why Democracy? and in my 20 years in this business.” (Editorial group member)
19 Progress reports to B&MG Foundation, March 2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 14 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
The EBU also played a role as it provided access to its large membership and helped in particular to network the project to the Eastern European broadcasters.
“This international connectedness and this national treatment afterwards was particularly interesting for us because for the EBU remit the broadcasters must have the liberty of talking to their audiences in ways that they think works well and they understand their audiences. But giving them a global event and strong commissioned international programming, the key filmmakers, the big stories from outside of their territories is important because they can’t buy it normally.” (EBU Stakeholder) DR played a key role in securing distribution and DR Sales was mandated to negotiate most of the broadcasting contracts, source new broadcasters, and importantly make sure that the agreed upon license fees were transferred within a reasonable time. A big success for distribution was bringing TAL on board (Television Americano Latino). They were given a license to share content with their network. Steps had only worked with Canal Futura in Brazil before, so the relationship with TAL meant the project was extended to all of Spanish speaking Latin America.
Disappointments were not securing an Indian broadcaster despite a sustained effort to do so, as well as e.TV in Africa, who decided to broadcast after Christmas, and not during the broadcast week. Eventually, however, e.TV screened on free-to-air terrestrial in South Africa, and across Africa on the eNCA channel on DSTV.
Number and Profile of broadcasters In the end a total of 69 broadcasters screened the films, reaching over 200 countries. A total of 17 broadcasters took the short films. Many of the broadcasters produced their own shows, promotional and educational content around the series on television, radio, online and in print.
Reach and market share It was difficult to compare reach and market share due to the fact that information provided by the broadcasters was not standardised for all the countries. For example, some countries had the reach statistics but did not have the market share figures, and vice versa. Not all films were shown by all broadcasters, with most showing all eight films whilst a few showed only one or two. TVP in Poland only aired Welcome to the World whilst the BBC in the UK showed all 8 films.
Table 2 Reach per country20 Broadcaster Country Total Reach of films ITVS / PBS USA 49,875,000 DR Denmark 1, 843, 000 VPRO Netherlands 1,552,000
20 Source: Feedback reports from broadcasters. This information was not provided by all broadcasters.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 15 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
TVO Canada 1,265,000 PTS Taiwan 1,258,700 RUV Iceland 121,380
RUV (Iceland) held the films with the biggest market share with Give Us The Money (55%) and Welcome to the World (50.8%). Give Us the Money had the lowest market share of all the films when aired on the BBC4 in the UK. (0.5%). PTS (Taiwan) had the smallest market share with its largest market share being 1.13% compared to that of RUV (Iceland), whose highest market share totalled 55%. This made a band of 54.5% between the biggest and smallest market shares. Welcome to the World was the only film that appeared twice within the top market share, showing that different films had different levels of viewership in each country. The table below illustrates the films with the biggest market share in each country. On reflection, a comparative market share between countries may not be meaningful, but market share is one of the key indicators used in the broadcast industry. It may be more meaningful on a country level to see which channels are attracting larger audiences.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 16 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 6 Films with biggest market share in each country
Market Share, Long Films
PTS (Taiwan) Educa on Educa on ETR (Greece) Solar Mamas VPRO(Netherlands) Land Rush BBC (UK) Welcome to the world TVP (Poland) Welcome to the World ORF (Austria) Stealing Africa RTHK (Hong Kong) Poor Us RUV (Iceland) Give us the Money
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
• On TVO (Canada) Solar Mamas proved the most popular with a reach of 205 000 • On ITVS (USA) the most popular was Park Avenue with a reach of 1 788 000. • In terms of market share and average audience Poor Us was seen to be the most popular on RTHK (Hong Kong) with a market share of 24, 5% and an average audience of 195 000.
• On RUV (Iceland) the most popular film was Give us the Money with a market share of 55% and an average audience of 67 000
• On the BBC (UK) the most popular was Welcome to the World with a market share of 9,1 % - however it was the only Why Poverty? film that was shown on BBC 1. The others were on BBC 4, which is a more niche channel.
• On ETR (Greece) the most popular was Solar Mamas with which had 2% of the market share • On ORF (Austria) the most watched was Stealing Africa with a market share of 12% and average audience of 118 000.
• On VPRO (the Netherlands) the films with the biggest market share were Land Rush and Welcome to the World, each with a market share of 5,3%. Welcome to the World, however, had a higher average audience at 182 000. Poor Us (294 000) and Give us the money (297 000) were the films with the largest reach, even though they had a smaller market share than Land Rush and Welcome to the World.
• Education, Education was the most popular in PTS (Taiwan) with a market share of 1,13%. The table with compiled broadcaster data is found in Appendix 3.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 17 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
DR viewer survey A viewer survey was conducted by DR which provides good quantitative data into the reach. The very positive results of a survey with a sample of almost 1500 are provided below. 21 • 1/3 of the Danish population has been in contact with at least one of the 10 programs that were aired in the last week of November 2012.
• 77% of the adult population know and remember Why Poverty?, which showed high levels of recognition. The knowledge of Why Poverty? according to the level of education was as follows:
• 83% with a university degree know about Why Poverty? (highest) • 68% with a high school education know about Why Poverty? (lowest) Older people were more likely to be knowledgeable of Why Poverty? in Denmark, although even the youngest age band (18-29) had 61% knowledge of the series. The graph below highlights that the knowledge of the series increased with age. There were no gender differences in knowledge of the series.
Figure 7 Who knows about Why Poverty? in Denmark, by age
Ages of people who know about Why Poverty? in Denmark 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 70 years and 60 - 69 years 50 - 59 years 40 - 49 years 30 - 39 years 18 -29 years older
21 The measurement was made between the 4th and 10th of December. Almost 1,500 interviews were conducted, with the vast majority as telephone interviews. The survey was conducted in a representative sample of the Danish population aged over 18.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 18 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
As can be seen in Table 3 below, respondents were also overwhelmingly positive about content elements of the films. The Children’s Programming received an overwhelmingly positive response (81%), followed by the documentaries (71%).
Table 3 Reactions to the various content elements of Why Poverty? in Denmark Positive Bad/Very Bad Documentaries 71% 4% Documentaries on DR2 60% 6% News items 56% 6% Radio (P4) 59% 6% Aftenshowet (entertainment 60% 6% show) Ramasjang (children’s channel) 80% 10% Radio (P1) 69% 5% dr.dk 62% 6%
4.5.2 Online distribution22
The online presence included a website and social media. The online team co-ordinated with broadcasters’ and partners’ digital departments to supply content and boost online activity. The Why Poverty? online strategy concentrated on building a site to host all the long and short films, as well as background material and links to organisations working on poverty issues. The main distribution activity online is at:
• www.whypoverty.net
• www.youtube.com/whypoverty
The short films were available online from October 2012, and the long films from January 2013 (after broadcast). Both the US broadcasters (PBS through ITVS) as well as the BBC, as the only two broadcasters with restricted online streaming rights, agreed to change their contracts in order for the long films to be streamed straight after broadcast.23 A Why Poverty? YouTube channel was formed as the best way to host the films online. Spanish versions were available online on the 12 March 2013. The films have been available for download since May 2013. A number of broadcasters also had catch-up channels, BBC had the films available on i-player and PBS designed a dedicated Why Poverty? page on their video portal. According to PBS, the programmes have received almost 100,000 combined views. As the films can be embedded anywhere, the films were not always being viewed on one platform (i.e. YouTube or the website). Approximately half are viewed on YouTube; 15% on the
22 Most of the feedback on the reach of the films online comes from the Why Poverty? Channel Specific Report, February 2013 and updated figures from online analytical tools 23 Progress report to B&MG Foundation, March 2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 19 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Why Poverty? site; 15% on other embedded players (i.e. broadcaster channels and I-am- bored.com) and around 10% on mobiles.
WhyPoverty.net
There have been 711,622 page views to whypoverty.net, increased from 186,622 in 10 December 2012. The number of unique visits more than doubled between December 2012 and April 2013, and increased to 186,086 by October 2013.
Table 4 Web statistics – 19 November 2012 – 31 October 2013 (cumulative totals)
19th November to the 19TH November - 30 19th November – 31 10th December April 2013 October 2013 Unique Visits 62,448 142,896 186,086 Page views 278, 464 619, 651 711,622 Pages per visit 2.86 n/a 2.09 Duration 5.36 n/a 3.36 New visits 62.24% n/a 54.28%
Figure 1 Unique visits to whypoverty.net (December 2012 - October 2013)
Unique Visits to Whypoverty.net December 2012 - October 2013 1000000
100000 142896 186086 62448 10000
1000
100
10
1 Dec-12 Apr-13 Oct-13
The graph below shows that visits peaked during the broadcast period, and then tapered off quite significantly, but have remained stable in the last quarter of 2013.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 20 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 2: Total number of unique visits: Monthly Figures (November 2012 – October 2013)
No. of unique visits to WhyPoverty.net: Monthly Figures December 2012 - October 2013 90000 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 Axis Title 30000 20000 10000 0
During the broadcast period, website traffic was dominated by English speaking countries and Northern Europeans, but a wide range of countries was represented overall. There are users from nearly 200 countries including Mongolia, Nicaragua, Peru, Sierra Leone, Bhutan and Pakistan.
Figure 3: Website views – top 20 countries (December 2012 – October 2013)
Whypoverty.net page views Top 20 Countries 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 21 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
The graph below highlights that while the number of page views was highest in November 2012, since February 2013 the unique visitors, page views and general visits are showing a similar trend.
Figure 4 Visits, unique visits and page views November 2012 – October 2013
350,000 Visits 300,000 Unique Visitors 250,000 287,983 Pageviews 200,000
150,000
100,000 120,768
50,000 55,626 34,766 34,267 29,361 27,886 26,001 25,660 25,134 23,780 0 20,431
Referrals The biggest referrers to whypoverty.net were Facebook, (over 31 000), the Open University (2 700) YouTube (2 900) and Twitter (4 350). The number of visits stemming from Africa For Norway (the spoof video urging people in Africa to send spare radiators to the Norwegians) was 1,600 visits. Of the broadcasters none other than PBS (who sent over 7 000 viewers) sent more than a few hundred viewers (BBC came in at 1 400, the Guardian at 1250 and Arte at 1600 users). It could be concluded that the broadcasters were sending viewers to their own sites, for example PBS was referring 5,000 users from their own site to their Why Poverty? micro site.
YouTube The YouTube channel proved popular, attracting around 1 538 430 views from September 2012 to October 2013. During the period Sept-Dec 2012 there were 500,000 views and as of 16 Apr 2013 there were 972,462 views. This showed the views had doubled in 3.5 months since broadcast, and then grew by another half a million viewers in the next 6 months. In the period September 2012 – December 2012 the most viewed films were the short films, however, once the long films were added they quickly outperformed the short films, and the percentage of embedded views rose steeply. Encouragingly, the subscribers figure continues to rise steadily. As of 31 October 2013 there are 38,943 subscribers, a rise from 29 500 subscribers in April 2013, and 7 000 in December 2012.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 22 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 5 No. of subscribers to the YouTube channel
Number of subscribers: YouTube Channel 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000
No. Of Subscribers 10000 5000 0 December, 2012 April, 2013 October, 2013
Audience demographics on YouTube
The English-speaking/Northern European bias that had been present on the WhyPoverty.net site was also witnessed on the YouTube channel. However there was more ‘partisan’ traffic, namely people looking at films about their country. There was also a bias towards older viewers which was more apparent once the long films were added. During broadcast, around 35-40% of the viewers on YouTube were over 4424.
This varied from country to country. During broadcast, 50% of American viewers were over 44, and only 1% under 17. By contrast, nearly 20% of Swedish viewers were under 17, as were 25% of viewers in Columbia. The most views came from the US (354,651, 23%), UK (169,673, 11%), Canada (96,640, 6%) and Sweden (66,63, 4%), the Netherlands (60,079, 3.9%),and Germany (53,894, 3.5%). Colombia, Australia, India, Russia, Denmark, Taiwan and Spain had 2% viewership each. However, the most channel subscribers came from India (10,015), followed by the UK (4,527) and Saudi Arabia (3,136).
24 NB: It is not clear how YouTube works out this statistic, thus one cannot be sure of its reliability
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 23 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 6 YouTube views 19 Nov – 10 Dec 2012
Figure 7: Further YouTube Statistics (October 2013)
Figure 8: YouTube statistics (Demographics, discovery and traffic sources) (October 2013)
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 24 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Traffic sources On YouTube, traffic came from a range of sources. In April 2013, most traffic was generated within YouTube, whilst nearly a third came from recommendations, other film pages and recommends from YouTube’s editorial feature, Spotlight. By October 2013, mobile had become a more significant traffic source, with most being generated by mobile apps and direct traffic (53%), followed by referrals from YouTube (40,8%), whilst only 7,2% came from outside YouTube. As the films can be embedded anywhere the films were not always being viewed on one platform (i.e. YouTube or the Website). Most viewers watched the films on the YouTube watch page (52,3%), embedded players on other websites, including whypoverty.net (31,2%) and only 10,9% on mobile devices. This has remained consistent since April 2013.
Figure 9 Top ten films on YouTube during 19 November – 10 December 2012
Figure 10: Top 10 films (October 2013)
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 25 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Views long films Park Avenue was the most viewed of the long films (252,874), with Stealing Africa (138,874) and Poor Us (135,993) following closely behind. Although Welcome to the World had proved popular in terms of broadcasting, it was less popular online. Again the reasons for this could stem back to the manner in which the films were broadcast (times, platforms etc.) whereas online there is far more control given to the viewer. The total number of views for all the long-films came to 781,124 by October 2013.
Figure 11 No. of views for long films on YouTube October 2013 (total =781124)
Long Films: No. of views (November 2013) - YouTube
Park avenue
Stealing Africa
Poor Us
Educa on, Educa on
Welcome to the world
Solar Mamas
Land Rush
Give Us The Money
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000
Views short films The short films received a total of 422, 46325 on YouTube with the most popular film being Finding Josephine by Tomas Sheridan (Uganda/UK) with 58 991. Love and Rubbish (44,547), Mama Illegal (41,417) and Waste (39,114 ) also proved popular. This may have been due to the filmmakers having an established and extensive online network.
25 This is the total number of views for all the films on YouTube as of 10 May 201. The total views (as shown on YouTube on that date) for each film on this date were added together to give a sum total.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 26 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 12 Short films, number of view, November 201326
26 There is a limitation to this data in that the films were replaced online, which meant that these figures only represent the views since replacement, and lost the initial views, which would have boosted them figures.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 27 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
YouTube engagement figures
Park Avenue, Poor Us and Stealing Africa were also the most liked, shared and viewed films. While BBC World Debate and Give us the Money were not in the 10 ten films viewed, they were in the most liked, shared and commented categories.
Table 5 Audience engagement on the top 10 films on YouTube (October 2013) Viewed Liked Shared Commented Park Avenue 252,874 2112 1529 1113 Stealing Africa 138,840 792 655 489 Poor Us 135,993 1313 665 687 Finding Josephine 58,736 Did not appear Did not appear in Did not appear in in top 10 top 10 top 10 Education 57,425 429 239 364 Education Welcome to the 49,039 215 143 184 world Love and Rubbish 44,293 172 119 154 Solar Mamas 43,252 Did not appear 245 172 in top 10 Land Rush 41,415 215 157 117 Mama Illegal 41,011 Did not appear Did not appear in Did not appear in in top 10 top 10 top 10 Give us the Did not appear 170 91 111 money in top 10 views BBC World Did not appear Did not appear 175 333 Debate in top 10 views in top 10
Case Study: Education Education in China27
Education Education garnered a great deal of attention within China, which speaks to the notion that people watched films coming from their own country. Other films in the series received positive feedback, but none as much as Education Education. Comments suggest that viewers shared the film via sites such as Youku and Sohu. The series was uploaded on Youku28 and reposted on Sohu and Iqiyi (both popular video sharing websites) as well as Asia’s popular micro- blogging site Weibo and the online networking platform Renren. On Youku, Education Education was shared over 700,000 times in April. Although Youku is arguably the more popular site, the video received almost seventy thousand more hits on Sohu.29 Youku Analytics and Sohu Index indicate that the film was getting about 1000 views per day at
27 Kin, M (2013) “Why Poverty? Education, education: Response in China” report for Steps International, Why Poverty? project 28 A popular Chinese video sharing website similar to YouTube with 50 million registered users 29 Information taken from the WhyPoverty? report on China.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 28 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
the time of writing (April 2013). The film received the most views between the 13 March 2013 and 16 March 2013, reaching a high of 31401 views on 14 March 2013. Views per day decreased to 3000 views a day and then plateaued. Views spiked up to 8096 hits on 8 April 2013 before dropping down to 1859 views a day. The government has not actively banned the mentioning of the film in the media. The video was easily accessible to anyone in China and could be found when searching on Baidu – China’s most popular search engine. However the film was eventually blocked for viewing, and the Director, Weijun, has been interrogated by security police in China because of the film.
Table 6 Number of views per film on the different video-sharing sites in China
Why Documentary Name Views on Youku Views on Views on Iqiyi Poverty? Sohu Series 1 Poor Us: An animated history 171678 110810 510773 2 Welcome to the world 64772 41417 Iqiyi only has the 3 Park Avenue 57569 47058 numbers for the entire 4 Land Rush 25410 19588 series as it is uploaded 5 Give Us the Money 17340 11186 as one playlist. We 6 Stealing Africa 33819 20005 had trouble accessing 7 Solar Mamas 20485 30244 Iqiyi from RSA. 8 Education, Education 708385 770692
Below are visual diagrams indicating sex, age, education level and profession of those who have been viewing and commenting on the film. These figures are based on the comments and reposts by registered users on Youku and Sohu.
Figure 13 Demographics of social media engagers in China (by sex, age, profession, education)
Sex Age
Below 21 Male 22-29 Female 30-39
Profession Student Part Time White Collar Civil Servant
Educa on Masters Undergrad College Highschool Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Middleschool Page | 29 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4.6 Marketing and strategic communications
Achievements
Marketing and strategic communications is defined as “… the process of informing target audiences about opportunities to watch and engage with the media.”30 The activities Steps and the broadcasters undertook to encourage people to watch the documentaries will be highlighted in this section. Anything that was done by the broadcasters or Steps to encourage further engagement with the subject will be discussed under “Outcomes”.31 There were important achievements with regard to marketing and strategic communications ahead of the global broadcast event.
• Why Poverty? was launched at a UN event in New York on 27 September 2012, where the UN Deputy Secretary-General lauded the project for helping to keep poverty high in the global public’s awareness and at the top of the international agenda.32
• Besides the website (www.whypoverty.net) and the YouTube channel which are described in the distribution section, STEPS had the following online presence for Why Poverty?
o www.facebook.com/whypoverty o www.twitter.com/askwhypoverty o There is also a smaller presence on: https://plus.google.com/101758415321741457362 and http://storify.com/askwhypoverty/33
• The film series was launched at IDFA on 22 November 2012, days before the broadcast launch on the 25th, where the eight long films and eight short films were
30 “This often includes reaching out to schools, member organisations and other existing networks that are seeking relevant media, conducting extensive online messaging to target audience segments and seeking press coverage.” Verellen, Emily, “From Distribution to Audience Engagement – Social Change Through Film.” The Fledgling Fund. 2010
31 This is because the broadcasters are not a direct project implementer, but the full table of broadcaster engagement can be found in Appendix 1. 32 http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/dsgsm641.doc.htm 33 Although Storify has a small following, it really is a good way to get an overview of the Why Poverty project.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 30 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
screened in three blocks in cooperation with VPRO. In addition, four of the eight Why Poverty? films and three short film were screened during IDFA's regular program34. The films have also been screened at many other film festivals around the world.
• Many broadcasters engaged in off-line marketing, including public stunts such as the Poverty Menu in the workplace cafeterias in Denmark (see Appendix 1 for details)
• Steps entered into agreement with The Communications Initiative (CI), which expanded access to people in the developing world. A Why Poverty? page was featured on their website, where the project received 4,000 unique visitors and over 12,000 page views35. The CI network currently has 88,429 registered users, 70% of whom are from non-OECD countries, and grows by 5-10 people per day. Issue 626 of the Drum Beat newsletter, containing more information on Why Poverty?, was also sent out electronically on 23 November 201236.
Challenges
The off-line marketing of the broadcast by Steps was a challenge, and a stronger marketing strategy was needed to underpin the online strategy. As the digital report notes, “Online can help with lots of things but not replace them. For example, having a social media account is not the same as having a marketing strategy, which your social media accounts support.”37 The online marketing strategy is discussed below.
Website
The website was first created in September 2010 as a ‘brochure’ site to hold basic information about the project and submissions of film proposals. An expanded website was launched in September 2012. The site was co-funded by VPRO. According to the Why Poverty? on-line report, the website was created as a long-term asset, with a life and purpose beyond broadcast, namely to provide content, press kits, facilitators’ guides, and distribution. The online strategy was to attract people to the Why Poverty? series through the platforms that they usually engaged with, rather than trying to direct them to whypoverty.net. The Why Poverty? site could not compete with the broadcasters’ own sites as they had also had all the films, their own content and the content that Why Poverty? had made. There was thus nothing particularly unique about the Why Poverty? site. The broadcasters also had established, trusted sites with existing audiences, and their own networks and marketing strategies drive traffic to their sites. The PBS figures highlight how much traffic broadcasters can capture, create and drive to their
34 http://www.idfa.nl/industry/festival/why-poverty.aspx
35 http://www.comminit.com/en/whypoverty/
36 http://www.comminit.com/global/content/drum-beat-626-why-poverty
37 Steps digital online report, March 2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 31 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
own website around a project like this. The programs received almost 100,000 combined views on the PBC video portal. High broadcast viewership does not necessarily translate into traffic for the Why Poverty? site - for instance the 1.4 million viewers in Denmark resulted in just 400 views from the DR site to the Why Poverty? site. “Rather than count hits to our site, we wanted to reach as many people as possible. We therefore let our content free, encouraging broadcasters to put it on their sites, and tried to engage people on platforms where they already were (like Facebook) rather than trying to bring them to our site.”38
Social media
In terms of social media, the following strategies were employed:
• The main strategy for Facebook (FB) and Twitter was to be sociable, and activate existing social networks. “The agenda was to get more people to watch the films so to do this I would follow organisations - charities, UN, foundations that had similar agendas and like their pages and actively like their content. It was a way of people finding out about us.” (Email response from digital team)
• FB and Twitter were used to inform people about the upcoming broadcast of the films - embedding the trailers on Facebook, posting memes, and tweeting about it with a link to the trailer ahead of broadcast.
• Why Poverty? tweeted during the UK broadcast of the films - using quotes, facts and figures from the films, and this helped spread the word and encouraged re-tweeting. Why Poverty? was not able to do this for all the other international broadcasts, mainly because of time differences.
• Why Poverty? social flagged when the films were available on broadcaster catch-up channels (e.g. BBC’s I-player)
• The short films and the documentaries were used for topical posts - for example, God is Rain was shared again on social media to mark World Water Day.
• A number of organisations including The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Independent Lens (PBS), RAI Storia (Italy), PBS, Oxfam (UK), Oxfam in Norway and Holland, Action Aid in Sweden, Norway and Holland, all endorsed Why Poverty? on their Facebook pages - thus flagging the existence of Why Poverty? They also tweeted about Why Poverty? This was crucial support that led to more people liking and following Why Poverty? on Facebook and Twitter.
The data in the following two figures was generated independently in England and sent to the EBU. The findings highlight that Twitter is predominantly used for marketing purposes, and people encouraging others to watch the films.
38 Why Poverty? online report, March 2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 32 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 14 Overview of Why Poverty ? Online Social Media 1 December – 1 February 2013
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 33 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 15 Geo-location heat map of online engagement , 1 December – 1 February 2013
Top Locations Top Languages United States 22% English 62 % United Kingdom 17% Other 14 % Sweden 8% Spanish 5 % Italy 6 % Swedish 4 % Spain 4 % Italian 2 % Germany 3% Canada 3% Japan 3% Australia 3% Netherlands 2%
During the period November 2013 to December 2013 the twitter account noted 3,400 followers which increased to 4,939 by April 2013 (45% increase). The number eventually increased to 7,332 by October 2013 which constituted a 216% increase from the initial total. During the November – December period the number of tweets using the #WhyPoverty was 11,424. By October 2013 #WhyPoverty was still the most popular hash tag, followed by #tax. During the period 1 November 2012 to 31 January 2013 the number of re-tweets was 3,734 and the number of mentions was 10,711. The twitter campaign had an estimated reach of
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 34 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
34,531,169.39, and an impression of 19,365,248 people. The most popular day for tweeting about the project was 27 November 2013 and the tweets were about Stealing Africa.
Between July and October 2013, there were 799 mentions (7,5 per day) and 728 re-tweeted tweets a total of 2,549 times. The films received an overwhelming positive response on Twitter and had wide reach. Graph of daily mentions
Figure 16 Number of Twitter followers (December 2012 – October 2013)
Number of Twi er Followers 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000
No. of Twi er Followers 1000 0 December, 2012 April, 2013 October, 2013
Geographical data The most active countries on Twitter were the US, UK, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Italy, Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Brazil. Often – but not always – the response reflected an engaged broadcaster. In Canada, @theagenda and @tvo tweeted about the documentaries. In the US, PBS/Independent Lens heavily promoted all the films too. The same was also the case in Italy for @RAIstories, @MBC2Group in the Middle East, and @ABC2 in Australia.
Patterns of Use In general, the majority of tweets were about:
• Screening times – broadcasters, NGO’s, partners, interested individuals and documentary fans publicising the broadcast • Responses to the films – individuals and organisations live-tweeting during broadcasts • Catch-up services – broadcasters and individuals publicising catch-up services and individuals responding to the films and requesting more information.
39 According to TopsyPro, the measuring service recommended by Gates.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 35 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Below are the lists of the most influential tweeters from two periods: December 2012 – April 2013 and July 2013 – October 2013:
Most influential tweeters:
December – April 2013
• The Gates Foundation tweeted to 884,655 followers • Rai Storia channel's Twitter account tweeted to 3,791 followers • MBC group tweeted to 905,154 followers • Raymond Baker of the Global Transparency Fund and his organisation tweeted about Stealing Africa to 4,971 followers
• Ann Pettifor, Director of Policy Research in Macro-economics and a fellow of the New Economics Foundation, tweeted about Stealing Africa and re-tweeted a number of Why Poverty?’s other tweets to 6,722 followers
• Richard J Murphy, tax researcher, chartered accountant, political economist and author of The Courageous State, tweeted about Stealing Africa to 16,911 followers. He is a key figure in the tax justice world.
• Alex Cobham is Head of Research at Save the Children. He was a contributor to the documentary Stealing Africa and posted a lot of tweets about the film to his 1,448 followers
• Dambisa Moyo, economist and author of Dead Aid, tweeted about Give Us The Money to 81,112 followers
• Calestous Juma, Harvard professor and author, tweeted to 28,202 followers • Vatican News posted quite a few tweets about RAI Storia's broadcast of the documentaries to their 126,352 followers
• Owen Barder, development economist and Senior Fellow and Director for Europe at the Center for Global Development, tweeted to 9,935 followers July 2013 – October 2013
• @Oxfam (450,290 followers) • @OxfamAmerica (180,778 followers) • @Amnestyitalia tweeted to 149,154 followers
• @MrStevenGeorge tweeted to 51,823 followers, founder LetsStartUpMedia.com in South Florida. Hash tags include #marketing, #philanthropy, #LifestyleofGiving
• @canalfutura tweeted to 39,759 followers • @WBPubs tweeted to 39,407 followers, World Bank Publications • @Xuxa2 tweeted to 38,795 followers, model and Curls Event Coordinator, London • @Halimamdee tweeted to 31,391 followers , Member of Parliament in Tanzania
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 36 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• @mtvexit tweeted to 31,117 followers, MTV Exit is a campaign to combat human trafficking and exploitation through live events, innovative content and youth engagement, Thailand.
• @MrMilitantNegro tweeted to 27,200 followers, he is an individual who fights racism, justice and oppression (and hates stupid ☺ ). There were also a number of active users who may not have necessarily been influential (however some did have a high number of followers) Below is a figure of the active users.
Figure 17: Most Active Users
From 19 Nov - 10 Dec, the Facebook page received 6,096 new likes, by 16 April 2013 it had 11, 418 and by October 2013 there were 11,459 likes. This showed an 88% increase in the number of likes between the two periods.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 37 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 18 Increase in Facebook likes from 19 November 2012 – October 2013
Increase in Facebook Likes 14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000 No. of Facebook Likes 2000
0 November - December, April, 2013 October, 2013 2012
On one day (27 November 2012), the page got 853 new likes. This occurred the day after Stealing Africa aired on the BBC, and the tax justice movement was very active online.
Figure 19 Why Poverty? meme In total the Facebook statistics were:
• No of Likes: 5,034 • No. of Shares: 4,018 Memes were designed by Why Poverty? for the digital media promotional activities, such as the graphic in Figure 19. Posts Several thousand people view each post on the Facebook page. The most popular post of all was a photo from Solar Mamas asking people to watch and share the film in honour of International Women’s Day. The post was liked by 184 people, was shared 115 times, and was seen by 13,408 people. The most popular video post was the one announcing that the Stealing Africa documentary was now available on the BBC i-player. It received 100 likes, 64 shares, 10 comments and an estimated 5,635 reach on Facebook. There is a large bias towards English-speaking countries - including Australia and India. The most engaged countries were the UK, Taiwan, Sweden, US, Greece, Australia, and Canada.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 38 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Many of the broadcasters also engaged in extensive marketing and communications campaigns, and this information is captured in section 5.3 (Networking and mobilising), as well as in Appendix 1. Challenges
Regarding Twitter, a challenge was that the project did not secure the @whypoverty handle (this had been taken by someone else by the time the social media engagement started). According to members of the online working group, the lack of clear strategic direction for the website was a challenge which hampered the progress of the web development. Initial propopals for an on-line strategy from VPRO, and another from Purpose, were not implemented and in the end an independent company was hired to build the site, leaving the development of the site late.40 This manifested in terms of the choice of whether to decentralise the resources to the broadcasters or build a strong central Why Poverty? site. Another challenge was that the initial site was built to house the films, but these were not available until after the broadcast period because of licencing agreements. There were also technical difficulties around making the site workable on a number of platforms, including mobile. With the social media team based in England, maintaining a truly global social media presence was challenging because of time differences and language barriers. However, because there were many followers also tweeting and engaging on Why Poverty?, the reach was extended in this way.
4.7 Educational outreach and audience engagement
We have defined educational outreach or audience engagement, as the “process by which the target audience is asked to go from passive viewing to active participation with the subject matter – the most critical link in achieving social change.” 41 Understanding how the community engages with the films is a key element of success in social media.42 For a broadcast project, outreach and audience engagement extends the life of the project beyond the broadcast date. For the Why Poverty? project, outreach and audience engagements happen both on- and off-line. They involve:
• partnerships with other organisations through an outreach and education programme • the production of an extensive facilitators’ guide to support facilitated screenings43 • the website as the central point for distribution and outreach, including provision of educational resources such as the facilitator’s guide and educational materials
40 There are differing opinions about this process, and the evaluator has hence focused on the ramifications and not the causes of this. 41 Verellen, Emily “From Distribution to Audience Engagement – Social Change through Film”. The Fledgling Fund, 2010 42 Draft Media Measurement Guide, 2013 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/564370-3- measuring-engagement-building-block-3.html?key=d9ff1aea8a9a51627979 43 http://www.whypoverty.net/en/all-about/teachers-guide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 39 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• DVD sets of the whole series (packaged together with the facilitator’s guide) • online viewing through the Why Poverty? YouTube channel
• online action Steps (for organisations championing issues raised in the films) • interactive online graphics, • Online discussion forums, and so on. • Translating the films into local languages. (Futura, has for instance, made all the films available in Portuguese). http://www.futura.org.br/international/ Partnership with organisations around the world is a key element of the outreach strategy. Partners include NGO’s, educational arms of broadcasters, academic institutions, educational institutions, civil society organisations, think-tanks, media groups and so on. By engaging organisations as outreach partners, Steps embeds the films into educational and social change programming and also helps to strengthen organisations by providing resources and a relationship with an international programme44. Working with organisations in this way is a strategic opportunity to increase the numbers of people moving from passive viewing to high engagement, because NGO’s provide platforms for local action. The findings from our evaluation reiterate that most people who watch a film will not necessary get involved in the issue beyond watching, even if they are moved by it - unless there is a platform for them to engage. Two case studies were written for this evaluation that capture how local networks can be mobilised for an outreach process using the films. One took place in Cape Town and another in Botswana. The case studies were also used as opportunities to test the audience engagement framework from the Draft Media Measurement Guide, and these have been applied in the outcomes section of this report.45
4.7.1 Facilitated screenings and educational resources
To extend the life of the films beyond broadcast and to make them available as resources for education and mobilisation, the films and a facilitator’s guide are available online for viewing on whypoverty.net and YouTube or for download from Vimeo. The hard copy distribution pack for Why Poverty? includes all the long and short films on DVD, and the facilitator’s guide booklet. A thematic site has been created on www.cominit.com, managed by Citurna and CILA. The films will be hosted there in Spanish and Portuguese, as well as relevant information about poverty and poverty alleviation in Latin America, activities and debates, and links to organizations and sources. Language versioning is critical for outreach. Language versions are being sourced from broadcasters as required. These will be used for the YouTube channel as well as outreach. To date, Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Italian and German versions have been acquired, and French requested. Chinese versions are being produced in Beijing under a distribution agreement with the CNEX foundation. New language versions will be produced where needed in the focus
44 Organisational strengthening is discussed in more detail in the 45 http://chrisrosenthaldesign.com/downloader/gates-knightIframes/index.html supported by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Knight Foundation, and developed by LFA Group and POSSIBLE worldwide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 40 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
outreach regions, and so far Hindi, Swahili, Sesotho and Setswana have been identified as needed for a selection of films. Other requests have been for Turkish, Burmese and Mongolian versions.
Facilitator’s guide The facilitator’s guide has been produced in English and was finalised in September 2013. The Spanish version was available in November 2013, and further language versions will depend on working relationships built up with other networks and organizations. The films and the facilitator’s guide provide a rich educational resource. The intended outcomes of the guide for screenings are to:
• help facilitators and educators to engage with audiences • deepen the understanding of the underlying causes of poverty and inequality as explored in the Why Poverty? films
• maximise the mobilisation and networking potential as a result of watching the films
The facilitator’s guide includes the following:
• Guidelines on using film as a social change or educational tool • Ways of using social media to communicate with the wider community. Why Poverty? continues to support social media platforms including Twitter, Facebook and You Tube as a means of engagement.
• Questions for discussion specific to each film • An overview of the main themes explored in the films. These can be seen at a glance in a spread sheet
• Suggested related films, so that long and short films can be viewed together in themes. The long films are also divided into shorter chapters to help explore specific topics
• Activities for group screenings where a deeper understanding of poverty and inequality is explored
Additional background material and resources are located on the website, as well as information on how to arrange screenings, ideas for action and links to organisations working in the related fields.
The STEPS action-learning cycle is a key ingredient of the educational process and the facilitator’s guide is structured around this. Using the action–reflection cycle, viewers are asked to reflect on their emotional and intellectual reactions to the films, and to think about how they may respond in their communities or contexts.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 41 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 20 STEPS Action Learning Cycle
Many screenings have already taken place following the broadcast, organised by partners and by STEPS. Eight screenings took place between November 2012 and April 2013 for which we received feedback forms and screening reports. The target audiences for these were policy- makers (in England and America), youth, NGO’s and students. The feedback from the screenings has been written up in the case studies, and was used for designing the Why Poverty? facilitator’s guide, and particularly the questions for discussion. There have been other screenings - for instance, ITVS showed Solar Mamas over 100 times as part of their Community Cinema outreach programme. Training STEPS has a training department which offers training to organisations who want to use documentary films to enhance their programme work, including a training of trainers programme. STEPS has trained a number of organisations throughout sub-Saharan Africa for previous projects, and the Botswana case study shows how the network of NGO’s which have been trained is easily activated to use this new series. Four out of the eight organisations that participated in the Cape Town NGO screenings indicated interest in participating in the training on the STEPS facilitated screening methodology and the action-learning cycle. 46
Challenges
Feedback from a number of respondents was that it would have been ideal if the educational resources, particularly the facilitator’s guide and the film sets, were ready for distribution at the time of the broadcast, to capitalise on the momentum and interest generated by the broadcast period. However, this would have meant that the films would have had to be ready at least 6 months prior to broadcast, which was not the case.
46 More information can be found in the Cape Town outreach case study
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 42 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4.7.2 Online campaign strategy
Initially, the Why Poverty? project was to have an online campaign element to build a mass citizen-based community, including the global South, to support campaigns on structural issues that caused poverty. A strategy for this was developed in August 2011. However, due to broadcaster impartiality concerns it was decided to separate the online site and social networking from the campaign strategy. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided a supplementary grant to begin executing the online campaigning and movement strategy over a six month period.47 An organisation called /TheRules was established, but it did not benefit from the momentum that it was expecting from the global broadcast, because of the separation of the two elements. The decision to create and support /TheRules is beyond the scope of this evaluation. However, the effect of the separation of the global broadcast from the campaign elements, posed three main challenges for the project. Firstly, it caused delays in the online process and a very different website could have been built for the project. Secondly, it impacted adversely on relationships both within Steps and between Steps and some of its partners. Lastly, it made it more difficult to capture the momentum generated by the project which could catalyse people into direct co- ordinated actions against poverty. Having said this, cooperation between certain broadcasters and NGOs is likely to be an on-going issue. However, the focus on building local action through partnerships with organisations and facilitated screenings, including the production of more local content films, is a feasible approach to ongoing audience engagement and mobilisation.
4.8 Conclusion – effectiveness
This concludes the section on effectiveness. In summation, this project has been a massive undertaking by a small core team, with many creative partnerships that have resulted in a “… challenging, beautifully crafted, ground-breaking series of 8 documentaries”48, 34 short films, cross-media content, social media marketing and engagements and ongoing educational resources and processes. The following outcomes section explores the changes in the target audience and other stakeholders, particularly emerging film makers, in terms of knowledge, attitude and behaviour.
47 Progress report to the B&MG Foundation, March 2013
48 http://groups.wdm.org.uk/miltonkeynes/2013/01/30/why-poverty-the-bbcs-best-kept-secret/
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 43 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
5 Outcomes
This section reports on the short term changes achieved as a result of the Why Poverty? broadcast, outreach activities and filmmaker development. It will look specifically at audience engagement in terms of shifts in awareness and social norms, organisational strengthening, networking and mobilisation, improved policies, and outcomes achieved for emerging filmmakers from the developing world. Because the data for this evaluation was conducted two months after the global broadcast of the films, its focus is on the more immediate outcomes of the project, and these findings will provide useful insight into the potential impact of the project. The results were used to inform the outreach phase.
5.1 Shifts in awareness and social norms
Feedback from audiences around the world reveals that the Why Poverty? films are a powerful tool for 1) building public participation in the poverty debate, and 2) changing people’s awareness and understanding of poverty, and shifting social norms on the topic. Evidence of this can be found from people’s responses via emails and social media; and from audience engagement at the outreach screenings. The films have tapped into a public sentiment and new way of thinking about poverty and international development, shifting from charitable sentimental responses, to solutions that emphasise agency that will bring about systemic lasting change to redress inequality - such as addressing transparency, corporate governance, tax, agriculture and so on49.
5.1.1 Evidence from emails and social media responses
The analysis of the feedback received from emails, Facebook and Twitter highlights a generally positive response, lauding the films for their insight into poverty. Most of the engagement revolved around people sharing their thoughts about the films, how they were able to relate to them, reflections on poverty, and what can be done to help in general. The responses also reflect that people were moved or inspired to participate in fighting poverty, as many asked about avenues for involvement. Based on the patterns of use for Twitter, a large majority of the tweets during the broadcasting period were responses to the films. This was mostly individuals and organisations live-tweeting during broadcasts. People tended to tweet meaningful quotes from the films, or re-tweet Why Poverty? tweets with messages, encourage others to watch and share times of broadcast. Facebook and Twitter did not prove to be dynamic platforms for debate and discussion, but the online symposium hosted by ITVS indicated that this type of web-based forum is better for stimulating interactive discussion.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 44 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
“Your piece was very informative and rewarding to watch, it gave me courage as a Zambian to continue fighting for change. Please continue providing such strong platforms and voices for many vulnerable people across Africa being subjected to unfair investments and policies.” (email correspondence). “I saw the Park Avenue film on the UK TV channel BBC4 last night. It is one of the most powerful documentaries I have seen. I am very grateful that you are giving voice to these issues. I don’t think it is an exaggeration to suggest they are a matter of life and death. Thank you.” (Email correspondence). “Watched the documentaries from Cyprus and believe me they do make a difference in people's hearts, minds and souls. Keep it up and looking forward to more projects to come!” (Facebook post) “Is there a way as the public we can make the people responsible for these blatant loopholes of the law accountable for their actions? Surely there's enough evidence available to stop this perpetual cycle.” (Facebook post) “I just watched Solar Mamas and it was completely inspiring. Thank you for bringing such wonder to our world.” (Facebook post) sample tweets: • @ragdollphysics @askwhypoverty I am profoundly changed, I want to thank everyone involved in #WhyPoverty One Love. #EarthSmart #GlobalDebate • @KateLaurenMoore: Completely moved by #4born documentary and the work of Dr de Almeida and @msf_uk. Must donate and help raise awareness #whypoverty • @stuart_hepburn Stuart Hepburn: Jaw-dropping figs. 4 USA distribution of wealth. Top 400 individuals control MORE than bottom 150million! #ParkAvenue #BBC4 • @lucajsage Luca Sage: Been watching another top drawer #whypoverty programme on the Rich/Poor divide in USA. Unbelievable. Truly unbelievable. #bbc4 #parkavenue • @ronkelawal Ronke Lawal "The amount of money/wealth flowing OUT of developing countries is 10 times the amount of aid that flows IN!" #stealingafrica #whypoverty
Particular films in the series have sparked a strong emotive response and engagement from audiences. For example, Welcome to the World evoked a wide range of responses on Twitter during the programme, with people donating money and time, expressing emotional responses of tears, shock and speechlessness, providing intellectual responses around global inequality and why resources are not being properly shared, and praising both the quality of the film and the BBC for showing it. Solar Mamas and Park Avenue have also evoked equally emotive responses, while in China, Education, Education triggered much online debate and discussion. A summary of this audience engagement in China is contained below.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 45 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Response to Education Education in China50 The film Education Education had a large response in China, mainly on video sharing websites. Viewers comment on how the film is an excellent portrayal of China today, and recommend that others watch it. Others expressed anger at the educational system of China and those, like the lecturer, who represented the flaws in the educational system.
Over 70% of the comments are from people who relate to the unemployed university student and feel that something has to be done about the capitalist nature that the education system has adopted. They all feel a strong sense of disapproval towards a society that has simply accepted this unjust system. They call for change to be made in China. Below are comments found online about the film: “It doesn’t matter how high our GDP is… our conscience is gradually disappearing, starting with our teachers…” “… this documentary compels us to put our patriotism aside for the moment and tip our hats for them. To so plainly present the many topics in need of discussion in China without attaching any political agenda lets us, through the eyes of an outsider, reflect on ourselves.” These findings prove that the films are a powerful tool for conscientising people around the structural causes of poverty: ‘Why Poverty? intended to try to make people think, and be constructive, and be part of the change to know better…..this had a fantastic ambition of trying to understand and trying to share – understand the causes of poverty but also see that people are not the same and poverty in different places means different things” (long film editorial group member)
An indication that the films challenged traditional Western conceptions of poverty is that they were recommended by the Norwegian spoof website “Africa for Norway”51 which challenges these stereotypes by urging people in Africa to send spare radiators to the Norwegians. This site taps into a youth audience speaking out for changing the discourse on poverty. This site drove a significant amount of traffic to the Why Poverty? website (1,100 visits, compared to 1,200 from Twitter at that time (April 2013.)
5.1.2 Evidence from outreach activities
A shift in awareness and social norms was also achieved amongst a diverse range of audience members who attended the initial outreach screenings around the world. A summary of the films, screening venues and audience members targeted is presented in Appendix 2. The outcomes in terms of audience engagement discussed next, provide a useful snapshot of the potential impact that outreach activities can have in keeping the films alive after broadcast and
50 Kin, M (2013) “Why Poverty? Education Education: Response in China” report for Steps International, Why Poverty? project
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 46 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
mobilising on-going support for people and organisations working to end poverty around the world.
Audience engagement
All the screenings resulted in active discussion and debate amongst audiences members. The findings from those participants who completed the individual feedback forms after the screenings are captured in the table below. The questionnaire was designed to measure the extent of people’s commitment to become involved in the issues raised by the films following the screenings based on their level of contribution.
Table 7 Audience responses to films (N=88) Agree Disagree No respon se 84% 0% 16% a. The Films are thought-provoking
76% 7% 17% b. The films are entertaining
82% 3% 15% c. I would encourage others to watch these films
76% 8% 16% d. The films are presenting the themes/topics in innovative
ways 71% 11% 18% e. I am thinking differently about the causes of poverty as a
result of participating in the event 63% 17% 19% f. I am thinking differently about the solutions to poverty
as a result of participating in the event
The responses show that the majority of respondents found the films to be thought-provoking (84%) and entertaining (76%). Most of them also believed that the films presented issues, themes and topics in innovative ways and said that they would encourage others to see the films. This indicates that they thought the films were of high quality. There has also been an overall shift in knowledge and awareness around poverty as a result of participation in the screenings - 71% of respondents said they are thinking differently about the causes of poverty and almost two thirds (63%) are thinking differently about the solutions to poverty as a result of participating in the screenings. How the films motivated people to continue engaging with the Why Poverty? project following the event was also measured, and the findings demonstrate that the outreach activities have the potential to stimulate engagement with the project. Contributions ranged from following on social media platforms (81%) to joining a local or global campaign (49% and 51% respectively). As may be expected, the number of respondents who are willing to contribute with higher levels of engagement diminished as the level of contribution required increased. The biggest response is that 82% of participants said that they would encourage others to see the films, which is another
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 47 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
positive indication that the viewers found the films valuable. This is visually represented as the trend line in the graph below.
Figure 21 Audience engagement with Why Poverty? project – trend line
Audience engagement trend line
I will link up with organisa ons in other countries and join the global campaign
I will promote it on social media pla orms
I would encourage others to watch the films
I will watch the other films on-line
Extent of contribu on: low to high I will follow on social media pla orms
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % of respondents
In support of the findings above, the vast majority of respondents (94%) indicated that they would like to know more about the Why Poverty? project as a result of seeing the films, depicted in Figure 21.
Figure 22 Response on future engagement with the Why Poverty? project
Would you like to know more about the Why Poverty? project now that you have seen the films?
Yes No 94% 6%
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 48 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Responses of different audience groups
Whilst common themes emerged across all groups, different types of audiences responded differently to the films. The screening of Land Rush in Cape Town and Botswana were attended by students and NGO representatives who had strong emotional responses to the film as it resonated strongly with the current issue of land rights in their countries. The screening of the same film which was targeted at policy-makers in the UK and US elicited a more technical response about the development process, and the discussion that ensued was more policy- focused. These findings prove that the films are able to stimulate the minds of all audiences despite their differing world views. This is confirmed by one interviewee who explained that, whilst it is often difficult to engage people on high value issues such as justice, poverty and inequality, the Why Poverty? series has managed to overcome this barrier because it focuses on the structural causes of poverty. This is reflected in the following statement: “I think from my perspective as an academic that it is a very different series than what else has been on TV and one of the things that it was very good at doing, is that it doesn’t portray poverty as being ‘over there’……poverty exists in the UK, in Denmark, in Mali. What the series did very well is to raise that poverty is a systemic problem and it looked at the structures that cause poverty and putting a band aid on it is not going to help”, (Key informant, Academic) Another outcome is that the films created a platform for a less polarised debate. For example, policy-makers in the UK found that they were able to look at agriculture and land rights in a different way as a result of watching the film Land Rush, because it showed issues of agricultural investment in a balanced way, which allowed them to be more open-minded to other perspectives. This is confirmed by one of the participants: “I think the film has made an impact in terms of making people think about all different sides of the debate – it has been able to bring different sides together to express both points of view”, (UK Parliament screening, Land Rush) Overall, the films have sparked a strong emotive response against the injustice of poverty from different audiences around the world in a wide variety of settings.
Key themes emerging
Based on the individual feedback forms and the screening reports the main themes that emerged across the screenings of Land Rush and Stealing Africa were:
• Increased understanding of the structural causes of poverty • Connecting the local issue of poverty and inequality to the global • Power, corruption and exploitation of Africa’s resources • Development and the participation of people in decision-making • Connecting land and natural resource ownership issues to poverty • Empowerment
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 49 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
The themes that emerged for the screenings of Solar Mamas and Miseducation were:
• Empowerment
• Gender issues • Child rights and child protection An explanation of these themes is provided below.
Increased understanding of the structural causes of poverty Participants discussed the issue of poverty and unequal distribution of wealth: “I think poverty and inequality are two of the biggest challenges Africa faces at the moment and this film did a good job of highlighting this,” (RAS screening) The films have also contributed to people’s understanding of the global financial system and how it perpetuates poverty and inequality by supporting the exploitation of Africa’s resources. The other issues raised go into the specifics of this, and are discussed below.
Connecting the local issue of poverty and inequality to the global Viewers’ responses also showed that they connected poverty at a local level to more global, structural inequalities. “The film shows us how the Western countries dominate other African countries. The hegemonic power that they have over most if not all African states leads to them having power over our resources. The means of production in Africa is mostly owned by the foreigners and what are we doing to correct that? What are the African governments doing about this?” (Botswana screening) At the UCT screening, students spoke about global economic governance systems which regulate trade and aid, which should be challenged.
Power, corruption and exploitation of Africa’s resources This was the dominant theme across all the screenings of Land Rush and Stealing Africa, with many respondents identifying the actions of corrupt governments and the marginalisation of local people as a major obstacle to development: ‘I came to realize that government or those in power tend to make decisions for the majority which side-line them at the end of the day,’ (Botswana screening)
The films also helped audience members understand how corruption affects the global economy and how it contributes to inequality. Respondents spoke of the poor ethics and accountability of certain multi-national corporations, as they are driven by greed and an ever-increasing need to increase shareholder wealth. This, together with corrupt political leadership, is a toxic mix: “The greed and corruption of corporations and governments that hurt millions of people is astounding and horrifying,” (UCT screening)
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 50 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
African participants argued that political elites within African countries collude with the West to exploit Africa (to the detriment of the majority who often lost their power and means of production (and hence their livelihoods) in the face of ‘development’. Students of Development Studies highlighted that the films excellently demonstrated in practical terms what they have been learning, including theoretical frameworks such as Dependency Theory (UCT) and Modernization Theory (UWC) and how these related to the exploitation and utilization of African resources. The issue of a local and international power imbalance was a key component to the theme. “African countries are very rich but they lack the resources to process their wealth so European countries take advantage of African countries,” (Botswana screening) The American students at UCT argued that civil society had a key role to play in ensuring accountability and bringing about change. The post-screening discussions also focused on the need for responsible investment, as one cannot assume that all investment is good for equitable growth.
Development and the participation of people in decision making Development management was also addressed in response to the films. Some noted that there is often a ‘top-down’ and ‘non-participatory’ approach to development, where the impact on the majority of the people is not adequately considered. This is largely because of non-participatory approaches where those in power do not communicate with or take into account the views of the people when making decisions that affect them.: “I think the project (Sosumar) was not introduced properly to the locals, it was a [top down] approach which does not work when it comes to development,” (UWC screening)
“It is very thought provoking. The question that is on my mind is, why would a government embark on a project that affects its people without taking the people into consideration? This is totally wrong,” (UWC screening) Audience members, especially those from African countries, pressed the need to communicate with local communities when it came to decision making. Participants argued that there needs to be inclusive development.
Connecting land and natural resource ownership issues to poverty Many responses to Land Rush and Stealing Africa highlighted land rights and ownership as key issues in poverty and noted the value of land for poor people. “Land is a very crucial source of living especially for the underprivileged Africans. If land is going to be taken away from people for development then it should be used to develop all,” (Botswana) Screening discussions by participants within South Africa (UWC) and Botswana focused on similarities between the land issues raised within the film and those witnessed within their own countries. Land rights were identified as a central issue in the fight against poverty and the question of ‘who owns the land’ was one that emerged as some participants argued that many
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 51 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Africans did not own their own land. Respondents felt the process of the government taking land from people and selling it to foreign investors was very harmful and must be addressed. The question was raised at the Botswana screening as to whether the current buying and selling of land in their country was sustainable.
Empowerment and Gender Issues Individual responses and screening discussions after screenings of Solar Mamas raised the issue of empowerment and the need to educate communities to allow them to tackle poverty and empower themselves. Participants at the RAS screening stated that the films gave people a voice and gave them the confidence to pursue their rights. “Africans need to be empowered [in their minds] so that they can manage to manufacture and export finished products to other countries” (RAS screening) At the Cape Town screenings the community’s role in facilitating empowerment was discussed with one participant stating that: “The films were helpful in highlighting social issues that communities face but also how despite your age and gender we all have a role to play in changing and empowering others.” (NGO respondent) A few people commented on how community support structures featured in the films allowed people to cope. For instance, in Solar Mamas the woman was able to leave her children in the care of an extended family and community network so she could travel and learn. Themes relating to women’s issues and gender discrimination and empowerment emerged in relation to the film Solar Mamas. Audience members at the Botswana screening spoke about the need to engage women when tackling issues of poverty, as they are often marginalized from discussions on this issue. It emerged that women needed to be given opportunities. “In Solar Mamas the men make the decisions and nothing goes beyond that; this structure is reinforced by the influence of her community, even including other women….. Rafea’s mother had no faith in her daughter getting an education,” (NGO respondent) A participant from a Cape Town NGO commented that patriarchy was one of the obstacles that communities put in the path of their own advancement.
Child rights and child protection Audience members had a strong emotional reaction to the film Miseducation and raised issues related to child rights and child protection. The participants discussed the psychological or emotional effects on a child growing up in this kind of an environment (overcrowded housing, gangsterism, poor parenting): “She is so alone and vulnerable and exposed – who does she call? She talks about not being alone, but she is alone”, (National and Provincial Department of Social Development, Government of South Africa screening) Respondents were left asking questions about what can be done to protect children:
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 52 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
“Is education the only way out? What else can be done to protect them from these negative influences?” (NGO respondent)
“Children have to go through their whole childhood with such a sense of danger – how can we protect them? Make them feel safe?” (National and Provincial Department of Social Development, Government of South Africa screening)
In summary, it can be seen that the films generated a lot of debate and discussion about critical causes and solutions to the problems of poverty and inequality. The films have wide relevance; irrespective of the audiences, they were able to find relevance to their particular studies, programmes, jobs and country contexts.
5.2 Organisational strengthening
Both the programme activities and educational activities of civil society organisations have been strengthened as a result of their involvement with the Why Poverty? project.
5.2.1 Strengthening programme activities
Civil society organisations involved in the screenings have identified the films as a useful tool for creating platforms for dialogue and awareness around poverty. Thirteen organisations have thus far submitted action plans indicating their intention to use the films to strengthen their programme work, through:
• educating and raising awareness among their constituencies on issues covered in the films, • promoting discussion and debate on the issues, • influencing anti-poverty policies, • empowering communities by encouraging them to stand up and talk about their challenges and ways in which to improve their circumstances,
• mobilising campaigns and getting young people engaged in political work, and • educating staff and inspire greater understanding of social justice.
An example of this is an organisation in Uganda, Hope for Orphans and Vulnerable Children, which intends to use the short film Morris’ Bag to strengthen their programme work in Uganda to tackle food security at a local level. The following is an excerpt of correspondence with SSteps: “Even though Kisoro is situated in very green and lush conditions in the volcanic south-west region of Uganda, it is one of the poorest areas of Uganda. Many families are subsistence farmers and often don't have land of their own so they have a very limited food & diet. Before I left for Kisoro, I was very encouraged to see many of your short films but particularly the short film titled Morris' Bag….. I thought that this bag is a very clever and inexpensive way for people to get a more nutritious diet who needing to have any land. Innocent is interested in trialling such a bag with a view to perhaps provide one for every family. Would you also have any further information or fact sheet about the types of green
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 53 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
vegetables that were planted in Morris' Bag and what is required?” (Lisa Roberts, Board Member, HOVC Australia)
In summary, with training and support, NGOs are an important target group which can use the films to mobilise large networks to provide solutions to poverty and inequality. As illustrated in Figure 23, many NGOs wrote to Why Poverty? to request films for use in their programming.
5.2.2 Strengthening educational activities
The films have been used extensively for educational activities. There were over 100 requests for films sent to [email protected] between November 2012 and April 2013 and, based on the data available from 53 of the emails, the majority of requests (62%) came from people in education, including teachers, university professors, students, and publishers. They wanted to show the films in their classes, use them at campus events to raise awareness, or have the films available in their library. Other requests came from people who wanted to screen the films at awareness events or for educational purposes from NGO’s (18%) and faith-based organizations (6%). Most of the requests came from the US (16), UK (9), and Canada (5), but 20 countries were represented in all. A summary of these findings is presented in the figure below.
Figure 23 Requests for films by sector
Requests for films by Sector
12%
6% Educa on NGOs 19% FBOs 63% Other
A composite review of Why Poverty? was written for inclusion in the Multi-media Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching project (MERLOT). MERLOT is supported by 17 systems and institutions of higher education, as well as the National Science Foundation in the USA. The review recognises the Why Poverty? site as an excellent web-based teaching and learning resource:
“This film collection and ancillaries can be used for instruction about global poverty in diverse contexts: traditional classroom, online courses, reference material, social
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 54 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
networking tool, and learning object repository. The site provides diverse and rich content for promoting research papers, class discussions, and group presentations” Sociology Editorial Board, March 2013
The BBC partnered with the Open University, one of the top distance learning and research universities in the world, to use the Why Poverty? film series as part of their development studies courses. The modules will run for eight years online52. The Open University has created learning modules that use the films, together with UNDP statistics (UN Development Programme's explorer tool) and commissioned content. Other universities are using the films in their development studies courses, including Birbeck University, and the University of East Anglia. The use of these films to create awareness and shift social norms is highlighted by this interviewee from the Open University: “Using these films in teaching is one of the great things we can do within the university….This is in-depth outreach, these films are analysed by the students politically, socio-economically – with questions asked, Why is this happening? What does it mean? What paradigms are in place?” (Open University key informant)
Figure 24 Screen shot of some of the results of a tag search “Why Poverty?” on the Open University site
52 http://www.open.edu/openlearn/society/international-development/international-studies/global- education
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 55 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
5.3 Networking and mobilising
The findings reveal that the involvement of civil society organisations in the Why Poverty? project has facilitated the building of networks and revived existing networks amongst them. A further positive outcome is that the project has mobilised the media around the issue of poverty, which has resulted in shifts in knowledge, awareness and social norms around poverty and inequality amongst audiences. As an indicator of media mobilisation, an impact report produced by ITVS highlighted that Solar Mamas and Park Avenue generated a total of 200 print and online articles for combined circulation of over 15,000,000 readers. The Huffington Post also paid a lot of attention to the Why Poverty? project. Two films were also aired by the New York Times in the OpDocs - Miseducation and Lullaby.
5.3.1 Networking and mobilisation through outreach activities
Screenings are an important distribution channel following broadcast. As one interviewee explained: “The television broadcast only gets you so far and, to keep the film alive, you need to do things actively – the screening builds up the idea that the film is a tool rather than just something which went out on television. It educates and keeps the film alive and keeps people talking about it and then it has its biggest impact – it becomes part of the education and the solution”, (Key informant, UK Parliament) While the films have evoked emotive and intellectual responses amongst students and policy- makers at the Cape Town and UK screenings, people are still looking for avenues to act. Some audience members were frustrated that the films did not provide a direct avenue for action with participants asking the questions: Is this going to have an impact on real people? How can it be used to have an impact? Why didn’t you link the film to a campaign? Correspondence from a Jesuit priest working in Zambia illustrates this point further. After screening the film Stealing Africa in Zambia he reported that after watching the film, people felt anger and a sense of hopelessness when being faced with the issues in the film. People felt compelled to act, but were not sure of how they could help. He asked to know how other people were responding, acting, and what would be an effective way forward. His story illustrates how the films can not only spread knowledge and information, but move people to action in fighting against poverty. However, as one interviewee noted, “it is difficult to inspire action when there is no avenue for action”, (NGO 3). This links to the next group of screenings which took place in Cape Town and in Botswana and were targeted at NGOs, encouraging them to consider using the films in their work, During the outreach activities in Botswana the network of civil society organisations that had been established around previous STEPS projects (i.e. Steps for the Future and Why Democracy?) was activated for screenings of Why Poverty? This highlights that if organisations are trained in
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 56 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
how to use film for education or mobilising purposes, it is more likely that their adoption of the medium is sustainable.
As shown in Figure 21, a small proportion of the audience will be motivated to take action. By providing platforms for local or international actions, CSOs can increase the numbers of people who do something against poverty as a result of watching the films. Hence, it is advisable for Steps to work with other organisations who can use the films for mobilisation purposes. The films and accompanying educational materials in the hands of trained facilitators can become a powerful medium to stimulate activism. This can be achieved through the outreach process - working with NGOs on the ground. Linking these projects with online campaigns and hence building international solidarity and global movements can be a powerful combination.
Case study: mobilisation in Saudi Arabia linked to Solar Mamas screening: After the film aired locally on MBC4 in Jordan, it was picked to open the Women's Film Week Film Festival in March 2013. The maxed to capacity audience of 300 at the Rainbow Theatre in the country's capital gave a standing ovation for the subjects of the film in attendance including Rafea and Raouf Dabbas, former Senior Advisor to the Ministry of Environment. During the Q & A the inspired audience was hit by the reality of how the rural solar electrification project had come to a standstill because of lack of funding and support. An article titled Hopes fade for two Bedouin ‘solar engineers’ was published the next day in the Jordan Times quoting Raouf Dabbas
“They have the ability to independently install and maintain solar-powered electricity, addressing two of Jordan’s main issues: renewable energy and female empowerment,” Dabbas said, adding: “Now, this whole project is threatened because no one is willing to finance it despite our repeated appeals to all existing institutions from the government to NGOs and embassies…It would fulfill the dual goal of providing sustainable energy to the village and empower its women, let alone that the project could be extended to the whole region.” The article garnered a lot of publicity and social media outrage in Jordan; subsequently there was an outpouring of interest to support the project from NGOs and institutions. In September 2013 the rural solar electrification project received a grant from UN Women and is in the last stages of securing funding from the Jordanian Hasimete Fund. In the interim, a ‘Bridge to Empowerment “ screening was held in New York where donations to supplement Rafea’s salary and support her 5 daughters were raised. The film screening raised enough money to support Rafea’s family for 3 months until the UN Women’s funding came in. A Saudi Arabian viewer was so inspired by Rafea and the film that she has donated funds to build Rafea and Uma Badr a house. In September 2013 Rafea was elected as the first female member of the Municipal Board in her district .A post election survey concluded that the community considered her a strong leader after the film aired.
In October 2013 Dabbas’ Friends of the Environment, the NGO that is now heading the
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 57 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
project, received an Emirates Energy Award for education.
5.3.2 Mobilisation of broadcasters
Many of the 69 networks participating in the broadcast of Why Poverty? went beyond broadcasting the films and produced their own outreach and educational content around the series. A key informant from TVO provides some useful insights into why they decided to do so much additional programming: “I wanted people to question what they thought about poverty in Canada. About 40% of Canadians believe poverty is the result of personal deficit (i.e., you’re just not taking responsibility for your life). Canadians tend to think of “real” poverty as something that happens somewhere else -- Africa, India, Asia, etc. What I loved about the Why Poverty? project is that it focused on the impact of inequality, and that happens everywhere…..we wanted to dispel the assumptions of who the poor are and how they got there. Finally, perhaps most importantly, we wanted to inspire Canadians with stories of how sometimes small actions can make a sustainable difference that pays back in droves for society at large. If TVO caused anyone to pause in thought, just once, it was all worth it”, (Key informant, TVO) The EBU dedicated their multiplatform programming to poverty throughout November 2012 which culminated in a Why Poverty? theme day on 29 November, with 37 EBU members. In addition, EBU offered free programmes for the Why Poverty? day to some members who could not afford to buy the film. Radio Vatican produced programmes and material related to poverty in various languages and made this available to other EBU Radio members free of rights and cost. Some broadcasters such as RTBF and DRT in Turkey used local programming only but still joined the Why Poverty? day, and in other countries there were strong radio activities. However, it was noted that those broadcasters who combined the international films from Why Poverty? with their own programming and activities were most successful in reaching audiences. A brief summary of these activities that we have received from some broadcasters is provided below, with full details contained in Appendix 1 of the report.
Figure 25 Infographic from TVO TV and radio - Many broadcasters organised debates and discussions on poverty through all genres such as news, talk shows and children’s programmes. Four channels (DR, ZDF/Arte, CT and Futura) produced national documentaries on local issues, for example, CT (Czech Republic) produced a 52-minute national documentary about single mothers. Futura has
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 58 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
developed a Speak up! Series which includes five new programmes about poverty. The BBC did a radio show called “Poor Reporting”, highlighting narratives on poverty, for Radio Four, and also commissioned other programming. The BBC World News produced a BBC World Debate on Why Poverty? which was filmed in Johannesburg, and controversially included Tony Blair on the panel. The discussion followed five main themes: the causes of poverty, the need for opportunity, the prospects for Africa, the importance of agriculture; and possible solutions. Clips from Why Poverty? films were screened to provide content for debate.
Online - Interactive online activities with info-graphics, quizzes and debates on Why Poverty? were launched on many of the broadcaster websites. An online mini-series of interviews related to poverty was hosted by TVO, which also featured simulators to explore what it is like to live below the poverty line53. Futura developed a wiki map - cartography - which seeks to develop collaboration among young Brazilians participating in the networking institutions to register and indicate the geo-location of poverty in the country54.
Materials development - TVO, Futura, VPRO and DR produced or are planning to produce educational materials and tool-kits based on the Why Poverty? theme, targeting both school children and adults.
Community screenings - VPRO, DR, ERT, ITVS and TVS organised a number of community screenings which included post-screening debates and panel discussions. For example TVO hosted 12 community screenings in seven locations, and ITVS, through its Community Cinema programme, screened Solar Mamas in 100 cities in the USA, followed by audience engagement. Events – A number of Conferences and Symposia were arranged by broadcasters. ITVS hosted an Online Film Symposium on Gender and Poverty on 12 December. Futura hosted four regional forums throughout the country in March and April 2013. VPRO had a whole Why Poverty? day in Utrecht with multiple events around the city including screenings, debates and discussions, while DR organised a major conference in Copenhagen on 29 November with world big thinkers, resulting in a live tape debate which was offered to EBU members through the network.
53 http://ww3.tvo.org/whypoverty/classroom 54 http://www.futura.org.br/por-que-pobreza-why-poverty/mapa-e-logo2/
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 59 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 26 Canal Futura's plans for Why Poverty? outreach
Links to charity campaigns – CT launched a special charity campaign on 15 November in cooperation with Committee of Good Will (The Olga Havel Foundation). This aimed to support Czech families with low income, with the help of the donor´s text messages. TVO Kids Online also did a Food Drive with Ontario food banks. On-line - A number of broadcasters did their own online marketing and strategic communications, and DR, VPRO, ITVS (PBC) and TVO seemed the most successful at this. For example, ITVS launched a social media campaign to engage and generate awareness of poverty and of the series amongst viewers. This included a Facebook promotion for each film launched prior to broadcast with links to Why Poverty? website; visual memes sent out the week prior to broadcast and shared over 300 times; and Get Glue – a social networking app – which allowed users to “check in” with Why Poverty? programmes – letting their friends know what they were watching. More details on the marketing, education and outreach activities of the broadcasters are found in Appendix 1.
Figure 27 Series of awareness raising posters produced by VPRO
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 60 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 28 Example of visual meme sent out by ITVS the week prior to broadcast
Source: ITVS Report to Steps on Why Poverty? VPRO developed a Why Poverty? supplement which was added to all radio/TV guides in the Netherlands (1.5 million issues), and organised a series of Why Poverty? events in the town of Utrecht, including film festivals, theatre, discussions and so on. DR’s Education Department arranged a number of activities around the broadcast period. Why Poverty? posters were placed on all the bus stops, a Why Poverty? menu was put in the luncheon canteen in all the factories all over Denmark with information on the films, a debate was held in the town hall about poverty and inequality, and the series was launched in the
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 61 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
concert hall. The ambassador to America also spoke about women’s rights. The news anchor spoke about Why Poverty? every evening in the news and there was a focus on poverty and inequality in other mediums.
5.3.3 Impact of broadcaster activities
The findings below illustrate how the broadcasting of films, combined with these additional outreach and online activities, has shifted people’s knowledge, awareness and social norms around poverty and inequality. It has also led to people talking more about these issues and has inspired them to take action for social change. The findings of an audience survey55 conducted by DR in Denmark confirmed that Danes have gained more knowledge about poverty as a result of the Why Poverty? broadcast:
• 72% indicated that they believe Why Poverty? has given them a greater understanding of poverty and inequality.
• 57% of the people who know the campaign say it has changed their opinion about poverty and inequality, to seeing it as a more important issue than it was before Why Poverty?.
• 54% are now more interested about the issue of poverty and inequality. • It was also found that Why Poverty? has encouraged Danes to talk more about poverty and inequality.
o 31% have already spoken to others about poverty or inequality and have typically spoken with more than one person about it.
o 37% have considered speaking to others about poverty or inequality. o 60% have spoken with their partners. o 29% have spoken to colleagues and friends. o 21% have spoken to their children. This indicates how the screenings together with the marketing and strategic communications and outreach activities, can create a national conversation. As an indicator of the positive attitude towards the film in Denmark, 80% of those who know the series believe that it represents good public service from DR and 82% of those who know the series say that it is a good way for DR to spend the license fee.
• At the Philadelphia screening of Solar Mamas, Dining for Women were moved by the film’s content and decided to begin the process of registering the Barefoot College (featured in the film), as one of their grant recipients.
55 The survey was conducted between 4 and 10 of December 2012 after the Why Poverty? Broadcast. Almost 1,500 telephonic interviews were conducted with a representative sample of the Danish population aged over 18.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 62 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 30 Philadelphia screening - live Q&A with audience members
• ITVS organised an online Global Symposium for Why Poverty?, which brought together poverty experts and women’s rights advocates from around the world. Participants learnt about tax havens, homelessness, aid, development, maternal health, and other themes. 169 people from North American and Europe participated, posting 455 comments.
• TVO reported that over 80,000 food items were collected as a result of the TVOKIDS food drive.
5.4 Policy outcomes
There is limited evidence of the contribution the films have made towards influencing policy change, largely because it is too early in the project life cycle to measure this impact. However, there are some examples that demonstrate the potential they could have if combined with effective outreach and strategic communications. The Capitol Hill and UK Parliament outreach screenings of Land Rush were specifically targeted at policy-makers to engage them around the issue of private sector investment in agriculture. Audience members actively engaged with the film’s subject matter, relating it to the wider policy environment. The result was that the film has helped to build understanding of the issues amongst policy-makers and, as one interviewee stated, “the more you understand, the better your policy can be” (key informant, UK Parliament screening). In another example of the potential to influence policy change, the film Solar Mamas has caught the attention of Queen Rania in Jordan, who referred to the film’s subject matter in a keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week (ADSW) on 15 January 2013. The Jordan News Agency reported: “Queen Rania highlighted importance of long-term sustainable energy solutions to addressing energy needs and powering sustainable development globally……and expressed her pride that many innovative solutions to the challenges being faced are coming from the
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 63 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Arab world, citing Bedouin women in Jordan who are training to be solar engineers and are swapping using unhealthy kerosene lamps for solar power.”
Importantly the annual event drew leaders, government ministers as well as experts in the fields of energy, environment, food and water from around the world. The production of the film has also been supported by the Ministry of Development in Denmark, which has focused on empowerment of women and alleviation of poverty. The Minister gave a speech at the launch of the Why Poverty? broadcast. The Norwegian Deputy Minister for International Development took part in the global Why Poverty? World Debate broadcast on the 24 November 2012. He argued that inequalities erode the trust between people, and that trust is an integral part of a thriving economy. Other themes were redistribution through taxation and employment, and the inclusion of women in the workforce. Likewise, the Norwegian Minister of International Development posted an article on NRK Ytring, where he related Norway’s development policies to issues raised in the Why Poverty? series. For instance, he referred to Solar Mamas when discussing women’s rights. The key themes were redistribution through taxes and the education of women.
5.5 Outcomes for developing world filmmakers
The findings of this evaluation reveal that developing world filmmakers, through their interaction with the Why Poverty? project, have a) benefited from knowledge exchange, and b) gained access to a professional network.
5.5.1 Benefit from knowledge exchange – what they learnt
The filmmakers revealed that they acquired a range of knowledge and skills through the input and support they received from the SSteps team: “I received resources to turn an idea into reality a lot of good professional advice a chance to showcase work on important channels abroad; an opportunity to collaborate with more experienced people and be part of a prestigious global project”, (filmmaker assessment form 2) For those who had the opportunity to work with experienced mentors, the learning curve was enhanced throughout the production and editorial process. Practical skills such as understanding and negotiating a contract and how to handle meetings were acquired, together with skills on how to tell a good story through short film, as the following quote reflects: “I learnt a lot from Brian. He pushed me to think more visually instead of just speaking – how do you visually represent what you want to say. This opened me up to different ways of thinking about the film”, (filmmaker 1) Similar outcomes were achieved through the filmmaker development workshops, where feedback forms reveal that all of the participants found the skills development valuable and learnt a great deal about developing a short film. The skills learnt relate to specifically to the importance of telling a good, focused story, as the following participant revealed:
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 64 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
“I learnt the importance of exploring different layers of a story in a new way that pushes the boundaries of how I am used to working” (feedback form 4)
Skills on how to pitch a film proposal were also acquired, including the need for clarity and focus on the basics of the story and ensuring that it has a good structure. Another key outcome for developing world filmmakers was the insight they gained into the value of sharing small, local stories, as the following statement reveals: “I have learnt that people around the world are interested in small stories – important issues are not necessarily big, enormous issues that affect millions of people but small issues that affect certain people. These are real, human problems and everyone understands them because they can affect our feelings”, (filmmaker, 3) Through collaboration with international experts they learnt how shape a story and make a film that could be accessible to audiences across the globe.
5.5.2 Access to professional network
A key challenge facing filmmakers in developing countries is that access to networks of filmmakers are almost non-existent, making it difficult to obtain resources and professional support. As one filmmaker stated, “one very often finds oneself on one’s own, starting from scratch”, (Filmmaker 3). There is also little scope for distribution and added to this is the perception that audiences are uninterested in documentary films on poverty and development, which are often perceived by the public to “put the country in a bad light”. As a result, documentary films are rarely broadcast on television or screened in public spaces. The Why Poverty? project has assisted filmmakers to improve access, with four out of the five filmmakers confirming that their involvement in the project has increased their international exposure and access to networking opportunities. They attribute this to the online presence of their films, and screening at international film festivals. Those who were invited to attend the film festivals were given a further opportunity to present their film and network with other filmmakers and producers, as the following quotes highlight: “I went to IDFA in Amsterdam so I could meet a lot of filmmakers there and we could easily approach people and one of the main contacts I made there was an editor who invited me to his film school and we had a class using my film and hopefully I can work with him in the future again.” (Filmmaker 1) “Now that the short film has gotten known it is has brought more exposure to my longer film. There has been a lot of mention and coverage for the Why Poverty? series so this has provided me with a lot of leverage and exposure.” (filmmaker 2) As these quotes suggest, this exposure has led to ongoing interest in their work, with some filmmakers being approached by the news media in their own countries and internationally for interviews or to showcase their films. Some have been offered future work opportunities. Out of the five filmmakers interviewed, one has been approached by Al Jazeera for possible collaboration in the future and another has done some work for a BBC documentary.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 65 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Networking opportunities were also increased for those who attended the filmmaker development workshop:
“We were given very good opportunities especially in getting to know the other filmmakers in Latin America which I hope to stay in touch with” (feedback form 4) “We made good contacts with collectives from Latin America and TAL, and have the opportunity to be in contact with the Steps team” (feedback form 3) Networking has resulted in connecting filmmakers with local broadcasters (TAL) and may also result in their collaboration on filming projects in the future, which are other positive outcomes of the project for the filmmakers.
6 Lessons learned
Lessons learned
Lessons learned that emerge from the findings are presented below.
• Development and production • Consultations ensured the relevance of the project, including people in the development and educational sectors and broadcasters.
• A very clear editorial vision was important as it provided a strong thread that ran through the series. This ensured that the diverse films worked well together as a series; looking at the same issue in many ways, but with one narrative, described by the Peabody Awards as a ‘Parallax’.
• A diversity of filmmakers enriches the series by bringing different perspectives and ways of storytelling, access to people or communities, and deeper understanding of the complexity of the issues being covered.
• People are attracted to viewing films from their own countries. It would have been beneficial had there been a long film from Latin America.
• The short film series presented an opportunity to get more global stories and more diverse filmmakers, and to highlight issues raised in the long films. They are also good for use in training or workshops as triggers for discussion, and for online viewing.
• The filmmaker development workshop that was held in Brazil was a good formula and could be repeated in the future.
• Distribution and broadcaster engagement • A key lesson learnt with regards to mobilisation of broadcasters is that those who combined the international films from Why Poverty? with their own programming and strategic communications and activities were most successful in reaching audiences. For this, buy-in of senior management at the broadcasting corporation is crucial.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 66 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• Online digital • One of the key lessons learned is that there is a need to build a following or community long before the broadcast. This needs time, a marketing strategy, unique content and a well-functioning cross-media platform.
• The conclusion drawn by the online team regarding the website strategy is that building a simple site, using free platforms such as YouTube and putting more resources into social media and working with partners is a good strategy. Sharing content with broadcast partners and decentralising on-line engagement is better than trying to do everything oneself, since broadcasters tend to direct traffic to their own sites. Further, using simpler technology makes the films more accessible to people in countries with slower bandwidth and less sophisticated technology.
• The online strategy needs to support the overall project goals, not only digital goals, and must be underpinned by a marketing strategy.
• It was difficult for the digital team to work remotely away from the core production team. Online represents very closely what an organisation does and is – and it proved difficult to work that out at a distance.
• Social media platforms, with their low barriers for production and emphasis on brevity, are perhaps not the ideal forum for detailed discussion of the complex structural issues underlying global poverty. In general, 'professional' and blogged reviews of the films and discussion of their issues in newspaper articles and on radio and TV, and online discussion forums, symposiums or webinars tend to be more nuanced. Social media have been great for sharing information, e.g. to let people know about the films, broadcast times and news for information sharing, marketing and awareness raising about the series and the theme. Social media are also useful to keep the films alive after the main broadcast period, and for distributing educational resources.
• Outreach and audience engagement These lessons learnt focus predominantly on the use of the films in screenings.
• Building strategic partnerships with organisations specifically involved in the subject matter dealt with by the film (i.e. food security, land and agricultural investment) can increase the likelihood of mobilising for social change and influencing policy makers. The tax justice movement was very active online the day after Stealing Africa was screened on BBC and this caused a spike in the number of likes on Facebook.
• If a media project such as Why Poverty? wants to encourage local or global action, then it needs to work together with NGO’s and the structures, programmes and networks that they provide. • Targeting organisations with facilitators who are already trained in the STEPS SA methodology for facilitated community screenings means that existing networks can be successfully re-activated and resources mobilised for upscaling outreach activities, as demonstrated by the Botswana case study.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 67 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• The majority of requests for the films (62%) came from people in the education sector and therefore this is a key target group which can be brought on board to scale up distribution and outreach activities. This should include, for example, universities which have development studies courses in both the North and the South.
• The interest generated by the global launch could have been better capitalised if the outreach strategy and materials were ready and available when the films were launched. In order to achieve this, the films would have to be ready between 6 – 8 months before broadcast. Work could also have begun with NGOs or social movements ahead of the broadcast to absorb the energy and goodwill inspired by the films amongst the audiences.
• Monitoring and evaluation of cross-platform media projects • The Draft Media Measurement Guide56 proved to be a useful framework for analysing audience engagement, and should be used upfront when planning projects and designing M&E tools. The continuum for audience engagement is a useful tool for both planning and evaluation purposes.
• In order to get standardised data from broadcasters, it is best to engage specialist companies that track viewer data for marketing departments of broadcasters ahead of the broadcast schedule. However, this requires significant funds. The main indicators that would be interesting are 1) average market share, 2) reach to individual viewers, 3) knowledge of the Why Poverty? series, and 4) whether it has changed the way people think about poverty. The DR survey conducted can be used as a framework for future audience research.
• Twitter tracking tools such as TopsyPro cannot be used retrospectively and need to be enabled before the launch, since they tend to cover a limited time span retrospectively. Tools for online analysis also need to be purchased because the capabilities enabled for the free versions are limited.
• NVIVO 10 has been a useful qualitative analysis tool for housing all the data. It is particularly good for a cross-media project since data can be audio, visual or text.
• The second main limitation has been the lack of analytical tools to deal with the huge amounts of online data that is mostly qualitative, such as tweets, Facebook comments, blogs, opinion pieces and so on. A tool for social network analysis has now been developed with the support of the Ford Foundation, and Why Poverty? should pursue this option in 2014.
• Facebook is difficult to analyse in terms of social networking because of privacy settings.
56 http://chrisrosenthaldesign.com/downloader/gates-knightIframes/index.html supported by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Knight Foundation, and developed by LFA Group and POSSIBLE worldwide
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 68 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
7 Conclusions
7.1 Effectiveness
This evaluation took place after the global launch, between January and May 2013, and social media figures were updated in November 2013. The key purpose of the evaluation was to establish the extent to which the above outputs have been met and the extent to which they have led to the achievement of the objectives. Through the identification of lessons learned and recommendations, the evaluation contributes to strengthening Steps.
The findings are based on a participatory mixed method evaluation comprising in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, online analytics, survey data and document review. The project team was involved in an evaluation planning meeting in January 2013, and the initial findings were presented and discussed with the team in Cape Town in May 2013. Other stakeholders had the opportunity to input into the evaluation design by reviewing the evaluation plan, through telephonic (Skype) interactions and by reviewing the draft report. The evaluation design was experimental and hopes to contribute to the measurement of media impact in the future. The evaluation includes this main report, and four accompanying case studies. Overall, the findings highlight that Why Poverty? is an impressive collection of long and short documentary films and educational resources, which has drawn the attention of television and online audiences, and has sparked an online interest through Facebook and Twitter. Its quality and contribution as a series has been recognised in the film industry, in the broadcasting sector, in the NGO sector and through educational institutions, including tertiary institutions. The series has helped to popularise a new discourse on poverty that moves away from shame and pity. It takes that narrative from the academic realm and makes it accessible for a global audience – this was a driving vision for the project. The factors that contributed to its success were:
• Consultations with people working to address questions of poverty and inequality, which ensured the relevance of the project.
• Strong editorial direction.
• The varied style of the films that addressed poverty and inequality from different angles. • Inclusion of filmmakers from developing world countries. • The combination of short and long films – speaking to different audiences and engaging people on-line.
• Broadcaster collaboration and the volume of broadcasters involved in the project (69 broadcasters)
• Broadcasters committed additional by commissioning additional local films and other content, and also to social media, marketing and on and offline educational activities and screenings.
• Strong social media engagement (facebook, twitter, whypoverty.net)
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 69 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• Facilitated screenings. • Funding from diversified sources including both broadcasters and foundations / donors. The main challenges were:
• Difficulties of collaboration between a large group of broadcasters. • Certain broadcaster impartiality rules which prevent linking films to campaigns. • Not enough focus on building the on-line and off-line following leading up to the broadcast.
• Not enough clear strategic direction for the marketing and communications side of the project, and the on-line digital strategy. Development, production and editorial vision Based on the above consultation, the editorial vision for the project became clearer and the long- film brief for filmmakers was developed. After 85 proposals were received, 9 films went into production and the final 8 long films were selected by consensus. This process was viewed positively by all those interviewed, even though it was time-consuming. Following research into short documentary films, the short film editorial group began an extensive process of recruiting filmmakers from around the world, with a specific focus on emerging filmmakers from developing world countries. A total of 346 submissions were reviewed, 60% from the developing world, and in the end 15 of the 34 short films were made by filmmakers from the developing world. Important lessons have been learned about what makes a good quality documentary short film that also works online. The very clear editorial vision for both the long and short film editorial groups helped with the quality end result. A filmmaker development workshop was held with TAL in Brazil that focused on pitching a story, and this proved to be a worthy innovation in terms of filmmaker development. The developing world filmmakers who were interviewed agreed that they were given an opportunity to contribute by sharing developing world perspectives, and that the complexity and nuances of the stories they were telling were enhanced because of this. They also commented that it was useful have such a clear editorial vision to work with. Distribution - broadcast
The films were distributed through 69 broadcasters who screened them over the same period - an unprecedented broadcast collaboration, and a remarkable effort on behalf of those who managed this contracting process. All the licenses are owned by Steps International, which means that the films can be used extensively still online and in outreach processes. The EBU was a central partner in the broadcaster collaboration, and the project was attractive because it allowed broadcasters to be part of a global event, have access to high quality international films and still produce their own national content for their viewers. It is difficult to calculate the total reach of the project because data submission by broadcasters was varied and limited. The participation of Latin American broadcasters through the TAL network brought a new target audience to Steps. The team is still working on signing an agreement with India, which would add large viewer figures. The broadcast of the series twice on BBC World (once during the broadcast week and another beforethe G8 meeting in June) also
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 70 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
ensured a global reach. Broadcast by MBC in the Middle East was also a distribution success. The use of satellite distribution channels such as ETV, BBC World and MBC extended the global reach of the films through broadcast. Distribution online The most successful way of showing the films online has been through YouTube, and the YouTube channel has doubled the number of viewers since the broadcast period from half a million views in December 2012 to 1 million views by April 2013 (over 3.5 months), and by October 2013 there were 1,538,430 views. Viewership has an English-speaking and Northern European bias, and seems to be an older demographic. There are now almost 40 000 subscribers to the YouTube channel, so there is a need to keep producing content for this. Large groups of channel subscribers come from India (10,105), the UK (4,527) and Saudi Arabia (3,136). The film Education, Education, which is about the privatisation of education in China, went viral on Chinese video-sharing sites, and was shared over 700,000 times in March 2013. It was still attracting about 1000 views per day in April 2013.
Marketing and strategic communications The project had a digital presence with the website, Twitter and Facebook. According to TopsyPro, the project had an estimated reach of 34,531,169 on Twitter in April 2013. In October 2013, there were 7332 followers on Twitter. The most active countries on Twitter were the US, UK, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and Brazil. Often the response on Twitter reflected an engaged broadcaster. Most of the tweets were praising or promoting the films or other related content and websites. Twitter and Facebook help to make the voices of those engaged stronger and to spread the message broadly, but they are not good mediums for deepening the debate and discussion. This can happen in direct outreach engagements such as facilitated screenings and discussions which take place online (e.g. the ITVS online symposium) or off-line. Those broadcasters that combined their own programming, marketing and educational activities with the screening of the films had the most success, and the ones who did this well included TVO, ITVS, VPRO, and DR. Futura is now embarking on a considerable education and outreach process using Why Poverty? as a platform for further engagement. Viewer figures were very positive in Denmark, where 77% of the adult population knew and remembered Why Poverty? at the time of the research. The BBC, on the other hand, was criticised in the media for not doing enough to publicise the series, for showing most of the films on BBC4 which has a niche audience, and for only having them on the iPlayer for a short period. Hence, while some important strategic communications activities were undertaken by the project, the main challenge was that there was not a shared vision for the online strategy.
Facilitated screenings and audience engagement The findings show that the STEPS methodology of facilitated screenings, using a facilitator’s guide built around the Action – Learning cycle is a powerful avenue to stimulate audience engagement. Relationships with organisations working on related subject matter and with existing networks are key for ensuring that the films be used effectively for mobilisation activities. Relationships are being forged with NGO’s in Africa, India and Latin America, while background research is
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 71 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
being conducted in the Middle East. STEPS has developed a training-of-trainers methodology for those who wish to conduct facilitated screenings and the training department will be ready to compliment the facilitator’s guide with training. There is a sentiment that it would have been better if the outreach materials were ready at the time of the global launch in order to capitalise on the enormous interest generated during the broadcast period, and in order for this to have been achieved the films should have been completed 6 – 8 months before broadcast. The films are viewed as a valuable educational resource. This is made clear from the inclusion of the series by MERLOT in its collection of educational online resources after a rigorous peer review process, the fact that the majority of the requests for the films came from educational institutions, and the extensive use of the films by the Open University in its development studies programmes. The outreach phase gives the project a long tail. For instance, the Open University courses will be in use for 8 years. The screening data also shows that the films are effective in stimulating deep discussions and for helping people to think about appropriate responses to poverty for the 21st century. The findings from the outcomes section show this very well.
7.2 Outcomes
Reactions to the films The films have sparked a strong emotive and intellectual response from different audiences around the world in a wide variety of settings. This indicates that they have the potential to change hearts and minds and ignite social change irrespective of whom they target. People’s responses to the films and their engagement at the outreach activities provide evidence that there have been shifts in knowledge, awareness and social norms as a result of the Why Poverty? project. People are thinking differently about the structural causes of poverty and solutions to poverty. They are speaking more to others about poverty and inequality and want to know more about the Why Poverty? project. In addition, there are some examples of how the films have moved people to take action and get involved in anti-poverty activities and activism.
Mobilisation An important positive outcome of the project has been the mobilisation of broadcasters around the issue of poverty. The additional activities they have undertaken, together with the planned outreach activities, have generated much discussion and debate on poverty and inequality, and are critical for ensuring that the films stay alive after the broadcast.
Organisational strengthening With regards to organisational strengthening, it was found that the programme activities of civil society organisations have been strengthened as a result of their involvement with the Why Poverty? project. The films have also been used to strengthen the curricula of a number of prestigious universities and other educational institutions.
Networks
The case study of the screenings in Botswana highlights how a network can be stimulated. With training and support, organisations are able to use the films to mobilise large networks of people
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 72 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
and encourage local action aimed at addressing the structural causes of poverty and inequality. While the films can inspire people to action, the avenues for action can be provided by NGO’s to ensure that this enthusiasm to take action is harnessed.
Policy There are some examples of how the films, when combined with outreach activities and strategic communications, could influence policy change. However this evidence is limited because it is too early in the project life cycle to determine this type of impact. Themes emerging from the screenings of Solar Mamas, Miseducation, Land Rush and Stealing Africa, which could stimulate changes to policy, are:
• Increased understanding of the structural causes of poverty • Connecting the local issue of poverty and inequality to the global • Power, corruption and exploitation of Africa’s resources • Development and the participation of people in decision making • Connecting land and natural resource ownership issues to poverty • Empowerment • Gender issues • Child rights and child protection
Developing world filmmakers Finally, the work undertaken with developing world filmmakers has led to improved knowledge and skills in film making and increased their access to professional networks of filmmakers.
8 Recommendations
Recommendations
The recommendations below are informed by the lessons learned, based on both the strengths and the challenges of implementing a cross-media global project that intends to contribute to social change.
• Development and production • Filmmaker development is something that has emerged from this project as a positive process and Steps should take the lessons learned about making and distribution of short documentary films and apply these to future filmmaker development workshops and processes. These workshops can also be expanded to include considerations for contracting arrangements, thinking clearly about whom the audience for the film is, how the films can be marketed through the filmmaker’s networks, and how the film should be used in outreach processes.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 73 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• Steps should continue to work with a diversity of filmmakers to bring in voices from around the globe, including gender diversity.
• Distribution and broadcaster engagement • A marketing and strategic communications strategy needs to underpin all elements of the social media in the run-up to broadcast and thereafter.
• The relationship with broadcasters needs to be re-thought. So far the primary relationships have been through commissioning editors, with some broadcasters having senior management buy-in. In the future, broadcasters should buy into co-operation not just on a television broadcast platform, but also to working with the digital platforms, as well as engaging their education or social engagement departments and their research/marketing departments.
• Continue to encourage broadcaster collaboration and especially around something like the Why Poverty? day which the EBU organised. It has good potential to peak the focus on the project.
• Co-operation between “richer” broadcasters and “poorer” broadcasters could be developed, for example skills transfer or co-productions.
• Online digital • Projects must be planned as a truly multi-platform initiative by people who really understand the digital space, early on. It is important to see online on a long time frame, beginning way before broadcast and then continuing thereafter.
• Focus on building a simpler site, using free platforms such as YouTube, and put more resources into social media.
• Make sure that the social media strategy is underpinned by a marketing strategy, which it in turn supports.
o The core content needs to be planned and commissioned with an eye to how it works online (from practicalities like online rights to how subjects fit together as a whole).
o Online has a completely different time-scale to broadcast. It’s about slow growth and longevity. There is a need to plan for the period before and even more importantly, after broadcast.
o Even if online remains primarily as broadcast support, it needs earlier thought about what platforms to use and what these involve. For example, @whypoverty should have been registered on Twitter when the project was first planned.
• In order to improve the management of the digital side of the project, two alternative approaches are recommended. One would be to hire a company from the start and make them responsible for and in charge of all digital platforms. Or if the preference is for someone in-house, it would be beneficial for them to be located closer to the Production team.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 74 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
• More effort and resources need to go into working with broadcast partners and sympathetic organisations, including educational institutions, to encourage them to take up the content that is offered.
• Social media must be used to encourage ongoing engagement with the films and the online strategy needs to be re-thought and formalised. Can the website encourage activism? Can people be asked to share their change stories? Can more of a community be built around Why Poverty?
• It is also recommended that in order to use the online space to generate debate and discussion, more online forums/seminar/webinars could be convened.
• Outreach and audience engagement • The focus now in the outreach phase should be to build strong relationships with existing organisations (NGO’s, educational institutions or even broadcaster education/outreach departments). Local screenings linked to existing social movements (local and international) can be a strong combination to provide people with avenues to deepen their engagement with the issues.
• Design and implement training in the use of the STEPS SA facilitated screening methodology and conduct training-of-trainers courses as well.
• The Open University link could be given more prominence on the Why Poverty? website. • In the future, outreach materials should be ready to be distributed as the films are launched. In order to achieve this, the films will need to be finished at least 6 months prior to broadcast to allow for accurate time notations, language versioning, focus groups and analysis which go into the facilitator’s guide.
• Monitoring and evaluation of cross-platform media projects • Continue to implement the monitoring and evaluation processes for the outreach phase using the tools developed for the process. Ensure the M&E tools are part of the facilitator’s guide.
• Continue to build relationships with organisations that can provide technical support for monitoring online data, such as the Norman Leer Centre Project at the University of Southern California (USC).
• Consider conducting a further evaluation on the outreach phase in at least one year’s time.
• Consider purchasing a license from TopsyPro to ensure on-going analysis of twitter data. • Engage the broadcasters market research departments or identify a market research company ahead of time and include this in project budgets. They should track viewer figures and conduct viewer surveys in selected countries if there is not enough budget for all. The broadcasters could also be asked to collect data and report on certain indicators as part of their participation in the project.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 75 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Appendix 1: Overview of broadcaster participation and additional content and educational/outreach activities (outcomes)
Figure 5 Participating broadcasters SER TV – Panama ABC – Australia Ikon – The Netherlands Sinart TV – Costa Rica Arte – France, Germany Knowledge Network – Canada SJRTV – MexicoSTV – Slovakia ARTV – Chile LRT- Lithuania SVT – Sweden BBC – UK LTV – Latvia Telemedellin – Colombia BBC World –180 countries MBC – 22 countries in the Tempo TV – Indonesia BNT – Bulgaria Middle East TG4 – Ireland Campus TV – Honduras MTV – Hungary TV 10 Chiapas – Mexico Canal 22 – Mexico Mobi TV – Zambia TV Ciudad – Uruguay Canal U – Colombia NBC – Namibia TV Cultura – Peru CCN Turk - Turkey NHK – Japan TVE – Spain Colsecor – Argentina NRK – Norway TV3 – Catalonia, Spain CT – Czech Republic Nuevo Mundo – Canada TVO TV Ontario – Canada CyBC – Cyprus NTV – Kenya TVP – Poland DR – Denmark ORF – Austria Universidad de Valle – e.tv – South Africa PBS – USA (through ITVS) Colombia e.tv Ghana – Ghana PTS – Taiwan VIVE TV – Venezuela eBotswana – Botswana RAI – Italy VPRO – The Netherlands eNCA – satellite across Africa Roya TV – Jordan VTR – Chile ERR – Estonia RTHK – Hong Kong Wattan TV – Palestine ERT – Greece RDU RTS - Serbia YLE – Finland Futura – Brazil RTVSLO – Slovenia ZBC – Zimbabwe HRT – Croatia RUV – Iceland ZDF – Germany Human – The Netherlands Señal Colombia – Colombia IBA – Israel
Table 8 Summary of activities conducted by broadcasters 57
Country/ Channel Activities conducted beyond broadcasting the films region
Netherlands VPRO TV: 12 public broadcasters are making 31 different programmes about Why Poverty? themes – includes 8 international documentaries 23 different prime-time talk shows highlighting the issues RADIO: 22 different radio shows including debates, discussions and
57 This summary is based on reports received from broadcasters and a desktop study. This table does not summarise activities of all broadcasters but rather provides a snapshot of activities conducted by a selection of broadcasters after the broadcasting period.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 76 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
politicians discussing poverty PRINT: Why Poverty? supplement added to all the radio/TV guides in Netherlands (1.5 million issues); 10 posters; 19 cartoons; infographics ONLINE: Building an international website on Why Poverty? EVENTS: Screenings programmed for 3 nights and a mini festival at IDFA; 25 November kick-off day in 30 locations in Utrecht including theatre, workshops, games, debates; film museum in Amsterdam programmed old classics about poverty
Europe EBU – 37 EBU members dedicated their multi-platform programming to network poverty throughout November 2012, which culminated in a Why of 37 Poverty? theme day on 29 November 2012. broadcas EBU offered the free programmes for the Why Poverty? day to ters from some members who could not afford the films. the public Some of the additional activities undertaken by EBU broadcasters service, are listed below mainly from Europe
Denmark DR TV: Daily debates after each film; Production of national documentary about being poor from children’s point of view; Poverty discussed through all genres (news, talk shows, fiction, entertainment); EVENTS: organised a major conference in Copenhagen on 29 November with world big thinkers resulting in a live tape debate and offered to EBU members through the network RADIO: aired expert debates, dilemma plays; poverty discussed and reflected in four main radio channels. INTERNET: films on website; developed educational material, games and dilemma plays for pre-school, schools and high schools; debate site after each transmission of films with specialist host including ministers to chat with viewers OTHER: public screenings; public debate in Copenhagen town hall; exhibition of children’s drawings of inequality in museums; Poverty menu stunt in workplace cafeterias.
Czech CT TV: Production of 52 minute national documentary about single Republic mothers; poverty discussed and illustrated through many genres (news, talk shows, children programmes) INTERNET: special interactive website about the project with social media support OTHER: Special Charity campaign in co-operation with Committee
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 77 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
of Good Will - The Olga Havel Foundation. Aimed at Czech families with low income. To start on Nov.16 on CT – with the help of the donor´s text messages.
Greece ERT TV: broadcast in-house productions – investigative documentaries, theatre plays, films - different theme each week OTHER: public screenings and debates in the French Institute; telemarathon for the soup kitchens and free meals for school children in co-ordination with the Church and Ministry of Education; public concert under the Acropolis.
Italy RAI TV: pre-produced a studio programme that analysed the topic of each documentary and referred to situation in Italy.
Italy Vatican Produced programmes and material in various languages related to Radio poverty and made the programmes and material available to other EBU Radio members free of rights and cost.
Canada TVO TV: current affairs programmes to focus on poverty; TVO Kids doing a Food Drive with Ontario food banks; 10 short films about poverty in Ontario ONLINE: mini-series of interviews related to poverty issues; interactive website with infographics, quizzes and income simulators that explore what it is like to live below the poverty line OTHER: development of educational tool-kit with classroom activity worksheets on the theme of poverty and inequality; 12 community screening in seven locations.
USA ITVS ONLINE: films made available online for audiences to watch through a specially designed page featured on PBS Video portal; online Global Symposium for Why Poverty? which brought together poverty experts and women’s rights advocates from around the world to watch and discuss the films SOCIAL MEDIA: social media campaign to engage and generate awareness amongst viewers; Facebook promotion for each film launched prior to broadcast with links to Why Poverty? website; visual memes were sent out the week prior to broadcast and shared over 300 times; Get Glue – a social networking app – allowed users to “check in” with Why Poverty? programmes – letting their friends know what they were watching OUTREACH and ENGAGEMENT: Through ITVS’ Community Cinema programme Solar Mamas was screened in over 100 cities around the country followed by audience engagement.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 78 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Brazil Futura TV: • Debate Room program (Sala de Notícias Debate), 60 minutes length each, on the subject of “The Fight against Poverty”. • News covered on Futura News (Jornal Futura) during the period the documentaries were aired, with clips of the production. • A special series of the Interview (Entrevista) program (15 minutes length), with specialists in various fields relating their areas of expertise to poverty and inequality – 22 episodes. • A series of features on poverty and inequality for Futura News (Jornal Futura) • Speak up! Series (Diz Aí!): 5 new programs about poverty. ONLINE: • Wiki map – cartography - collaboration among young Brazilians participating in the networking institutions to register and indicate the geo-location of poverty in the country. OTHER: • Four regional forums: Curitiba, São Paulo, São Luís and Manaus (March and April 2013). • National seminar held with IPEA - Rio de Janeiro – May 10th of 2013. • Forum and seminar feature subjects: Education, Early Childhood, Youth, Women and Social Technologies. • Futura Generation (Geração Futura) University Partners: 25 videos produced by university students in workshops administered by the Futura Chanel. • Production of a Why Poverty? suitcase – a kit with documentaries, videos, text, materials covered in forums and seminar • Implement Futura Suitcase at Futura Room, educational institutions and mobilisation networks
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 79 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Appendix 2: Screenings captured for the evaluation
Country Screening Name of Purpose and focus Target groups Films shown venue hosting areas organisation
United UK All Party Seeks to bring Policy-makers Land Rush Kingdom Parliament Parliamentary together and Group on Parliamentarians practitioners Food and concerned with concerned with Agriculture agriculture, nutrition agriculture, for and wider food nutrition and Development security in the wider food (APPG) developing world. security in the developing It aims to raise world. awareness on these issues and engender Smallholder progressive and farmers. informed debate and understanding of the needs of small hold farmers and to hold government accountable to support agriculture in the developing world.
United Royal African Joint AAPPG focuses on Policy-makers Land Rush Kingdom Society (RAS) screening by broad strategic (Lords and MP’s Africa All issues in Africa and from all parties Party raises the profile of interested in Parliamentary Africa and African Africa) Group issues in Parliament. Africans and (AAPPG) and The RAS provides the non-Africans, the RAS administrative and including research support to business the AAPPG. leaders, RAS is a membership eminent society with the goal academics, of promoting Africa politicians, civil in business, politics, servants, culture and teachers and academia. It works to students, health fostering better professionals, understanding and journalists and strong relationships writers, artists
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 80 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
between Britain, and musicians. Africa and the world.
United Capitol Hill Partnership Conducts policy and US government Land Rush States to Cut Hunger advocacy work to officials and and Poverty increase investment policy-makers; in Africa in agriculture in private sector Africa. investors in agriculture A key intended impact is to increase the income of resource-poor farmers by assisting them to obtain the investment they need to increase their food production and to enter the value chain.
South University of Institute for The ISD is a Research Post-Graduate Land Rush Africa the Western Social Institute with the students from Cape Development emphasis of the African research undertaken countries who and courses offered are working or being on the social have worked in and economic Government. challenges developing countries have to meet to transform successfully.
Botswana University of Gasegale Gase is part of the Mix of students Stealing Botswana Sengwaketse STEPS regional and NGO Africa, and partnership network. representatives. Land Rush
She is a social development practitioner trained in the STEPS action- learning cycle as part of STEPS to the Future, living in Botswana.
South Community STEPS / Part of the piloting of Various NGO’s Solar Mamas, Africa House Southern the STEPS outreach and Hemisphere methodology for Miseducation Why Poverty?
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 81 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
South District 6 STEPS / Planning for Various NGO’s Solar Mamas, Africa Homecoming Southern outreach and and centre Hemisphere assessing outcomes Miseducation
Lesotho Sesotho Sesotho Planning for Various NGO’s Welcome to Media and Media and outreach and the World; Development Development assessing outcomes God is Rain, Morris’s Bag, and The thread
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 82 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Appendix 3: Compiled broadcaster data
Note: where the blocks are blank, it is because that data was not supplied by the broadcaster
Date of Av Market AM Broadcaster Film Time Reach Peak Broadcast Audience Share R Education, Education 5-Dec 21:00 170,000 Give Us The Money 25-Nov 21:00 292,000 Land Rush 5-Dec 22:00 141,000 Park Avenue 2-Dec 21:00 178,000 TVO – Canada Poor Us 26-Nov 22:00 38,000 Solar Mamas 28-Nov 21:00 205,000 Stealing Africa 28-Nov 22:00 129,000 Welcome to the World 3-Dec 22:00 112,000
Park Avenue 12-Nov 22:00 1,788,000 Solar Mamas 5-Nov 22:00 1,087,000 Education, Education 28-Nov 19:00 Give Us The Money 26-Nov 19:00 ITVS – USA Land Rush 27-Nov 20:00 Poor Us 27-Nov 19:00 47000000 * Stealing Africa 26-Nov 20:00 Welcome to the World 28-Nov 20:00
Park Avenue 116,000 Solar Mamas 88,000 Education, Education 49,000 Give Us The Money 76,000 Land Rush 45,000 DR- Denmark Poor Us 51,000 Stealing Africa 378,000 Welcome to the World 332,000 Fattige danske børn 647,000 Debatten special (debate 61,000 program)
NRK Education, Education 48, 000 4.40% Give Us The Money 44, 000 2.60% Land Rush 31, 000 1.80% Park Avenue 62, 000 4.80% Poor Us 50, 000 4.80%
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 83 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Solar Mamas 98, 000 8.50% Stealing Africa 28, 000 1.80% Welcome to the World 71, 000 5.30%
Education, Education 10-Dec 20:10 28,980 44,000 50.10% Give Us The Money 21-Dec 20:10 29,505 67,000 55.00% RUV – Iceland Park Avenue 12-Dec 22:24 19,110 44,000 43.70% Solar Mamas 5-Dec 22:35 19,110 44,000 43.70% Welcome to the World 28-Nov 22:22 24,675 56,000 50.80%
Education, Education 175,000 4.90% Give Us The Money 297,000 4.30% Land Rush 79,000 5.30% VPRO – the Park Avenue 177,000 4.70% Netherlands Poor Us 294,000 3.90% Solar Mamas 198,000 2.80% Stealing Africa 150,000 4.00% Welcome to the World 182,000 5.30%
Education, Education 30-Nov 22:00 250,800 1.18 1.13% Give Us The Money 1-Dec 8:00 117,000 0.38 0.93% Land Rush 4-Dec 22:00 171,000 0.54 0.69% Park Avenue 7-Dec 22:00 226,900 0.86 0.90% PTS – Taiwan Poor Us 8-Dec 8:00 121,000 0.34 0.87% Solar Mamas 11-Dec 22:00 186,000 0.8 0.90% Stealing Africa 15-Dec 8:00 95,000 0.32 0.63% Welcome to the World 22-Dec 8:00 91,000 0.3 0.69%
820, TVP – Poland Welcome to the World 26-Nov 22:41 10.80% 176
Education, Education 5-Nov 22:31 175,000 1.20% Give Us The Money 25-Nov 21:01 171,000 0.50% Land Rush 4-Dec 22:02 176,000 0.90% Park Avenue 27-Nov 22:03 402,000 2.10% BBC – UK Poor Us 28-Nov 22:32 126,000 0.90% Solar Mamas 2-Dec 21:01 264,000 0.90% Stealing Africa 26-Nov 22:04 172,000 1.00% 1,140,00 Welcome to the World 19-Nov 22:37 9.10% 0
57,0 ETR – Greece Education, Education 27-Nov 20:57 1.20% 57
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 84 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
29,4 Give Us The Money 26-Nov 20:59 0.70% 89 85,8 Land Rush 28-Nov 21:54 1.90% 25 34,8 Park Avenue 28-Nov 20:05 0.90% 99 22,7 Poor Us 27-Nov 19:59 0.60% 25 85,6 Solar Mamas 26-Nov 21:02 2.00% 84 34,5 Stealing Africa 29-Nov 20:08 0.90% 47 107, Welcome to the World 25-Nov 19:10 1.90% 725
Give Us The Money 28-Nov 23:21 80 67,000 7.00% Poor Us 25-Nov 0:04 68 56,000 8.00% ORF – Austria Solar Mamas 25-Nov 23:12 135 111,000 9.00% Stealing Africa 29-Nov 22:10 157 118,000 12.00%
Education, Education 15-Dec 19:30 130,000 14.20% Give Us The Money 22-Dec 19:30 130,000 14.80% Land Rush 5-Jan 19:30 130,000 10.00% RTHK – Hong Park Avenue 29-Dec 19:30 130,000 15.20% Kong Poor Us 1-Dec 19:30 195,000 24.50% Solar Mamas 8-Dec 19:30 130,000 16.90% Stealing Africa 12-Jan 19:30 130,000 12.00%
* Statistic given for combined reach of these films broadcast on the WORLD channel
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 85 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Appendix 4: M&E concept maps and tools
Figure 29 Why Poverty? Logic Model
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 86 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Figure 30 Why Poverty? Project Map, 2011
For assessing the outcomes, the following theory of change or logic model was developed for the project and applied to the evaluation.
Figure 31 Why Poverty? Results chain (theory of change), May 2011
Purpose / short-term Outputs Impact – long term outcomes outcomes
Global event – global Engagement on cross-media project poverty related issues. Strengthening of an - about aspects of poverty movements. poverty calling viewers to ac on. Every ac on makes a How to make a Making a difference. difference. difference.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 87 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Table 9 Conceptual map for the outcome evaluation58
Outcome Definition Evaluation Indicators / categories level MOV
1. Shifts in social Social norms are the knowledge, attitudes, Outcomes KAP norms values, and behaviours that comprise the and impact (Knowledge, normative structure of culture and society. attitude, Advocacy and policy work increasingly has practice); social focused on this area because of the sentiment importance of aligning advocacy and policy analysis goals with core and enduring social values and behaviours.
2. Strengthening Organizational capacity is another name Outcomes Strengthening organisational for the skill set, staffing and leadership, organisational capacity organizational structure and systems, programmes finances, and strategic planning of non- and education
profits and formal coalitions that do efforts by advocacy and policy work. Development of developing skill these core capacities is critical to advocacy of using film for and policy change efforts. awareness- raising and activism.
3. Strengthened Alliances among advocacy partners vary in Outcomes Mobilisation alliances levels of co-ordination, collaboration, and effect; network mission alignment, and can include non- effect traditional alliances such as bipartisan alliances or relationships between unlikely allies. Alliances bring about structural changes in community and institutional relationships and are essential to presenting common messages, pursuing common goals, enforcing policy changes, and protecting policy “wins.”
58 Harvard Family Research Project, The evaluation Exchange XIII 1, page 22 accessed: http://www.hfrp.org/var/hfrp/storage/original/application/6bdf92c3d7e970e7270588109e23b678.pdf on 09.10.2012
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 88 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
4. Strengthened Non-profits draw on grassroots, Outcomes Mobilisation base of leadership, and institutional support in / impact effect; network support working for policy changes. The breadth, effect depth, and influence of support among the general public, interest groups, and opinion leaders for particular issues are a major structural condition for supporting policy changes. This outcome category spans many layers of culture and societal engagement, including increases in civic participation and activism, “allied voices” among informal and formal groups, the coalescence of dissimilar interest groups, actions of opinion leader champions, and positive media attention
5. Improved Change in the public policy arena occurs in Outcomes Policy impact policies stages—including policy development, / impact policy proposals, demonstration of support
(e.g., co-sponsorship), adoption, funding, and implementation. Advocacy and policy evaluation frequently focus on this area as a measure of success. While an important focus, improved policies are rarely achieved without changes in the preconditions to policy change identified in other outcome categories.
6. Changes in Changes in impact are the ultimate and impact project impact impact / lives of long-term changes in social and physical people affected lives and conditions (i.e. individuals, by Poverty populations, and physical environments) that motivate policy change efforts. These changes are important to monitor and evaluate when grant-makers and advocacy organizations are partners in social change.
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 89 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Table 10 M&E tools developed for Why Poverty ? project
Outreach / screenings
Tool Name Description Indicators Tool (these are accessible electronically) no.
1 Film maker form To gather feedback Film maker from film makers in development the developing world
2 Film maker To gather feedback Film maker mentor form from experienced film development makers who helped to mentor those they were working with
3. Film maker To gather feedback Film maker development from the developing development workshop world film makers on feedback form their experience in the workshop
4. Broadcaster To gather feedback Effectiveness of the http://questionpro.com/t/AJrNOZO feedback form on broadcaster broadcast (reach, 7iI activities and market share) distribution Outcomes
5. Co-producers To gather feedback Effectiveness of the https://docs.google.com/forms (broadcaster) on the co-production process /d/14s1e26UJxf6FvftHYV_7IXK process FauwVyP59Jx4MdnOy- gw/viewform?sid=1367528146 76544e&token=OOi61zwBAAA. qC9nA58xCHq8i6GNBqxUYQ.W 2Az3ZKmT-wGj-i1GOYXIg
6. Attendance To record participants register present at workshop
C:\Users\dena\AppData\Local\ Microsoft\Windows\Temporar y Internet Files\Content.Outlook\TO5WT 7QR\Attendance Register.docx
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 90 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
7 Action Plan for Organisations that Intentions of NGOs; partner screenings wish to partner with reach, networking STEPS and show the effect films as part of their OD or their programme, should complete an Action Plan
9 Screening report A report which an Reactions to the organisation which films, networking has organised effect, mobilisation screenings submits to effect, organisational report on 1 or more strengthening, reach screenings
10 Post-screening Post-screening evaluation form evaluation form for people who participated in a screening event
11. Outreach To conduct interviews Impact – how have Qualitative with people (those been used the films interview schedule representing and what difference organisations) that has this made on submitted an action their organisation? plan to use the films. in their work
12 Post-screening For representatives of Reactions to the feedback form – organisations who films, networking organisational attended screenings effect, mobilisation with the view to effect, organisational getting organisations strengthening, reach to use the films in their work
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 91 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za FInal evaluation for Why Poverty?, for Steps International, December 2013
Appendix 5: Case studies (attached separately)
a. Outreach and facilitated screenings conducted in Cape Town between November 2012 and February 2013
b. Outreach and facilitated screenings conducted in Botswana between December 2012 and March 2013 c. An analysis of Solar Mamas in 5 countries
d. An analysis of screenings conducted with the film Land Rush
Southern Hemisphere. PO Box 3260, Cape Town, 8000 Tel: +27 21 422 0205 Page | 92 Fax: +27 21 424 7965 www.southernhemisphere.co.za