Journal articles on the topic 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

Michael Moore's 2004 film Fahrenheit 9/11 is a visual and narrative tour de force that critiques everything from the controversial conditions under which George W. Bush assumed the US presidency to President Bush's handling of his so-called “war on terror.” With its tagline “The temperature where freedom burns,” Moore stresses the dubious ethical nature of the Bush administration's post-9/11 policies, especially as they redefine the US relationship between freedom and censorship. In so doing, he challenges the Bush administration's constructions of US morality as ultimately elitist and self-serving, substituting his own populist, class-based moral America(n) in its place.

<p><em>This thesis starts from structural anthropology, combines some shooting methods of film-documentary, and conducts initial structural analysis to the documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, which was directed by Michael Moores and which won an award at Cannes International Film Festival. On the basis of confirming the effectiveness of the documentary, this thesis analyzes how the film director uses methods of shooting and organizing to criticize the series of domestic and diplomatic policies adopted after the September 11 attacks by the U.S. president G·W·Bush. </em></p>

This article explores the concept of popular culture and popular art. When Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 received the Golden Palm in Cannes in 2004, the French press and director Jean-Luc Godard joined in a critique of the jury’s choice. The press discussed the possibility of the festival loosing its status as the most prestigious festival of art cinema after giving the prize to an American political documentary. Godard criticized Michael Moore for being to direct and not communicating through more subtle aesthetics. Between the lines of both critiques one find a devaluation of popular art often seen in modern aesthetic theory and this article tries to refute this devaluation in a critical reading of Theodor W. Adorno’sview on the popular.

Al entender al documental como una herramienta que adquiere un papel activo en la construcción de identidades políticas y en la conformación de la historia de las comunidades, el objetivo del texto es analizar los documentales de dos cineastas estadounidenses —Michael Moore y Ken Burns— en relación con la candidatura y gestión presidencial de Donald Trump. A través de una metodología cualitativa de corte interpretativo, se descubre que los directores y sus respectivos documentales —Michael Moore in Trumpland (2016), Fahrenheit 11/9 (2018) y The Central Park Five (2012)— abonan y participan en el debate nacional actual, coincidiendo en un contexto que consideran peligroso y urgente, a pesar de sus profundas diferencias y matices. Se concluye que en Estados Unidos, como desde hace nueve décadas, el documental sigue siendo una herramienta necesaria de la disidencia para abrir discusiones sobre temas que se consideran de relevancia nacional.

“From Syndicalism to Seattle” was first delivered to ILWCH late in 2000, conceived during the highpoint of post-Seattle euphoria and before the events of 9/11. In some obvious ways the anticorporate movement in North America and Australia has since fallen on harder times due to: the necessary diversion of radical energies into the antiwar movement and opposition to inept and authoritarian counterterrorism initiatives; a reluctance on the part of some NGOs to continue campaigning in the prevailing conservative political climate; increased surveillance and repression of all forms of dissent and protest; and greatly reduced media coverage due to obsession with the “war on terror.” However, in Europe, South America, Asia, and Africa, gigantic mobilizations and/or spectacularly stubborn day-by-day forms of resistance have continued and grown. Obituaries to anticorporate activism, invariably focused on the United States, are generally ignorant of these important struggles. In any case, despite the harsher political environment in the United States since 9/11, there are also positive developments that reveal the extent to which the critique of corporate power has gained public attention and political traction. Consider, for instance, the recent emergence of anticorporate blockbuster movies, such as Super Size Me, Fahrenheit 9/11, The Corporation, and Outfoxed. This new cinematic genre bears the imprint of Seattle: it builds upon the radically democratic anticorporate analysis brought to prominence by the worldwide movement that burst upon the political scene late in 1999; and it provides a valuable and previously unavailable avenue for dissemination of anticorporate ideas. Rather than dying—as those who pen its obituaries fervently wish—the anticorporate movement in the heart of Empire is instead assuming new forms and finding new ways to promulgate its message.

Abstract The insecticide trials were conducted in Lancaster County, Landi.sville, Pa. Certified 'Katahdin' seed potatoes were planted on 30 May with 9 inch spacing between plants and 3 ft between rows. Plots size was 4 rows by 25 ft with 2 border rows arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4 replicates. Temik 15 G (1.0 lb [AI]/acre) was applied in furrow at planting for all treatments. The control received the Temik application, however, no specific foliar insecticide was applied. The entire field was sprayed with 0.0375 lb (AI)/ acre esfenvalerate on 20 Jul to reduce the high density Colorado potato beetle (CPB). Experimental treatments were applied on 27 Jun, 11 Jul, and 2, 9, and 18 Aug. A George White boom sprayer delivering 30 gal/acre at 27 psi was used to spray the plants. A hand held CO2 pressurized spray was also used to apply the materials. Thirty gal of spray material was delivered/acre at 27 psi also with the hand sprayer. Sprays were applied by the tractor mounted sprayed at 3 mph; a Ty-18 type nozzle with 50 mesh screens were used. Five or ten stems/plot were sampled before the spray was applied. Counts were recorded 24-72 h after the sprays were applied with all stages being sampled. Two 25 ft rows/plot were harvested on 4 Oct, and graded by size two wk later. Average daily temperatures (degree Fahrenheit) were 72.2° for Jun, 74.6° for Jul, and 72.2° for Aug. Departure from average was 2.8 degrees for this period. Rainfall totals were 4.43 inches in Jun, 6.6 inches in Jul, and 1.58 inches in Aug. Total for the 3 mo was 12.61. Precipitation for Jun was 0.33 inches above normal. Jul precipitation was 2.24 inches above normal. Aug precipitation was 2.03 inches below normal. Rainfall following applications were 0.44 inches on 28 Jun.

Abstract The trials were conducted in Lancaster County, Landisville, Pa. Certified class B 'Katahdin' seed potatoes were planted on 30 May with 9 inch spacing between plants and 34 inches between rows. Plot were 4 rows by 25 ft with 2 border rows arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4 replicates. Temik 15 G (1.0 lb [AI]/acre) was applied in furrow at planting for all treatments. The control received Temik at planting, however, no foliar treatment was applied to the plot. The foliar insecticides were applied on 24 Jun, 16, 30 Jul, and 11 Aug with a George White boom sprayer delivering 30 gal/acre at 27 psi. Border rows were sprayed with Asana (0.0735 lb [AI]/acre) on 26 Jun by hand, and with the boom sprayer on later dates. A Tx-18 type spray nozzle with a 50 mesh screen was used, with the tractor speed at 3 mph. Ten stems per plot were sampled immediately before and 24 h after spraying, with all stages of Colorado potato beetle being sampled. A subjective damage index was implemented beginning on 2 Jul: 1 indicating 0-5% leaf loss to 5 indicating &gt;75% defoliation. Two 25 ft rows/plot were harvested on 25 Sep, and graded by size 2 weeks later. Average maximum and minimum daily temperatures (degree fahrenheit) were 76.2° and 49.3° for May, 89.6° and 59.1° for Jun, 89.0° and 63.5° for Jul, and 85.5° and 58.5° for Aug, respectively. Rainfall totals were 3.62 inches in May, 1.88 inches in Jun, 2.85 inches in Jul, and 1.99 inches in Aug. Precipitation for May was 0.04 inches above normal. Jun precipitation was 2.22 inches below normal. Jul precipitation was 1.52 inches below normal. Aug precipitation was 1.62 inches below normal. A factor affecting the trials was drought stress (precipitation for May through Aug was 5.32 inches below normal).

Abstract Abstract 5051 Heavy chain diseases (HCD) are rare B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders characterized by production of a monoclonal immunoglobulin without a light chain. Three subtypes are known based on the type of monoclonal immunoglobulin produced ie. alpha-heavy chain, gamma-heavy chain and mu-heavy chain disease in order of decreasing frequency. Here we report a case of gamma-heavy chain disease in a previously healthy 48 year old African American man, which demonstrated clinical and pathologic response to treatment with bortezomib and dexamethasone. The patient was transferred to our institution for work-up of persistent high fever, hypotension and eosinophilia after a thorough negative infectious and rheumatologic work-up spanning two outside hospital admissions. The patient had originally presented with two months of constitutional symptoms and cough refractory to antibiotics and prednisone. His outside hospital admissions were notable for an RCA NSTEMI (an unexpectedly large thrombus was noted on cardiac catheterization), eosinophilia and persistent fevers to 105 degrees Fahrenheit. Imaging studies included a CT torso and tagged WBC scan which were unrevealing but for mild splenomegaly of 15 cm and notably did not show lymphadenopathy, masses or evidence for infection. The fevers transiently abated with an empiric course of steroids but recurred accompanied by shock, which responded to a pulse of high dose methylprednisolone. Ultimately he was felt to have primary adrenal insufficiency without evidence of infiltrative disease on dedicated CT. On presentation to our hospital, his initial labs showed WBC 5. 3 K/uL (83% neutrophils, 10% lymphocytes, 3% monocytes, 4% eosinophils), Hb 11. 2 g/dL, platelets 173 K/uL. Comprehensive chemistry profile was unremarkable. SPEP/IFE of the serum and urine revealed a monoclonal gamma-heavy chain without associated light chain. The total IgG was elevated at 2522 mg/dL, IgA was mildly depressed at 57 mg/dL and IgM was normal at 147 mg/dL; the monoclonal protein itself could not be quantitated; hence, total serum IgG was followed. The patient underwent a bone marrow biopsy and aspiration which showed trilineage hematopoiesis, marked esosinophilia, no evidence of leukemia or lymphoma, 10% CD138+ plasma cells, with the overwhelming majority staining for IgG but not for kappa or lambda. A skeletal survey was negative for lytic lesions. The findings were felt to be consistent with a plasma cell dyscrasia associated gamma-heavy chain disease. The observed eosinophilia was felt to be reactive to the gamma-heavy chain disease as has been previously described. In the literature, gamma heavy chain disease is reported to most commonly present as a lymphoplasmacytic process and the finding of a plasma cell dyscrasia appears to be an unusual presentation of what is already a rare disease. We decided to tailor the treatment to the finding of a plasma cell dyscrasia. Therefore the patient was started on bortezomib 1. 3 mg/m2 SC D1, 4, 8, 11 and dexamethasone 20 mg PO D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 of a 21 day cycle. His treatment was complicated by paroxysmal atrial tachycardia; a cardiac MRI did not reveal evidence of infiltrative cardiomyopathy. After 4 cycles of bortezomib and dexamethasone, the patient's total IgG had normalized at 1265 mg/dL and though a monoclonal gamma heavy chain was still detected by IFE of the serum and urine, a repeat bone marrow biopsy and aspiration was without morphologic evidence of the heavy chain plasma cell dyscrasia. The patient reported feeling subjectively improved with abatement of his malaise and fatigue and without further episodes of fever. Interestingly, the parameter that most seemed to correlate with his clinical status was eosinophilia which also decreased from a peak of 61% (absolute eosinophil count of 5063/uL) to 8–19% after 4 cycles with bortezomib and dexamethasone. Secondary eosinophilia has been reported in the literature in a subset of gamma HCD patients. The patient further underwent stem-cell mobilization in preparation for auto stem cell transplant with high dose Cytoxan, after which the eosinophilia completely resolved. There are only approximately 120 cases of gamma HCD described in the literature. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of plasma cell dyscrasia associated gamma HCD responding to treatment with bortezomib and dexamethasone. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Статтю присвячено вивченню впливу чинника статі мовного посередника на застосовувані ним пріоритетні стратегії під час створення цільового тексту. Емпіричним матеріалом дослідження слугували тексти англомовної художньої прози та їхні українські переклади у виконанні чоловіків та жінок. Застосований у праці психолінгвістичний підхід до аналізу двомовного корпусу дав змогу встановити деякі ‘S-універсалії’ (Chesterman, 2011) вибору різностатевими посередниками тих чи тих мовних структур, що дає підстави погодитися з іншими дослідниками в питанні існування значущих відмінностей у гендерних пріоритетах структурування перекладного дискурсу. Серед найпомітніших “жіночих” універсалій в перекладі українською – метакогнітивна гнучкість, що кваліфікуємо як синтетичний когнітивний стиль. Крім того, простежено застосування перекладачками стратегії статусної нейтралізації в діалозі між персонажами під час відтворення статусно-маркованих і дифузних ситуацій; вищі показники лексичного розмаїття, експліцитації й номіналізації, ніж у цільових версіях перекладачів чоловічої статі. Останні виявляють більшу обережність у перекладі, вдаючись до ‘семантичного методу’ (Newmark, 1988) перекладу, виявляючи відтак аналітичний когнітивний стиль поведінки, а також демонструючи стратегію негативної ввічливості під час відтворення діалогів персонажів у статусно-маркованих і статусно-дифузних комунікативних ситуаціях. Література References Бендас Т. В. Гендерная психология. – СПб.: Питер, 2007.Bendas, T. (2007). Gendernaya Psikhologiya [Gender Psychology]. St. Petersburg: Piter. Карасик В. И. Социальный статус человека в лингвистическом аспекте // “Я”, “Субъект”,“Индивид” в парадигмах современного языкознания. – М. : ИЯ РАН, 1992. – С. 47–74.Karasik, V. I. (1992). Sotsialnyi status cheloveka v lingvisticheskom aspekte [Human socialstatus in linguistic aspect] ‘Ya’, ‘Subjekt’, ‘Individ’ v Paradigmakh SovremennogoYazykoznania, 47–74. Кутузов А. Переводы мужские и женские: есть ли разница? (на материале Корпусанесовершенных переводов)/А. Кутузов // Проблемы перевода, лингвистики илитературы. – 2012. – Вып. 15, № 1. – С. 97-104.Kutuzov, A. (2012). Perevody muzhskiye i zhenskiye: yest li raznitsa? [Male and femaletranslations: Any difference?]. Problemy Perevoda, Lingvistiki i Literatury, 15(1), 97-104. Сорокин Ю. А. Переводоведение: статус переводчика и психогерменевтическиепроцедуры. – М. : МТДК «Гнозис», 2003. – 160 с.Sorokin, Yu. A. (2003). Perevodovedeniye: Status Perevodchika i PsikhogermenevticheskiyeProcedury [Translation Studies: Translator’s Status and Psychohermeneutic Procedures].Moscow: Gnozis.5. Холод А. М. Речевые картины мира мужчин и женщин. – Днепропетровск : Пороги, 1997.– 229 с. Kholod, A. M. (1997). Rechevye kartiny mira muzhchin i zhenshchyn [Speech world view ofmen and women]. Dnepropetrovsk: Porogi. Холодная М. А. Когнитивные стили: О природе индивидуального ума. – М. : ПЕР СЭ,2002. – 304 с.Kholodnaya М. А. (2002). Kognitivnye Stili: O Prirode Individualnogo Uma [Cognitive Styles:On the Nature of Individual Mind]. Мoscow: PERSE. Arabski, J. (2013). Psycholinguistic and neurobiological differences between males andfemales. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of the ISAPL (423). Baker, M. (1999). The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of translators.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(2), 281–298. Berman, A. (1990). La retraduction comme espace de traduction. Palimpsestes, 4, 1–7. Blum-Kulka, S. (1986). Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In: Interlingual andIntercultural Communication (pp. 17–35). J. House, S. Blum-Kulka, (Eds). Tübingen: Narr. Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Chesterman, A. (2000). A causal model for Translation Studies. In: Intercultural Faultlines:Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects (pp. 15–27).M. Olohan, (Ed). Manchester: St. Jerome. Denturck, K. (2012). Explicitation vs. implicitation: a bidirectional corpus-based analysis ofcausal connectives in french and dutch translations. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(2),211–227. Desmidt, I. (2009). (Re)translation revisited. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 54(4), 669–683. Leonardi, V. (2007). Gender and Ideology in Translation. Do Women and Men TranslateDifferently? A Contrastive Analysis from Italian into English. Bern: Peter Lang AG. Laviosa, S. (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Finding, Applications.Amsterdam; Atlanta: Rodopi. Newmark, P. (1988). Approaches to Translation. London: Prentice Hall. Olohan, M. (2002). Leave it out! Using a comparable corpus to investigate aspects ofexplicitation in translation. Cadernos de Tradução, 9, 153–169. Vinay, J. & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French and English. Translated byJ. C. Sager and M. J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zasiekin, S. (2016). Understanding translation universals. Babel: International Journal ofTranslation, 62(1), 122–134. Sources Bradbury, R. The Smile. Retrieved from: http://raybradbury.ru/library/ story/52/9/1/ Bradbury, R. (1983). Fahrenheit. Short Stories. Moscow: Raduga Publishers, 1983. – 382 p. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. Л. Коломієць // Всесвітня література в середніхнавчальних закладах України. К.: Педагогічна преса, 1999. № 3 (227). С. 11–12.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by L. Kolomiyets. VsesvitniaLiteratura v Serednikh Navchalnykh Zakladakh Ukrainy, 3(227), 11–12. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Веприняка // Зарубіжна література. 6 клас.Посібник-хрестоматія. Тернопіль: Навчальна книга – Богдан, 1999а. С. 296–300.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Yaroslav Vepryniak. ZarubizhnaLiteratura. 6th Form, 296–300. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Євси // Світова література. 6 клас. Хрестоматія /Упорядник Гарбуз В. М. ; наук. ред. Таранік-Ткачук К. В. – Харків : ФОП Співак В. Л.,2011. – С. 374–381.Bradbury, R. (2011). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Andrii Ievsa. Svitova Literatura.6th Form. Textbook, 374–381. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. – Х.: Клуб сімейного дозвілля, 2006.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by A. Kamianets’.Kharkiv: Club Simeinoho Dozvillia. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. // Всесвіт. – 2006. – № 1–4, 11–12. – К. : Всесвіт.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by V. Shovkun. Vsesvit,1–4, 11–12. КТУМ: Корпус текстів української мови / [Електронний ресурс]. Режим доступу:http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209Korpus Tekstiv Ukrains’koyi Movy [The Corpus of the Ukrainian Language] / [ElectronicResource]. Retrieved from: http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209 Slovnyk Ukrainskoyi Movy [Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language] / I. K. Bilodid, ed. –Vol. 5. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. – P. 36, 100. Tolkien J. R. R. (1954). The Fellowship of the Ring. L.: George Allen & Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Володар Перснів: Хранителі Персня / пер. з англ. А. Немірової. Харків:Фоліо, 2003. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Старий ліс: Уривок з епопеї «Володар Перснів» / пер. з англ.А. Веселовського // Всесвіт. 2006. №№ 11–12, 124–135. Tolkien, J. R. R. (1981). The Hobbit, or, There and Back Again. L. : Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Туди і Звідти / пер. з англ. О. О’Лір. – Львів: Астролябія,2012.Tolkien, J. R. R. (2012). Hobit abo Tudy i Zvidty [The Hobbit, or There and Back] / translated byОlena О’Lear. Lviv: Astroliabia. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Мандрівка за Імлисті гори / пер. з англ. О. Мокровольського.– К. : Веселка, 1985.Tolkien, J. R. R. (1985). Hobit abo Mandrivka za Imlysti Hory [The Hobbit, or a Trip Beyond theMisty Mountains] / translated by Оlexandr Mokrovols’kyi. Кyiv: Veselka.6. Brown, D. (2003). The Da Vinci Code. L. : Corgi Books.

En el número actual, los textos transitan mayoritariamente sobre el ámbito de las artes escénicas y musicales, sin desprenderse de la dimensión de la imagen puesta en movimiento como factor que se reitera en los manuscritos que hemos publicado. La edición contempla como siempre la incorporación de la obra de una artista de la región, Pamela Román, quien desarrolla y practica el grabado como espacio de experimentación y expresión; en esta oportunidad nos presenta “REVERDECER”, una mirada sobre la corporalidad humana y la transformación que viene desarrollando desde la naturaleza; asimismo, como colofón. José Antonio Abreu realiza una reseña sobre Fahrenheit 11/9, documental del director Michael Moore, donde además de la denuncia política como perfil de su filmografía, construye un discurso muy visual, con recursos donde la imagen es fundamental; una constante que en nuestros últimos números, sigue siendo protagonista.

Introduction Documentary film has grown significantly in the past decade, with high profile films such as Fahrenheit 9/11, Supersize Me, and An Inconvenient Truth garnering increased attention both at the box office and in the news media. In addition, the rising prominence of web-based media has provided new opportunities for documentary to create social impact. Films are now typically released with websites, Facebook pages, twitter feeds, and web videos to increase both reach and impact. This combination of technology and broader audience appeal has given rise to a current landscape in which documentary films are imbedded within coordinated multi-media campaigns. New media have not only opened up new avenues for communicating with audiences, they have also created new opportunities for data collection and analysis of film impacts. A recent report by McKinsey and Company highlighted this potential, introducing and discussing the implications of increasing consumer information being recorded on the Internet as well as through networked sensors in the physical world. As they found: "Big data—large pools of data that can be captured, communicated, aggregated, stored, and analyzed—is now part of every sector and function of the global economy" (Manyika et al. iv). This data can be mined to learn a great deal about both individual and cultural response to documentary films and the issues they represent. Although film has a rich history in humanities research, this new set of tools enables an empirical approach grounded in the social sciences. However, several researchers across disciplines have noted that limited investigation has been conducted in this area. Although there has always been an emphasis on social impact in film and many filmmakers and scholars have made legitimate (and possibly illegitimate) claims of impact, few have attempted to empirically justify these claims. Over fifteen years ago, noted film scholar Brian Winston commented that "the underlying assumption of most social documentaries—that they shall act as agents of reform and change—is almost never demonstrated" (236). A decade later, Political Scientist David Whiteman repeated this sentiment, arguing that, "despite widespread speculation about the impact of documentaries, the topic has received relatively little systematic attention" ("Evolving"). And earlier this year, the introduction to a special issue of Mass Communication and Society on documentary film stated, "documentary film, despite its growing influence and many impacts, has mostly been overlooked by social scientists studying the media and communication" (Nisbet and Aufderheide 451). Film has been studied extensively as entertainment, as narrative, and as cultural event, but the study of film as an agent of social change is still in its infancy. This paper introduces a systematic approach to measuring the social impact of documentary film aiming to: (1) discuss the context of documentary film and its potential impact; and (2) argue for a social science approach, discussing key issues about conducting such research. Changes in Documentary Practice Documentary film has been used as a tool for promoting social change throughout its history. John Grierson, who coined the term "documentary" in 1926, believed it could be used to influence the ideas and actions of people in ways once reserved for church and school. He presented his thoughts on this emerging genre in his 1932 essay, First Principles of Documentary, saying, "We believe that the cinema's capacity for getting around, for observing and selecting from life itself, can be exploited in a new and vital art form" (97). Richard Barsam further specified the definition of documentary, distinguishing it from non-fiction film, such that all documentaries are non-fiction films but not all non-fiction films are documentaries. He distinguishes documentary from other forms of non-fiction film (i.e. travel films, educational films, newsreels) by its purpose; it is a film with an opinion and a specific message that aims to persuade or influence the audience. And Bill Nichols writes that the definition of documentary may even expand beyond the film itself, defining it as a "filmmaking practice, a cinematic tradition, and mode of audience reception" (12). Documentary film has undergone many significant changes since its inception, from the heavily staged romanticism movement of the 1920s to the propagandist tradition of governments using film to persuade individuals to support national agendas to the introduction of cinéma vérité in the 1960s and historical documentary in the 1980s (cf. Barnouw). However, the recent upsurge in popularity of documentary media, combined with technological advances of internet and computers have opened up a whole new set of opportunities for film to serve as both art and agent for social change. One such opportunity is in the creation of film-based social action campaigns. Over the past decade, filmmakers have taken a more active role in promoting social change by coordinating film releases with action campaigns. Companies such as Participant Media (An Inconvenient Truth, Food Inc., etc.) now create "specific social action campaigns for each film and documentary designed to give a voice to issues that resonate in the films" (Participant Media). In addition, a new sector of "social media" consultants are now offering services, including "consultation, strategic planning for alternative distribution, website and social media development, and complete campaign management services to filmmakers to ensure the content of nonfiction media truly meets the intention for change" (Working Films). The emergence of new forms of media and technology are changing our conceptions of both documentary film and social action. Technologies such as podcasts, video blogs, internet radio, social media and network applications, and collaborative web editing "both unsettle and extend concepts and assumptions at the heart of 'documentary' as a practice and as an idea" (Ellsworth). In the past decade, we have seen new forms of documentary creation, distribution, marketing, and engagement. Likewise, film campaigns are utilizing a broad array of strategies to engage audience members, including "action kits, screening programs, educational curriculums and classes, house parties, seminars, panels" that often turn into "ongoing 'legacy' programs that are updated and revised to continue beyond the film's domestic and international theatrical, DVD and television windows" (Participant Media). This move towards multi-media documentary film is becoming not only commonplace, but expected as a part of filmmaking. NYU film professor and documentary film pioneer George Stoney recently noted, "50 percent of the documentary filmmaker's job is making the movie, and 50 percent is figuring out what its impact can be and how it can move audiences to action" (qtd. in Nisbet, "Gasland"). In his book Convergence Culture, Henry Jenkins, coined the term "transmedia storytelling", which he later defined as "a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience" ("Transmedia"). When applied to documentary film, it is the elements of the "issue" raised by the film that get dispersed across these channels, coordinating, not just an entertainment experience, but a social action campaign. Dimensions of Evaluation It is not unreasonable to assume that such film campaigns, just like any policy or program, have the possibility to influence viewers' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. Measuring this impact has become increasingly important, as funders of documentary and issue-based films want look to understand the "return on investment" of films in terms of social impact so that they can compare them with other projects, including non-media, direct service projects. Although we "feel" like films make a difference to the individuals who also see them in the broader cultures in which they are embedded, measurement and empirical analysis of this impact are vitally important for both providing feedback to filmmakers and funders as well as informing future efforts attempting to leverage film for social change. This type of systematic assessment, or program evaluation, is often discussed in terms of two primary goals—formative (or process) and summative (or impact) evaluation (cf. Muraskin; Trochim and Donnelly). Formative evaluation studies program materials and activities to strengthen a program, and summative evaluation examines program outcomes. In terms of documentary film, these two goals can be described as follows: Formative Evaluation: Informing the Process As programs (broadly defined as an intentional set of activities with the aim of having some specific impact), the people who interact with them, and the cultures they are situated in are constantly changing, program development and evaluation is an ongoing learning cycle. Film campaigns, which are an intentional set of activities with the aim of impacting individual viewers and broader cultures, fit squarely within this purview. Without formulating hypotheses about the relationships between program activities and goals and then collecting and analyzing data during implementation to test them, it is difficult to learn ways to improve programs (or continue doing what works best in the most efficient manner). Attention to this process enables those involved to learn more about, not only what works, but how and why it works and even gain insights about how program outcomes may be affected by changes to resource availability, potential audiences, or infrastructure. Filmmakers are constantly learning and honing their craft and realizing the impact of their practice can help the artistic process. Often faced with tight budgets and timelines, they are forced to confront tradeoffs all the time, in the writing, production and post-production process. Understanding where they are having impact can improve their decision-making, which can help both the individual project and the overall field. Summative Evaluation: Quantifying Impacts Evaluation is used in many different fields to determine whether programs are achieving their intended goals and objectives. It became popular in the 1960s as a way of understanding the impact of the Great Society programs and has continued to grow since that time (Madaus and Stufflebeam). A recent White House memo stated that "rigorous, independent program evaluations can be a key resource in determining whether government programs are achieving their intended outcomes as well as possible and at the lowest possible cost" and the United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB) launched an initiative to increase the practice of "impact evaluations, or evaluations aimed at determining the causal effects of programs" (Orszag 1). Documentary films, like government programs, generally target a national audience, aim to serve a social purpose, and often do not provide a return on their investment. Participant Media, the most visible and arguably most successful documentary production company in the film industry, made recent headlines for its difficulty in making a profit during its seven-year history (Cieply). Owner and founder Jeff Skoll reported investing hundreds of millions of dollars into the company and CEO James Berk added that the company sometimes measures success, not by profit, but by "whether Mr. Skoll could have exerted more impact simply by spending his money philanthropically" (Cieply). Because of this, documentary projects often rely on grant funding, and are starting to approach funders beyond traditional arts and media sources. "Filmmakers are finding new fiscal and non-fiscal partners, in constituencies that would not traditionally be considered—or consider themselves—media funders or partners" (BRITDOC 6). And funders increasingly expect tangible data about their return on investment. Says Luis Ubiñas, president of Ford Foundation, which recently launched the Just Films Initiative: In these times of global economic uncertainty, with increasing demand for limited philanthropic dollars, assessing our effectiveness is more important than ever. Today, staying on the frontlines of social change means gauging, with thoughtfulness and rigor, the immediate and distant outcomes of our funding. Establishing the need for evaluation is not enough—attention to methodology is also critical. Valid research methodology is a critical component of understanding around the role entertainment can play in impacting social and environmental issues. The following issues are vital to measuring impact. Defining the Project Though this may seem like an obvious step, it is essential to determine the nature of the project so one can create research questions and hypotheses based on a complete understanding of the "treatment". One organization that provides a great example of the integration of documentary film imbedded into a larger campaign or movement is Invisible Children. Founded in 2005, Invisible Children is both a media-based organization as well as an economic development NGO with the goal of raising awareness and meeting the needs of child soldiers and other youth suffering as a result of the ongoing war in northern Uganda. Although Invisible Children began as a documentary film, it has grown into a large non-profit organization with an operating budget of over $8 million and a staff of over a hundred employees and interns throughout the year as well as volunteers in all 50 states and several countries. Invisible Children programming includes films, events, fundraising campaigns, contests, social media platforms, blogs, videos, two national "tours" per year, merchandise, and even a 650-person three-day youth summit in August 2011 called The Fourth Estate. Individually, each of these components might lead to specific outcomes; collectively, they might lead to others. In order to properly assess impacts of the film "project", it is important to take all of these components into consideration and think about who they may impact and how. This informs the research questions, hypotheses, and methods used in evaluation. Film campaigns may even include partnerships with existing social movements and non-profit organizations targeting social change. The American University Center for Social Media concluded in a case study of three issue-based documentary film campaigns: Digital technologies do not replace, but are closely entwined with, longstanding on-the-ground activities of stakeholders and citizens working for social change. Projects like these forge new tools, pipelines, and circuits of circulation in a multiplatform media environment. They help to create sustainable network infrastructures for participatory public media that extend from local communities to transnational circuits and from grassroots communities to policy makers. (Abrash) Expanding the Focus of Impact beyond the Individual A recent focus has shifted the dialogue on film impact. Whiteman ("Theaters") argues that traditional metrics of film "success" tend to focus on studio economic indicators that are far more relevant to large budget films. Current efforts focused on box office receipts and audience size, the author claims, are really measures of successful film marketing or promotion, missing the mark when it comes to understanding social impact. He instead stresses the importance of developing a more comprehensive model. His "coalition model" broadens the range and types of impact of film beyond traditional metrics to include the entire filmmaking process, from production to distribution. Whiteman (“Theaters”) argues that a narrow focus on the size of the audience for a film, its box office receipts, and viewers' attitudes does not incorporate the potential reach of a documentary film. Impacts within the coalition model include both individual and policy levels. Individual impacts (with an emphasis on activist groups) include educating members, mobilizing for action, and raising group status; policy includes altering both agenda for and the substance of policy deliberations. The Fledgling Fund (Barrett and Leddy) expanded on this concept and identified five distinct impacts of documentary film campaigns. These potential impacts expand from individual viewers to groups, movements, and eventually to what they call the "ultimate goal" of social change. Each is introduced briefly below. Quality Film. The film itself can be presented as a quality film or media project, creating enjoyment or evoking emotion in the part of audiences. "By this we mean a film that has a compelling narrative that draws viewers in and can engage them in the issue and illustrate complex problems in ways that statistics cannot" (Barrett and Leddy, 6). Public Awareness. Film can increase public awareness by bringing light to issues and stories that may have otherwise been unknown or not often thought about. This is the level of impact that has received the most attention, as films are often discussed in terms of their "educational" value. "A project's ability to raise awareness around a particular issue, since awareness is a critical building block for both individual change and broader social change" (Barrett and Leddy, 6). Public Engagement. Impact, however, need not stop at simply raising public awareness. Engagement "indicates a shift from simply being aware of an issue to acting on this awareness. Were a film and its outreach campaign able to provide an answer to the question 'What can I do?' and more importantly mobilize that individual to act?" (Barrett and Leddy, 7). This is where an associated film campaign becomes increasingly important, as transmedia outlets such as Facebook, websites, blogs, etc. can build off the interest and awareness developed through watching a film and provide outlets for viewers channel their constructive efforts. Social Movement. In addition to impacts on individuals, films can also serve to mobilize groups focused on a particular problem. The filmmaker can create a campaign around the film to promote its goals and/or work with existing groups focused on a particular issue, so that the film can be used as a tool for mobilization and collaboration. "Moving beyond measures of impact as they relate to individual awareness and engagement, we look at the project's impact as it relates to the broader social movement … if a project can strengthen the work of key advocacy organizations that have strong commitment to the issues raised in the film" (Barrett and Leddy, 7). Social Change. The final level of impact and "ultimate goal" of an issue-based film is long-term and systemic social change. "While we understand that realizing social change is often a long and complex process, we do believe it is possible and that for some projects and issues there are key indicators of success" (Barrett and Leddy, 7). This can take the form of policy or legislative change, passed through film-based lobbying efforts, or shifts in public dialogue and behavior. Legislative change typically takes place beyond the social movement stage, when there is enough support to pressure legislators to change or create policy. Film-inspired activism has been seen in issues ranging from environmental causes such as agriculture (Food Inc.) and toxic products (Blue Vinyl) to social causes such as foreign conflict (Invisible Children) and education (Waiting for Superman). Documentary films can also have a strong influence as media agenda-setters, as films provide dramatic "news pegs" for journalists seeking to either sustain or generation new coverage of an issue (Nisbet "Introduction" 5), such as the media coverage of climate change in conjunction with An Inconvenient Truth. Barrett and Leddy, however, note that not all films target all five impacts and that different films may lead to different impacts. "In some cases we could look to key legislative or policy changes that were driven by, or at least supported by the project... In other cases, we can point to shifts in public dialogue and how issues are framed and discussed" (7). It is possible that specific film and/or campaign characteristics may lead to different impacts; this is a nascent area for research and one with great promise for both practical and theoretical utility. Innovations in Tools and Methods Finally, the selection of tools is a vital component for assessing impact and the new media landscape is enabling innovations in the methods and strategies for program evaluation. Whereas the traditional domain of film impact measurement included box office statistics, focus groups, and exit surveys, innovations in data collection and analysis have expanded the reach of what questions we can ask and how we are able to answer them. For example, press coverage can assist in understanding and measuring the increase in awareness about an issue post-release. Looking directly at web-traffic changes "enables the creation of an information-seeking curve that can define the parameters of a teachable moment" (Hart and Leiserowitz 360). Audience reception can be measured, not only via interviews and focus groups, but also through content and sentiment analysis of web content and online analytics. "Sophisticated analytics can substantially improve decision making, minimize risks, and unearth valuable insights that would otherwise remain hidden" (Manyika et al. 5). These new tools are significantly changing evaluation, expanding what we can learn about the social impacts of film through triangulation of self-report data with measurement of actual behavior in virtual environments. Conclusion The changing media landscape both allows and impels evaluation of film impacts on individual viewers and the broader culture in which they are imbedded. Although such analysis may have previously been limited to box office numbers, critics' reviews, and theater exit surveys, the rise of new media provides both the ability to connect filmmakers, activists, and viewers in new ways and the data in which to study the process. This capability, combined with significant growth in the documentary landscape, suggests a great potential for documentary film to contribute to some of our most pressing social and environmental needs. A social scientific approach, that combines empirical analysis with theory applied from basic science, ensures that impact can be measured and leveraged in a way that is useful for both filmmakers as well as funders. In the end, this attention to impact ensures a continued thriving marketplace for issue-based documentary films in our social landscape. References Abrash, Barbara. "Social Issue Documentary: The Evolution of Public Engagement." American University Center for Social Media 21 Apr. 2010. 26 Sep. 2011 ‹http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/›. Aufderheide, Patricia. "The Changing Documentary Marketplace." Cineaste 30.3 (2005): 24-28. Barnouw, Eric. Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film. New York: Oxford UP, 1993. Barrett, Diana and Sheila Leddy. "Assessing Creative Media's Social Impact." The Fledgling Fund, Dec. 2008. 15 Sep. 2011 ‹http://www.thefledglingfund.org/media/research.html›. Barsam, Richard M. Nonfiction Film: A Critical History. Bloomington: Indiana UP. 1992. BRITDOC Foundation. The End of the Line: A Social Impact Evaluation. London: Channel 4, 2011. 12 Oct. 2011 ‹http://britdoc.org/news_details/the_social_impact_of_the_end_of_the_line/›. Cieply, Michael. "Uneven Growth for Film Studio with a Message." New York Times 5 Jun. 2011: B1. Ellsworth, Elizabeth. "Emerging Media and Documentary Practice." The New School Graduate Program in International Affairs. Aug. 2008. 22 Sep. 2011. ‹http://www.gpia.info/node/911›. Grierson, John. "First Principles of Documentary (1932)." Imagining Reality: The Faber Book of Documentary. Eds. Kevin Macdonald and Mark Cousins. London: Faber and Faber, 1996. 97-102. Hart, Philip Solomon and Anthony Leiserowitz. "Finding the Teachable Moment: An Analysis of Information-Seeking Behavior on Global Warming Related Websites during the Release of The Day After Tomorrow." Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture 3.3 (2009): 355-66. Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York UP, 2006. ———. "Transmedia Storytelling 101." Confessions of an Aca-Fan. The Official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. 22 Mar. 2007. 10 Oct. 2011 ‹http://www.henryjenkins.org/2007/03/transmedia_storytelling_101.html›. Madaus, George, and Daniel Stufflebeam. "Program Evaluation: A Historical Overview." Evaluation in Education and Human Services 49.1 (2002): 3-18. Manyika, James, Michael Chui, Jacques Bughin, Brad Brown, Richard Dobbs, Charles Roxburgh, and Angela Hung Byers. Big Data: The Next Frontier for Innovation, Competition, and Productivity. McKinsey Global Institute. May 2011 ‹http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/big_data/›. Muraskin, Lana. Understanding Evaluation: The Way to Better Prevention Programs. Washington: U.S. Department of Education, 1993. 8 Oct. 2011 ‹http://www2.ed.gov/PDFDocs/handbook.pdf›. Nichols, Bill. "Foreword." Documenting the Documentary: Close Readings of Documentary Film and Video. Eds. Barry Keith Grant and Jeannette Sloniowski. Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1997. 11-13. Nisbet, Matthew. "Gasland and Dirty Business: Documentary Films Shape Debate on Energy Policy." Big Think, 9 May 2011. 1 Oct. 2011 ‹http://bigthink.com/ideas/38345›. ———. "Introduction: Understanding the Social Impact of a Documentary Film." Documentaries on a Mission: How Nonprofits Are Making Movies for Public Engagement. Ed. Karen Hirsch, Center for Social Media. Mar. 2007. 10 Sep. 2011 ‹http://aladinrc.wrlc.org/bitstream/1961/4634/1/docs_on_a_mission.pdf›. Nisbet, Matthew, and Patricia Aufderheide. "Documentary Film: Towards a Research Agenda on Forms, Functions, and Impacts." Mass Communication and Society 12.4 (2011): 450-56. Orszag, Peter. Increased Emphasis on Program Evaluation. Washington: Office of Management and Budget. 7 Oct. 2009. 10 Oct. 2011 ‹http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/memoranda_2010/m10-01.pdf›. Participant Media. "Our Mission." 2011. 2 Apr. 2011 ‹http://www.participantmedia.com/company/about_us.php.›. Plantinga, Carl. Rhetoric and Representation in Nonfiction Film. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997. Trochim, William, and James Donnelly. Research Methods Knowledge Base. 3rd ed. Mason: Atomic Dogs, 2007. Ubiñas, Luis. "President's Message." 2009 Annual Report. Ford Foundation, Sep. 2010. 10 Oct. 2011 ‹http://www.fordfoundation.org/about-us/2009-annual-report/presidents-message›. Vladica, Florin, and Charles Davis. "Business Innovation and New Media Practices in Documentary Film Production and Distribution: Conceptual Framework and Review of Evidence." The Media as a Driver of the Information Society. Eds. Ed Albarran, Paulo Faustino, and R. Santos. Lisbon, Portugal: Media XXI / Formal, 2009. 299-319. Whiteman, David. "Out of the Theaters and into the Streets: A Coalition Model of the Political Impact of Documentary Film and Video." Political Communication 21.1 (2004): 51-69. ———. "The Evolving Impact of Documentary Film: Sacrifice and the Rise of Issue-Centered Outreach." Post Script 22 Jun. 2007. 10 Sep. 2011 ‹http://www.allbusiness.com/media-telecommunications/movies-sound-recording/5517496-1.html›. Winston, Brian. Claiming the Real: The Documentary Film Revisited. London: British Film Institute, 1995. Working Films. "Nonprofits: Working Films." Foundation Source Access 31 May 2011. 5 Oct. 2011 ‹http://access.foundationsource.com/nonprofit/working-films/›.