I ask this because I've been offered a job working on a video that is essentially a propaganda piece on the wrong side of a social issue that I feel passionately about. It's not for the KKK, but what if it were? I'm telling myself that I believe in free speech and everybody has the right to have their argument heard, and frankly, I really need the money. How do other people handle this? For the record, if it really were for the KKK no way would I do it. Just wanted to make that clear. Where is that line though? I'd really appreciate other people's insight on this.

If you really don't agree or can't abide by their positions, I think that would affect the quality of the work you could do.

Well Richard, I'm a sound person, and I hate bad sound. I hate it. There is no way I could tolerate getting them anything but the best sound possible. So, I really don't think my work would be compromised. I hope that doesn't sound flip.

If you don't believe in the message, don't do it.

You're the one that has to live with whatever your work achieves.

If you cannot abide that end result, walk away.

Just MPO.


CS

Think of how you would feel if you were black and you found out a friend did a promo for the KKK? Could you still be friends with that person? For this reason I would not do it.

But I have to admit there's a part of me that says it would be fascinating to look at the KKK more closely and try to understand how their side of the story developed because you learn the most about yourself from the people with whom you disagree the most.

Marco,

Well, I was thinking more in the line of directing/producing sort of work, but still (not knowing EXACTLY what we're dealing with) I would think that your 'heart' wouldn't be in it, and that sort of thing tends to slip into our work ... in one way or another.

The fact that it bothers you enough to ask for opinions about the ethics, indicates that its REALLY a problem for you, and not a small one

I mean, I wouldn't have any trouble shooting or directing say, a piece for a political candidate on 'the other side of the aisle' ... I don't agree with the politics, but I'm okay with agreeing to disagree on some issues for instance. It probably wouldn't bother me. (Though I probably couln't write the piece.) But a PARTICULAR person, even if they were on this side of the aisle, I might not work for. I'd find a way to be busy.

I'm not a vegetarian, but I could certainly work on a shoot that advocated vegetarianism. It's just not that big of a deal in my book - not the 'hill I want to die on'.

There are no conflicting needs, only conflicting strategies.

I'd like to think that our efforts in a productions are more of a reflection of ourselves than most " jobs ". The creative part of us, adds a degree of our own flavour in each production.
Also this medium we use to tell a story or display a perceived truth should require us to live up to our own personal standard.
Deciding on our standard is a huge part of professional integrity.
I won't do anything I can't deal with.I refuse to promote the things I don't believe in both verbally and professionally.Hope you can do the same.

I think that this is a position a lot of attorneys find themselves in. These people aren't stupid and I'm sure they know in their hearts that they're defending someone who's as guilty as sin - but our system says that everyone has a fundamental right to an effective defense in court because to do otherwise would subvert the system and allow innocent people to be convicted.

I think people have a right to have their stories told and told well, as long as the telling isn't in itself illegal or unethical.

What would you think of a doctor who stood by and let a rapist die for lack of medical attention? Regardless of what the doctor personally thought of rapists.

Jim has a point.... but physicians take an oath to protect life and do no harm. If a patient presents himself or herself they have little choice, as opposed to you in the current situation.

I'm a lawyer. (Don't tell my Mom. it would break her heart - I lie to her and tell her I play a piano in a whorehouse). I have a similar story. Years ago I was court appointed (again not my choice as compared to you here) to represent a gentleman of advanced years who wrote a will leaving everything to his very young voluptous nurse and was giving her large sums of money as things went along.. During his lifetime (rare) that situation was challenged by his heirs and I was charged by the Court to represent his interests.

Now had I thought him truly unable to make rational thoughts, I would have said so, but frankly I have seen men half his age succumb to that affliction in the presence of a beautiful woman and in addition did not find him obviously incompetent... I represented him vigorously. I lost (I was not ashamed or distraught at the loss). I did my job to the best of my ability. But then, I didn't get to decide whether to take this client or not - I was court ordered into this. However...You have that choice. It is all about making that choice. It is not unethical to choose to do it. It is all about your own personal morality and whether it offends YOU.... in my book.

Postscript. About a month after the trial the old man died. About 6 months after that I was mailing a package at a "Mailbox" kind of place and the proprietor recognized me. I did not recognize him. He was the son of the old man. He said the family respected me for vigorously doing my job and giving the old man (his father) the dignity of a strong defense. He thanked me with tears in his eyes.

Make of that what you will.

If I don't think I would be comfortable putting my name on a project, I don't do it.

Hi Chris - I figured a piano player would chime in!

I think the whole point of what we're saying is that it's up to the individual to make the final decision to tell or not tell the story, but that either way one decides is OK. I wouldn't hold it against someone if he told the story of the KKK nor would I hold it against someone who refused to tell the story. I just think that the decision needs to be based on a balanced assessment of one's personal beliefs and one's perception of the rights of the potential customer to have the story told as well as possible.

This discussion does however open an ethical can of worms. Should a Jewish fim-maker refuse to direct a film portraying Hamas as a champion of the rights of the Palestinians? If he/she did make the film would it imply that he/she was any less Jewish or any less a supporter of Israel? Or does being Jewish necessarily imply that one should be a supporter of Israel?

No good answers, just good questions, I'm afraid. Thanks to the OP for asking.

it's easy to say when you're not the one who really wants that money, but I think you have to stick to your beliefs, and if you take the job, you are helping to promote whatever that cause it that you don't believe in, so you're being paid to do it but that's what you are basically doing. and once you get past this time and that one payment, you can't take your work back and what you did back, it's permanent, and it's has and will continue to help that cause. its hard to turn down money and easy to say if you're not the one faced with the decision, but hang in there if you can.

Simple. If you have to ask then obviously money is more important than principles to you. Otherwise you wouldn't have asked.

OK,
Let see...

!. Attorneys have a special thing called privilege which allows them to do things most of us would get in deep trouble for (like blaming the VICTIM and dragging them through the dirt in "defending" a crimina), or would find thoroughly distasteful. It's part of the "justice" system, and is a poor example...

2. Doctors also take an oath, and while some refuse to perform certain procedures, it can result in deep professional consequences. Again, not a good analogy.

3. Videographers are "independent business people" - no oath, no special laws with either requirements or privileges per se... generally the right to refuse service is up to the proprietor, as long as you're not discriminating on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, age or disability....

The problem I see is that practitioners in point #1 can probably find one or more of those "discriminations" in just about any exercise of your right to refuse service. The example of wedding videographers in TX (IIRC) that refused to shoot a civil union on grounds of their disagreement with the lifestyle choice comes to mind - they lost, and a substantial sum...


SO I think rationally you have a choice - if the "cause" you're being asked to shoot for is not illegal or immoral (keeping in mind that both can be alarmingly "flexible"), and you need the money, hey, it's money and you're a business. If you aren't comfortable putting your name on the finished product, be straightforward about it, and make that a part of the contract (business deal). Then treat them as you would any other client, take the money and move on.

I know that that may be somewhat cold and distasteful, and the aspect of your "product" being used to promote something you don't agree with presents a quandry (no doubt why you asked the question...).


Just to ask this a different way, mainly to encourage thought... an enterprise that makes knives doesn't have any control over how their product is used, and certainly knives are dangerous <wink>, but they continue to produce knives and make money from that enterprise. I have several knives myself <wink>. I've cut myself enough to prove they are dangerous. Philosophically I accept that I don't want just everybody running around with dangerous knives, yet I must allow for their right to have and legally use a knife, or my right to have a knife (or perhaps a REALLY dangerous hammer or screwdriver!) is compromised.


Without knowing the exact circumstances it's hard to say for sure, but be sure you're not "discriminating", for your business sake. That can come back to haunt you.

When all else fails, try the golden rule standard - are you treating the customer the way you would want to be treated?? That MAY enable you to work for someone you philosophically disagree with, but deal fairly and honestly, while still looking yourself in the mirror...

Then again I stopped patronizing a certain restaurant chain for quite a while because I found their advertising distasteful... no matter how much I might like the food, I found it difficult to support their "message". So in the end it is going to be a personal choice, as long as you dont' discriminate.

Hope that helps, rather than adds to the confusion...

Simple. If you have to ask then obviously money is more important than principles to you. Otherwise you wouldn't have asked.

That's a bit harsh... we all choose whether to work and pay our bills, and don't necessarily always agree with our "employers" or clients. If you're telling me you agree with your clients on everything, I call BS...

Not that principle isn't important, but one has to choose their battles. And when there are bills due and legitimate paying work... I can see the dilema.

Dave... agreed.

Being a child of the 60s, there is no moral dilemma for me here. I wouldn't do it. America defends freedom of speech and a group like the KKK has a right to promote their message. I, on the other hand, strenuously disagree with it and would not do anything help that message get out to even one more person. I'd rather panhandle and live in a box. There are other groups/positions that I would not help support, lest you think it's just this group. My principles/values are more important to me than anything I posses.

I also wouldn't want the world, or even the smallest part of it, to know I participated in something that was contrary to my values.

Ultimately, the decision has to be yours and there is no way I'm going to judge what you choose. Regardless of how well I ever got to know you and no matter how many dozens or even hundreds of hours were spent trying to understand your priorities and values, I'll still be on the outside looking in.

I'm reticent to recommend in general and even more so in this case. If I was faced with this dilemma, I would think it all the way through and make a decision that I'm sure that I won't regret later.

Criminals are represented by lawyers and attorneys. This doesn't mean that they approve of what thy have done.

Stelios

Okay, if anything, take this one on for size....
I know, i've been in a simliar circumstance....


Ask yourself this..
When the credit rolls start, and it's your name that rolls up, your name will be attached to the final product..FOREVER!!!
That being said, it's likea bad tattoo that gets inked onto your skin. The type of future work you ponder might get affected by what you do now...Yeah, we all need the money, but only you can make the decision whether it's worth it..
Scrupples aside, you definately need to think if this will be a long term noose around your neck..

If you need the money you can always use a pseudonym... not that the truth might not come out anyway, but there are "options" if you're desperate <wink>. And a 30 second commercial doesn't need credits... depends on the project... and probably the people involved as well - you may not agree with someone, but if you have mutual respect in a business relationship... MAYBE it can work.

I vote for following your principles in your personal life, and in theory it should also translate into your business, but business is business, and sometimes that doesn't work that way. Maybe I go to shoot a wedding that I can already tell will end in a divorce before the ink on the license dries, and I don't agree with that... do I shoot anyway? How about that civil union?

If you feel strongly enough to refuse to do business with a client, that's fine. Just watch out for that discrimination issue.

I'm going to guess that perhaps the client isn't necessarily as polarized as the "KKK", but since the OP didn't want to reveal that info, maybe that's off base. The OP referring to it as "propaganda" is strongly worded, but he also touches on free speech - so the dilema runs deep, I'm trying to add some depth to my answer...

I'm sorry to make it all so cryptic. I've just learned the hard way never to talk about a client on public boards such as these. I would say that the social issue is as polarizing as the KKK, but it's not so cut and dry. In other words, good people I respect can be found on the side of the argument espoused by this video production. Whereas with the KKK, well, it's pretty easy to see they're a bad bunch.

I think that this is a position a lot of attorneys find themselves in. These people aren't stupid and I'm sure they know in their hearts that they're defending someone who's as guilty as sin - but our system says that everyone has a fundamental right to an effective defense in court because to do otherwise would subvert the system and allow innocent people to be convicted.

I think people have a right to have their stories told and told well, as long as the telling isn't in itself illegal or unethical.

What would you think of a doctor who stood by and let a rapist die for lack of medical attention? Regardless of what the doctor personally thought of rapists.

Well, doctors and lawyers are considered professions mostly because they are ethically responsible to defend those they believe to be guilty and heal those who they find repugnant, because the alternatives - the "obviously guilty" get no defense, and the repugnant sick no treatment, are simply not possible.

The consequences in the first case are innocent people going to jail; in the second case, people dying unnessesarily.

However, the worst case is that these guys don't get your art. The fact that some viewpoints are so repugnant that they are outright rejected by many people is, perhaps, unfair, but not unjust. One of the values of free speech is being able to say what you want - but if you can't find an audience, tough cookies.

I would turn down the job. It is bothering you greatly. I'd be polite and professional about it - the same guy hiring you for this one job might have jobs in the future that you might be willing to work on.

It also depends on how badly you need the money. If you need it badly enough that you might not make rent, do a half assed job (you don't want repeat business from them, after all) take the money and run.

I'd absolutely film a movie for the KKK, but I'd hire Dave Chapelle and Chris Rock to do the voiceover. :)

I'm sorry to make it all so cryptic. I've just learned the hard way never to talk about a client on public boards such as these. I would say that the social issue is as polarizing as the KKK, but it's not so cut and dry. In other words, good people I respect can be found on the side of the argument espoused by this video production. Whereas with the KKK, well, it's pretty easy to see they're a bad bunch.

I can think of only one subject in the US, which appears to be as divisive as extreme racism. If it's one I'm thinking of I personally wouldn't have problems with working as a technician, because it would be a matter of personal conscience and both sides have the right to put forward their case.

However, I would draw the line if the client was promoting extreme or illegal actions rather than just promoting their case in having say a law changed.

If it were up to me, I too would share the original poster's sense of pride in one's work - and as such simply couldn't do a "poor quality" job - even if I vehemently disagreed with the subject matter. That said, there really are only two things that I'd refuse - anything dealing with animal testing/torture or the abuse of children. I simply couldn't witness either without killing the offender with my bare paws. Bottom line - Don't harm the innocents (children and animals), and I'd film it or record it, and throw my name in the credits without hesitation - then gladly cash the check and buy more gear.

My two cents and pocket lint... from a wolven perspective.

Howls,
Wolf

Marco,

I guess I believe that if you have to ask that question in the first place, then maybe you already have your own answer...as for me, I'd seriously consider doing the job. Generally speaking, as long as it's not illegal, I'd consider doing any job. I too, have bills to pay!

(Clarification: Not saying I'd agree with the content, just that I need all the work I can get...period!)

Whereas with the KKK, well, it's pretty easy to see they're a bad bunch.

Is it? Didn't D.W. Griffiths film "Birth of a Nation" represent the KKK as heroes?

That's kinda the power of film as a propaganda tool. It can be used to represent all manner of bad guys as sympathetic figures. Dexter, anyone?

I don't think it matters how "good people" are lining up on both sides of the issue, because underneath the KKK sheets were respected pillars of their communities...

It is easier to compromise our own morals when we are invisible, as your own example suggests. I would say imagine a real person whose respect you would never want to lose (in my case, that would be my child). I would not want to make a video that I could not show to that person without feeling guilt or embarrassment.

I'm sorry to make it all so cryptic. I've just learned the hard way never to talk about a client on public boards such as these. I would say that the social issue is as polarizing as the KKK, but it's not so cut and dry. In other words, good people I respect can be found on the side of the argument espoused by this video production. Whereas with the KKK, well, it's pretty easy to see they're a bad bunch.
Perhaps it would be more outrageous if you refused to do the job. If it is a legitimate issue with respectable points of view on both sides, are you sure you are on the right side?

But if you want to get invited to parties in Hollywood, you better choose your side good.

Sounds like it's more along the lines of whether a plumber who is supports the "Right to Life" movement should fix a broken water pipe at an abortion clinic.

Blacks and whites are pretty scarce. Everything else is a shade of gray. Which can be almost white or almost black, but can't be either one.

In the end it's simply up to you whether green outweighs whatever particular shade of gray you'r struggling with.

No right or wrong answers I'm afraid.

This is very interesting and I might be inclined to take on a project like this for this reason:

Being able to do my own artistic version of this project on this unusual subject matter.

First, if you are concerned about your name being associated with the work, request IN WRITING on the contract that you don't wish to be listed in the credits, and you want payment in full after viewing rough edit. You also should state that you own the copyright and that they sign that.

I would also give a lot of thought what this project could be "cut and edited" into for your own sake and point of view and interpretation that would not really fall into the realm of "their" project, but for you to show in your own interpretation. This could easily turn out to be a your creative interpretation of this group, without having to give this to them, just the original agreed project parameters.

Surely you'll get tons of footage (hopefully) and some of the best stuff are the outakes, tests, and so on. This is the beauty of film/video. You must film EVERYTHING, keep the camera rolling for those unscripted moments. As a videographer, blend in, even if you hate it. Keep thinking of what might come of this FOR YOU.

Try not to be obvious about this. Go under cover. Show the world what you can do with this. And make a couple of bucks at the same time. But be very careful. Human nature is weird.

I hope this post gives you food for thought.

Jonathan

...Being able to do my own artistic version of this project on this unusual subject matter.
If you're hired to "work on" a project there's virtually no chance that you own the footage, so it would be quite impossible (and highly unethical) to act as a mole or saboteur and do this.

This whole "shades of gray" and "you gotta earn a living" thing is a very dangerous slippery slope. Using this reasoning you could justify shooting kiddie porn or being the videographer for Al-Qaeda as they blow up a building. Absurd extremes, but follows the same reasoning.

I've been asked for marketing and advertising help for cigarettes and similar projects, and without hesitation I always refuse. You gotta make a stand somewhere.

And I don't think the plumber in the abortion clinic analogy holds. In our business, what we do has the effect of legitimizing and promoting ideas... that's the sole purpose of the propaganda video in question. While fixing a pipe does enable the abortion clinic to continue functioning, it's not publicly supporting the idea.

With all due respect, blacks and whites are not scarce at all. They're obvious nearly all the time. And there are definitely right and wrong answers staring you straight in the face.

So with respect to the original question in the thread title, the answer is not only "no," but "hell, no." But if you did sign on to do this, to betray your client as suggested above would be even worse. And Marco, your guilt over betraying your principles will last far longer than whatever cash they pay you to do so.

There is a very simple principle that applies to this story: if something FEELS bad, it probably IS BAD. The OP came to the board because he feels it's bad... ergo...

There are things money can't buy [clean conscience for example]. For everything else there's Mastercard...