Connecting Communication: Using Video to Open Spaces and Mediate Exchange Between Kenyan Grass-roots Activists

“Participatory video processes are well-documented ways to create enabling environments for dialogue. Video projects can provide space for marginalised people to build expressive skills and confidence, develop group agendas, and rehearse articulating their perspectives before taking part in public forums. Furthermore, participatory video practitioners utilise group recording and playback activities to mediate interaction more democratically, for example by organising turn-taking in presentation and production roles, or by using control of the camera to position marginalised participants more influentially than usual.”

This research report reflects on the experience of adapting and scaling down elements of a participatory video approach that sought to revitalise and connect constituents of a Kenyan grassroots social movement called Bunge La Mwananchi (BLM). Specifically, it looks at how the project was adapted to respond creatively to the time, cost, and capacity limitations, and shares lessons learned on how video processes can be applied creatively and accessibly to mediate exchange in similar contexts in the future.

As explained in the summary of the report, “Bunge La Mwananchi (BLM) is a Kenyan grass-roots social movement that creates space for unrepresented people from the poorest backgrounds to raise and debate issues, and to amplify their social struggles. In 2015, BLM members carried out action research - supported by Institute of Development Studies (IDS) staff, as part of Making All Voice Count - to find out how the movement sustains its power against co-option and division. A key finding was the importance of reaching across differences of ethnicity, gender, class and geography to increase BLM’s influence.” Following this, in 2016, longstanding BLM organisers and new members took part in a short accompanied participatory video project. The aims of the video project were:

1. Video documentation and reporting to produce a short video to tell the story of the 2015 action research findings, and what is currently being done to address BLM’s identified communication challenges. The purpose was twofold: BLM would make a video product that they could use to initiate further discussion within the movement, and gain practical experience of time-efficient production processes, which they could repeat to make further videos.
2. Video-mediated insight-sharing and discussion-prompting to communicate the action research findings to the wider Bunge movement through distribution on BLM’s social media platforms, and by piloting ‘live’ playback on mobile phones. The purpose was to share insights and catalyse discussion within the national Bunge space in Nairobi. In turn, this would pilot a process that could be applied for future video-mediated exchange.
3. Raising awareness of participatory video processes to model introductory participatory video activities. The purpose was to provide insight into how video can be applied to motivate participation, build communication confidence, and generate democratic space and inclusive team dynamics.

The paper discusses the main project achievements in relation to the three key aims, based on participants’ inputs incorporated from project evaluation discussions. Overall, the report states that “the project was successful in achieving its key aims, due to BLM’s clear communication purpose and the project structure.” However, there were practical challenges and further questions raised for practice in comparable contexts. These include:

• Choosing appropriate technology and adapting processes for purpose. The report, for example, looks at the advantages and disadvantages of using camcorders vs. mobile/phones and tablets in relation to the objectives of the project. For example, by using a camcorder on a tripod, an external hand mic, and a large video monitor ensures that everyone speaks and listens, and experiences all the roles in a production team. “Furthermore, working with the external monitor means that everyone can be involved in production decisions, and that technical and creative progress is accelerated.”
• Negotiating the contradictory power dynamics afforded by videoing processes - the paper looks at the positive and negative dynamics generated by using video in a public space (videoing effect). It can for example be used to position video group members more influentially than usual in a public space, but on the other hand, in a contested public space, it may cause people to leave the sitting or amplify tensions if feelings are running high. The potential risks of using a camcorder, should therefore always need consideration.
• Tension between opening possibilities and raising unrealistic expectations - the paper describes, for example, how there was a mismatch between the video production plans, based on what the facilitator thought was possible, and the participants’ expectations. This was especially the case with the editing process, where plans to focus more on in-camera editing approach (involves producing short stories or messages by recording shots in order using a video recording device, without the need to edit afterwards) did not work out as planned and resulted in more time-consuming computer editing. In addition, as the participating group learns about and realises the potential of using the technology to bring about change, expectations arise that cannot always be met within the short time frame of the project.

In order to consider the lessons learned for future practice, the paper ends by looking at the participatory video applications (such as capacity and resource development; documenting and reporting; mediating communication and prompting discussion; and generating democratic space and inclusive/collaborate dynamics) in relation to: how they were adapted to respond creatively to the resource limitations; how they brought about enduring gains for the video group participants and the Bunge movement; as well as the implications for future participatory video projects in similar contexts.

The paper concludes that the experiences of the project have shown that it is possible to apply elements of the participatory video approach productively during short-term engagements with activist groups such as BLM. However, the paper does make the point that one of the factors that made this possible was the fact that the BLM are already communicating confidently in the public domain, and could therefore make progress with more limited input.