Why we don't see ourselves on Canadian Screens
Canada basically tried to ignore the report of the Royal Commission in 1997. The Canadian media criticized the report for its costs and its magnitude. However the report had been authorized because of the events that surrounded the OKA CRISIS where Mohawk and Canadian authorities faced off over a golf course expansion. At the time of the OKA CRISIS around 1990 I was working at the CBC. I was the only first nations person working at the network level. But it was difficult being the only Indian in the shop. As it turns out I left the CBC in 1993. Now there are no visible first nations working at the Network level but there are a few producing or reporting in the regions, like here in Vancouver where Duncan tries his best to give the National a first nations profile. So why don't we see ourselves on TV screens more often? What follows here is another aspect of the CROSSROADS report that spelledout some of the problems. But no one likes to hear that there was some form of institutional racism.
______________________________________
III. ACCESS TO MAINSTREAM MARKETS
This section summarizes the challenges Aboriginal producers face when accessing mainstream television as reflected in the literature review, case studies, and from the experiences of participants in our roundtables. There are also some issues that were raised in our telephone interviews with commissioning editors that are addressed. There are successes by some Aboriginal producers in accessing mainstream markets as demonstrated in the case studies. Taken together, this information forms a picture of what are perceived to be the barriers for Aboriginal producers in accessing mainstream markets.
3.1. Key Challenge: The Definition of an Aboriginal Producer
Our interviews with commissioning editors, producers and executive producers and with broadcasters and the Agencies revealed that one of the key challenges for Aboriginal producers to access mainstream television is the lack of clarity in the definition of an “aboriginal producer and an “aboriginal production”. Questions raised centered on how do you define “aboriginal”, “First Nations” filmmakers? Is it by: language, aboriginal nationality, Indian Act, Constitution Act of Canada, or other First Nation Treaty, final or Self-Government Acts.
Secondly, how do you prove this “status” if called upon? It was pointed out that definitions become more complicated when you consider the composition of
the production crew. For example, where the producer is non-native and the director is native, and vice versa; where the producer/director is non-native but the director of photography and associate producer is First Nation; where the producer/director is native but working with a more experienced non-native producer and director in order to meet the production requirements to get the production off the ground.
What defines an aboriginal producer? An Aboriginal producer is loosely defined as a self-identifying aboriginal person who owns a majority share of a federally or provincially incorporated company, as defined by the federal Income Tax Act. Most aboriginal production companies produce television or film programs with predominantly aboriginal content. The CRTC defines an aboriginal program as follows:
A program in any language directed specifically towards a distinct native audience, or a program about any aspect of the life, interests or culture of Canada’s native people. ”
We should note that the CRTC’s definition of a “native program” is not programming exclusively made in a native language. For its part, Revenue Canada does not make distinctions with companies as being owned by an aboriginal person.
Our study found that there are approximately thirty Aboriginal-focused film, video, television and media corporations in Canada. In the last twelve years, the aboriginal production community has experienced profound growth. If we use the number of aboriginal producers who have taken advantage of funds from the Canadian Television Fund--the CTF--as a way to measure this growth, we note that in 1997-1998, there were twelve aboriginal producers compared to five years later when that number had more than doubled to 28 aboriginal producers.
In our case studies of Aboriginal production companies (Annex 3), we were able to draw on the diverse and varied experience of seven companies. We made our selections based upon the following criteria: access to the funding of Telefilm Canada and the Canadian Television Fund; production of drama, documentary series and theatrical feature films; demonstrated business innovation; and success in the mainstream. Many independent producers have pursued the establishment of small businesses and are running their own companies to produce television and film content from an Aboriginal perspective. There are several companies that have partnered with non-aboriginal professionals. In these circumstances, the companies need to be 51% owned by the aboriginal partner in order to qualify for aboriginal funds. There are also several production businesses that are 100% aboriginally- owned companies.
In northern Canada, the picture is different. There are no companies owned by broadcast undertakings in southern Canada, like APTN. However some of the earliest northern broadcasters have companies established at arms- length. The northern broadcasters also form the governance structure of the APTN and nine of the thirteen societies funded through the Northern Native Broadcast Access Program are on the board of directors for APTN. Each of the 13 societies funded through NNBAP are subsidized and qualify each year for core funding and this acts as overhead for their production affiliates. Access to training and mainstream audiences by the northern producers faces its unique set of challenges and circumstances (well documented by Television Northern Canada –TVNC--and the APTN). Indeed, the northern producers have an established association whereas the southern aboriginal independents are separated by distance and greater cultural diversity.
As the aboriginal industry grows, so does the demand for an anchor, a place to call the “commons”. Participants in our roundtables believe that the time is right to establish a coordinating body that could represent aboriginal producers, nationally, and have a mandate to facilitate capacity building for the aboriginal film and television workforce. They recommended support and the identification of resources, financial or otherwise, for an industry-based association (s) that will coordinate the growth of the aboriginal film and television workforce that may lead to the establishment of standards and definitions for the aboriginal film and television industry. (Annex 2-A)
3.2. Framing the Impediments
3.2.1. Screen Diversity, Story Diversity & Systematic Racism
There was an overwhelming consensus among participants in the roundtables held that there is systematic racism when Aboriginal persons access employment opportunities in mainstream television. One participant noted that “mainstream media do not keep an accurate record of an aboriginal workforce and because there is a very small database of aboriginal producers and journalists that [unless] specifically targeted, they are not the first choice. Change has to start with normal opportunities but with significant placements. It all comes down to hiring opportunities”.
Many expressed the perspective that a more inclusive workforce is the answer to accessing mainstream media. The participants pointed out that without aboriginal people in senior creative and decision-making positions, access will continue to be an impediment. The participants expressed the need to have aboriginal people hired in all areas of the agencies currently undertaking this study: analysts at Telefilm Canada; policy managers at the Department of Canadian Heritage; Aboriginal programmers, producers, camera operators and editors (tape and stories) at the CBC; executive producers and producers at the NFB; analysts at the CRTC; and managers and officers at the Canada Council. This process should also take place at conventional private Canadian television networks and distribution systems.
One participant suggested that federal Agencies (for example, CBC) need to take a proactive approach to recruit from diverse communities. He went on to say “a person not being available, with the notion that they (aboriginal workforce) are not out there is more perception than reality. There seems to be a desire to overcome systemic barriers. Perhaps there has to be a shift in the way we perceive the communities in which we live”.
Participants noted that while they see the advantages of having employment equity programs to reflect diversity in the workplace, change is slow to come. It was pointed out that there is only one aboriginal person who anchors a television program in Canadian conventional television. There are no aboriginal producers working at the network level in any of the conventional networks in either dramatic or documentary production. It was also noted that there are a handful of reporters and researchers who work at the local level and one journalist working at the National of the CBC. In addition, the CBC has created an aboriginal content unit located in Winnipeg. The unit has acquired an aboriginal person “seconded” to them by the APTN. A non-aboriginal CBC producer manages the unit. “
In our interviews with commissioning editors, it was pointed out that “we need to make our own workforce more diverse. We can remind ourselves of the gender balance initiatives and if you look around the country there is entirely new CBC then what was there 15 years ago. Once the club is infiltrated the process circles back to the visible aspects of the screen.” (Annex 5)
One participant noted that there are few aboriginal professionals already in these institutions (Agencies) that could be utilized to train incoming aboriginals in the small groups and teams within which they excel – some mentoring exists but it needs the opportunity to expand.
One solution proposed was to organize producers into an association so that an Aboriginal production workforce could be promoted. A national support organization is needed that can support and represent Aboriginal media to create employment opportunities and promote and enhance Aboriginal culture and aspirations.
3.2.2. Points of Access to Mainstream
Our review of current points of access for Aboriginal producers to mainstream television is detailed in Annex 5. One comment made in our interviews with commissioning editors helps to explain why there are not access points for independent Aboriginal production. It was pointed out that there is no room for niche programming (as aboriginal programming has often been defined): Since 1939, the industry has been based on a mandate to, “explain Canada to Canadians.” Although times have changed, the cliché still exists. In Canada, the industry is based on the politics of division – by “language,” “region,” “big city,” “small city,” “genre,” “type of genre”, “demographic. This approach may have made sense at one time and in those circumstances, but today’s changing views and society demands a new approach.”
Our examination of the National Film Board of Canada reveals that while the NFB has played a leadership role in training, there are no “access point” initiatives for Aboriginal producers. The NFB was created in 1939 and since that time the cultural industries have been driven by various national agendas. Indeed one might argue that the NFB has paved the way for the developments in aboriginal filmmaking. They have supported the works of our existing generation of documentary storytellers and some aboriginal directors have won acclaim for their collaboration with the NFB. But if we examine the results of the Aboriginal Filmmaking Program as described in The Gathering Place, (an evaluation of the Program) the NFB reported that they have supported 40 filmmakers since 1996. They have spent on average $4000 thousand for smaller projects (development) and up to $600,000 thousand dollars productions with established directors. With only a handful of exceptions, these projects were produced using NFB producers. No aboriginal producers are supported by these project initiatives and the vast majority of projects that have been co-produced by NFB have been completed exclusively with non-aboriginal production companies.
The Report, The Gathering Place reported on two pilot training initiatives that are directed at aboriginal communities: a mobile training facility in Quebec that will travel to francophone communities and another project in British Columbia that involves first nations in the Vancouver locality. The Quebec project is not an aboriginal initiative whereas the British Columbia project has had significant participation from aboriginal professionals in concept development to curriculum design and the delivery of the training to aboriginal students.
There are some models that could improve access. TV-Ontario’s Calling Card Program which is available to Aboriginal filmmakers (sponsored by the Ontario Media Development Corporation, NFB and TVO) is targeted at students who have finished formal studies but do not have production experience. Aboriginal producers could access the CBC’s Rough Cuts strand although there is no identified aboriginal program, the CTV’s Cross-Cultural Fund is targeted at stories with a cross cultural element but there is no specific program for Aboriginal filmmakers. It was observed that with cross-cultural material, there is an opportunity to “kick up (the project) a notch” but not “ghettoize” the project so that they are part of the regular strands of projects for production and broadcast. More needs to be done to discuss screen cultures and cultural perceptions and the application of aboriginal stories and storytelling production. Many aboriginal producers are insulted by the characterization of the ghetto. While mainstream producers view our programming slots as a ghetto, aboriginal producers see them as an appointment.
Most participants in our roundtables (Annex 2-A) stated that they are aware of very few opportunities for them to improve their access to mainstream markets. Some cited the Trade Initiative organized by the National Screen Institute which had several financial partners including Telefilm Canada. The goal of this initiative was to encourage co-productions with Aboriginal producers in three countries. Eight Aboriginal producers traveled to Australia and New Zealand. Another initiative cited by the participants is the SPARKPLUG program which is organized by Telefilm Canada and supports four producers in their development of a pilot dramatic television series by sponsoring four producers to go to Banff Television Festival to pitch their ideas.
Another participant made the comment that current Aboriginal training programs are geared towards building an Aboriginal production industry primarily to serve the Aboriginal audience. This does not preclude success for Aboriginal productions in the mainstream market, for example as demonstrated by Attanarjuat. One participant suggested that Aboriginal producers need to research and become more aware of the audience and the marketplace of the broadcast industry, that is, cultural indicators, television, festivals, forums, workshops and seminars. This requires market research to develop an understanding for the supply and demand of aboriginal programming in the mainstream marketplace.” (Annex 5)
Another participant suggested that Aboriginal producers need to network more often and to include the Agencies in this process. Others expressed the viewpoint that the Agencies need to adopt a more coordinated approach to recruitment and if necessary use Aboriginal associations to design a program for recruitment. Clearly, this is an under researched issue and many of the problems from both perspectives are subjective and require further investigation. Aboriginal producers feel that they are on the outside pushed out by a system that does not acknowledge their unique and valid styles of storytelling. Mainstream producers and commissioning editors demonstrate inflexibility in allowing for an aboriginal narrative to emerge. Should aboriginal producers assimilate their styles in order to be accepted into the Canadian mainstream?
3.2.3. Storytelling and Approach: Assimilate to Gain Access?
There is a general belief that First Nations have an affinity for and unique sensitivity in telling our own stories. An aboriginal storytelling approach is sometime considered not to be up to industry standards and that the aboriginal approach to narrative structure is almost always misunderstood. Broadcasters have said that our work is emotional. Participants in our roundtables pointed out that there continues to be a cultural gap that “keeps ideas apart”, that “mainstream producers do not appreciate the aboriginal point of view and therefore do not value the product or seek ways to co-produce with aboriginal producers”. Participants have experienced an extremely high rejection rate of aboriginal produced material by the mainstream because of this cultural gap. (Annex 2-A)
One participant pointed out that “because the mainstream media do not understand the aboriginal point of view, they do not value the product or seek ways to promote it to the best advantage. An aboriginal storytelling approach is sometime considered to be in conflict with established western traditions. “ When producers do access mainstream markets, it was observed that the timeslots may not always be good and there are no promotional and marketing advantages provided by the broadcasters. Participants expressed the view that broadcasters are only fulfilling a mandate. Several participants pointed to the arrival of the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network as a serious impediment because the perception is that mainstream markets consider the APTN as a “dumping ground” for aboriginal produced and aboriginal language programs.”
Overall, participants expressed the view that as long as the gatekeepers including commissioning editors, program producers, executive producers and producers continue to reject submissions from Aboriginal producers, “old ways of doing things” will continue. Our interviews showed that mainstream producers and networks believe that more traditional approaches in the telling of aboriginal stories is required for these programs to be sellable to mainstream audiences. In our Case Studies of Production Companies, for example, one producer was told that the drama series being presented was “too educational” for the audience. (Annex 4)
There is also a perception that many different cultural references may have to be understood for a mainstream audience to fully appreciate the programming. There is a need to sensitize broadcasters and the funding Agencies cross cultural workshops for them to gain a better understanding of First Nations culture and heritage. But all is not lost in the vast cultural gap. There are some basics in story development that may help.
From the perspective of most commissioning editors, they are interested in unique approaches to human stories with broad-based appeal. The main hurdle for both commissioning editors and First nations storytellers is to identify local First nations issues and stories with a universal appeal and then to find ways of telling the stories by connecting on basis human level that can appeal to a mainstream audience. One editor noted that the pool of emerging projects and filmmakers needs to increase in order to increase the odds for the successful completion and distribution of a project. For example, it was observed that more stories need to be developed with humor such as Tom King’s novels and stories which are told with heart and humor. He went on to explain that “it’s time to let people into the tent with resonant stories and engaging characters to build exposure and reach broader audiences through more than just a one-note, super serious approach.” (Annex 5)
One participant pointed out that access is easier for those with strong writing skills. For example, the participant stated that the writer is provided with an opportunity to develop writing skills and then move onto the next stage of developing and producing the project. The writer needs to write and develop projects that will fit into a MOW, a series or one off documentary with the ultimate goal to see the production broadcast across Canada. (Annex 5)
Our review of training models for the Aboriginal film and television industry shows that there are ten Aboriginal-focused film, video, television and screenwriting programs in Canada. (see Annex 4)They range from a one-week media intensive program at the Gulf Island Film and Television School (GIFTS) on Galiano Island, British Columbia to a three-year diploma program at the First Nations Technical Institute in Tyendinaga (Deseronto), Ontario. One of the unique characteristics of some of these programs is that are sensitive to the unique stories of Aboriginal people. One participant noted that it is critical that the institution providing training and professional development appreciate the need for Aboriginal-specific training programs.
Some participants stated that there is evidence that access to mainstream requires an assimilation process for aboriginal storytelling. For example, one participant noted that “In CBC news, for example, there are certain culture, fashions and values that do not always click with other cultures, particularly when one comes from a oral, or, story culture. There is resistance to tweaking and massaging a story.”
It was pointed out that at the same time, veteran producers on the frontlines of the CBC see the advantages of having aboriginal people tell their own stories. It was observed that “as with any contentious issue if you look deep enough, one can find inherent contradictions in the way we see things. Different cultures have different notions of story sense and are run by contrasting structures. The style and approach determines whether the story works for us (mainstream) or not. At worst the different approach neutralizes the story, at best the style, yes, and the approach, in particular, can pose a tremendous advantage.”
One participant referred to a recent documentary about aboriginal justice as an example of aboriginal involvement greatly determining access to the story. Another participant cited another example - a series produced in the 1990’s by the CBC called “DRUM”. In that program, “there was an aboriginal producer and writer who worked with an array of emerging aboriginal producers. Their understanding of the issues created a TV program that had pathos and depth. We could not have done the same job with non-aboriginal producers.”
Another participant noted that “the CBC received a wake-up call last year when the National News conducted confidential polls and surveys about Canadian perceptions of News. The main message: there should be a conscientious effort placed upon and more interest displayed in stories about Canadian diversity on and off-screen. He went on to state that “many saw this as a chance to improve programming at all levels while others feared that the pay-off would be too slow. What to do? Take advantage of the open doors. CBC is looking for proposals that reflect the diversity of Canada right now”, citing Reel Diversity, Mixed Flicks (Zed Tv), The New Aboriginal Content Unit In Manitoba and a new initiative for daytime dramas. Some of these initiatives are new and others are in their second and third rounds but in addition to what we do internally, the independent producer should look to create their own points of access with program makers and program ideas.” (Annex 5)
Everyone agrees that there is not enough—almost non-existent—dialogue between aboriginal producers and mainstream producers and commissioning editors. There is an overwhelming consensus that this must change and that both formal and informal channels of communications must be either enhanced or created. Each editor and producer interviewed in this study has expressed an interest in and passions for creating a more inclusive Canadian culture. The fear is the financial stability of Canadian cultural resources and giving up and equitable share of pie. The impediments, systemic cultural barriers and monotype story structures, need to be mitigated through dialogue.
to be continued.....................
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
