Something to Think About ...

This is such an important question that it seems to me reason alone to consider the video. Once I read through to your teacher reflection, it took on a different significance.  The question about the video itself seemed localized to the video as a product.  In your reflection, the comments took on the force of commentary about the Darfur project itself.

In terms of the video, the critique of the use of images of human suffering is an important and long one in development work and global action projects.  it is, of course, everywhere, and the images are powerful motivators of action whether they are are conflict or starvation or tragedy like flooding. And the action is intended to help the suffering, so the intended effect is often achieved.  

But folks do note that the cumulative effect of seeing such images might be to cast these people -- generally of color and in poorer nations -- as unable to manage their affairs, as only a 'drain' on the largesse of wealthier nations, etc.  Over the last 15 - 20 years, media watchers have seen several large global charities, for example, remake the way their feature the recipients of charity (think Children's Fund as an example) as full of potential and deserving of investment as opposed to beleaguered and deserving of help.  Your question reminded me of this issue.

So with that in mind, I was looking at the film itself.  One thing that struck me is that the context for the images is not easily developed in a music video, so the images didn't seem to be nested within an argument that would make them feel 'required'. I was interested in the shot of the hat with "don't look away" (or something like that), and wondered whether it would have felt different if some of the images would have come then -- as if in an argumentative structure. Or, if after the map image, some of the images of Darfur in stable times might have come then.  So for me as a viewer the issue of whether the images are exploitative connects to whether they are used within the argument of the piece that made them necessary then and there, as opposed to general imagery.

But your reflection that referred to the comment on the last page of your resource seemed to raise the ante to talking about the whole project itself, which would include the larger Darfur project and its engagement and 'use' of young people.  I've heard this argument before too -- that these large scale social action projects, when they become the stuff of schooling, are inherently exploitative of the young people, taking their energy and enthusiasm and channeling it in ways the teacher determines.  In this case, I wonder whether part of the trigger for the comment was that the video was of the teacher's song.

I appreciate the moral question embedded in this perspective and think it is useful as a prompt to reflection.  But i don't buy it automatically.  On the one hand, taking students' energy, interests and enthusiasms and channeling it in productive ways seems to me a definition of good teaching. And then about the Darfur social action project, I have to say that out here all the way on the other side of the country I saw young people deeply concerned and involved in the issue.  It was more than just a savvy media campaign, it was also the resonance of child soldiers, ethnic warfare, many things.  Why shouldn't they be allowed and supported to follow this interest through in their schooling?

Long winded response!  Need to get off the soapbox.  Short version -- the video with your reflection raises interesting issues and therefore perhaps should stay in.