ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

facebook

The New Corporation: The Rise of Social Capitalism

by Leave a Comment

The more things change, the more they stay the same… or get worse…

In their latest documentary, The New Corporation: The Unfortunately Necessary Sequel, filmmakes Joel Bakan and Jennifer Abbott return to explore the underlying issues of corporate greed and how it is currently affecting our lives. The sequel to 2003’s compelling doc The Corporation, Bakan and Abbott have yet again created an enthralling expose regarding the hypocrisy of the modern business mindset.  Whereas the first film explores the legal decisions that allowed business to define themselves as people, the sequel instead sheds light on new social piety embedded within corporate greed and how that is shaping our world. Since their last venture, much has changed in the corporate world with the rise to power of social networks and continuing de-regulations on domestic businesses that have allowed an unprecedented amount of money to be handed to the wealthy. As a result, the gap between rich and poor continuing to widen and civil unrest continues to rise. 

Perhaps the most significant revelation in New Corporation is the evolution of the perception of big business as motivator of social change. Since 2003, corporations such as Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and many more have publicly stated their intent to support and even spearhead reforms on social justice, globalization and the environment. In doing so, their public image continues to improve while they emphasize the financial bottom line behind the scenes. (In one particularly revealing example, Abbott and Bakan point out that, although efforts to improve education in 3rd world countries appear to be benevolent, the work actually brings more money in for the stockholders back home.) With this in mind, New Corporation proves that the underlying message of big business has not changed in the last two decades: profit. Despite their superficial public benevolence, this ‘win-at-all-costs’ mentality continues to drive their decision-making with little care for those who stand in their way, including influencing government policies.

However, in the midst of this, New Corporation also offers a glimmer of hope. Coming at a time when global culture demands genuine social action, the film is also a call for people to become actively involved in affecting change together. This is not a film merely interested in pulling back the cover on corporate greed but rather one that insists that something must be done to prevent it. Though the statistics and financial influence of these companies can seem deafening, Abbott and Bakan remind their audience that their voice still matters. As more and more people enter the political arena and speak out through social movements such as Occupy, there have been ripple effects that have managed to slow or even overturn the power of major businesses. As such, the film serves as a wake-up call to not only increase awareness for the viewer but also invite them to actively participate in the resistance. In this way, there is a pulsating heartbeat of justice that lies at the core of The New Corporation that makes the film essential viewing.

As The New Corporation comes to a close, one cannot help but feel frustrated by the ever-evolving relationship of manipulation between business and consumer. By returning to the world of high-stakes finance, Bakan and Abbott have once again uncovered a story that is as fascinating as much as it is upsetting. As corporations continue to tighten their grip on our lives, the filmmakers understand the importance of their message and prove that, as the title suggests, the film is ‘unfortunately necessary’.

The New Corporation: The Unfortunately Necessary Sequel is available in select theatres on November 13th, 2020. 

The Social Dilemma – You’re Being Manipulated

by Leave a Comment

“So we’ve created an entire global generation of people who were raised within a context where the very meaning of communication, the very meaning of culture, is manipulation.”

Hopefully you “like” Screenfish’s Facebook page and follow us on Twitter and Instagram. But keep in mind that each of those actions tells the world a little bit about you. And those various platforms will use that (and all the other info they’ve collected about you) to allow others to try to manipulate you. In The Social Dilemma, documentarian Jeff Orlowski takes us on a tour of how those social media platforms shape and manipulate us as individuals, and as a society.

The film is filled with commentators who have stepped away from important positions in social media companies, many for ethical reasons.  They have first hand knowledge of the hows and whys of social media. One, a former Twitter executive, tells us: “What I want people to know is that everything they’re doing on line is being watched, is being tracked, is being measured. Every single action you take is carefully monitored and recorded. Exactly what image you look at, and for how long you look at it. Yeah, seriously, for how long you look at it.” These people go on to explain how all that information is monetized (one of the people we hear from is the former director of monetization at Facebook), and how others can use that information to target you with ideas (not limited to ads) that may shape your life in many ways.

The film isn’t a completely dark picture of the internet. Those who worked in the industry early on got into the work with visions of the good that could come from it. As one points out, it has allowed families to be reunited, organ donors have been found. It has literally saved lives. But that comes with a price. As one of the commentators tells us, social media are both utopian and dystopian simultaneously.

Many people may worry about the extent to which social media have filled the world—especially when parents think about how much screen time they should allow their children. Some think the way we connect with social media has destroyed the personal connections we had when it was face to face. That has become a problem for many. Even those who speak in this film note their own struggles with online addictions that they have had to deal with—and they invented some of these things.

That tendency to be tied to our screens is only an aspect of the real problem, which is how that opens us up to manipulation by business, political, and perhaps even immoral actors. They can tailor what they say or show to whom. It makes it very easy to spread disinformation and fake news more rapidly than real information can be shared. At the heart of the problem are questions about truth—including if there can be any real truth in this “information age”. (What an irony that the more information we have available, the harder it is to find the truth.) I like a reference in the film to the Peter Weir film, The Truman Show. Each of us is unaware of the people watching us and shaping what we think is reality.

While all the commentators are interesting, the one who got my attention was Tristan Harris, who worked as the Google Design Ethicist (who knew such a thing existed) before starting a non-profit to deal with the ethics of this “attention economy”. In a presentation he gives during the film, he offers this warning: “We’re all looking out for the moment when technology will overwhelm human strength and intelligence. When is it going to cross the singularity, replace our jobs, be smarter than humans? But there is a much earlier moment when the technology exceeds and overwhelms human weaknesses. This point being crossed is at the root of addiction, polarization, radicalization, outrage-ification, vanity-ification, the entire thing. This is overpowering human nature, and this is checkmate for humanity.”

That really takes this examination of the role of social media into the realm of the spiritual (although that is not the kind of language these people use). One of the big spiritual questions they don’t quite ask (but would be of great importance) is the role of free will and determinism in this process. Do we have choice in this, or does the manipulation of social media have control of us?

Another question of import is whether the genie can be put back in the bottle. That is a question that these people struggle with a bit at the end. Some may doubt it can be done without real regulation, which is difficult to bring about after the fact. The film’s message is not to focus on the “can it be done” question, but to make the point that we must regain that control.

The Social Dilemma shows on Netflix. For more information go to Netflix.com/TheSocialDilemma.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

Limetown: The Boundaries of Building Babel

by Leave a Comment

Airing now on Facebook Live, Limetown follows Lia Haddock (Jessica Biel), a journalist for American Public Radio (APR) who is exploring the mystery behind the disappearance of over 300 people at a neuroscience research facility. As she gets closer to the answers behind the failed experiment, Haddock’s journey becomes increasingly perilous as unseen forces attempt to keep their actions hidden at the expense of human lives.

Based on the podcast of the same name, Limetown is a complicated web of science-fiction, intrigue and suspense. Borrowing elements from a wide-variety of popular modern mythologies such as Lost, The Leftovers and famed podcast, Serial, Limetown manages to carve out its own unique space amongst them. Interestingly, while Biel leads each episode (and the mythology is clearly tied to Haddock’s history), neither does she (wisely) demand the spotlight, allowing the stories of each ‘survivor’ to drive the narrative. In doing so, the mystery of Limetown maintains a more ‘first-hand’ account of the drama, giving more impact to its intrigue.

Without giving away any spoilers, Limetown speaks to mankind’s desire to create a perfect world in their own image. Set up as a scientific community, Limetown itself existed as a place where people could come together and attempt at building a ‘better world’. However, as the truths behind the existence of the facility begin to unfurl, the audience discovers the dark underbelly of human progress and the damage that can be left in its wake. In other words, as human life begins to lose its value in the name of building something ‘better’, the concept of progress can quickly give way to the abuse of power.

Interestingly, early on, the series references the ‘Library of Babel’, a mythological library that contains all of the answers in the universe, though they remain buried under an infinite layer of nonsense that must be waded through to find them. While the show uses the analogy to describe the difficulty to finding the truth about Limetown, it’s reference to the Biblical Tower of Babel also points to a story where man attempted to prove their worth as greater than God by building a society in their own image. While the reference is merely a throwaway, it also speaks heavily to the vision for Limetown itself as it recklessly places the value of mankind’s scientific ingenuity ahead of the soul of humanity. Although technological achievement is essential to the progress of any culture, it can also create unspeakable horror when the value of life is misplaced for the sake of human glory. To its credit, it is this question of boundaries that lies at the heart of Limetown as the lines between advancement and exploitation blur.

With two new episodes airing each week, Limetown is worthy mystery to explore. By incorporating the podcast format, the series excels as it unravels its mystery from the perspective of its survivors (or victims). As a result, the personal accounts of Limetown add greater weight to the questions of human achievement which, although incredible in their scientific revelations, also contain the potential to damage the human soul in the process.

Limetown currently has released the first six episodes available via Facebook Watch with new episodes every Wednesday.

Searching: Life and Death Online

by Leave a Comment

Think of how much time we spend looking at screens. I’m looking at one (with various windows open) as I write this review. You’re reading it on a screen. We work and play and often socialize through the many screens of our lives. Searching tells us its story through these screens. To use such a gimmick can be a distraction or even a way of covering up shortcomings. But in Searching it becomes a vital part of the story and of the social commentary the film is making.

The film opens with the setting up of a new computer and adding photos that outline the life of the Kim family. It brings us up to the current day where David Kim (John Cho) and his daughter Margot (Michelle La) live in Silicon Valley. We catch their texting pack and forth, typical parent/teen conversations. But when Margot doesn’t come home one night and doesn’t answer texts or calls, David becomes worried. At first there are possible simple explanations, but eventually he must call in the police. While Detective Vick (Debra Messing) oversees the police investigation, David begins hacking into Margot’s laptop, searching for clues and leads. Everything that we see on the movie screen are things that are taking place on computer, phone, or TV screens.

As the story plays out we get a minor guided tour of the internet, including Facebook, Twitter, Google, Pinterest, Facetime, and a range of other apps. To some extent this plays up the gimmicky side of the film. But it also serves as an effective way to organize this thriller with increasing tension. And the use of social media is an essential part of the thriller. And it is a rollercoaster ride of a thriller with the ups and downs, twists and turn in the last half hour especially enjoyable.

Where this becomes more than just a gimmick is how the film serves to reflect our culture and the way we live so much of our lives—whether actively or passively—online. Our screens are our archives. The screens hold our secrets. The screens give us access to a broad world. The screens also make us vulnerable. There are ways in which the screens that fill our lives make us voyeurs—looking at the world from the outside. But the screens also give us a way to discover and connect people and place in ways both positive and negative. The potential of our screens, however, really rely not in what we watch, but in how we choose to engage them. That is the lesson that underlies the thriller aspect of Searching.

Photo Credits: Sebastian Baron, Elizabeth Kitchens. ©2018 CTMG, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

3.18 Entering THE CIRCLE

by Leave a Comment

This week, Steve welcomes Patrick Erskine and Paul Levac to enter into James Ponsoldt’s THE CIRCLE.  Starring Emma Watson and Tom Hanks, this sci-fi drama explores our world through the eyes of social networking and just might have something to say to the Millennial generation as well… but is it worth your money?  (Plus, this might be the most entertaining edition of Screen It or Skip It since the show began…)

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

3.18 The Circle

Thanks Paul and Patrick for coming on the show!

2016 sucked (and didn’t) and death is still the problem

by Leave a Comment

15780676_10154935525978470_7574595387239350824_n

2016 retrospectives understandably
multiply at the moment,
as does the sentiment
that 2016 sucked,
on the whole

in general,
esp in terms of
what memes get
play on Facebook,
that’s probably accurate

many are pointing, still,
with dystopian, apocalyptic fervor,
at the ascension of
the one they call Trump

fair enough
and agreed
(but read this screed)

many more,
given the timing,
are pointing to
a perceived spate of
high-profile deaths

and fair enough,
agreed,
and i don’t need
to catalogue them here . . .
(we’ve seen, read,
perhaps wept,
at least wistfully remembered,
watched that old flick,
spun that classic disc,
relived triumphant
human moments,
reveled in kitsch
and gravitas alike)

tldr: i’m sad, like you,
and it does make me say,
with you,
that 2016 sucked

but/however

2016 also did not suck

perhaps it’d help to
catalogue items of hope?
births full of potential?
perhaps it’d help to
meme and proliferate
that instead?
to burn those images,
those memories,
into our heads?

and/also

i wonder whether
this spate is truly a spate,
or if bad things just
*seem* to come in bunches,
when one looks
for bad things,
when one memes,
in general,
on Facebook?

and/also

i wonder whether
it’s just that
we’re all of us
getting to a certain age,
our pop culture,
our social media,
included?

and/also/finally/respectfully

isn’t that the point?

that we’re all of us
getting to a certain age,
that we’re all of us
moments closer to the end,
like them,
even as we sit and
write/read this screed?

isn’t
death
still
the
problem?

yes/of course

yes, of course,
part of why
those who die
matter is:
as horrible reminder,
as gauges of
our own mortality,
our own significance –
their finished stories
meeting our continuing story,
their deaths foreshadowing
our eventual death

isn’t death still the problem?
a problematic
part of life at least?

don’t we
(at least)
wish
it
were
different?
and shouldn’t we?

don’t we
(at least)
wish for
a mollifying perspective?
a palliative of some sort?
a blow softener?
a medicine, a salve,
a balm in Gilead?
or maybe we even wish for
a solution,
a fix?
a de-stinger
for death’s sting?

don’t we,
ultimately,
wish for
death’s death?
for resurrection?
for vindicated life –
true life?

yes/of course

and/well

probably, maybe they’re
working on such a thing –
probably, hopefully
it’ll be around for 2017,
you know,
so we’re not just
here again in a year –
meming on Facebook
and so on . . .

or/perhaps

there’s such a thing already