[HN Gopher] WaterBear - A free library of documentaries and shorts
___________________________________________________________________
WaterBear - A free library of documentaries and shorts
Author : mrzool
Score : 156 points
Date : 2021-09-04 10:59 UTC (12 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.waterbear.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.waterbear.com)
| jl6 wrote:
| > impact films
|
| Is an "impact film" one which is optimized for conversion of non-
| believers to a cause, as opposed to being optimized for
| education?
|
| I am a "believer" in the green agenda. I get it. I support it.
| But I would like to learn more about the scientific reality of
| climate and nature, and a lot of these films turn me away because
| they just feel like emotional propaganda.
| throwawayswede wrote:
| You can't expect more when the discussion behind-closed-door is
| to whether "global-warming" or "climate-change" is a better
| term to get people to lean one way or the other. It's the idea
| that story telling is more important than actual and plain
| scientific evidence that will be the downfall of these
| important issues (that are being manipulated for short-term
| profits by green-agenda-profiteers).
| publicola1990 wrote:
| Yes, I view any kind of "story telling" as a dark pattern, in
| anything other than works of fiction.
|
| "Storytelling" is a bad way to argue any point.
| camjohnson26 wrote:
| Storytelling is the only way to argue any point, it's just
| about what order you present facts in and what you include
| or choose to lie about.
| throwawayswede wrote:
| > Storytelling is the only way to argue any point
|
| Depends on your definition of storytelling, but generally
| this is just false.
| jl6 wrote:
| Don't get me wrong, storytelling is important, and these
| kinds of films are important for the sector of the population
| that still doesn't get it, and still needs to hear the call
| to action, but I'm not sure I would call them documentaries.
| throwawayswede wrote:
| Our brains have evolved to be attracted to stories and
| story telling. I'm not exactly knocking it down when it
| comes to social situation (or even business/advertising),
| but when it's being used in the context of presenting
| factual evidence it's being used as a brain-hack to
| propagate an agenda.
| throwaway34241 wrote:
| > that are being manipulated for short-term profits by green-
| agenda-profiteers
|
| I kind of agree with the larger point about story telling vs
| evidence, but this cuts both ways. Your specific example
| about global warming vs climate change has a history in the
| US, but in the other direction (excerpt from internal
| Republican strategy memo):
|
| > "Climate change" is less frightening than "global warming."
| As one focus group participant noted, climate change sounds
| like "you're going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale." While
| global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it
| [1]
|
| > The phrase "global warming" appeared frequently in
| President Bush's speeches in 2001, but decreased to almost
| nothing during 2002, when the memo was produced. [2]
|
| Reading the memo, he also goes on to suggest that the
| scientific consensus is closing against them, but the public
| is still uncertain, so there's a window of opportunity for
| the party to spread doubt about this, and finding and
| promoting counter-experts works best.
|
| I think, at the time, all these strategies were effective.
|
| To be fair to (the strategist) Frank Luntz, he later had a
| change of heart, and now does the same stuff for policies on
| the other side of the issue.
|
| [1] https://www.sourcewatch.org/images/4/45/LuntzResearch.Mem
| o.p...
|
| [2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2003/mar/04/usnew
| s.c...
| throwawayswede wrote:
| > Your specific example about global warming vs climate
| change has a history in the US, but in the other direction
|
| Actually my example was to show that"both directions" are
| equally dumb and manipulative in terms of how they're
| politicizing the issue. Taxing us normal citizens for
| carbon emissions just as a feel good mechanism
| (concentrically just like those idiotic lockdowns) while
| creating exemptions for the themselves and their fellow
| sleazeballs who go to climate change summits on private
| jets.
| throwaway34241 wrote:
| > my example was to show that"both directions" are
| equally dumb and manipulative
|
| In my view, most people probably wouldn't have an opinion
| on climate science absent external influence, since they
| don't encounter it in their day-to-day life. So, various
| groups vie for influence (academia, businesses, political
| parties, media outlets, etc) and that determines public
| opinion. But just because both sides try to influence the
| public, I wouldn't say they are the same - which side is
| closer to the facts seems like a separate issue than how
| public opinion works.
|
| From your other comments:
|
| > One very telling thing I always find extremely jarring
| and annoying is the term "climate change denier"
|
| > which is to say that the "science is settled", againt
| acting as if it's an undeniable fact that their
| interpretation of the data and evidence is not
| questionable
|
| > It's beyond idiotic imo to think that bending facts or
| coercing an agenda will get us any good
|
| It sounds like you might be skeptical (although I'm not
| sure). I can only share some facts I have found
| convincing:
|
| - 97-100% of climate scientists think global warming is
| real [1]
|
| - The greenhouse effect of CO2 has been known for 100
| years [2]
|
| - Burning fossil fuels emits CO2, and we use a lot of
| fossil fuels
|
| - We can measure historical CO2 by looking at air bubbles
| trapped in the ice in Antartica. It also correlates with
| estimated temperatures (by using isotopes like
| Deuterium). [3] [4]
|
| - We already have ~25% higher CO2 concentrations than the
| entire ice core record going back 800,000 years. This
| increase happened in the last ~60 years. [5]
|
| Didn't down vote you BTW.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on
| _climat...
|
| [2] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-
| talking...
|
| [3] http://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-
| climate/ice-co...
|
| [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth
| %27s_at...
|
| [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth
| %27s_at...
| nkrisc wrote:
| Storytelling is important because when you just tell people
| about a 1 degree (C) rise in average global temperatures they
| don't understand because they know they can't even tell the
| difference between 21C and 20C, so what's the big deal?
|
| Most people simply don't have enough relevant education to
| even know what to make of the raw data.
| throwawayswede wrote:
| If they want people to agree with them, they can only
| present the fact and maybe encourage people to educate
| themselves and be inquisitive. They can't trick people into
| "believing". You don't "believe" in science. We don't need
| more religions.
|
| One very telling thing I always find extremely jarring and
| annoying is the term "climate change denier" as if it's
| some sort of a fucking belief system, a church, or a
| religion.
| nkrisc wrote:
| If someone chooses to not believe the moon landings were
| real, fine. But when it comes to the climate, we're all
| in this together whether you believe it or not, so
| there's a little bit more urgency to get everyone on
| board.
|
| So no, I don't think just laying out raw facts with no
| context and explanation and simply hoping everyone
| educates themselves is good enough.
|
| Ideally, the storytelling around the data is the
| educational part. It should explain what this data means
| and why people should care by releasing it to things they
| do understand.
| throwawayswede wrote:
| > So no, I don't think just laying out raw facts with no
| context and explanation and simply hoping everyone
| educates themselves is good enough.
|
| Again, it's not a matter of belief. When you call them
| "unbeliever" you're inviting doubt into it. This also
| goes to another vexing thing on the issue of how the
| general uneducated public deals with "climate change",
| the likes of online warriors and talking-point media
| personality and politicians, which is to say that the
| "science is settled", againt acting as if it's an
| undeniable fact that their interpretation of the data and
| evidence is not questionable. This too will not help
| prevent further damage to the environment, no the
| opposite imo, it's one of the main reasons people
| continue to talk and talk and talk, and no actual
| preventative measures are being taken that actually can
| make a difference. All of this is because the issue was
| politicized by almost all sides from the beginning.
|
| This is exactly the kind of mentality that's giving fire
| power to the corporations and the people behind them that
| give two shits about the environment, the future of the
| planet, or life quality of next generations, to come up
| with counter propaganda that sways people the other way.
| So far it's working. It's beyond idiotic imo to think
| that bending facts or coercing an agenda will get us any
| good.
| soliton4 wrote:
| its not free!
| tommica wrote:
| Would be nice to see what there is available, instead of having
| to sign up just to see that
| throwawayswede wrote:
| Propaganda is still propaganda, regardless of whether it's used
| for "good" or for evil.
|
| From watching hundreds of similar documentaries over the years,
| these here look exactly the kind that I'd avoid watching because
| they manipulate the truth and tell half-truths (unnecessarily)
| just to propagate their agenda, which is usually not exactly
| enviromental, but seeming like they are care.
| mrzool wrote:
| Could you elaborate on what their agenda would be, if "not
| exactly" environmental?
| throwawayswede wrote:
| Seeming like they care, either for population karma points or
| for a more sinister reason like control. Like how the oil
| industry has spent billions to control the climate change
| conversation.
|
| edit: regarding downvotes I really don't understand the HN
| crowd anymore. It's like finger on the button ready to
| disregard anything that slightly differs from their world
| view. Here's a guardian link for those who are in doubt
| https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/08/oil-
| compani...
| specialist wrote:
| You're challenging received wisdom, status quo. Wear the
| downvotes proudly.
|
| I treat arguing on HN as batting practice. I write to
| understand, refine my messaging.
|
| It helps to treat arguing as performance.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thank_You_for_Smoking
| tssva wrote:
| The down votes likely aren't because people don't believe
| the oil industry spends money to control the climate change
| conversation. It is more likely your assumption that the
| documentaries at this site are somehow connected to this or
| a similar non-environmental effort given the organizations
| involved with the site.
| [deleted]
| akudha wrote:
| What would a perfect documentary film look like? Like many
| people, I don't trust most of the media anymore, especially
| after reading Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent. This includes
| documentaries.
|
| Given the sorry state of the situation, what can an aspiring
| documentary maker do to win the audience back? I am willing to
| pay reasonable price, I am guessing there are others like me
| als0 wrote:
| I noticed there's a way to add a payment method, but I don't see
| any paid content on the site...
| soliton4 wrote:
| keep browsing. there is plenty to pay for
| mrzool wrote:
| Maybe it's for donations? There might be a plan to attract
| users with quality content and use the platform to connect
| potential donators to environmental NGOs.
| anarchogeek wrote:
| "We're so sorry! Sorry, WaterBear is not available in your
| country yet but we hope to be there soon!"
|
| I hate region blocking.
| kgarten wrote:
| Not available in my country ...
|
| Region filters for IP addresses are just iditoic.
| mukundesh wrote:
| Sadly not available in India yet !
| werber wrote:
| I love that they just have A decline button for cookies. I'm so
| sick of the manage button, such terrible ux
| madmulita wrote:
| "Sorry, WaterBear is not available in your country yet but we
| hope to be there soon!"
|
| I guess I'll keep pirating.
| smhg wrote:
| > Watch hundreds of award-winning documentaries, anywhere, for
| free
|
| It would be nice if they removed 'anywhere' in that case.
| dmitriid wrote:
| I mean, isn't the US "anywhere"? The world doesn't exist
| outside the US
| unixhero wrote:
| Get a wireguard vpn from mulvad.
| kleiba wrote:
| Interesting thought: isn't using a vpn a form of pirating?
| Can you even "pirate" something that is offered free (just
| not to you)?
| throwawayswede wrote:
| > isn't using a vpn a form of pirating?
|
| sorry, what?
| peakaboo wrote:
| No a vpn gives you an ip number in the country where the
| vpn provider has servers.
|
| Makes it appear as if you are accessing the internet from
| that country.
|
| I don't have moral issues with it whatsoever.
| yissp wrote:
| Morally of course I agree, I think the parent was
| wondering if this _technically_ violates copyright law,
| though. It seems like it might if WaterBear doesn 't have
| the right to distribute their content in your country for
| whatever reason.
| thanksforfish wrote:
| Right.
|
| Content creator: Can you distribute my content? Only in
| $list-of-countries though.
|
| Distributor: Sure.
|
| If the distributor permits VPNs, how are they sure they
| are authorized to distribute?
| 3np wrote:
| More likely:
|
| Content creator: Can you distribute my content
| everywhere?
|
| Distributor: Sure. But because of $reasons, it will only
| be $list-of-countries
| thanksforfish wrote:
| Legal and moral definition of piracy vary.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_piracy
|
| Unfortunately, if you don't have permission to download
| then you may be committing piracy. In this case, entire
| countries apparently don't have permission.
|
| If the system is guessing location based on IP address,
| then granting permission based on that guess, then I expect
| their permission grant should be valid. How would a user
| know that they have bugs in their permission system?
|
| If you connect directly first, are told "no", then bypass
| the system with a VPN: You probably understand that you
| aren't supposed to have access.
|
| What will happen if you commit this type of piracy? I don't
| think there's a loss of revenue, or damages so pursuing
| pirates likely isn't worth it.
|
| Obligatory, I am not a lawyer.
| 3np wrote:
| Pretty much. Intent matters.
|
| If you connect over a VPN with the purpose of
| circumventing geoblocking, it could be judged equivalent
| to copyright infringement in many jurisdictions.
|
| If you just default to connect over VPN and weren't aware
| that by doing so you now have access to content you
| otherwise would not be allowed to access in your area,
| you're in the clear.
| mrzool wrote:
| Which country are you connecting from?
| fipar wrote:
| Not parent, but I get the same message connecting from
| Uruguay.
| madmulita wrote:
| Lucky you, I'm in Peronistan.
| EB-Barrington wrote:
| Same for me. Message appears right on the front page.
| scoopertrooper wrote:
| > Where is WaterBear available?
|
| > WaterBear is available in Australia, Austria, Belgium,
| Bermuda, Bonaire, Bulgaria, Canada, Cook Islands, Croatia,
| Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece,
| Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
| Malta, Mozambique, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
| Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain,
| Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the USA.
|
| This will hopefully save some people a click.
| anarchogeek wrote:
| Yet they don't even SAY that if you're not in one of those
| countries.
| [deleted]
| areille wrote:
| I think that people "dedicated to the future of the planet" and
| "avoiding greenwashing" should mention that online video
| generates 60% of world data flow (~300MT CO2/year) [1], and that
| carbon dioxide emissions are also paradoxically one of the
| reasons why these documentaries are created.
|
| This video is bad for climate change. Thanks for watching ! [2]
|
| [1] https://theshiftproject.org/en/article/unsustainable-use-
| onl...
|
| [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJn6pja_l8s
| eloff wrote:
| We have literally 100 bigger problems to solve before we worry
| about the climate impact of digital transmission.
|
| This will just be solved as a happy side effect of getting our
| electrical grid off hydrocarbons.
| cyberpsybin wrote:
| Sorry, WaterBear is not available in your country yet but we hope
| to be there soon!
| superasn wrote:
| I used to love watching documentaries but the more you watch them
| the more you see how most often they are biased and edited to
| show the authors / producers point of view.
|
| How a documentary is edited can mean the same facts and interview
| being used to show something being positive or totally negative.
| I guess it's true for all media but I've found this especially
| true for a lot of recent ones I've seen (last was Bikram yoga
| predator).
|
| Btw here is an awesome video that shows how editing can do
| wonders for how we perceive things(1). Though this one is about
| reality tv, I've seen the same done in a lot of recent
| documentaries too.
|
| (1) https://youtu.be/BBwepkVurCI
| TruffleLabs wrote:
| That's what documentaries are about, a point of view of the
| people who made it. Yes, they all have a bias.
|
| This is true of all media. The people who create it always
| inject some bias into how it is created and published.
| camjohnson26 wrote:
| Agree, you could say the same thing about books.
| Documentaries get you into the head of their creator and can
| surface information to research later. They shouldn't be seen
| as objective fact, the format just doesn't allow for it.
| shangxiao wrote:
| Mainstream news outlets have been caught doing this. Australian
| ABC News (government funded) deceptively edited a Navy ceremony
| that showed the Governor-General & Navy Chief ogling over young
| women twerking [1]
|
| [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/apr/15/australian-
| nav...
| peakaboo wrote:
| Specially today, all Netflix "documentaries" seems more like
| propaganda. I can't see any value in watching them.
| publicola1990 wrote:
| Even most BBC documentaries are seriously flawed. Nature
| documentaries especially seems to use lot of fake "natural"
| footage.
| tyjaksn wrote:
| I recently watched a documentary that showed how they
| create these nature scenes. Especially for insects and
| small animals, it is not nature rather a professionally
| created set in a controlled environment.
| specialist wrote:
| > _the more you watch them_
|
| aka Media literacy.
|
| > _the more you see how most often they are biased_
|
| What's the alternative?
|
| > _...here is an awesome video that shows how editing can do
| wonders for how we perceive things
| ...https://youtu.be/BBwepkVurCI_
|
| That's quite good. Nice point about how better gear enabled the
| reality TV format.
|
| I did some radio and TV stuff as a kid. (A vocational tech
| program. Student radio, cable public access, job shadowing,
| "journalism", etc.)
|
| Transmuted me into a "Kill your television" type crank. I can't
| watch "the news" without yelling at the TV.
|
| As a counterpoint: Robert X Cringley's NerdTV had the radical
| notion of sharing all of the source footage. Viewers could
| watch his edit, highlight reels, and teasers. And then they
| could also make their own.
|
| Sadly, this format hasn't caught on.
|
| Anyway. It seems to me that Zoomers will prove to be the most
| media literate generation. And so therefore the least
| susceptible to ham-fisted narrative techniques. Certainly
| compared to Boomers.
| mjklin wrote:
| "The best historians of later times have been seduced from
| truth, not by their imagination, but by their reason. They far
| excel their predecessors in the art of deducing general
| principles from facts. But unhappily they have fallen into the
| error of distorting facts to suit general principles. They
| arrive at a theory from looking at some of the phenomena and
| the remaining phenomena they strain or curtail to suit the
| theory. For this purpose it is not necessary that they should
| assert what is absolutely false, for all questions are
| questions of comparison and degree. Any proposition which does
| not involve a contradiction in terms may possibly be true, and
| if all the circumstances which raise a probability in its favor
| be stated and enforced, and those which lead to an opposite
| conclusion be omitted or lightly passed over, it may appear to
| be demonstrated. In every human character and transaction there
| is a mixture of good and evil: a little exaggeration, a little
| suppression, a judicious use of epithets, a watchful and
| searching skepticism with respect to the evidence on one side,
| a convenient credulity with respect to every report or
| tradition on the other, may easily make a saint of Laud
| (Archbishop of Canterbury), or a tyrant of Henry IV."
|
| -- Thomas Babington Macaulay
| 3np wrote:
| It didn't take long being subscribed to /r/documentaries to see
| that pretty much everything trending there was part of pushing
| some agenda or narrative for political/subvertive purposes.
| neilv wrote:
| Sometimes the bias and liberties taken for persuasion is
| glaringly obvious, including to people who agree with the
| overall premise.
|
| One Michael Moore film, I saw at the cinema in the neighborhood
| of an expensive liberal arts college, where the people
| generally have a broad education, and are (like myself) left-
| leaning by US standards. What I most appreciated at the time
| about the experience was Moore would do some non-journalistic
| thing (e.g., what seemed to be a dishonest editing cut) and the
| crowd would instantly erupt with laughter -- like _there he
| goes again, that mischievous imp_.
|
| (I haven't seen enough Moore to guess whether this was
| intentional, and this might've been before the style of The
| Daily Show got popular.)
|
| One of my recent societal concerns is that, although we might
| still be able to notice bias and manipulation, we collectively
| don't believe as much in truth and critical thinking as we used
| to. If the cinema anecdote happened now, would people who can
| see the liberties implicitly think "this is obviously not
| something we would do ourselves, but Moore will be Moore, ha
| ha", or would those people think "yes, go, team, be angry, and
| shout about the enemy, by all means necessary".
|
| I think I understand and am sympathetic the latter perspective,
| given some of the horrible problems that have reached a boiling
| point in recent years (and hopefully will finally be solved).
| But I'm concerned about even some college professors throwing
| out the baby with that boiling bathwater.
| azinman2 wrote:
| Moore's films are HEAVILY biased. Just him trying to depict
| school lunches in France is enough. I've eaten at a high
| school in the south of France. It's 0% like what he picked as
| an example and said all of France is like this. And that's
| just one tiny example from his films where there's a CLEAR
| agenda. What I hate the most is he tries to pass it off as if
| it's somehow good journalism.
| slim wrote:
| I found most people are not aware that documentaries have a
| scenario (screenplay). The author comes with the vision and
| what he wants to say before shooting any frame. I'd argue that
| the difference between a movie and a documentary is the
| documentary has a clear agenda (and that agenda is 99% of the
| time left wing for historical and structural reasons)
| mathnmusic wrote:
| Why is always them wanting to "say something" rather than
| "learn something"? I'd love to watch the story of somebody
| genuinely trying to learn or understand something complex.
| cpach wrote:
| Such stuff is available. E.g. makers documenting their
| journey on YouTube.
| kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
| Yup, YT is where that content lives. One example is Matt
| Whitman's 10 Minute Bible Hour channel which has several
| episodes where he visits and learns from other
| denominations, and he genuinely is there to learn and
| share that experience.
| greypowerOz wrote:
| well, to be fair to these guys they wear their agenda pretty
| proudly on the home page:)
|
| "Our mission is to drive impact around the world through great
| storytelling. Our platform is free, funded by carefully chosen
| brands dedicated to committed sustainability agendas over the
| next decade. These companies are vetted extensively by
| WaterBear to avoid greenwashing, and join the network to
| develop integrated partnerships over the long-term"
| boba7 wrote:
| >Pigs can't steal my data so easily because i'm in Slavlands
| >They block access to the service
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-04 23:01 UTC)