The BBC has recently acquired the U.K. rights to the Sundance prize-winning documentary, “Bad Press.” Directed by Rebecca Landsberry-Baker and Joe Peeler, the film offers a unique perspective on the fight for a free press within the Muscogee Nation. Although the documentary received critical acclaim and several awards, a closer analysis reveals some shortcomings in its storytelling and overall impact.
While “Bad Press” promises unparalleled insight into the inner workings of a modern Native American tribe, it fails to fully deliver on this promise. The documentary briefly touches on the repeal of the “Free Press Act” in 2018, which placed Mvskoke Media, the Muscogee Nation’s sole news outlet, back under the control of the chief and his cabinet. However, it does not delve deeper into the historical context or provide a thorough analysis of the implications of this move. As a result, viewers are left with a superficial understanding of the challenges faced by the Native American press.
One of the shortcomings of “Bad Press” is its limited representation of voices within the Muscogee Nation. The documentary primarily focuses on the role of veteran reporter Angel Ellis as the key voice of dissent at Mvskoke Media. While Ellis’s story is undoubtedly compelling, it would have been beneficial to hear from a more diverse range of individuals within the community. This would have provided a more comprehensive and nuanced portrayal of the fight for press freedom within the Muscogee Nation.
The documentary’s narration, although adequate, falls short of creating a truly immersive and captivating storytelling experience. While the film is described as a “political docu-thriller,” it lacks the suspense and tension typically associated with the thriller genre. The pacing feels uneven at times, and the narrative fails to build a sense of urgency or convey the gravity of the challenges faced by the Native American press. A stronger and more cohesive storytelling approach would have enhanced the documentary’s impact.
“Bad Press” heavily focuses on its success at various film festivals and the awards it has received. While it is commendable that the documentary has garnered recognition, the excessive emphasis on these accolades feels self-congratulatory and detracts from the overall message of the film. Instead of showcasing its achievements, the documentary should have sought to engage viewers on a deeper level and foster a greater understanding of the importance of a free press in democracy.
“Bad Press” falls short of its potential as a thought-provoking documentary about the fight for press freedom within the Muscogee Nation. While it offers some insights into the challenges faced by the Native American press, it fails to provide a comprehensive exploration of the topic. The limited representation and underdeveloped narration hinder its ability to fully engage the audience. Moreover, the excessive focus on awards and accolades distracts from the documentary’s core message. Despite these shortcomings, “Bad Press” serves as a starting point for a broader conversation about the importance of press freedom in indigenous communities and the need for more nuanced storytelling in documentary filmmaking.