Discussion Guide
Table of Contents
IN HER OWN WORDS:
A Letter from Director Johanna Hamilton ................................................................................... page 1
BEHIND 1971
About the Film ............................................................................................................................. page 3
The Characters ............................................................................................................................ page 6
The Film Team ........................................................................................................................... page 11
SCREEN SHOT: MAKING THE MOST OF YOUR SCREENING
Planning for a Community or Campus Event ............................................................................ page 16
Checklist for Screening Organizers ........................................................................................... page 17
BRIDGING THE GAP: FROM 1971 TO YOU
30 Questions for the Classroom ................................................................................................ page 19
UP FOR DEBATE: 1971 AND CITIZEN ACTION
30 Questions for Community Screenings ................................................................................. page 24
BEYOND 1971
Research .................................................................................................................................... page 28
Resources .................................................................................................................................. page 28
Further Reading ......................................................................................................................... page 29
In Her Own Words:
LETTER FROM DIRECTOR JOHANNA HAMILTON
In late 2009, I began working on a film about activists who, in 1971, broke into a small FBI office in Media,
Pennsylvania and took documents that led to the discovery of a massive, illegal, domestic surveillance
program known as COINTELPRO.
I was introduced to the story via Betty Medsger, a veteran journalist who had written the first stories about
the documents when they were leaked to her at The Washington Post. She was in the midst of writing a book
and we agreed to share all our primary research materials. I benefited enormously from her many years
of research, including access to the 34,000 pages of the FBI investigation. (Her book, The Burglary: The
Discovery of J. Edgar Hoover’s Secret FBI, was published by Knopf in early 2014.) While in production on the
film, we kept things very quiet to protect the story and its subjects, who had never before revealed themselves.
The break-in is a little-known but seminal event in contemporary American history. The decision by The
Washington Post to publish the documents was a defining moment for investigative journalism. We know about
COINTELPRO, and the FBI’s dirty tricks targeting Martin Luther King, Jr., the Black Panthers and many others,
but we only know about them because of the stolen documents and the actions of the Citizens’ Commission
to Investigate the FBI, as the burglars called themselves. They didn’t look for the spotlight. Their mission a
success, they returned to their normal lives, telling no one what they’d done.
In response to 9/11, the American government
dramatically increased its domestic and international
surveillance programs. As we were finishing our film
edit in 2013, the first revelations about the scope and
scale of the NSA’s surveillance surfaced, primarily
through leaks provided by former NSA contractor
Edward Snowden. Although not directly analogous,
there are a lot of similarities between the actions of
Edward Snowden and the burglars.
We are in the midst of the biggest
public debate about civil liberties
and privacy since 9/11.
1
Academy Award-nominated filmmaker and journalist Laura Poitras, a longtime colleague and friend who serves
as a Co-Executive Producer on 1971, interviewed Edward Snowden. She continues to break stories about
the NSA’s activities for news organizations including The Washington Post, The Guardian and Der Spiegel.
Edward Snowden has been regarded as both a hero and a whistleblower, as well as a traitor and a criminal.
Back in 1971, my film’s protagonists were hunted in one of the largest criminal investigations in FBI history.
Watching the furor unfold around Snowden led us again to wonder how the American government and the
public would treat the burglars 43 years later. I have been immensely gratified that (almost universally) they
have been celebrated as courageous whistleblowers.
My hope in telling this story for the first time is that it will deepen the meaning and impact of the actions taken
by the Citizens’ Commission: a band of suburban parents, university professors and community leaders.
Their story will inspire audiences—young and old—and encourage them to think hard about the relevance
of nonviolent civil disobedience while reminding people what it means to be an engaged citizen, and how
vigilance is needed to sustain democracy.
Their actions exposed the FBI’s illegal surveillance programs and helped lead to the Church Committee
hearings: the country’s first congressional investigation of U.S. intelligence agencies. The Church Committee’s
findings and policies have been routinely invoked as our country grapples with how to deal with current
surveillance activities.
I don’t think the film could come at a better time. We are in the midst of the biggest public debate about civil
liberties and privacy since 9/11. I am thrilled 1971 will add a unique and entertaining perspective (this is a heist
story after all!) to this important and evolving public discussion.
~Johanna Hamilton, Director, October 2014
2
Behind 1971
ABOUT THE FILM
Before Watergate, WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden, there was Media, Pennsylvania.
On March 8, 1971 eight ordinary citizens broke into an FBI office in Media, a town just outside Philadelphia,
took hundreds of secret files, and shared them with the public. In doing so, they uncovered the FBI’s vast and
illegal regime of spying and intimidation of Americans exercising their First Amendment rights.
On the night of the “Fight of the Century” boxing match between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier, the activists,
calling themselves the Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI, picked the lock on the door to the small FBI
field office. They took every file in the office, loaded them into suitcases, and walked out the front door.
Mailed anonymously, the documents started to show up in newsrooms. The heist yielded a trove of damning
evidence that proved the FBI was deliberately working to intimidate civil rights activists and Americans
nonviolently protesting the Vietnam War. The most significant revelation was an illegal program overseen by
lifelong FBI director J. Edgar Hoover known as COINTELPRO: the Counter Intelligence Program.
Despite searching for the people behind the heist in one of the largest investigations ever conducted, the FBI
never solved the mystery of the break-in, and the identities of the members of the Citizens’ Commission to
Investigate the FBI remained a secret.
Until now.
For the first time, the members of the Citizens’ Commission have decided to come forward and speak out
about their actions. 1971 is their story.
Told through a combination of exclusive interviews, rare primary documents from the break-in and
investigation, national news coverage of the burglary and dramatic re-creations, the story of the Citizens’
Commission forces us to consider questions of privacy in our current era of government surveillance.
3
The film opens deep inside the heart of the Philadelphia anti-war movement in 1970, with Bill Davidon,
a Haverford College physics professor and a politically active anti-war protestor. Feeling the specter of
intimidation, Bill is deeply concerned that the FBI is spying on antiwar and civil rights activists. He worries
dissent is being criminalized and he suspects FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover is trying to prevent the exercise of
First Amendment rights in the name of the rule of law.
Bill knows he needs empirical evidence to prove his spying hypothesis or Hoover will remain untouchable
in Washington. It’s a last resort, but Bill decides to organize a break-in to find the evidence of wrongdoing in
Hoover’s files.
Bill sets about recruiting his team, handpicking a group he has come to know through the anti-war community,
including John and Bonnie Raines, a couple with small children; Keith Forsyth, a cab driver; and Bob
Williamson, a social worker. They all know the consequences they face if they are caught. Over the course of a
few months, they train as amateur burglars, meticulously gathering information and planning the raid.
The Muhammad Ali-Joe Frazier fight on the night of March 8th,
1971, serves as a dramatic backdrop to the burglary. It provides
noise in the building where the burglary is to take place and
serves as a major distraction for police and FBI agents. After
the break-in is successfully executed and the group has filled
suitcases with hundreds of files, they retreat to a farmhouse
to look over the contents. Within the first hours, they discover
a directive that encourages agents to step up interviews with
activists to “enhance the paranoia endemic in these circles and
further serve to get the point across there is an FBI agent behind
every mailbox.” After careful triage they set about mailing selected
documents to the press and two members of Congress.
Journalist Betty Medsger picks up the story. She is the first
reporter to receive the stolen documents, mailed to her
anonymously, at The Washington Post. As she works furiously
to break the story, there is a heated debate occurring between
Ben Bradlee, the Post’s editor, Katherine Graham, the paper’s
publisher, and Attorney General John Mitchell over whether or not
they should publish. It is the first time the Nixon administration
demands Graham suppress a story. The Post publishes the next
day, and the story runs on the front page, above the fold.
FAST FACT
The National Security Agency
monitors the phone records
of billions of telephone calls
made by Americans daily, as
well as emails, text messages,
social media activity and
Internet traffic.
NPR - 2013
FBI Special Agent Neil Welch explains the magnitude of the fallout within the Bureau. The FBI comes down
hard on Philadelphia, flooding the area known as Powelton Village, well known for being home to many
members of the counterculture movement and strong political activism. 150 FBI agents hunt our subjects.
National outrage follows the initial media reports. There is harsh criticism of Hoover and the FBI, but it will
take a number of years for the FBI’s “dirty tricks” to be revealed. These revelations, along with Watergate,
now make a congressional investigation inevitable. The Church Committee is formed; it is the first-ever
congressional investigation into American intelligence agencies.
F.A.O. Schwarz Jr., chief counsel to the Church Committee, explains how the Committee’s findings lay bare
the inner workings and extent of COINTELPRO, together with the impact that it had on America. Ultimately, the
committee passes legislation curtailing surveillance powers of intelligence agencies.
The Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI has won; real regulation of the FBI and a national conversation
about privacy rights has begun. The Citizens have disbanded and gone on living their lives. The film ends with
our characters and their families explaining why, after 40 years, they have decided to break their silence.
4
KEY DATES IN 1971
1956
FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover authorized COINTELPRO, short for the Counter
Intelligence Program. COINTELPRO grew to include several programs targeting
domestic organizations and individuals the FBI deemed subversive.
In the fall of 1970, professor and anti-war protestor Bill Davidon began assembling a trusted
team of activists to commit a burglary of a regional FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania.
1970
On March 8, 1971, eight ordinary citizens, calling themselves the Citizens’ Commission to
Investigate the FBI, broke into an FBI office in Media, Pennsylvania. They took hundreds
of secret files, which exposed the FBI’s vast and illegal regime of spying and intimidation
of Americans. These documents were sent to the country’s largest newspapers.
After significant deliberation, on March 24, 1971, The Washington Post published
reporter Betty Medsger’s story about the Media break-in. Information from the stolen
files was published on the front page.
1971
In April 1971, Hoover terminated COINTELPRO, but he ordered the operations be
continued without the program name. The Bureau assigned 150 agents to investigate
the Media burglary.
1972
On August 22, 1971, a group of activists broke in to a Camden, New Jersey draft
board and destroyed papers in an effort to protest the Vietnam War and disrupt the
draft process. All 28 participants were arrested and put on trial facing 47 years each.
The FBI assumed they had caught the Media burglars as they thought John Peter
Grady, leader of the Camden 28, was the mastermind behind the break-in. On May
20, 1973, the group was acquitted through jury nullification. The jury deemed the
break-in an act of civil disobedience.
On March 11, 1976, the Media burglary case was closed unsolved.
1977
In May 1976, then FBI Director Clarence Kelley apologized to the American people for
COINTELPRO in a speech made at Westminster College.
5
The Characters
BILL DAVIDON
Bill Davidon was the mastermind and de facto leader of the Citizens’
Commission to Investigate the FBI.
Bill Davidon was born in 1927, and his lifelong activities reflected his
dedication to nonviolence, civil liberties and ending the proliferation of
nuclear weapons. He was a member of the national steering committee of
the organization Resist; a member of the board of the National Committee
for a Sane Nuclear Policy; an officer of both the Society for Social
Responsibility in Science and the Federation of American Scientists; and
served on the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union.
During the Vietnam War, he became more deeply involved in local,
national and international peace and social justice movements. He was
sponsored by the Committee for Nonviolent Action to travel to Vietnam
in 1966 to demonstrate opposition to the Vietnam War, which included a
meeting with Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh. He received his B.S., M.S.
and Ph.D. from the University of Chicago.
Bill’s work included research with the Fermi Institute at the University of
Chicago and Argonne National Laboratory until 1961, when he was invited
to join the faculty at Haverford College. One of his best-known scientific
contributions was the development of the Davidon-Fletcher-Powell
Algorithm, one of the earliest and most effective quasi-Newton optimization
methods. Bill died in 2013, survived by his two daughters, Sarah and Ruth,
and two sons, Alan and Martin. His wife Maxine, who was supportive of his
life’s activities, died in 2010. He was previously married to Ann Morrissett
Davidon, also active in the peace movement, and Phyllis Leon.
KEITH FORSYTH
Keith Forsyth took on the role of master lock picker for the Citizens’
Commission during the burglary.
Keith was born in Marion, Ohio, and attended the College Of Wooster
from 1968 to 1970, either dropping out or being expelled, depending on
whose story you believe. Shortly after the invasion of Cambodia and the
killings at Kent State and Jackson State, he hitchhiked to Philadelphia,
hoping to become more involved in fighting against the war in Vietnam.
For the next several years he actively participated in both the legal peace
movement and illegal nonviolent resistance, while earning a living as
a cabdriver, stamping press operator and electrician. In 1972 his main
focus shifted from the anti-war movement to community and then union
organizing. In 1980 he withdrew from active political work and began
going to night school to study engineering, earning a bachelor’s degree
in 1986 and a master’s in 1992.
6
BONNIE RAINES
Bonnie Raines cased the inside of the FBI office for the Citizens’
Commission, providing invaluable intelligence as they planned
the break-in.
Bonnie Raines grew up in a progressive household in Grand Rapids,
Michigan. She was the first one in her family to attend college. At Michigan
State University she majored in elementary education. In the summer of
1961, one year shy of completing her degree, she met John when she
waited on his table. He had just returned from being a Freedom Rider in
the South. They married a year later and moved to New York, where she
completed her degree. They had their first child, Lindsley, in 1963, all the
while becoming more active in the civil rights movement.
In 1966, they moved to Philadelphia. She and John joined other
progressive people protesting the war in Vietnam. They were drawn into
what was then called “the Catholic left,” using the concept of resistance to
disrupt the military draft. It was in this context that she met Bill Davidon,
who invited her to join the group that would break in to the Media office.
By this time two other children, Mark and Nathan, had joined the family.
Once the mission was accomplished, she quietly went back to her dayto-day life. She brought another child, Mary, into the family, earned an
M.Ed., and became an early childhood specialist. In recent years, she
concentrated on child advocacy and public policy. She is the mother of four
and grandmother of seven. She and John continue to live in Philadelphia
and remain politically active.
JOHN RAINES
John Raines drove one of the getaway cars. He planned the rollout
after the break-in, including the release of documents to the press.
John Raines was born in 1933, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He graduated
from Carleton College in 1955 and received an M.Div. (1959) and a PhD
(1967) from Union Seminary in New York City. He joined the Religion
Department at Temple University, where he has taught for the past 47 years.
In July 1961 he was arrested and put in jail in Little Rock, Arkansas as
a Freedom Rider. He participated in the Mississippi Freedom Summer
in 1964 and in the Selma March in 1965. From his years as a civil rights
worker, he learned that J. Edgar Hoover and his FBI were actively
engaged in opposing the movement and used “dirty tricks” to stop
the protests. When in the late 1960s Raines joined the anti-Vietnam
War activists, he was sure that Hoover was once again using massive
surveillance and the placement of infiltrators and informers to derail the
war resisters’ movement. He and his wife Bonnie decided they needed
internal FBI files to prove these violations of civil liberties to a Congress
deeply reluctant to take on the national icon who had headed the FBI
for more than four decades. They joined the Citizens’ Commission to
Investigate the FBI.
7
BOB WILLIAMSON
Bob Williamson was a young foot soldier who offered the comic
relief as the Citizens’ Commission planned the 1971 burglary.
Bob Williamson grew up in the Philadelphia area and attended St.
Joseph’s College. After the death of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., he became
active as a community organizer and social worker in a Philadelphia
neighborhood. He also became an anti-war activist and was a defendant
in the Camden 28 trial. In 1973, Bob moved to New Mexico, where he
founded and ran a small graphic arts agency for 12 years. Since 1988,
he has been a business and life coach. He lives in Albuquerque, near his
daughter, son-in-law and two grandchildren.
BETTY MEDSGER
The Journalist
Betty Medsger was born in 1942 in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. After
graduating from college in 1964, she began her journalism career as a
reporter at The Tribune-Democrat in Johnstown. Later she worked at The
Evening Bulletin in Philadelphia and then at The Washington Post.
In March 1971, two weeks after the Media burglary, she was one of
five people who received the first copies of Media FBI files distributed
anonymously by the Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI. The
first reporter to write about the content of the Media files, Medsger was
the only recipient who did not return the files to the FBI. It was the first
time a journalist received secret government files from people outside the
government—as opposed to inside whistleblowers—who had stolen the
files. Many years later, she accidentally found two of the burglars, John
and Bonnie Raines. With their help, she found seven of the eight burglars
and they agreed to tell the story they had planned to take to their graves.
She is the author of The Burglary: The Discovery of J. Edgar Hoover’s
Secret FBI, published in 2014 by Alfred A. Knopf. She is the former head
of the Department of Journalism at San Francisco State University and
founder of its Center for the Integration and Improvement of Journalism.
Her photographs have been exhibited throughout the world and were used
in the Academy Award winning documentary Breathing Lessons: The Life
and Work of Mark O’Brien by filmmaker Jessica Yu.
8
CARL STERN
The Journalist
Carl Stern served for 26 years as the law correspondent for NBC News,
covering the Supreme Court and the Justice Department and many of the
nation’s most newsworthy trials. In 1972, looking for information on how
the Justice Department was handling its investigation of anti-Vietnam war
protests, Stern went to a Senate office. While he waited for the documents
he had come for, he was handed a sheaf of papers, one of which
contained the term COINTELPRO. Stern decided to find out what the term
meant. He sued the DOJ and, after much delay, they released 50,000
pages on the FBI’s counterintelligence program.
Stern was a founding member of the Forum Committee on
Communications Law of the American Bar Association, and served on
several ABA committees. He is the recipient of the Justice Department’s
highest honor, the Edmund J. Randolph Award, and broadcasting’s
Peabody Award for “exceptional journalistic enterprise” in connection
with his coverage of Watergate and his use of FOIA to uncover the FBI’s
secret COINTELPRO actions. In 2014 the American University Washington
College of Law’s Collaboration on Government Secrecy presented him
with its “FOIA Legends Award” for his “unique role over four decades”.
Professor Stern has bachelor’s and master’s degrees in journalism from
Columbia University and a J.D. magna cum laude from Cleveland State
University. He is the J.B. & Maurice C. Shapiro Professor Emeritus of
Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University.
DAVID KAIRYS
The Lawyer
David Kairys, a professor of constitutional law at Temple Law School, is a
leading constitutional scholar and civil rights lawyer. He has represented
the Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI in secret for over 40 years.
It began when Keith Forsyth approached him shortly before the break-in
without telling Kairys what was about to transpire. The idea was that if any
of them were caught they could call him. It’s probably the longest no-fee
retainer in history.
As a civil rights lawyer, Kairys won the precedent-setting race discrimination
case against the FBI, won challenges to unrepresentative juries around
the country, stopped police sweeps in Philadelphia, was the lead lawyer in
the most significant acquittal of anti-Vietnam War activists (Camden 28),
represented Dr. Benjamin Spock in a free speech case before the Supreme
Court, and conceived and sometimes litigated the city lawsuits against
handgun manufacturers brought by more than 40 cities and one state in the
1990s. He co-founded the law firm Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing & Feinberg
in 1971 (now of counsel). He edited and co-wrote the classic progressive
critique of the American legal system, The Politics of Law, A Progressive
Critique (Pantheon, 1982; Pantheon, 1990; Basic Books, 1998), and wrote
With Liberty and Justice for Some (New Press, 1993). Kairys’ latest book is
Philadelphia Freedom, Memoir of a Civil Rights Lawyer (2008).
9
FREDERICK A. O. SCHWARZ, JR.
The Counsel
Frederick A. O. (“Fritz”) Schwarz, Jr. was chief counsel to the Church
Committee, the first congressional investigation into U.S. intelligence
gathering. He served as New York City Corporation Counsel under Mayor
Edward Koch (1982-1986). In 1989, he chaired the NYC Charter Revision
Commission that extensively revised New York City’s Charter, and from
2003-2008, he chaired the New York City Campaign Finance Board. He
was a long-time litigation partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, where
he is currently senior counsel. Schwarz received an A.B. magna cum laude from Harvard College and
J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard Law School, where he was an editor
of the Law Review. He clerked for Chief Judge J. Lumbard of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Schwarz has written numerous op-ed and
magazine articles, and two books, including (with Aziz Huq) Unchecked and
Unbalanced: Presidential Power in a Time of Terror (The New Press). He
is currently finishing the final touches on his most recent book, Democracy
in the Dark: The Seduction of Government Secrecy, which is set to be
published in April 2015.
10
The Film Team
JOHANNA HAMILTON
Director/Producer
Johanna Hamilton co-produced Pray the Devil Back to Hell, the gripping
account of a group of brave and visionary women who demanded peace
for Liberia, a nation torn to shreds by a decades-old civil war. It premiered
at the 2008 Tribeca Film Festival, where it won the Grand Jury Prize for
Best Documentary, and was later short-listed for an Academy Award. It has
been shown at hundreds of festivals and grassroots screenings all over
the world. In fall 2011, it spearheaded the PBS mini-series Women, War &
Peace, which won the Overseas Press Club Edward R. Murrow Award for
best documentary. Additionally, she has produced nonfiction programs for
PBS, The History Channel, A&E, Discovery Channel, and The Washington
Post/Newsweek Productions, among others. Johanna began her career in
the dramatic run-up to the 1994 first all-race elections in South Africa. She
went on to work on the country’s premier investigative magazine program,
Carte Blanche. She has worked all over Africa, Europe and North America
and is an alumna of the Garrett Scott Documentary Development Grant
and the Sundance Documentary + Composers Lab. Johanna is a graduate
of the University of London and holds an M.A. in Broadcast Journalism
from New York University. 1971 is her documentary feature debut.
GABRIEL RHODES
Editor
Gabriel Rhodes is both an editor and a filmmaker. His work has
premiered at both the Sundance Film Festival and at Cannes and has
been broadcast on Sundance Channel, A&E, Animal Planet, CNN,
PBS and on the NPR radio show This American Life. His theatrical
documentary credits include The Tillman Story, Without Shepherds
and Control Room. In 2011, two of his edited films, The Tillman Story
and Quest for Honor, were short-listed for an Academy Award. His
commercial clients include Condé Nast, Google, Virgin America,
YouTube, HarperCollins and Revlon. In 2004, he was awarded a
fellowship from the New York State Council for the Arts. He received his
Master’s Degree in Documentary Film from Stanford University in 2000.
11
MARILYN NESS
Producer
Marilyn Ness is a two-time Emmy Award-winning documentary
producer. She produced Katy Chevigny’s and Ross Kauffman’s film
E-Team, which premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival. She is
currently a partner at Big Mouth Productions and produces and directs
feature length documentaries as well as short films for nonprofits. She
directed and produced the documentary feature film Bad Blood: A
Cautionary Tale, which broadcast nationally on PBS in 2011 and was
the centerpiece of a campaign to reform blood donation policies in the
U.S. Prior to that, Ness spent four years as a producer for director Ric
Burns, collaborating on four award-winning PBS films: Ansel Adam,
The Center of the World, Andy Warhol and Eugene O’Neill. Ness’s
other credits include films for TLC, Court TV, and National Geographic.
Her films have received funding from the Ford Foundation, National
Endowment for the Humanities and the Sundance Documentary Fund,
among others. She lives in New York City with her husband and two
sons and currently teaches Producing Documentaries at the Columbia
University School of the Arts Masters Film Program.
KATY CHEVIGNY
Producer
Katy Chevigny is an award-winning filmmaker and co-founder of Big
Mouth Films. Most recently, she co-directed the film E-Team with Ross
Kauffman, which premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in 2014.
She also directed the film Election Day, which premiered at the South
By Southwest (SXSW) Film Festival in 2007 and was broadcast on
POV in 2008. With Kirsten Johnson, she co-directed Deadline, an
investigation into Illinois governor George Ryan’s commutation of
death sentences. After premiering at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival,
Deadline was broadcast on NBC to an audience of more than six million.
It was nominated for an Emmy Award and won the Thurgood Marshall
Journalism Award, among others. She has produced several acclaimed
documentaries: Artic Son, Innocent Until Proven Guilty, Nuyorican
Dream, Brother Born Again, Outside Looking In: Transracial Adoption in
America, Pushing the Elephant and (A)Sexual. Chevigny’s films have
been shown theatrically, on HBO, Cinemax, POV, Independent Lens,
NBC and Arte/ZDF and have played at film festivals around the world,
including Sundance, Full Frame, SXSW, Sheffield and Berlin.
12
KIRSTEN JOHNSON
Cinematographer (Interviews)
Kirsten Johnson works as a director and a cinematographer. Her shooting
appears in the Sundance 2012 Audience Award winner and Academy
Award-nominated documentary The Invisible War, and she shared the
2010 Sundance Documentary Competition Cinematography Award with
Laura Poitras for The Oath. She also shot the Tribeca Film Festival 2008
Documentary Winner Pray the Devil Back to Hell, and her cinematography
is featured in Fahrenheit 9/11, the Academy Award-nominated Asylum,
the Emmy-winning Ladies First, A Place at the Table, This Film is Not Yet
Rated, American Standoff and Derrida. She is currently editing A Blind
Eye, a film that investigates the relationship of the cinematographer to
those she films. Her previous documentary as a director, Deadline, (codirected with Katy Chevigny) premiered at Sundance Film Festival in 2004,
was broadcast on primetime NBC and won the Thurgood Marshall Award.
ANDREAS BURGESS
Cinematographer (Re-creations)
A Wisconsin native who now splits time between New York and Los
Angeles, Burgess’ narrative credits include 2006 Independent Spirit
Award-Winner Conventioneers (directed by Mora Stephens) and ABC’s
innovative crime series Final Witness. He recently completed production
on the first season of A Crime to Remember, a new period murder
series for Discovery I.D. set in the 1950s. In addition to music videos
for Pink, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah and The Flesh, Andreas has shot
many acclaimed short films, including Arden Wohl’s Two Other Dreams
and Peter Glanz’s A Relationship In Four Days. Burgess’ documentary
credits include In So Many Words, The Other Half of Tomorrow, In The
Courtyard of the Beloved and Branded.
13
MAUREEN A. RYAN
Re-creations Producer
Maureen A. Ryan is a New York-based producer specializing in feature
films and documentaries. She is co-producer of James Marsh’s Man
on Wire, which won the 2009 Academy Award for Best Documentary
and the 2009 BAFTA Award for Best British Film. Other awards include
the Sundance Jury Prize for World Cinema documentary and Audience
Award for World Cinema documentary, the Critics Choice Award, the IDA
Award, the National Board of Review, the NY Film Critics Award, the PGA
Award and the LA Film Critics Award. Her latest documentary, Project
NIM, premiered at the 2011 Sundance Film Festival, won Best Director of
World Cinema Documentary and was shortlisted for the Academy Award
for Best Documentary. Screened theatrically in the US and UK, on HBO
and BBC, it was nominated for two Emmys in 2013. Ryan is also the recreations producer for Alex Gibney’s feature documentary Mea Maxima
Culpa: Silence in the House of God, which won the BFI Grierson Award
at the London Film Festival and was shortlisted for the Academy Award
for Best Documentary and won four Emmys. She is also a producer of the
independent narrative film Bomber, The Gates, Grey Gardens: From East
Hampton to Broadway and Wisconsin Death Trip. She is on the full-time
faculty at Columbia University’s Graduate Film Program.
DANIELLE VARGA
Associate Producer
Danielle Varga is a Brooklyn-based filmmaker working in documentary film
and television. She was the archival producer on Matt Wolf’s Teenage,
which premiered at Tribeca Film Festival 2013, and the researcher on
E-Team, which premiered at Sundance 2014. For television, she was
associate producer for Bill Moyers’ weekly current affairs program, Moyers
& Company, and on the PBS series Makers. Her additional PBS credits
include Frontline’s Football High and the Emmy- and Peabody-award
winning My Lai for American Experience. She is a Queens native and
graduate of the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
14
COINTELRO
The FBI program COINTELPRO targeted American activists and political dissidents with illegal
wiretaps, warrantless searches and other dirty tricks to suppress organizing and protests.
FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover authorized COINTELPRO—the Counter Intelligence
Program—in 1956. FBI
COINTELPRO was first created to disrupt the Communist Party, but grew to
the widespread surveillance of American citizens and active efforts to harass
domestic political organizations, including civil rights and anti-war activists. Slate
Hoover famously targeted Martin Luther King, Jr. under COINTELPRO. The FBI
bugged King’s phone and hotel rooms to record him in extramarital affairs. The
Bureau sent King a tape of their recordings with a note calling on him to drop out
of politics, and, as interpreted by King and his advisors, to commit suicide. NPR
In April 1971, following the Media break-in, Hoover terminated COINTELPRO, but
ordered operations continue without a name in order to prevent discovery. The Burglary
COINTELPRO was exposed to the public by journalist Carl Stern. He sued
the Department of Justice and, in 1975, was the first journalist to be granted
documents under the newly strengthened Freedom of Information Act. These
revelations, along with the Watergate scandal, prompted the creation of the
Church Committee: the first legislative investigation of intelligence agencies. NBC
The Church Committee led to reforms and guidelines for intelligence gathering,
including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978. COINTELPRO
operations were gradually shut down. PBS
15
Screen Shot: Making the Most of your Screening
PLANNING FOR A COMMUNITY OR CAMPUS EVENT
Thank you for hosting a screening event and for facilitating an important discussion within your community or campus.
As you begin to plan your event, your first task should be finding a venue where you can host your screening.
You’ll want to look for a space that is easy to locate, can accommodate the size of your intended audience and
has the technical capability to show the film. (Tip: If you’re using a non-traditional room, sit in various spots
around the room to make sure people can see the screen from every seat.) You’ll also want to make sure that
the screen is large enough for your projection, and the sound system is loud enough for everyone to hear. As
you’re shopping for venues, it’s helpful to bring along a DVD of a film you already own to test the space for its
audio-visual capabilities.
Next, select a date that is far enough in the future to give yourself time to reach out to your audience. (We
suggest at least three weeks.) If you’re screening on a college campus, note that Wednesday and Thursday
night events are typically better attended than screenings held on weekends or Monday or Tuesday nights. To
ensure the best turnout, you might also want to check community event calendars to make sure there are no
other major events or holidays on the day of your screening.
And finally, if you haven’t already, register to host a screening at the 1971 website. Here, you can apply for the
license—or copyright permissions—necessary to show the film outside a private home. Once approved, your
screening details will appear on the site here.
16
CHECKLIST FOR SCREENING ORGANIZERS
Three Weeks Prior to Your Event
Post your event flyer near university buildings,
cafés, student center bulletin boards, the bulletin
boards of relevant campus departments (e.g.
journalism, communications, American studies,
history, law, and political science). Depending
on the audience you’re trying to reach, you may
also wish to equip a few volunteers with tape and
thumbtacks, and send them on a posting mission
at local stores, coffee shops and community
centers like public libraries, senior centers,
YMCAs and public schools.
Chose a location, date and time for your
screening, and secure the license—otherwise
known as copyright permissions or “public
performance rights”. Remember that securing the
license requires payment of a modest fee.
Consider partnering with a campus club or a
community group on your screening, to broaden
the network of people who might attend your
event, and to share the costs of renting a venue,
providing refreshments and promotion.
Promote your event on social media platforms by
using photo stills from the film (all downloadable
from our press kit or by linking to the film’s trailer.
You can get even more creative by Tweeting
quotes from the film in the lead-up to your event,
or reposting reviews from the film’s festival run.
Keep your social media audience excited about
the coming screening by posting one item a day
in your feed(s).
Research potential audience members and
compile an audience wish list (community leaders,
administrators, faculty, students).
Decide on the best way to reach out to your
audience (social media, email, phone calls,
flyers). Younger audiences may be better
reached digitally, while older audiences may
be best activated through posters, flyers and
emailed invitations.
One Week Prior to Your Event
If you’ve used email or a program like Evite
or EventBrite to invite guests, use this same
approach to send a reminder to your invitees.
Make sure all of your materials (social media
posts, emails, flyers, etc.) include all the details
about your event: venue address, date, time and
how to RSVP, if necessary. If you’ll sell tickets,
be sure to include the ticket price or suggested
donation on your promotional items.
Double-check with your venue about day-ofevent details such as parking procedures, room
capacity, wheelchair-accessible entries and
policies on food and drink.
If you want to track RSVPs, consider creating a
Facebook, Evite or EventBrite event listing to send
to your invitee list. Note that if your screening is
free and seating unreserved, RSVPs will likely
outnumber actual attendees by at least 10%.
If you will need the help of volunteers, start
recruiting them now!
Do a technical test of your DVD and equipment.
If you notice a problem with your DVD, send us a
message immediately.
A few specific items to check:
Make sure the DVD plays all the way through.
Make sure your projector, audio and DVD player
cables fit.
Make sure your sound is audible.
Make sure the picture projected on your screen or
wall is the right shape and size. If not, adjust your
player’s and/or projector’s aspect ratio settings
until the picture looks right.
Two Weeks Prior to Your Event
Issue a press release to your campus newspaper,
your local city daily paper and your alternative
weekly, and submit your event details to the
community calendar section of your local or
campus newspaper.
17
TIPS FOR FOSTERING NONPARTISAN DEBATE
It’s often helpful for event facilitators to establish ground rules or guidelines before the
discussion portion of a film screening, to encourage respectful, nonpartisan dialogue
that avoids charged rhetoric and personal attacks and encourages nuanced debate
and conversation. The following tips will make setting such a tone easier, particularly in
classroom settings. If you’re an event facilitator or discussion moderator:
Do not make assumptions about the politics or experiences of your audience.
Phrase questions neutrally, and aim for open-ended questions that are not
intended to produce a specific answer.
Encourage students or participants to play the devil’s advocate by taking the
opposite stance from the one they first adopted or making an argument for
the “other side”.
Prompt participants to use “I” statements—“I believe that…” or “I understand
that…”—instead of language that blames or attacks those in disagreement or
assumes that the whole audience feels the same way.
When participants offer personal reflections, recollections or ethical judgments,
avoid the escalation of partisan rhetoric by thanking the participant for his or her
contribution and posing a new question. Not every comment requires a rebuttal.
Provoke curiosity and critical thinking by asking participants to end their
contribution to the conversation with another question, rather than a
declarative statement.
Encourage participants to cite their sources when they make note of facts or
statistics related to the issue.
Use the “repeat-back” technique of summarizing or clarifying a participant’s
comments before asking for further response from others. This can neutralize a
statement that has veered toward the incendiary.
18
Bridging the Gap: From 1971 to You
30 QUESTIONS FOR THE
CLASSROOM AND BEYOND
The below questions are intended to spark conversation in
the classroom or curricular setting, though they may also
be appropriate for audiences viewing the film at think tanks,
conferences, public seminars or community gatherings.
Among students, these questions can be used to promote
dialogue and debate in political science, American history,
government and communications courses. They may also serve
as prompts for students’ short essays or written reflections, or
they may provide entrée to further questioning and research that
could form the basis of a term paper or thesis.
If you are a classroom professor or instructor, you may wish
to provide a small selection of these discussion questions
prior to screening the film, as a tool to help students home in
on key themes and anticipate post-film discussion. Note, too,
that resources for further study are included at the end of this
guide, and can be helpful in encouraging students to think about
the answers to the below questions in the context of past and
current academic and journalistic inquiry. While some questions
are meant to elicit personal reflection and articulation of an
individual’s own ethics or moral reasoning, others are meant to
encourage historical research and intellectual consideration of
the role of government and politics in citizens’ lives.
1.
What was the most surprising or thought-provoking
aspect of this film for you? Why do you think this
story—and the particular moment in American history it
captures—is important?
2.
Before watching this film, were you aware of the event in
Media, Pennsylvania? If not, why do you think this story
is not better known? Why didn’t this incident rise to the
notoriety of Watergate or, more recently, WikiLeaks? Do
you think the anonymity of the perpetrators affected the
profile of this story?
3.
Do you think there is a modern-day equivalent to 1971’s
Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI? Do you think
there should be?
19
FAST FACT
Information collected by
the NSA is used to “extract
valuable information such
as location data, contact
retrievals, credit card details,
missed call alerts, roaming
alerts (which indicate border
crossings), electronic
business cards, credit card
payment notifications, travel
itinerary alerts and meeting
information.”
Electronic Frontier Foundation - 2014
4.
Do you see the incident in Media as a precursor to the Watergate scandal, WikiLeaks and Edward
Snowden’s NSA revelations? In what way? Can you identify other moments in American history or
politics in which strategic leaks of information—either by civilians or others—prompted broad national
dialogue about the role of surveillance and intelligence in American civic life?
5.
How have advancements in technology changed surveillance since 1971? Do you think these changes
allow the government to be more effective? Less effective?
6.
Is the sophisticated surveillance of the 21st century good or bad for individual citizens? In what ways
does it enhance protection and it what ways does it compromise privacy? Do you think our current
Digital Age gives citizens more liberty? Less?
7.
Do you think Americans’ attitudes have changed since the 1970s regarding government transparency? If
so, how have they changed, and what do you think caused the changes?
8.
Do you think exposure of information about surveillance served the public interest in 1971? Does it now?
9.
Consider the differences in mass media today as compared to 1971, including the current 24-hour news
cycle, the ascendancy of the Internet, the broad diversity of cable news outlets and the immediacy of
social media. Do you think the media would cover the break-in differently now than it did in 1971?
10.
Citizens’ Commission member Bob Williamson says his
mission was to “Do as much damage to, what we thought of
at the time, as the war machine; we wanted to do as much
damage to it as we could…before we got caught.” What
does he mean by “the war machine”? Is there a presentday equivalent? Do you think individual citizens or citizen
groups can damage the “war machine” in a meaningful
way? Do you think the Citizens’ Commission did in 1971?
11.
When classified government records are made public,
how does the type of information released affect the
public’s reaction to the leak? Is there a difference
between leaking military information and exposing
surveillance records? In which situations is the public’s
reaction more likely to be negative?
12.
J. Edgar Hoover was appointed director of the FBI at 29
years old and led the agency for 48 years. What impact do
you think such a long tenure has on the nation? Do you
think one person should be permitted to lead a powerful
government agency for such a long time? How was
Hoover’s management of the FBI different from presentday FBI leadership?
13.
FAST FACT
Approximately 55,000 “facial
recognition quality” images
are intercepted by the NSA
each day. This practice is
aimed at improving the NSA’s
ability to find intelligence
targets internationally.
The New York Times - 2014
How has the relationship between the sitting President and the FBI changed over the last 40 years?
How does President Obama’s relationship with the FBI differ from President Nixon’s?
20
14.
The records from the break-in in Media were sent to several leading newspapers, which were faced
with the decision of whether or not to print leaked information for the first time. Are you surprised that
some papers decided against it? What were the considerations for journalists then? How are those
considerations different for journalists today?
15.
Carl Stern’s investigation revealed that COINTELPRO (the Counter Intelligence Program) was an FBI
initiative started in 1956 with the express purpose of suppressing and monitoring the actions of civil
rights leaders, anti-war protestors and suspected Communists who were engaged in protected First
Amendment activity. Why do you think Hoover felt this kind of covert surveillance was necessary?
16.
Do you think public dissent is more or less protected in the United States today than it was in 1971?
Why or why not?
17.
Does the FBI have the responsibility to infiltrate or monitor resistance groups? In what circumstances?
18.
Do you think the FBI should “keep tabs” on individuals they view as radical? In modern parlance, this
might be termed profiling; do you think this term is appropriate? Is profiling merited in some contexts but
not in others? Do you believe profiling is appropriate in some cases—for example, profiling based on
race, culture, gender or religion—and not in others?
19.
The film references the popular 1960s television series The F.B.I. How do you think this type of
program might have shaped public opinion about the agency? How do current shows like Person
of Interest, Homeland, Scandal or The Americans shape public opinion and perception of the FBI?
What other popular media portrayals can you identify that either shape or reflect public perception of
intelligence agencies?
20.
How did the actions of the journalists who covered
Watergate; Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange in the
WikiLeaks scandal; or Edward Snowden differ from the
action in Media, Pennsylvania? How are they the same?
21.
After the Media break-in, many Americans questioned
whether their privacy was protected from the FBI. How
do you think public knowledge of the FBI’s surveillance
changes the value Americans put on their privacy?
22.
23.
What value do you place on your personal privacy? If the
government decided to conduct surveillance on your family
and felt it had a legitimate national security justification,
would you be comfortable with this? How should the
government handle situations in which the right to privacy
comes into conflict with the government’s perception of
what is necessary for national security?
FAST FACT
NSA agents are authorized
to read or listen to any
international call or email to or
from a U.S. citizen.
AlterNet - 2014
When The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times received the stolen documents from the
Citizens’ Commission, they opted to give them back to the FBI. Do you think Katherine Graham and The
Washington Post, which published the information, were more courageous? Less responsible? Why do
you think the different newspapers made the choices that they did? How do you think they might handle
the same situation today?
21
24.
Do you think the government is able to appropriately manage its own secrecy or transparency? Is it
possible to hold agencies like the NSA, FBI and CIA accountable when they are in control of the secrets?
25.
Can journalists provide an adequate check against the power and bureaucracy of government agencies
like the NSA, FBI and CIA? If so, how? If not, why not?
26.
If democratically elected governments withhold information from citizens, to whom is the
government accountable?
27.
The action in Media took place during the Vietnam War. WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden’s NSA
revelations took place during the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. How does war influence our
understanding of the importance of government transparency? Of government secrecy?
28.
Do you think the actions of the Citizens’ Commission would have been viewed in a different light if the
United States were not fighting in Vietnam? Would the actions of Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden
have been viewed differently by the American public if they happened in peacetime?
29.
What level of surveillance do you think is acceptable? Do you think the amount of surveillance that
occurred in 1971 was appropriate? Do you think the amount that occurs today is necessary? Does
surveillance make you feel more or less safe?
30.
Do you think freedom of speech should extend to speech that might threaten a country’s military
interests? If there is a line to draw, who should determine it? What are the factors to consider?
22
THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was passed on July 4, 1966. The law ensures public
access to government records by requiring federal agencies to disclose records upon request.
President Lyndon Johnson signed the law, stating he did so “with a deep sense of
pride that the United States is an open society in which the people’s right to know
is cherished and guarded.” Privately, he was strongly opposed to FOIA. It was last
minute calls from newspaper editors that finally convinced the President to sign the
bill into law, and he did so without public fanfare. The American Presidency Project
In 1972, one year after the Media break-in, NBC reporter Carl Stern was given
a document mentioning “COINTELPRO New Left.” Surprised by the term and
unable to get answers from the FBI, Stern used FOIA to sue for information.
In 1973, a judge ordered the FBI to release details of COINTELPRO. The
FBI released just four pages, saying it was all the information they had. The
document, however, referenced six other programs. Stern sued for information
on those programs as well, ultimately securing the release of 50,000 pages on
the FBI’s counterintelligence programs. He was the first journalist to receive files
from the FBI using FOIA, bringing visibility to the new law.
In the wake of the Media break-in and Watergate scandal, there was public
outcry for greater government transparency. In 1974, Congress responded
by passing a bill to strengthen FOIA, which was vetoed by President
Gerald Ford. The Senate overrode the President’s veto, and FOIA was
amended. National Security Archive
Today anyone—individuals and organizations—can file a FOIA request. All
federal agencies within the executive branch of the government are subject
to the disclosure law, but Congress and the federal courts are not. Reporters
Committee for Freedom of the Press
The federal website foia.gov has information on the law and provides tools for
gathering aggregate data on FOIA requests.
Introduced in the Senate in September 2014, the FOIA Improvement Act of
2014 is aimed at curtailing an exemption commonly cited by federal agencies
as a reason for denying disclosure. The exemption was invoked in response to
81,752 FOIA requests in 2013 alone. National Security Archive
Want to file a FOIA request? The Freedom of Information Resource Center from the
Investigative Reporters and Editors provides comprehensive information on freedom
of information law, tips for filing requests and news on government transparency.
23
Up for Debate: 1971 and Citizen Action
30 QUESTIONS
FOR COMMUNITY SCREENINGS
The below questions are intended to urge dialogue at screenings
for community groups and general audiences. As such, they are
generally less academic than the questions in Bridging the Gap:
From 1971 to You, and they are more suited to the roundtable
or panel discussions, filmmaker talks or expert Q&As that often
accompany public screenings.
If you are facilitating a community screening, you may wish to
use one or two of these questions to jump-start discussion after
the film has ended. If you are moderating a panel discussion, you
might pose a few of these questions to panelists, and then open
questions up to the broader audience. In some cases, you may
wish, instead, to break your audience up into small groups to
discuss the questions below among themselves.
Keep in mind that if your audience is composed of individuals
who were adults in 1971, you might handpick the questions
below that encourage the sharing of personal memories.
While some questions are meant to elicit individual
reflection, others are meant to call on broader themes, and
to encourage civic debate. Select those that best match the
tone and aims of your own gathering.
1.
What was the most surprising or thought provoking
aspect of this film for you? Why is this story important?
Do you feel it is as important now as it was in 1971?
Why or why not?
2.
How do you think the tumultuous events of the 1960s set
the stage for the action in Media in 1971? How did that
decade change the scope of government secrecy? Why?
3.
The break-in in Media led to the first congressional
investigations of intelligence agencies in the history
of the United States. Why do you think this hadn’t
occurred before?
4.
Betty Medsger explains that Bill Davidon felt, “…If the FBI
was suppressing dissent, it was as important to expose
that, as it is to end the war.” Do you agree or disagree?
Why or why not?
24
FAST FACT
The NSA divides data into two
categories: data in motion and
data at rest. Data in motion
includes information that moves
between cell phones, computers
and data centers. Data at rest
includes information on hard
drives, overseas data centers or
cell phones.
Bloomberg Businessweek - 2014
5.
Keith Forsyth explains at the beginning of the film, “When I realized that so many things were so wrong,
there was no decision to be made; you have to do something.” Is this a unique way of reacting to the
actions of government? Why or why not? Would you react this way?
6.
In reflection of Keith Forsyth’s motivations to carry out the break-in, do you think this is how other
“leakers”, including Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, felt as well?
Or do you feel these individuals had different motivations?
7.
Should individuals be prosecuted for breaking the law if the result is the revelation of inappropriate
activity on the part of the government? If the Media, Pennsylvania group had been caught and put on
trial for breaking and entering, destroying property and other similar crimes, would you have voted
guilty or not guilty?
8.
Is it important for the public to know when dissent is being suppressed? Why or why not? Under
which circumstances?
9.
John Raines explains that within the resistance community, “There were cameras everywhere.
Everywhere you went there was someone taking your picture. I saw how fear within the resistance
community can break the spirit of that community. … It shrinks the discourse. It shrinks the
possibility of resistance. It makes you more afraid and more lonely. ” What do you think Raines
means by this? Does this fear exist today? Does increased surveillance on American citizens affect
the “spirit of the community”?
10.
In the 1950s, Senator Joseph McCarthy led investigations to identify Communists. In the 1960s and 70s,
the government kept records about civil rights leaders and anti-war protestors. Today, the government
keeps files on persons of Middle Eastern descent. It has been said the best way to unite people is to
give them a common enemy. Do you think this sentiment applies to these surveillance practices?
25
11.
John Raines explains in the film that he was ready to “transition from nonviolent protest to nonviolent
disruption.” What does that mean? When, if ever, is “disruption” necessary? If you disagreed with
government policy, what lengths would you go to in order to protest?
12.
John and Bonnie explain their decision to participate in the Media action by saying, “‘Just because we are
parents doesn’t mean we can remove ourselves from responsibility.” Do you agree with this statement?
13.
Did the Citizens’ Commission break-in create a threat to national security? Why or why not? If the same
action were to occur today, would you feel the same way?
14.
Do you think it is appropriate in a democracy for the government to decide what information to share
and what information to withhold from the people, without citizen knowledge or approval? Can you
envision a better system?
15.
Several of the people involved in the action in Media said that as they have grown older, they prefer to
“make a small ripple.” What do you think that means? What do you think is the most effective way to
create change? Do you think people become less willing to take extreme action as they get older? Is
radicalism a “folly of youth”?
16.
John Raines explains that the files they discovered “had nothing to do with crime and everything to do
with political activity.” What does this mean? What is the difference? How should the FBI respect this
distinction given its responsibility to gather intelligence to protect the country?
17.
One of the stolen documents contained a memo advising
FBI agents to behave in such a way as to “enhance the
paranoid epidemic in the circles… to get the point across
that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox.” Did that
directive surprise you? What do you think of this tactic? Do
you think this directive is at work in present-day surveillance
operations?
18.
Why do you think The Washington Post chose to publish
the documents stolen from Media? Do you think they had
a responsibility to do so? What was the risk involved in
this choice?
19.
Did the Media break-in prepare journalists for Watergate?
In what ways? Do you think Watergate would have been
covered differently had the break-in not taken place?
20.
Given that Congress is tasked with oversight of the FBI,
why do you think Sen. George McGovern (D-SD) and Rep.
Parren Mitchell (D-MD) immediately returned the documents
to the FBI upon receiving them? Do you think the elected
officials’ primary responsibility should have been to promote
government transparency or to protect its covert operations?
21.
FAST FACT
Much of the data the NSA
compiles is stored in its millionsquare-foot data center near
Bluffdale, Utah. This data center
can hold an estimated 12
exabytes of data. (An exabyte
is the equivalent of 1 billion
gigabytes.)
Bloomberg Businessweek - 2014
Newspapers began criticizing the FBI with headlines such as “Who Watches the Watchmen?” for the first
time in American history. How did this fundamentally change the relationship between journalists and
the government? How did this alter American’s perception of newspapers and the kind of information to
expect from them?
26
22.
Do you consider the action of the Citizen’s Commission an act of civil disobedience? A crime? A threat to
national security? What criteria inform your answer?
23.
What steps, if any, do you believe should occur before an action of this kind is taken? What other ways
could the Citizens’ Commission have made Americans aware of the FBI’s illegal actions?
24.
The Church Committee eventually succeeded in passing legislation curtailing the surveillance powers of
intelligence agencies. But once it was determined that the FBI had been acting to silence and intimidate
citizens, what would have been an appropriate remedy? Should there have been a consequence for the FBI?
25.
Why do you think the members of the Citizens’ Commission decided to reveal their identities? In their
shoes, would you have done so? Would you have done so sooner? Later?
26.
F.A.O. Schwarz, Jr. says in the film, “I think a government program with secrecy and no oversight
is bound to have mission creep and go from the wrong but understandable to the horrible and ununderstandable”. Do you agree with this? Why or why not?
27.
Do you think the advent of social media and advancements in technology allow agencies like the FBI to
have more or less control of their public image? Do you think image control is necessary to maintain a
strong and trusted government?
28.
Should the government increase surveillance because it is so much easier to disseminate information
to a wide audience today than it was 40 years ago? Or do you think the transparency provided
by enhanced communication technology (social media platforms, online publishing, etc.) makes
surveillance less important?
29.
There were initially nine people involved in planning the action in Media. Do you think it is significant that
they worked as a group, rather than alone? How does this differ from the more solitary actions of Edward
Snowden, Chelsea Manning and Daniel Ellsberg? How might it be both beneficial and detrimental for
activists to work together?
30.
As a result of the break-ins, it was revealed that the FBI had files on far more Americans than expected.
Why do you think the FBI felt that this level of surveillance was necessary at that time in history? Is it
more or less necessary now?
27
Beyond 1971: Research, Resources and Further Reading
RESEARCH
RESOURCES
The following items include studies from journalistic
outlets, academic institutions and foundations that
research issues of surveillance, national security,
information sharing and government secrecy, as well
as timelines that depict the history of events related
to the film. All can be used in tandem with the film,
providing present-day context to the historical events
depicted in 1971. In a classroom setting in particular,
such research can provide a scholarly complement to
the narrative of the Media break-ins.
The following items include films, video, multi-media
presentations, interactive graphics and podcasts that
relate to the themes explored in 1971 and throughout
this guide. These may be especially helpful in
classroom settings, and can be shown either before or
after film screenings to provoke dialogue and to link the
events in the film to current questions about democracy,
surveillance, secrecy and civil liberties. Resources are
listed in chronological order, with the most recently
published or distributed items appearing first.
Electronic Frontier Foundation:
Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying
Praxis Films:
CITIZENFOUR
Pew Research Center:
Global Opposition to US Surveillance and Drones, but
Limited Harm to America’s Image
NPR:
The Challenge Of Keeping Tabs On The NSA’s
Secretive Work
ProPublica:
The NSA Revelations All in One Chart
Bloomberg BusinessWeek: Interactive Graphic:
The NSA Spying Machine
Pew Research Center:
Public Split over Impact of NSA Leak, But Most Want
Snowden Prosecuted
Democracy Now:
“It Was Time to Do More Than Protest”: Activists Admit to
1971 FBI Burglary That Exposed COINTELPRO
American Civil Liberties Union:
History of the FBI Timeline
The Leonard Lopate Show:
Government Surveillance and You
UCLA Law Review Discourse:
The New Ambiguity of “Open Government”
by Harlan Yu and David G. Robinson
The Guardian: Interactive Feature:
NSA Files Decoded: What the Revelations Mean for You
TED Talk: Ivan Krastev:
Can democracy exist without trust?
TED Talk: Beth Noveck:
Demand a more open-source government
TED Talk: Glenn Greenwald:
Why privacy matters
POV Documentary Films:
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg
and the Pentagon Papers
POV Documentary Films:
The Camden 28
HBO Films:
The Newburgh Sting
28
FURTHER READING
Included below are books, articles, essays, news items and—in some cases—entire reading lists—that explore the
events and themes in 1971 with depth and nuance, providing researchers, students and interested citizens with enhanced
understanding of the Media break-in and the questions it provokes.
The Burglary: The Discovery of J. Edgar Hoover’s Secret FBI
by Betty Medsger
The Washington Post:
Remembering an earlier time when a theft unmasked government surveillance
by Betty Medsger
No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State
by Glenn Greenwald
Dragnet Nation: A Quest for Privacy, Security, and Freedom in a World of Relentless Surveillance
by Julia Angwin
Subversives: The FBI’s War on Student Radicals, and Reagan’s Rise to Power
by Seth Rosenfeld
Top Secret America: The Rise of the New American Security State
by Diana Priest and William Arkin
Abuse of Power: How Cold War Surveillance and Secrecy Policy Shaped the Response to 9/11 by Athan Theoharis
Unchecked And Unbalanced: Presidential Power in a Time of Terror
by F.A.O. Schwarz Jr. and Aziz Huq
The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI’s Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States
by Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall
J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets
by Curt Gentry
The New Republic:
WikiLeaks Reading List
The Atlantic:
Government Surveillance, The Essential Reading List
TEDBlog:
Further reading (and watching) on the state of digital privacy
Discussion guide developed and created by
29