Fledgling online video Web site VBS.tv scored an environmental journalism coup this month with “Garbage Island” - a quirky, travelogue-documentary about man-made debris floating in the North Pacific Gyre. Currents in that part of the ocean naturally swirl around like a giant whirlpool, drawing in decades of pollution. Since the flotsam and jetsam first popped up on the press’s radar in 2006, numerous outlets have reported on the diffuse, Texas-sized patch and its higher than average concentration of trash (predominantly plastics), but few have sailed through it. VBS.tv, an offshoot of the notoriously successful Vice magazine, chartered a fifty-foot boat and traveled seven days into the center of the gyre, where they discovered neither the “pit,” “dump,” nor “heap” that many news outlets have described. Instead, the crew learns how the diffuse, hard-to-spot plastics in seawater can be even more of threat than an actual “Garbage Island.” The series has clocked over 100,000 views since it began less than three weeks ago, a major success for the site, and concludes Friday, April 25 with Part-12. The Observatory’s David Downs chatted with producer Meredith Danluck and director of photography Jake Burghart about the reactions to their work and the philosophy behind their brand on non-traditional journalism.
CJR: “Garbage Island” is dotted with profanity, other mature content, and entire episodes where boredom is the subject. What’s the logic behind decisions like that?
Jake Burghart: We wanted it to be more than just a science piece. We tried to make it not just about the issues, but about our trip into the issue and our discovery right along with the viewers of what the problem is. We’re trying to keep it on the level that everyone can understand and put it in front of a whole new audience.
CJR: How is it a counterpoint to the status quo?
JB: I think other environmental journalism just gets real boring even if it’s a topic that you’re interested in. You get beat over the head with facts and science and this and that, which is good. I don’t think we should be the only type of media covering stuff like this. There should be the super-fact-heavy, legitimate environmental documentaries and then there’s us.
CJR: How does your work add to the traditional coverage?
JB: What we’re doing is a great addition because it puts it in front of a whole new viewer. It makes it interesting to them. There’s a hole in the market. It’s the next generation coming up who maybe isn’t into environmentalism yet, and maybe it gets them into environmental journalism.
You know, you’re just on this little fifty-foot piece of boat and after a while it gets monotonous and it gets a little boring. I guess in shooting we try to shoot everything-it’s boring, we need to show that it’s boring, like if we thought it was a pile of garbage floating the size of Texas and it wasn’t, we need to show that and shoot it. You have to go out there and find out what the story is and tell it as the story unfolds, you don’t want to hide things and change things to what you want them to be.
Our audience doesn’t respond as well to authoritative, conventional approaches and can see it as false. They see truth in authenticity and the authenticity comes through in the series’ rawness. We’re coming to these conclusions, and they’re coming to them with us
Meredith Danluck: You can arrange facts and numbers and all that stuff, but it can be massaged. It’s hard to argue something that you see with your own eyes - it’s hard to argue with a family in West Virginia whose tap water runs black; it’s hard to argue that’s not a problem. It’s hard to argue being in the remotest part of the ocean and coming up with Tonka tires. Stuff like that is the strength of the “Toxic” series [which has included “Garbage Island” and a series on Canadian oil sands].
CJR: Do you think the title “Garbage Island” is inaccurate given what you found?