Why Amnesty International Took Freedom Out of the United States’ Anthem
It has been nearly two months since the Supreme Court overturned ‘Roe v Wade’ in a historic ruling that terminated women’s constitutional right to have an abortion acorss the United States. Since then we have seen, amongst protests and petitions, creative media responding to the ruling in various ways, utilising creativity to spark action.
Amnesty International Oslo, who have been working as a global organisation to strengthen the rights to abortion worldwide, teamed up with Anorak / NoA to create a global campaign underpinning the need to protect abortion rights in the US. The campaign tells the story of four women in completely different circumstances that all end up needing an abortion, and is strengthened by the sound of the altered lyrics of ‘Star-Spangled Banner,’ which positions the US as no longer ‘the land of the free.’ As the film finishes, audiences are met by a statement: ‘You’re not free when you can’t decide your own future.’ Strongly supported by the music, and in fact based on the altered song, the campaign film tugs on audiences’ heartstrings by replacing the word ‘free’ with painful and prolonged silences.
In fact, long-term partners Anorak / NoA and Amnesty Oslo started working on this collaboration as early as Christmas, so when the draft opinion from the Supreme Court leaked in May, they were ready to start working on the film. The campaign is also supported by Amnesty’s petition, which aims to target individual state governments working to expand or restrict access to abortion and contact the governors of these states directly.
LBB’s Zoe Antonov spoke to Janne Espevalen, client director at Anorak / NoA on the meaning of the campaign, what it was like working on it while the situation was unfolding in real time, and how adland can make meaningful work relating to ‘Roe v Wade.’
LBB> What was the brief for this campaign and what were the initial conversations surrounding it?
Janne> Amnesty International reached out to us in December last year asking if we had any initial thoughts regarding the abortion issue coming up in the US.
We had already been working on the same matter in earlier campaigns, eg. in 2017 when we contributed to set Teodora Vasquez, who was sentenced to 30 years in prison after suffering a stillbirth, free.
LBB> Assuming Amnesty International got started on their petition immediately after the announcement of the overrulement was announced, how did you manage to keep up with them and have such a quick turn around?
Janne> We started working on the project around Christmas, and when the draft opinion from the Supreme Court got leaked in the beginning of May, we worked hard to get the video ready so we could act quickly if Roe v Wade got overturned.
LBB> How long was the production process?
Janne> We signed up with B-Reel Films right after Easter and had the campaign ready at the end of May, so it was a fast and successful process due to our close-knit collaboration.
LBB> What was it like working with Amnesty International?
Janne> Anorak / NoA has been collaborating with Amnesty International Oslo for over five years, hence we have a lot of practice and know each other very well. The teamwork is truly amazing and working with Amnesty International is something that gives us a lot of purpose as a creative communication agency. Lots of people have been working pro bono to make these projects come to life, and we’re looking forward to sharing similar humanitarian projects in the future, together with Amnesty International Oslo.
LBB> Tell us more about the role of the music in the campaign.
Janne> The core idea of this campaign is based on a piece of music, and not just any piece of music, but the U.S. national anthem. Finding the right artist and coming up with a musical arrangement that could fit both the artist and the visual storytelling of our film, has been an integral part of the creative process and the production. In Emilie Nicholas we felt we found both an artist and a voice that could help us get our message through. We are really happy with the end result and feel that the music played a huge part in how people have reacted to the campaign. The idea of cutting the song before the word ‘free’ had the impact we wanted it to have – highlighting that the U.S. is no longer ‘the land of the free’ for many of its citizens, as it claims.
LBB> Was there a lot of pressure when it comes to speaking on such a global and huge issue such as this one?
Janne> In terms of pressure, it’s mostly about the pressure we put on ourselves to create something that can make a difference. In a way, you’re grateful that you’re able to use your creativity to speak up about such an important issue, yet that also makes it a bit more frightening. In this process like this, it helped a lot that Amnesty shared their knowledge about the topic and its nuances with us from start to finish.
LBB> What were the hardest parts to execute of the project?
Janne> Mainly the unpredictability of such a situation unfolding in real time.
LBB> It's interesting to see one of the first campaigns on the issue coming out from outside of the US. Do you think the industry is doing enough as of right now when it comes to Roe, and if not what do you expect to see in the coming months?
Janne> The unthinkable has happened, and there is an urgent need to create international pressure – especially on the 22 states that have passed laws that completely or partially prohibit abortion. I believe that our industry, which has the major power to influence, will contribute and I think we will see more creative work in the coming months.
LBB> Coming from the perspective of the creative, is there somewhat of a difficult balance to strike with this issue, between truly being informative and using a platform to bolster good, and jumping on a bandwagon?
Janne> It all depends on who’s delivering the message. Amnesty has been working to strengthen abortion rights globally for decades, and when the news leaked that this might happen it felt more like ‘of course we have to address this’. The fact that we were able to plan our campaign in advance also gave us the time to think properly through all our creative choices, which is a good thing when dealing with complex issues such as this. So, no this truly didn’t feel like jumping on a bandwagon.
LBB> Assuming we will see more work on the subject in the coming months, where do you think you would draw the line between real and authentic work, and one done as part of the abovementioned bandwagon?
Janne> As mentioned earlier, it’s all about who’s delivering the message. There is a strong difference between being a human rights organisation and a donut or a bike company. We know that there are many companies that have said that they would help their employees if they ended up in a difficult situation due to the new abortion laws. For many brands, taking action sounds like a better idea, than expressing their opinion. And if they want to have an opinion, it has to be backed up by something real.
LBB> What is your advice to the industry?
Janne> Continue to use creative force to influence politics and shed light on the injustice that is happening in the United States. We’re never done fighting for what’s right!
