This short documentary video introduces viewers to the leaders and controversy surrounding opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline (sometimes called DAPL). The video explores North Dakota’s oil boom, and the pipeline company’s decision to reroute the DAPL away from a predominantly white community and instead cross the Standing Rock Sioux lands. Tribal leaders and anti-DAPL activists explain how this pipeline construction will disturb ancestral burial grounds, and be an unfair imposition upon their lands—paralleling historical patterns where tribal lands have been taken or destroyed in pursuit of resources. They explain how the Sacred Stone Camp was established to oppose the pipeline construction, and how the North Dakota government and police have supported the oil company and allowed them to commit acts of violence and arrest peaceful protestors.
What is the goal of this video? Do you think it is effective? Why or why not?
What type of media is this video? (documentary? advocacy? journalism?)
How did this documentary make you feel about the Dakota Access Pipeline? Did it change what you thought about it before? Why or why not?
Were the perspectives of the speakers featured in the documentary familiar to you? Do they seem similar to the representation of other disenfrancished groups?
How are the voices and views in this documentary similar or different from other Native Americans you've seen represented in media?
What voices and perspectives were not included in this video? Why do you think they were not included?
If you wanted to advocate for a cause through media, would you include voices with multiple opinions? What do you think would be more or less persuasive?