as a swedish filmmaker and journalist i always took the right of freedom of speech for granted. but as i came to learn it depends on the story you want to tell. in two thousand and nine i had made a film about a court case in los angeles where banana workers from nicaragua were suing old food company for the use of a banned pesticide i think claimed made them sterile along with other serious health effects and in november two thousand and seven the jury in the los angeles court delivered a groundbreaking verdict was found liable for malice and misconduct. my hope was that this would bring about better conditions for the fall workers to

produce by us today. ever the message was extremely unpleasant so to get a film out would prove to be a journey full of obstacles. out . in the beginning or made two dozen nine who were ready to launch my film by anonymous. one morning a huge package from the us was delivered to our office. only a few days earlier we had launched the film's website announcing that we would have our world premiere in competition at the los angeles film festival. inside this package was a cease and desist letter from a law firm representing dold food company claimed that facts in my film were based

on a fraud. that the but i workers were lying. by me and. i said what's going on here we're not out to get. him and the story convinced that this was a misunderstanding. as they see the film everything will fall into place. when the cease and desist letter came in from dole i was also mentioned and i guess in some way i was kind of flattered it was like wow ok nice i'm on the rich the radar for a dollar it's really nice to see but. my wife really sort of looked you know brought me back to reality and said you know this is quite serious you know we could lose the house we could lot of things could happen doe decided to go after everybody so they could stop the film and in doing so they threatened everybody

threatened me they threatened los angeles film festival by going to all of the major sponsors including the l.a. times and i think it was important that we are how do you knighted friends. as we started to step towards you know the film screening at the festival. i wanted to tell the whole world what was going on but i didn't so when i was interviewed for a local swedish t.v. news i did not give the reporter to full story i didn't tell her about the letters from told that we might not be able to show our film. i was doing a segment on this film that was about to compete at the l.a. festival. all sound a few days later i received a long letter any mail from dos b.r. agency in washington. that is to want to look at the documentary was based on false accusations and lies my initial reaction was fear i was scared to

think it made me very uncomfortable i mean this was a tiny segment aired by a local news station how did they find it i'll be watching if. i can talk to the agency that put me in touch with those vice president i have made it very clear to this producer and to the l.a. film festival given that there are notice to the absolute basis on which they built this trial and they're going forward with it very well when they're going to get sued and two they're going to be exposed to chemical damages and they are still asked him what exactly is faked. what lies are you throwing to. try to me just went on and on that made me angry the film is based on a sham that's the point but have you seen the trailer share or told you know charlotte . we didn't tell anybody threats against

a film. that created the first headline. front page. page of the. day. this is. you see this this is the front page of the l.a. . despite. what. the writer has seen. i want to talk about pesticide use and its impact on workers. successfully shifted the focus away. to appear the main target. workers. in the media. cuban immigrant chasing.

a beloved american corporation and now eve swedish filmmaker is making this crook into a hero. is afraid. that . it was such an insult who worked so hard to make this movie the fumes of the skin grew in the film's entire. i want to say. we feel like. it's a very silly sensible. so weak. it all very. clear to us there's anything. other than struggle it was

sued by joel geyser our early trying to be addressed. and especially likely to ask you. guys los angeles they're going to serve you with us are obvious surprise if they doctored yes. i've been successful in court the same week to judge concluded that. case probably had committed fraud the conclusion was based on testimonies from witnesses stories journalist could facts and. so what happened to the central premise that your documentary that's just about to be released turns out to be a fraud. that. they're basically created in and. they sort of support the people getting

their piece of that wow so have you finally seen the documentary and i have to admit i did not. and could not defend themselves publicly instead journalist attacked me and my film with one question why don't you change your film. is found to be a fraud. i told them that this was still an ongoing legal fight and that i didn't believe decent usage they're attacking you as a filmmaker their film their. everything became personal it wasn't just about the film is really going after you. and if you look back everything. was actually they moved it off of them because they couldn't get after him to the film because. to them is damaging because you know the c.e.o.

from then had you know admitted his guilt right there you know in court did it occur to you mr runs over me it would be best not to use d.c.p. until you were sure your workers wouldn't be affected just general waiting for the evidence to pile up. the first tool pass but you still don't know if our film will be screened at all. or. just will board calls us to an urgent crisis when they had received new letters from going. through they're not even on a plane. and they make it very clear to us it will no longer defend my from. my accomplices express. to modify me.

just the bottom line. it's not really finished but they. think they will get sued so hard not to risk their own organization the fessor game up with different options but the options are never going to be in your favor in the options or i mean i was in the room with the options where they were going to show up next year where you can get distribution or why don't we just show clips and we can do a discussion around it but all along that was going to do anything for your for your show and then also we felt as in on the publicity side all that said to dole was yes you're right so i'm just going to show clips so that i don't get in trouble . if festool keeps changing the conditions we have to accept that the film has been taking on a competition not a legal disclaimer defending those view of the film. it's going to be read before the screen. if we don't accept these terms there will be no world premiere.

i've got to find a disclaimer text in my hand just as i arrived to the theater the festival is given into pressure from dawn publicly announcing that the banana workers are liars i tried not to read it because i knew i would because. so basically if you say i'll say it is a microcosm coming during the watch that is this is that. the vice president michael connor and his lawyers are right these are the guys who have been putting pressure on us for over six weeks not to pull the film. on november the fifth more than four hundred cities around the globe are hosting mass rallies for fairness justice and freedom.

followed million mask march on our t.v. and our t. dot com. place it was a. very hard to take a. look and there was a plan. that would make their lives. as. if. it. was a bit. of

a. dramas that can't be ignored to. stories others use to know to. say since changing the world right now. the picture of today's you know. from around the globe. dropped. to. this ok great thank you all i'm so sorry like big contingent there getting us going here. welcome to the fifteenth annual los angeles film festival presented by the los angeles times i'm don hudson executive director of film independent and i also

looking to tonight screening and case study of bananas the screen is presented by film independent film and his los angeles film festival and frederick burton the director and i want to introduce to you right now. right now i want to take you to the first. time. i want you to read the first you want to introduce the film yes i will but i want you to read this first i would i mean i you know. it's the that's what saw i was told you know all right it was actually one of the most shocking things i've ever seen this sort of putting a documentary into a special ghetto of its own declassifying it and then. actually feeling like there was surveillance on me in the audience as we lined up and were forced to read

a document that disavowed this thing and i actually felt completely ashamed for the entire los angeles movie industry and the festival i. it was beyond belief to think think that that could be done to to a participant in a film festival before you watch this film you need to know that serious questions have been raised about its credibility. the judge specifically mentions in her ruling that the witnesses you will see in the film tonight from the trial lied under oath presented false employment records and presented fraudulent evidence of sterility none of this is reflected in the film you are about to see as a result there seems to be little question that the version of reality the film portrays does not match the reality that emerged in the courtroom. we are not eager to be sued that is why we are showing this film out of competition as a case study to eliminate a timely exploration of what makes and doesn't make

a responsible documentary the language was basically saying we're going to show this film as a test case we don't believe it's true we don't believe this filmmaker. so just be warned that what you're about to see is a bunch of crap why would they show a film it's a bunch of crap at all it's. it was just it was weird let me introduce the director again frederick thank . everybody. sort for all this way of doing it's be the very very special. time this. i have never experienced anything like this before in my life i believe in democracy and i believe in free word and i believe that there was a balance in the side to between different voices and i think those are all to be

room for independent films and i'm really happy to talk to all of you off to the film about the complexity of life and filmmaking and truth i mean all truth in the court but maybe also in filmmaking. lean back have a nice time thanks. thank you. what was kind of sad with the whole disclaimer thing it was really said it was exactly what dole wanted to do don't want to have a divide division between film independent and use a filmmaker you know if felt like those screenings at the festival coupled with the disclaimer and the panel discussion afterwards of colleagues and a lawyer it felt like they were punishing you and what i saw those really like

a power like it was almost like a shift like an effect for show tests or make sure that they distance themselves anough from you so that we don't couldn't come out and that just felt really really strange at that that they would do that because allison you became the pariah in the room not dull. the festival was nearly over and still no loss but all this pressure just been scattered. as i was preparing to leave los angeles i heard that dole had served a court order on the festival demanding all emails contracts recordings film footage relating to my movie. it seems like this is not over yet.

i came back to sweden early july i was totally exhausted after the turmoil in l.a. . so i was actually sitting at home one night on the internet looking for a whole day trips with my kids and i received a call from los angeles it's a journalist who wants to comment on a lawsuit being brought against me from dold dole foods is suing. swedish filmmaker for wanting to show a fraudulent documentary slamming the company. based filmmaker frederick is being sued by a dollar the company claims the film is a fraud. we are suing. because we. produced a movie which is there clearly this much to read against the company and against our employees. it's three different lawsuits they're seeing frederick and. the way they doing this what exactly is their strategy. really their main.

their main object if. they have a. we've become a part of our own film if you trace the trial and now the same forces are directed against us. have you considered accommodating them in any way with the film there is nothing to accommodate their demands include stopping the film shutting down the websites i won't discuss this issue in public in the future with a lawsuit on our shoulders we worked around the clock twenty four seventh's and we have no time to engage in new film projects. luckily we have a us insurance policy covering us against lawsuits and now we have the best lawyer working for us your film is wrapped up into a much bigger for their cause is to get rid of billions.

using chemicals so this is a cheap investment for that they are. very expensive. they're going to do but it's an investment in a bigger picture. yeah it's it's just distressing i mean it's distressing and yeah i mean it is but it's kind of the notional rollercoaster because i mean most of the time i feel quite good but it's. this of course extremely tiring yeah this is my little bit that's the point and that's that's what they want to get trying to zap your confidence they're trying to make you cautious in what you say they're trying to essentially you and others to say you know it's not worth it to go after these corporations by touch these sort of hot potato issues on the be on the hot seat stuff so i don't feel that in.

the book. i worked as a foreign correspondent earlier on like in korea or chile or south africa and i always teamed up with american journalists and i have had respect of them but i kept wondering why did they keep telling the story from dole's perspective why didn't they dig deeper. the thing that was most surprising about the media coverage of the suit that came out against you was how easily you were a fraud and don't was wrong and the banana company was fighting for justice and. no reporters should ever take that at face value we have a astounding lack of curiosity on the part of the journalism community in the us. a lack of skepticism these journalists failed in their job they took

a press release and reprinted it basically they didn't do any due diligence and that is even more shameful than the film festival disavowing you we have a media that is corrupted by power mostly by corporate power you have corporate ownership from the top you have corporate advertising coming in from the side we have a media that is where advertising and money and corporate influence is really the mother's milk. the reality is that the media is much more willing to take down stories when a company comes to then say listen. don't write that story now because you're going to look stupid and we will go on with a massive denial and we'll go all to your media organization as well i know all the global corporations in the us who have threatened to pull advertising from the wall street journal the new york times because they don't like the editorial

coverage so there isn't as much investment in investigative journalism as there was in the past journalism itself is under threat. spending a lot of money to story they have an american p.r. company contacting journalists around the world to broker is one of the prominent public relations firms in washington they're located in the heart of downtown just about a block from the white house it's really hard to know what your parole tour is up to or who they are going to work for because they're not obligated to disclose any of that information. proctor used to work for the coalition provisional authority in iraq which the united states government set up shortly after the invasion that overthrew saddam hussein so he would have been involved in frequent strategy meetings about how to sell the iraq war and part of selling that war would have

also been to attack the critics and to make the critics look bad and if you look at the roster of any of the top wapping in public relation firms in town they're filled with former members of congress for murder ministration officials former cia officials increasingly journalists are going the same route. and. we know occupy an era of extreme reputation anxiety among leading companies around the world because they're very aware that corporate reputation which they may have built over fifty years or so can be shredded in a matter of minutes so when a company feels that it's on the potential attack you try and divert attention

from the real story or you have a snow dump all good alternative information so they will go out there and say listen we've got this story about reputations being on the files by this disreputable swedish filmmaker acting for a lawyer who we think is fraudulent we you can have this exclusively we'll give you all the background information and you plant the story so if it's fredericks a bad guy if i can get that narrative into the newspapers first to make it sticky and appealed to people in a way that they'll want to tell their friends then that's the story that will go out. there was a swedish documentary maker who went to nicaragua he did a documentary on how pesticides of damage the health of workers there the problem was that was not the case these workers were recruited by by

a lawyer down there who wanted to make a case he wanted to he had a brief against dole basically and so he recruited a bunch of nicaraguan but now to harvesters total lie and say that their health was damaged the swedish filmmaker made the documentary. he didn't find out it was a fraud until the film was done this guy still wants to show the film because he went through the process of making the documentary of the season r.t.o. . so the bank of england if you open it up the walls you won't see gold you won't see silver you want to even see bitcoin what you'll see in our mouth and mountains and mountains of garbage and trash and gutter oil and dead bodies and mervyn king's dresses that he's to wear when he was not seen governing the bank of england before old guys from the old victorian era stacked up like firewood rotting and that's the collateral that is the buttressing the real estate speculation which has only one

inevitable conclusion and that is. lost but it's a question of when. do you change your argument about turkey being that for. example a muslim democracy that was able to separate that it's really engine from its economy still can be applied to these day that's a fair point what i spoke about in the book was how ways gokey had done some being accompanied by the said make you to go away with hyper inflation to invade evolve it die a little with the tide so achieved so much economic success and i think that was great but the problem date is of course they do wind. dave has an attitude has changed he now has become much more to talk to day and less dollar rate of any criticism and more bad annoyed.

proximately sixteen percent of sleaze you imports came from illegal fishing. the european union is ironically taking fish from some of the poorest nations on earth so this is a very serious and very urgent problem that needs immediate international action. give birth of the day enter our territorial waters they fish they load the fish on to the ships and leave for europe. to day illegal fishing just taking the bread out of our mouths. exactly what happened that day i don't know but a woman got killed. fears later is when i got arrested for. for a crime i did not do. we have numerous cases where police officers lie about

polygraph results. innocent people take interest the police officers don't beat people anymore i mean it just doesn't happen really. in the course of interrogation why because there's been this is like meant no because the psychological techniques are more effective in obtaining confessions than physical abuse and they were off taking they could get what they wanted they can say what they wanted and there was no evidence of what they did or what they said. right on the scene. first struck. and i think the true. on our reporters with the. instrument.

the in the. journalism or terrorism the partner of the newspaper reporter who revealed intelligence leaks is accused of espionage and breaching national security. legal action against the british government little by david miranda questioning got it see all that actions now well underway we'll be bringing you all the latest twists and turns from here in london. and other news america's huge soon to be open new spy complex is the target for outrage with an already failing to keep the public away from what was supposed to be a secret facility. they put it inside of the middle of an army base so you can't yet you would be protesting the army to protest the n.s.a. action has been seen as the already in a tory as data center in utah.