Independent Film Channel (IFC)

MISSION: For years, the Independent Film Channel (IFC) has been a major force for the independent filmmaking community, providing an unparalleled opportunity for artistic expression.  Often, the outcomes of such expressions are political in nature.  Venture Communications was hired in July 2006 to gain political coverage for a variety of these projects.   While Venture conducted work on a host of projects, the two primary components were for the documentaries “Fabolous! The Story of Queer Cinema” and “This Film Is Not Yet Rated”. 

“Fabulous! The Story of Queer Cinema”

STRATEGY: During this campaign, Venture Communications focused on targeting cultural, gay, women’s issues, political and lifestyle reporters.  This film was the centerpiece of IFC’s Queer Cinema Month, and so we found the film a natural fit for the larger cultural discussion on issues of sexual orientation.  We felt these reporters would be most interested and compelled by the film.  In describing the film and its message, we were able to target a wide audience and disseminate copies of the film to a number of major outlets

RESULTS: The most notable and positive press came from prominent publications in the gay community.   This provided focused coverage to a narrow audience, and this was successfully accompanied by the wide audience we were able to target through a highly visible article in the New York Times.  This coverage allowed us to market IFC and its contributions to a wider audience that might otherwise be unaware of its mission and objectives.

“This Film is Not Yet Rated”

STRATEGY: This documentary film provided an analysis at the intentionally obscure world of the MPAA film ratings system.  A well-done, humorous and at times shocking film, it was aimed at persons interested in the film industry and government oversight programs.  In addition, we conducted outreach to reporters interested in personal freedom and censorship issues.  We invited them to screenings of the film, offered them copies of the production notes, and interviews with the director.  Adversity towards the film that developed during the process was turned into a positive, as well.  For example, the MPAA placed restrictions on the proposed film posters; rather than allowing this to deter us from delivering the film’s message, we took this instance of censorship and made it public to the media.  Thus, far from detracting from the power of the film, we were able to use this censorship to further its message.

RESULTS: The unique and shocking information from the film about the total lack of transparency in the system of film ratings found a receptive political audience.  We were able to have over 25 members of the media see the film prior to its theatrical release. The interviews that resulted from screening of the film helped demonstrate to reporters the impact of the ratings system and thus the need for media attention on the MPAA and the film.  Notably, a major editorial on the MPAA and the film ran in the New York Times.  This spurred other articles and appearances, with media focus coming from The National Journal, Washington Post, ABC.com, C-SPAN, The Bob Edwards Show, and NPR.