Investigative journalist Christo Grozev, a key contributor to Oscar-winning doc “Navalny” and central protagonist of “Antidote,” is one of Vladimir Putin’s most wanted men for having exposed his assassination operations against opponents such as the late Alexei Navalny. At Copenhagen’s CPH:DOX documentary festival Tuesday, he spoke about the dangers he is facing.
Grozev was part of a panel at the festival that looked at the guts and sacrifice that have to be made to expose truth through filmmaking and news reporting. He was joined on stage by the director of “Antidote,” Emmy-winning British filmmaker James Jones (“Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes”).
With “Antidote,” which won best editing at the last Tribeca Film Festival and screens at CPH:DOX in an updated version, Jones told the audience that his initial idea was to investigate Putin’s poison program with the open source investigation platform Bellingcat with which Grozev was collaborating. But then intelligence services informed the latter of a plot to kill him. “Christo’s journey then became the film,” said Jones.
Describing his work for Bellingcat, Grozev said, “It started as an algorithm-based tool to uncover intelligence secrets. “That pissed off bad guys and embarrassed Putin.” Over a decade, Bellingcat contributed to cracking more than 40 cases, he said. ”Our contribution was to shame law enforcements to do their job.”
Asked by the moderator, journalist Anthony Kaufman, about the cost of uncovering truths during the making of “Antidote,” Jones said his entire team was under intense pressure, but they were strongly supported by their producers at Passion Pictures, broadcaster Channel 4 and Impact Partners. Although he and his filmmaking team took “huge precautions” regarding security measures, he was still stunned when six spies, part of a Russian cell tailing Grozev, were eventually arrested.
“Then obviously the world has changed since our film was finished,” added the filmmaker. “President Putin is no longer persona non grata in the U.S., and who knows what will happen to Christo, who is now based there…”
So how is it to be an investigative journalist under the second presidency of Donald Trump, asked the moderator. Is it more dangerous?
“It is somewhat less rewarding in a way,” admitted Grozev. “You hope that what you’re doing makes contributions towards understanding who the bad guys and who the good guys are and in shaping attitudes, in shaping politics. Our investigation led to economic sanctions; we felt OK it was worth doing, even putting my family at risk. But four months ago it all changed,” said Grozev as “the bad guys now are seen as being OK in the U.S.” He added: “It is becoming less motivating and also more dangerous.”
“I found refuge in the U.S., because I was told Europe was more dangerous. But now I find Europe less dangerous,” stated Grozev, referring to Trump’s closer ties to Putin.
Brushing away the threat to his own safety, Grozev cited the endangered fate of dissident Russians who emigrated to the U.S., anti-Putin journalists or scholars temporary invited in the U.S., now running out of money, visa and risking being sent back to Russia.
Asked whether the cost of exposing truth is worth it, Grozev said having the full support from his family is critical. “My kids, my family tell me, ‘Don’t stop.’ On the contrary, they actively offer to help with my investigations. So the cost is worth it … and if I stop working it will be much less fun!,” he said defiantly.
Distribution Challenge
As Kaufman then moved the topic of the session to the challenge of finding distribution outlets for daring documentaries, especially in the U.S., Jenny Raskin, “Antidote’s” executive producer and executive director of Impact Partners, said “there is a lot of unpredictability right now in terms of distribution, especially in the U.S. You need to be strategic at every moment, keep pushing and pushing and not rely on institutions that are willing to pre-censure content.”
“But I do think there are new outlets coming,” she said, mentioning Jolt.
Raskin underscored the role of festivals such as CPH:DOX, public broadcasters and international co-productions to widen audiences outside the U.S. “If platforms won’t buy particular films because of politics or other reasons, we will find other ways. I think people more than ever do want to be challenged. The success of ‘Navalny’ showed that,” she said.
For Jones, who stressed the cinematic qualities of “Antidote,” filmmaking can be both entertaining and challenging, but “streamers have to be ambitious and not fall on the lowest common denominator,” he insisted.
Grozev underscored the need to attract “the lazy” audience with free content on ad-supported platforms. “I do believe there is a demand, especially for shorter content to tell stories in a captivating way.” Pointing to the success of conspiracy-prone services such as TikTok thanks to “short catchy stories,” he said: “Why not make investigative journalism into catchy short form? If disinformation is candy and fact is spinach, then let’s make factual candy!”
Described by Variety as “a tense, entertaining documentary about the perils of investigative journalism,” “Antidote” is competing at CPH:DOX for the F:ACT Award, to be handed out Friday at the festival’s closing ceremony. The documentary will next screen at Hot Docs.
