海角大神

It is fitting that one of the country鈥檚 most well-known investigative journalists would take on a project to uncover the underappreciated legacy and contributions of one of the country鈥檚 most well-known civil rights figures.

Armed with autonomy and artistry, Soledad O鈥橞rien was the executive producer of 鈥淭he Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks,鈥� a documentary released last month on Peacock. The film was recently nominated for a Critics鈥� Choice Documentary Award, in the category of Best Biographical Documentary.

Ms. O鈥橞rien is no stranger to pinpoint analysis and presentations. After a decade with NBC and MSNBC, she became a household name with CNN through her work on programs such as 鈥淏lack In America.鈥� Now, under her eponymous production company, Ms. O鈥橞rien remains committed to 鈥渦ncovering stories on the divisive issues of race, class, wealth, poverty, and opportunity through personal narratives.鈥�

Ms. O鈥橞rien recently spoke with the Monitor about the documentary and her legacy of investigative journalism. The conversation has been lightly edited.

What inspired the documentary?

The thing that really inspired the documentary was an excellent book by the same name, 鈥淭he Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks,鈥� which was written by Jeanne Theoharis in 2013. One of the directors of the movie, Johanna Hamilton, always found it amazing that Theoharis would tweet all of these facts that you didn鈥檛 know, but should know, about Rosa Parks. Johanna was like, 鈥淚鈥檓 a well-read person, I鈥檝e done a lot of civil rights history, and yet, Jeanne would tweet this list of 25 things, and I knew probably one, maybe two, of them.鈥� [Next, Ms. Hamilton] reached out to Jeanne to talk about turning her book into a documentary, and then reached out to Yoruba Richen, another documentary producer, and the two of them decided they would partner and produce this doc. They brought the project to us and that was the start of it.

There鈥檚 a fearlessness that鈥檚 very clear regarding the documentary. Describe the urgency and deliberate nature of using terms such as 鈥渨hite supremacy.鈥�

The beauty when you鈥檙e dealing with a documentary about a civil rights icon is I think you鈥檙e free to be a truth teller. And especially with this doc and especially with Rosa Parks, what is the point of what you鈥檙e doing if you鈥檙e not brutally honest? Rosa Parks was taking testimony from women who鈥檇 been raped. I can鈥檛 clean it up. 鈥� I didn鈥檛 know that that was her job, that she would travel around the country doing that. It just really changes your take on her, and I think my take was probably a lot like everybody else鈥檚: She was a little old lady who was tired that one day on the bus, and it鈥檚 just so inaccurate.

On one hand, if you get the privilege of doing a story about Rosa Parks, you better get it right, and that means using the right words. Also, you know, when you run your own production company and people trust you to do a good job ... They鈥檝e hired us to tell the true story. I鈥檇 feel worse if I were dishonest. I鈥檇 feel worse if I felt like I was editing things to make people comfortable.

In that same vein, there were radical elements, such as mentioning the Black Panthers and the RNA (Republic of New Afrika). Even within the framework of civil rights, many people don鈥檛 know about the 鈥淔ree the Land鈥� movement.

Exactly. I鈥檓 embarrassed to say what I knew about it was very much kind of like a middle school textbook. I just did not know. I very much admire Jeanne, because she really was interested in sharing the story of the actual woman. When Rosa Parks died, The New York Times called her the 鈥渁ccidental mother of civil rights.鈥� Rosa Parks was a lot of things 鈥� accidental was not one of them. Her whole life鈥檚 work was in this. And so it鈥檚 a real misunderstanding of who she was. And I think it鈥檚 a tremendous luxury to get the opportunity to fix that, to change that.

Between this documentary and your production company, it seems that you鈥檙e able to tell stories that might not be in the national mainframe, even as a journalist who worked for CNN for many years.

CNN was really the place where I got to do documentaries, and it was such a great place to learn. I鈥檓 very grateful because I left CNN with like 50 hours of documentaries, and it was a place where I really figured it out and got to work with great people and understood what makes a great documentary. When we did 鈥淏lack and Missing,鈥� for example, for HBO, that was another documentary that was really successful. Those stories can be tough to sell, and they can be tough to get people to think they might want to watch. We鈥檝e been pretty fortunate on that front so far.

One of your recent presentations on 鈥淢atter of Fact鈥� hit really close to home 鈥� it was a report about the water crisis in Denmark, South Carolina, which was a point of reference for Democratic presidential candidates such as Bernie Sanders and Tom Steyer.

I think the most powerful thing you can do when you鈥檙e a journalist is to bring attention, right? That鈥檚 the job. We get to focus the nation鈥檚 attention on something that鈥檚 important, that maybe people are missing, or maybe people don鈥檛 realize that they need to be looking at. Being able to do that and bring attention to a story is very important. It鈥檚 essential, and again, I鈥檝e always looked at it as a luxury. I鈥檓 often very frustrated by the idea of, you know, [journalists] thinking that people don鈥檛 think policy matters to them. It鈥檚 why they sometimes cover politics like it鈥檚 a joke, you know? I really felt very lucky to be able to go in and tell stories of communities and bring attention there when that attention is sorely needed.

听