After Donald Trump’s statements about Sweden, the filmmaker Ami Horowitz received harsh criticism from the policemen who he had interviewed in his short documentary.
Now the cinematographers he worked with during the production also criticize him.
Emil Marczak and Jakob Bjelfvenstam say they would never have worked with the production if they had known what the material was going to be used for.
After commenting on the situation in Sweden last weekend, US president Donald Trump referred to a segment on Fox News. In the segment, filmmaker Ami Horowitz, who made the heavily biased short documentary ”Stockholm syndrome”, a documentary which also contains several factual errors, was interviewed.
DN has previously reported that two Swedish policemen who appear in the short documentary claim that they were interviewed on false premises and that they were answering other questions than shown.
”We don’t stand behind it. It shocked us. He has edited the answers. We were answering completely different questions in the interview. This is bad journalism,” said Anders Göranzon in an interview with DN.
The Swedish cinematographer Emil Marczak, who filmed the interview, now confirms the policemen’s story. Marczak tells DN that Horowitz ”time and again tried to get the policemen to agree with him”.
”I would never have participated if I had known how unethically and frivolously the material would be edited. To double check that my memory is correct I have gone through the raw material and it confirms the policemen’s view of the course of events”, Emil Marczak says.
Filmmaker Ami Horowitz has defended his short documentary and method of working. In an interview on the show ”Tucker Carlson Tonight” he implies that the Swedish policemen have been pressured by their superiors to criticize him.
”Can you imagine the amount of pressure that must be on them from their bosses because of this maelstrom that they’ve kind of found themselves in? I don’t necessarily blame them for kind of wanting to cover their buts a little bit on this thing. But the reality is that with everything I asked them, it’s clear what their answers were”, he says in ”Tucker Carlson Tonight”.
Emil Marczak says that Horowitz called him and asked if he could do a quick job of filming an interview for a TV-segment. The filmmaker never stated that the material would be used in the short documentary, which would later be published on Youtube.
”In the raw material one can see that Horowitz has an agenda, that he is making a biased segment about refugees being linked to criminality, no matter what answers he receives. I do not stand behind such unethical and frivolous work methods and I do not want the policemen’s or my own name to be defamed”, says Emil Marczak.
Another Swedish cinematographer, Jacob Bjelfvenstam, helped Horowitz with an interview with journalist Annika Hernroth-Rothstein. She has previously said to DN that she doesn’t feel that her quotes were distorted, but that the editing of the short documentary was ostentatious.
”I had no idea what he was going to do with the material. I didn’t ask, but I assume that people are serious about their profession. But the whole interview was without nuances,” says Jacob Bjelfvenstam.
How did you react when you realised the film had been spread and used in the political debate?
”I am surprised that I, as a freelance cinematographer, happen to find myself in this kind of context and that I’m involved with Donald Trump. It’s weird”, says Jacob Bjelfvenstam.
Would you have participated, knowing what the material would be used for?
”No, I wouldn’t have,” says Jacob Bjelfvenstam.
Emil Marczak and Jacob Bjelfvenstam have not had any contact with the filmmaker since the production of the short documentary.
Translation from Swedish: Evelyn Jones