I totally agree with the comments above mine. I feel like the journalist who was commenting didn't actually watch the video. There was a huge graphic that illustrated how Kony had crossed the northern border out of Uganda and was no longer operating within Uganda, but still remained at large and a threat. The journalist seemed sour with the success of the video and criticized its great production value. When people are in situations where they see an incredible wrong in the world, they will use what resources they have at hand to help out. The whole idea of the films is to raise awareness, which for a group of people who are not lawmakers, educators, military professionals or in any position of political power, is a legitimate course of action to take.

In response to your segment and guest journalist, I appreciate your valuable criticism of the group Invisible Children. I have followed their progress for a while. However, I was deeply saddened that your guest focused on criticising (and stating incorrect facts about the video) instead of offering an alternative solution.
Your guest said that the video leads viewers to believe the problem is in Uganda. This is incorrect and makes me wonder if your guest even watched the video. The feed explains the history of the problem, where it started (Uganda) and where the war is taking place now, it even displays it clearly on a map. Hence, why you see later in the video that they are building schools and helping the reclaimed children learn trades in the now peaceful Uganda.
Another issue that you mentioned was that the group spends most of its money to make movies, and promote themselves. I believe you hit this correctly on the dot. That is what Invisible Children is about, making people aware of injustice so that those people can do something about it. If it is in our face and on our minds the more likely we are to do something. This group took their knowledge of injustice and married it with their passion of making movies. They knew injustice was taking place while the majority of the world was unaware, they wanted to start a new precedent, and most importantly they wanted people to know about the injustices who would know how to and could do something about it.
In the U.S. we do not see it a problem for people to become aware of war criminals that affect our well being, so why is it a bad thing that we are widening our scope to include other countries war criminals? Not only is he another countries war criminal, but Joseph Kony is the number one war criminal in the world. I think that deserves some highlighting and it should call all those with a soul to action.