A Symbiotic Relationship
Since it’s conception photography
has been an instant hit; it has become renowned around the world. Artists devote their lives to mastering it,
and people flock to see the fruits of their labors. It has become a common concept to equate that
a “picture is worth a thousand words”. The
belief that photographs hold this intrinsic meaning, a meaning that can be
defined as true or false, has become integrated into our society. However, there are some that argue that a photograph
in and of itself is neither true nor false.
Errol Morris is one such individual who in his article Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire in the NYT
argues that a context—or rather a caption---is needed before one could make the
claim of whether a photograph is true or false. So, where does this leave
photographs? Do they hold no meaning
unless accompanied by some form of information or context? Or rather is their meaning simply limited in
the absence of such knowledge? But
perhaps the question one should ask is whether the photograph adds meaning to
the text just as the text, in turn, adds meaning to the photograph.
How does one go about answering this
question? Photographs are easy to find, be
it an art galleries, photo book, or a blog.
What about news articles? News
articles often accompany stories with some photograph, sometimes more than
one. By that notion you could see the
relationship of text and photograph by simply looking at a news article. Then again, what if you were to look at two
news articles? The same story, but presented by different news sites; wouldn’t
that provide a greater representation of the relationship?
 |
| FoxNews |
 |
| MSNBC |
These two pictures for example, the one on the left is from FoxNews and the one on the right is from MSNBC. Alone these pictures seem to produce very little emotion, maybe a question or two, if any. You may even be surprised to discover that they are used, by their respective sites, to cover the same story. Fox’s picture corresponds to the article’s title, US officials addressing cyber threat at ‘highest levels’ with China, on heels of hacker report. MSNBC’s picture corresponds with the title, Expert: US in cyberwar arms race with China, Russia. Both titles refer to the recent claims that China has been responsible for multiple hacking attempts on corporations throughout the United States. Now with that information as well as the two titles, look back at their respective images. Do these images now produce a greater emotional response then before? Do more questions suddenly to pop into your head? Don’t be alarmed by this sudden increase in heart-pounding and mental activity. You have simply seen the basic relationship that both photographs and text have with each other. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. If the titles alone produce this greater meaning when paired with these images, what will happen when you take the actual body of the articles? In MSNBC’s article there is a passage that states:
‘Stuxnet and Flame (malware used to disrupt and gather
intelligence on Iran's nuclear program) are demonstrations of that,’ he said. ‘…
(The U.S.) could shut down most critical infrastructure in potential
adversaries relatively quickly.’ (Windrem).
This specific part of the article
reassures the reader that the United States is able to defend itself. Now if
you would take this passage into consideration, look back at the picture on the
right. A picture of a U.S soldier,
accompanied by these words, do they not produce a greater sense of security? Of
confidence? Yes, the text and image work
on one another, magnifying the meaning of the words used as well as the image. The image can now be declared either true or
false based off the context of the text.
At the same time, the text itself is given a “face” if you would. It is no longer just words the reader is
seeing, but an image to accompany it.
The same is true for FoxNews:
‘It is a major challenge for us in the national security
arena,’ Carney said, adding that it is known that foreign countries and
companies "swipe" sensitive U.S. information. Pentagon spokesman
George Little also said the U.S. is a "victim of cyber-attacks from
various places around the world. (Chakraborty).
Now repeat the process and look back
at Fox’s picture. The text alone produces
an element of uncertainty/nervousness, but when paired with the picture, a
skull on a computer screen, the emotion in amplified into one of fear—panic. This enhances the article itself, improving
its own message and meaning. At the same
time the image, now in context with the article’s story, can, too, be declared
either true or false. So, once again we
see that the image and text work together to make the each other more powerful.
This
symbiotic relationship between text and photographs can be seen in other medias
such as magazines, novels, and even news broadcasts. This analysis of these two articles and their
respective images does accomplish another purpose. MSNBC being more liberal and
Fox being more conservative, shows how different pictures and wording are used
together for specific audiences. But the
point remains that photographs alone contain some inherit meaning, but when
paired with text these two elements work off one another to increase their
respective power.
No comments:
Post a Comment