What impact does context have on a message?
Sarah Palin has complained that a recent cover photo for Newsweek was sexist. The image in question is of her standing in bicycle shorts beside an American flag. The photo was apparently borrowed without permission from an earlier article in Runner's World magazine. Above is the Newsweek cover and below is the original image from the Runner's World story. I present it here in the context of other images (from a series of seven) Runner's World published.
If the image wasn't sexist when it was published in the context of like images by a fitness magazine, how does it become sexist when it's published solo in a news magazine? Frankly, I'm not sure it does - this case seems a bit more bluster than fact by a politico-celebrity with a book to promote. However, while the motivations here are debatable, we shouldn't underestimate the power of context and imagery.
The St. Petersburg Times recently published an article regarding the tragic workplace shooting in Orlando a few weeks back. In the article were two images, one larger - of a smiling Caucasian man. The other smaller, grainier and of a young African-American man in a white shirt.
Viewed separately the images represent exactly what they are - pictures of people. But when you put them below a headline which indicates one man is a murder victim and the other a killer you provide a context. When one image resembles a family photo and the other a mugshot further context is implied. The result? Readers may perceive they are viewing images of a family man and the young minority male who murdered him. It isn't until they read the article the correct context of the photos become known.
And in this case, the opposite of what proved to be the common perception is true.
The fact is Jason Rodriguez shot killed 26 year-old Otis Beckford. But the context of the imagery presented by the newspaper conveys a different message.
In verbal communication there is a code transmitted which must be understood (decoded) to be received. The source of the message (the speaker) encodes their intent (speaks in a recognized language) the message is sent (verbally - out loud), received and decoded (heard and understood) by the receiver (audience). In visual communication there is no code. A picture of tree is a picture of a tree - the image denotes its subject matter entirely, there is no decoding required.
However, once we create a context for images there becomes a connotation which must be properly decoded by the viewer. Assuming different cultures, different socio-economic backgrounds and experiences are at play - the connotation of the images' context may vary by viewer.
So, while all may not have perceived the false implications of the St. Petersburg Times photos, and while I (a middle-aged male) may not find the use of the fitness photo in a news magazine evidence of inherent sexism - there are certainly those who do.
If a visual image has no code, in and of itself, we must be cautious about what message we imply when we provide a context for the image.
THE POINT: A picture is worth a thousand words, what those words say is controlled by the context (or lack thereof) in which the image is presented. Be cautious.
No comments:
Post a Comment