I would also like to point out that many of the Obama ads the camera is slowed down to try to show McCain out of focus and highlight is old physical features.
In addition, I had a debate with another student over whether all of these tactics are "fair" or not and I must say that I believe in presenting the truth, but in this day and age candidates will do almost anything to win, and in my mind as long as they are not lying or actually changing (which is much different then manipulating) the facts then I don't see any of this as "unfair." What do you think?
I followed that discussion, and, in general, I think the manipulation of images -- unless it it done in a manner that draws attention to itself, like the "morphing" of the image of one candidate into another -- is, well, manipulative. It's not far removed, in my mind, from subliminal messaging. It's a kind of propaganda: an effort to persuade not through reason, but through emotion.
But it raises some hard questions when we move from the normative/ideal to the practical/real: if, in the midst of a close campaign, one side is using distortion and manipulation to influence voters, should his or her opponent take the high road, and refuse to do the same; or must he or she, as a matter of practicality, compete on the same playing field (these techniques can work, after all)? I have no simple answer to that.
The R Word
-
Not unlike Jed Bartlett's on air gaffe about the intelligence of governor
Richie, Obama's offensive remark the other night just seems a little too
perfect....
The Media: A Fourth Branch or A Whole Other Tree?
-
I begin with a video (Notice the Cameo at the end)
Try JibJab Sendables® eCards today!
And what a time for campaigning it has been. This election season ha...
2 comments:
I would also like to point out that many of the Obama ads the camera is slowed down to try to show McCain out of focus and highlight is old physical features.
In addition, I had a debate with another student over whether all of these tactics are "fair" or not and I must say that I believe in presenting the truth, but in this day and age candidates will do almost anything to win, and in my mind as long as they are not lying or actually changing (which is much different then manipulating) the facts then I don't see any of this as "unfair." What do you think?
I followed that discussion, and, in general, I think the manipulation of images -- unless it it done in a manner that draws attention to itself, like the "morphing" of the image of one candidate into another -- is, well, manipulative. It's not far removed, in my mind, from subliminal messaging. It's a kind of propaganda: an effort to persuade not through reason, but through emotion.
But it raises some hard questions when we move from the normative/ideal to the practical/real: if, in the midst of a close campaign, one side is using distortion and manipulation to influence voters, should his or her opponent take the high road, and refuse to do the same; or must he or she, as a matter of practicality, compete on the same playing field (these techniques can work, after all)? I have no simple answer to that.
Post a Comment