The Pitfalls of Pictures

According to most respondents of this study and several scholars such Robinson (2013), Perlmutter (1998; 2005), Vilmer (2012) and Ammon (2001) and Sharkey (1993), among others; pictures have a powerful effect on individuals especially due to their capacity to stick to memory, carve history, stir emotions and public outcry, entrench stereotypes and sometimes trigger action from policymakers. However, despite their “power,” pictures are not immune from drawbacks and shortcomings. Therefore, this section seeks to discuss these pitfalls or shortcomings of the pictures under study and pictures in general, particularly from the point of view of the respondents.

6.3.1 Manipulation, “Fake News,” Subjectivity, Selectivity and the “Missing” Picture From the discussions with the respondents during the research, a number of shortcomings associated with the pictures under study and pictures in general which emerged include;

pictures’ susceptibility to manipulation, selectivity and subjectivity and their inability to tell a complete story. A sift through the responses of the respondents reveals that some of them were wary of the fact that pictures could be manipulated. In the same vein, respondent seven (2016) noted that: “Whilst modern technology has made it easier to produce and distribute numerous pictures across space and time, the same technology has also made it possible for pictures to be “photoshoped,” “doctored” or manipulated in pursuit of narrow individual and institutional interests.” As evidence to these claims, respondent seven (2016) cited the example of the Jewish Orthodox newspaper called Di Tzeitung which manipulated the famous White House Situation Room iconic picture taken during the Bin Laden raid by deleting Hilary Clinton and

another woman from the photograph. Therefore, this is clear evidence that pictures are not immune from editing or “manipulation” for personal and institutional expediency.

Picture P

Bin Laden’s capture image “photoshopped” by Di Tzeitung newspaper by removing Hillary Clinton (Doble (2010)/Di Tzeitung).

Respondent 16 (2017) also pointed out that in the digital age of advanced technology and “fake news,” it could be possible that some of the pictures that were shown on BBC and CNN were manipulated for the purposes of political expediency. Six respondents to the study mentioned that pictures run the risk of manipulation and the iconic pictures under study should not be treated as an exception. However, respondent 20 (2017) argued that although pictures are subject to manipulation, “reputable” media houses such as the BBC, Aljazeera, France 24 and CNN are less likely to manipulate images as they have a reputation to protect.

Some scholars alert us to the fact that, apart from being prone to manipulation, pictures are also subjected to acts of “selectivity” by journalists and media houses. This means that journalists and media houses choose, sometimes in a biased fashion, the pictures that they want to broadcast according to institutional expediency. In the same wavelength, Fishman (2017:1) notes that: “At the scene, the camera creates an infinite number of images but only one or two will get published...With each catastrophe, photo editors at major news organisations will examine thousands of images of devastation, looking for one that will make a cut.” This shows that photojournalist tend to select images that they think best depict the situation or in line with their agenda. In the same vein, Charaudeau, Lochard and Saoulages in Vilmer (2012) argue

that: “the priority given (...) to spectacular images and unifying subjects with high emotional impact such as the exhibiting and relating of the victims’ lives, reveals bias in the way the conflict is dealt with...” This selection of images from a pool of others is what Vilmer (2012) labels “selectivity.” In light of selectivity, 11 respondents argued that the iconic pictures depicting violence during the land reform programme extremely overlook the plight of black farm workers in favour of the white commercial farmers. This shows a selective approach to the broadcasting of images, hence, selectivity.

However, the challenge with selectivity is that it has the potential to distort the reality on the ground. For instance, Sharkey (1993) notes that in the Somali case; the images distorted the situation on the ground as they were one-sided since they did not show food being delivered in Mogadishu as well as Somalis who demonstrated in support of the slain US soldiers. One could say that, had these “positive images” been shown, the perception of the situation would have taken a different dimension. By the same token, the same argument can be extended to Zimbabwe where a closer look could reveal that the international media seem to have been obsessed with showing negative pictures at the expense of the positive ones. This could be linked to the wider negative publicity problem that African countries still face from international media stations. For instance, Okgibo (2007:109) observes that international media houses always focus on “the bizarre and absurd” when covering Africa. This means that there is a deliberate selectivity approach in terms of stories and accompanying pictures of the media houses in question. Another challenge with selectivity is that it creates a scenario characterised by “missing pictures” which portrays an incomplete story. In one of her speeches, Nigerian Novelist and Storyteller, Ngozi (2009) warns of “the danger of a single story” as it might lead to stereotypes due to the overlooking of the other side of the story. Therefore, there is a danger that selectivity in Zimbabwe which could be associated with the “single story” pictorial narrative.

Another challenge which is associated with the pictures under study is that they are also subjective as they are subjected to different interpretations and meanings. In light of subjectivity and varying interpretations, Bonnell (1998:11) posits: “Like books, images and their combinations may be "read" in unpredictable ways. Pictures meant to emphasize class identity also conveyed—often unintentionally and subliminally—ideas about gender and gender relations, ethnicity, and other forms of cultural and social identification.” By the same token, two respondents interpreted the image of a woman with two children being evicted from her farm differently. One respondent said it showed boldness on the part of the woman whilst

another said it was one of the most pitiful images depicting the land reform programme. The two-conflicting interpretations of the same picture show that pictures are prone to multiple interpretations and meanings, hence, subjectivity. Sharkey (1993) warns that real time images of violence and conflict are also subjective and have the potential to distort public opinion and government priorities. The next section deals with pictures vis-a-vis perception hurdles, optical illusions and blindness.

6.3.2 Optical illusions, Perception Hurdles, Blindness and Deafness

In addition to other challenges discussed above, pictures are also associated with optical illusions which could affect even their perception by the viewer. For instance, Yale (2014) alerts us to a condition called prosopagnosia (a neurological disorder that impairs a person’s ability to perceive or recognise faces; also known as face blindness). People suffering from this condition have nothing wrong with their vision but their perception. Therefore, individuals suffering from this condition might have challenges to perceive certain faces on pictures.

Perception challenges could also be associated with optical illusions. Therefore, consumers of pictures, even those selected for this study, could face such a challenge. However, no respondent to this study suffered from the prosopagnosia condition.

Another drawback related with pictures is that those who are visually impaired (blind) cannot see them. Even if someone else was to describe the picture to them, it would be impossible for them to reproduce the exact image in their mind. In addition to that, the blind cannot see the gestures especially in relation to moving images (videos). Although the deaf cannot hear the sound (in relation to videos) they can actually see the moving images, gestures and the text.

Although pictures subject the blind and deaf to such challenges, it is important to note that visual culture in general does not overlook deafness and blindness. In the same vein, Mitchell (1998:90) notes that: “Visual culture entails a meditation on blindness, the invisible, the unseen, the unseeable, and the overlooked; also, on deafness and the visible language of gesture; it also compels the attention to the tactile, the auditory, the haptic, and the phenomenon of synesthesia.” Thus, blindness and deafness limit the affected individuals to fully consume television images but such individuals remain in the realm of visual culture.