Analysis of 9/11 Images: Violent or Not?

EN P.

Order the writing of a tailor-made Journalism Book reviews

Free quote online

Book review Format .docx

Analysis of 9/11 Images: Violent or Not?

Download

Read an extract

Themes

Image violence, 9/11 images, iconic image, indicative image, point of view, human presence, violent images, terrorism imagery, media representation, François Jost, The Spectacle of Terror, image interpretation, subjective viewpoint, media sensitivity, event coverage, news broadcasting, image impact, emotional shock, perceptual shock, memory and imagination, Timisoara, media evidence, image control, science fiction imagery, victim representation, personal interpretation, journalist perspective, media ethics, event understanding, terrorism representation, news imagery, image analysis, media studies, communication theory, digital images, visual representation, media violence, traumatic images, catastrophic events, disaster imagery, visual shock, media coverage, news reporting, image perception, viewer sensitivity, media impact, catastrophic imagery, visual interpretation, media representation theory

Reader
Abstract
Extract

Abstract

François Jost's analysis on the perception of 9/11 images, discussing the role of point of view and imagination in determining their violence.

Extract

[...] The Spectacle of Terror, Chapter Are the 9/11 Images Violent Images? - François Jost (2006) - Digital Images and Communication Digital Images and Communication 22.10.25 The Spectacle of Terror Text in Support: Are the images of 9/11 violent images? - François JOST What we retain from the text: - After Timisoara, it becomes clear that the images were not evidence of the speech and that they can lie. - Few viewers turned off their sets because the images were violent. [...]

[...] We have control over the images of these events. There is no visible violence (no death, no blood . But we can project what is happening. We just know that something has happened and that it must have caused deaths. The image is dehumanized from every human point of view. It's all just a matter of point of view: from an aerial point of view (which doesn't correspond to anything because it's not our point of view), or from the journalist's point of view (human report). [...]

[...] However, saying that an image without a body, without blood . is not violent, that's not enough either because we're not capable of agreeing on something that goes further. What difference does he establish between iconic image and indicative image? Indicative images testify to a look, a man-sized image. Proof that another is a victim and it's a sensitive image. It's an explicit image with human presence, (sound, people running . ) and where you can understand what's happening is an indicative image. [...]

[...] Journalists say we have to try to imagine what's happening, the number of deaths etc. Everything therefore relies on imagination because we don't want to show shocking or violent images. Why does he criticize the fact of considering an image violent based on the behaviors it produces? Tisseron claims that we can determine if an image is violent based on the behaviors it produces. But the author says that in order to consider this, it implies setting up a protocol to evaluate it and that's not possible. [...]

docx