Errol Morris claims that each picture possess a thousand words but in those thousand words, the two polarizing words “true” and “false” don’t belong. These two words imply an universal qualifier for a picture. One of the most frustrating parts of these fact-based words is that we tend to apply these words without context. Without captions, a picture has no grounding and is open to judgement by the viewer. True and False can’t be applied because it depends on the opinion and social context that the viewer brings to the picture. “A photograph is neither true nor false” however, we do tailor our beliefs to the individual pictures that we encounter because we all have a unique background influenced by school, media, family, and our relationships. I don’t know much about warships but when looking at the following picture I understand enough to realize that it was taken in black and white so it is older, it runs on coal because of the black smoke, and the design reminds me of that of the Titanic. I also recognize the vantage point from which it was taken. The person who took this picture was not aboard the ship and could have been an observer, wishing that they were on it, or a paid professional. “True” and “False” don’t apply in this context.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/pictures-are-supposed-to-be-worth-a-thousand-words/
In the short video, “Drones for America” by Drew Christie, a former K.B.G. agent describes his embracing of the USA drones over US soil to monitor individuals believed to be terrorists. Christie is so well informed that he was able to create this animated video as a reaction to US drone policy. Without knowing any of his political background, he obviously has a bias towards eliminating the drone program as his video is overly enthusiastic towards the implementation of this utopian society. He is able to bring in historical examples and context to the video to better support his true point. Watching this video without a background in previous drone policy, one wouldn’t be able to label it as “true” or “false”. If one were to try, the reasoning behind their argument would be that Christie’s arguments are “good” or “bad,” all centered around subjective opinion.
http://www.nytimes.com/video/2013/02/18/opinion/100000002068339/drones-for-america.html
It's interesting to realize that when we perceive photos as "true" and "false" it's essentially the same as subjectively calling arguments "good" and "bad." We do it all the time without even noticing.
ReplyDelete