Writing this blog has been an eye-opening experience for me, in more ways than one. Blogging is a lot of work. Previous semesters have touched on the blogging aspect, but trying to undertake a weekly publication while simultaneously working on other, often unrelated, web media was a bit of a shock to me, though I admit, a needed one. Today’s newsroom is as fragmented and multi-specialized as its readership, and any job in news media production will no doubt involve us wearing a multitude of ‘hats.’ This has fostered in me a greater appreciation for blogging, as before I would visit them, but had little conception of the work and research that goes into writing a post, even if most blogs draw from previously published source material.
I have also learned more about my topic than I previously thought possible. I had no idea the depth and scope of the role of photo editing in the news. I knew it was prevalent in paid communications (namely advertising) contexts, as I’m frequently browsing websites like Photoshop Disasters, and Bad Ad Good Ad. However, I had never really looked into other areas, and I was really surprised by how frequently it is used on government figures.
 |
| Via ForeignPolicy Blog |
 |
| Via National Post |
The airbrushing to remove love handles on French President Nicolas Sarkozy and the cleavage on MP Rathika Sitsabaiesan come to mind, as I had never heard, nor could I have imagined why anyone would want to/think they could get away with altering political figures before actually seeing it. Hearing things like ‘Perception is Reality’ thrown around in class and actually seeing it enacted in the media is fascinating. Though I wouldn’t go so far as to say it is a paradigm shift in our society, I think it is something we (both as producers and consumers of media) will need to keep in mind for the future.
The interactivity is an interesting feature, though I admit I didn't get as much out of it as I probably could have. Perhaps my topic isn't that interesting, but I didn't get a whole lot of comments. When I did I tried my best to answer questions and add additional information, but it never resulted in a new post or additional content as I has expected (and hoped) it would.
Comments and interaction are a great tool for bloggers, as it keeps the readers coming back for more, in a sense. If I comment on a blog post, I will return to see if the writer has anything to say about it. Potential drawbacks are, of course, if a bloggers opinion is not like my own, I will, by human nature, distance myself from them and their blog.
The public must be a part of journalism if it is to survive. Comments and commenters generate much needed transparency in the journalism function. In an age with countless choices as to where to get your news, we need reader investment in the source. Newspaper and Broadcast news has been fragmenting for the past decades, and it takes more than being the only game in town to exist any longer in the writhing, bustling US media scene.
I'm with you, I can't believe they Photoshop politicians! I mean, I can. But I'm still a little surprised.
ReplyDeleteYou touched on this briefly, but I'd like to know more. Since women in politics are becoming more prevalent, do you think we will see more Photoshopping? I have seen pieces here and there that are saying that the public is going to be harsh on women politicians. Unlike men, they will be expected to be wise and beautiful. Just as a general example, we have Hilary Clinton who sometimes looks old and then you have Sarah Palin who is beautiful but often critiqued for not being very politically savvy.
What do you think? Will women politicians be more Photoshopped than the men?
I think Page is onto something. We live in an upmost hypocritical and hypercritical society in regards to women. They are held to a certain level of attractiveness that a man never is. I can tell you, from seeing Bush up close in person. He is one ugly dude. Not attractive. A woman of the same age and office would have to an appearance level that is so far above a comparable man. Think of the grief that hillary received. I've heard enough pant suit comments in my life. It's horrid. I do think that with political women, you'll find there is more photo grubbing and what not. Great point.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you both. I think it is really interesting socially that comment simply *must* be made on how any famous woman looks. Be it a scientist or singer, eventually the point must be made that she's attractive or not. Off the top of my head, Susan Boyle comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteI try to resist getting all womens studies about it-- but it has always struck me as reminiscent of the old wry line "Oh, she does XYZ? Great, but can she cook?" As if to say that XYZ is useless without the latter.
Are we as a culture still sending the message that the first priority of a female is to look pleasing to males? Probably. Will we grow out of it some day? I sure hope so.