Recently I came across an image in my social network that sparked my attention. I'll attach the image below, but first I'm going to describe it. The image contains three men, cropped, in their own individual panel. The first panel is a man of Middle Eastern descent, with some scruff on his face. He's holding what looks like an AK47 and dressed in what I assume is the cultural wardrobe in his native land. Behind him is a flag on a flagpole that's green and has some sort of Arabic writing on it. In the lower third portion, there is a word blazed across this man: "TERRORIST"
The second man, in the middle, is a man of African American descent, also with some scruff on his face. He's holding what looks like a semi-automatic, 9mm pistol, and dressed in a "wife-beater" shirt, a backwards cap of sorts, and has an earring(s). It's hard to tell what is in the background since the image is cropped, but it looks like a blacklight is above him and he's in a common bedroom. In the lower third portion on this panel, it says, "THUG".
The last man, in the last panel, is a Caucasian man, with a trimmed goatee and a cigar in his mouth. He's holding what looks like an AR15, with a scope. He too is wearing a "wife-beater" shirt and has a military styled hat. I think he might have a tattoo on his collar-bone, but I can't really tell. The background of the image looks like he's standing in the woods. The lower third this time says, "2ND AMENDMENT".
Here is the image...
Now, what do you take from this? Seriously think about it and hold onto that thought.
I mentioned that I saw this image in the timeline of my social network. The person that shared this is a friend (who is African American) I was in the military with. One day we went out to lunch, and I'll never forget that day because he taught me more about the social construct of race then I've ever learned up to that point. Where I'm from in the world, majority of African Americans speak in a very urbanized manner. The media I've consumed, represents African Americans in an urban manner (one of the first albums I bought was Snoop Dogg, "Doggiestyle"). It never dawned on me that black people could speak like those white people from the suburbs. I watched The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air growing up, and I remember Will constantly criticizing Carlton for the way he spoke, it was a running joke that viewers waited for. It was a thought process that pop culture and contemporary media reinforced, this is how you're suppose to talk. My friend taught me that NOT every black person speaks the way the media had influenced me for so many years, and it's actually kind of offensive the think that. It changed my life forever.
Anyway, back to the image. This is a powerful image, because it's things like this that are supposed to be thought provoking. This is a current trend in our news media. Armed arabs are terrorists. Armed blacks are thugs. Armed white men are exercising their rights.
My friend included the comment, "If you have to un-follow me I understand..."
Considering that I've been studying communication, media, and the effects it has on people, I commented back saying, "Of course things look like that when you take them out of context."
Naturally, someone replied with something along the lines of "Enlighten us". Not wanting to get into an argument I said, "I don't disagree with him" and backed off. You know how these things go. Something said gets taken the wrong way, there's back peddling, massive trolling, etc. Social media becomes tiresome. I swear, I should just have my girlfriend manage my social accounts. She often acts as a mediator for things like this saying, "Why bother?"
But the comment stuck with me. The image stuck with me. The fact it came from an influential friend, stuck with me. So if you're willing to learn a little bit, I'll enlighten you to why it's important to not take media shared out of context. But first, some fundamentals.
As you can tell from the diagram, the is The Mathematical Theory of Communication (The Sender/Receiver Model). It was created by Dr. Claude E. Shannon in 1948. The path is as follows:
The information source produces a message -> A transmitter operates on the message to create a signal, which is then sent through a channel -> A channel, which is the medium or method over which the signal, carrying the information that composes the message, is sent -> Noise in introduced, whether wanted or unwanted, this cannot be avoided -> A receiver, which transform the signal back into the message intended for delivery -> A destination, which can be a person or a machine, for whom the message is intended
So what does this mean? This explains how the symbols of communication are transmitted, how the transmitted symbols convey meaning, and the effect of the received meaning.
This is the Encoding/Decoding Model created by Stuart Hall in 1973. This model explains how media messages are produced, disseminated, and interpreted. In contrast to the traditional linear approach of the sender and receiver, Hall perceives each of these steps as both autonomous and interdependent. "Each stage will affect the message (or ”product”) being conveyed as a result of its ’discursive form’ (e.g. practices, instruments, relations). This implies that, for example, the sender of information can never be sure that it will be perceived by the target audience in the way that was intended, because of this chain of discourse."
Broken down, this is the path:
On the left you have Production – This is where the encoding of a message takes place. By drawing upon society's dominant ideologies, the creator of the message is feeding off of society's beliefs, and values.
In the middle you have Circulation – How individuals perceive things: visual vs. written. How things are circulated influences how audience members will receive the message and put it to use.
On the right you have Use (distribution or consumption) – This is the decoding/interpreting of a message which requires active recipients. This is a complex process of understanding for the audience.
Not necessarily picture, lastly you have Reproduction – This is the stage after audience members have interpreted the message in their own way based on their experiences and beliefs. What is done with the message after it has been interpreted is where this stage comes in. At this point, you will see whether individuals take action after they have been exposed to a specific message. (Ex. Sharing an image you like on social media)
In simpler terms, Encoding/decoding is the translation of a message that is easily understood. When you decode a message, you are extracting the meaning of that message into terms that you are able to easily understand. Decoding has both verbal and non-verbal forms through communication. Decoding behavior without using words would be observing body language. People are able to decode body language based on their emotions. For example, some body language signs for when someone is upset, anger, or stressed would be a use of excessive hand/arm movements, red in the face, crying, and even sometimes silence. Sometimes when someone is trying to get a message across to someone, the message can be interpreted differently from person to person. Decoding is all about the understanding of what someone already knows, based on the information given throughout the message being received. Whether there is a large audience or exchanging a message to one person, decoding is the process of obtaining, absorbing, understanding, and sometimes using the information that was given throughout a verbal or non-verbal message.
For example, since advertisements can have multiple layers of meaning, they can be decoded in various ways and can mean something different to different people. Hall claims that the decoding subject can assume three different positions: Dominant/hegemonic position, negotiated position, and oppositional position.
This is a popular picture of Richard Sherman. In 2014, at the end of the NFC Championship game, he went off in a rant and was quoted as saying, "I'm the best corner in the game. When you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree, that's the result you're gonna get! Don't you ever talk about me!"
For example, since advertisements can have multiple layers of meaning, they can be decoded in various ways and can mean something different to different people. Hall claims that the decoding subject can assume three different positions: Dominant/hegemonic position, negotiated position, and oppositional position.
Additionally, we have three media effects models that were popular from the 1920's-1960's and still speak volumes today.
The first is known as the Hypodermic Needle Model (or Magic Bullet theory, or Direct Effects Model) This model assumed that audiences passively accepted media messages and would exhibit predictable reactions in response to those messages. You don't question what is being sent, you just believe what you're told.
Ex. You see a commercial that says "Join the Army, you're life will be better" and you run out and join the Army. (You see this a lot in social media. People will share images or articles without questioning authenticity.)
Second is the Minimal Effects Model (selective exposure/retention - individual based)
Searching for media that reinforces personal values.
Ex. You have a liberal perspective, so you watch liberal news stations.
Third is the Uses and Gratifications Model (instead of asking "what", this model asks "why")
Using certain media to fulfill certain uses/needs.
Ex. Watching Fox News to argue with their points because you don't agree with them.
Ex. Watching Fox News to argue with their points because you don't agree with them.
Watching a specific TV show, so you can tweet about it with other people who are watching it.
Finally, we have this:
This is a popular picture of Richard Sherman. In 2014, at the end of the NFC Championship game, he went off in a rant and was quoted as saying, "I'm the best corner in the game. When you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree, that's the result you're gonna get! Don't you ever talk about me!"
Social, sports, and news media exploded calling this dude a thug. But let me ask you a question, who is pictured?
Simply put, that picture is NOT Richard Sherman, it's the media representation of Richard Sherman.
Again, that picture is the media representation of Richard Sherman, not Richard Sherman.
Given the nature of how messages work, the intentions of the sender might not be the same as those receiving the message. It's a new world out there. We're all content creators and producers of media. The second you come across an image or an article and you share it, you're feeding the fire. It's a matter of whether or not that fire is going to be used for warmth or destruction.
So when I say, "Of course things look like that when you take them out of context," I mean exactly that. The original image shared serves no purpose, because I don't know the context of those images. Is that guy labeled a "TERRORIST" an actual terrorist? Is that black guy a "THUG"? What about that white dude, is he just exercising his "2ND AMENDMENT" rights?
I don't know... and neither do you.
