Making Meaning Part 2

I was channel surfing this morning and inadvertently stopped on Fox News just as they began a story on the arrest of a Russian man caught trying to sell highly enriched uranium in Georgia during a string operation. During the broadcast they ran footage from one of TV show “24”’s most recent episodes, in which a nuclear bomb went of in Los Angeles. They aired this footage and then cut to a picture of Jack Bauer as they described the real-life nuclear threat posed by this potential uranium sale. At first I didn’t know what to think. I was a bit confused over whether they had gone to commercial or the story was real, although I quickly caught on to what the network was doing: using a cheap entertainment ploy to garner interest.
It sickens me that a news channel believes that it is appropriate to mix footage from entertainment programs with real-life news broadcasts. I am unaware of when it became acceptable to make comparisons between the threats posed on “24” and those in real life, and it speaks volumes of the quality of the Fox News broadcast.
This connects quite well to the first chapter of Practices of Looking, is it pertains to how different viewers make meaning from images. Since I was watching the news, I expected what I was seeing to be reality. Instead of the informative images based in reality that I was expecting, I got fictional shots from a television series I happen to be a big fan of. Now, had I not been an avid viewer of “24,” would those images have affected me differently? Maybe somebody that doesn’t watch “24” would have panicked, thinking a nuclear attack had really just transpired, since they were watching the news and expecting the stories and visuals to be accurate and informative.
This mixing of Jack Bauer into the broadcast says a lot about the blur television has created between entertainment and the news. This was a technique used to try and make the news more interesting, hoping to draw in fans of “24,” to the story. It was sensationalization of a serious story, which seems to be all too typical in today’s news. It also shows that we have come to see fictional TV series like “24,” as serious, perhaps even accurate, reflections of the world around us. We are going to be a very confused crowd as the lines between news and entertainment, fiction and reality continue to blur like this, as television and the news seem to be holding themselves to lower and lower standards. People will need to begin to shift the way in which they treat visuals and make meaning from images, as sources no longer hold on to their traditional roles. It is amazing to think that many of the things that come almost second-nature to us, like treating a news broadcast as credible, are rapidly eroding. It is going to be much harder to decode images in the future as sources multiply and leave their traditional functions. It's happened before, but can it happen again, with pictures and TV?

Making Meaning

After reading the introduction to Practices of Looking, I am quite excited about this semester, and look forward to dealing with the material outlined in the author’s chapter guide. I’m particularly interested in getting to Chapter 6, dealing with advertising images and how companies use different strategies to add meaning to their products with them. That is probably why the section in Chapter 1 dealing with how we negotiate the meaning of images was what interested me most in this week’s reading.
The section detailed how viewers interpret images and make meanings with them, describing the way we use “codes” adopted by society to understand them. While I was at least somewhat aware that different people look at images differently and draw different meaning from them based on their individual experience, I had no idea how profound or remarkable those differences could be.
The Benetton clothing company ad was particularly powerful in showing the way interpretations can change drastically over time. Somebody looking at the picture in the seventies might see civil unrest, but nowadays the first thing somebody would think of is terrorism. It is amazing how much the meaning of a car on fire can change over thirty years based on the circumstances the viewer is used to in everyday life. It was also brilliant of the Benetton company to choose such a basic image open to multiple interpretations like that.
I wonder if they did that on purpose, knowing that an image of a car on fire would still be relevant, albeit for different reasons, to an audience all these years later. It is amazing how the image can adapt like that, having its meaning change with the times. It doesn’t really get pinned down until you start searching for details in the photograph and begin to determine some sort of timeframe.
The longevity of the Marlboro man as a sign of masculinity was just as impressive, although for different reasons. This shows the staying power certain symbols or signs can have. It would be interesting to see how people would react to the ads if they were completely unfamiliar with the cowboy symbol. It must be pretty confusing to some people unfamiliar with our sign systems when they watch TV or look at magazines with advertising that utilize our systems of code. Now that I think about it, I wonder how many ads I don’t really understand or think are stupid simply because I am not familiar with the signs they are employing. I guess that is the job of a good advertising executive; know your target market and the kinds of symbols or signs that resonate highly with them and that they would be most likely to understand.
The Most Confusing Ad on Television
That pink-haired, animated superspy is selling what?
By Seth StevensonPosted Monday, Nov. 13, 2006, at 7:27 AM ET
"The Spot: A cartoon man and woman are players in some sort of futuristic football game. They wear spacesuits and helmets. Their opponents are large, menacing robots. One of the robots shoots snow out of his chest, coating the field in big white drifts. The cartoon woman—who has pink hair—runs with the football, scores a touchdown, and then topples one of the robots. As all this is happening, the man and the woman are having an ongoing conversation about … something. I never quite catch what it is."