Where Do I Fit?
For this essay I am trying to evaluate the different ways in how Visual Communication can be communicated to the spectator, and how do I fit in within Visual Communication.
Visual communication to me is seen as a way in which we are trying to send messages to the audience or trying to sway their opinions on the certain subject that is being communicated to them. I see this as being done through a range of different mediums such as, documentary film making, photography, illustration, graphic design or advertising, the list could go on.
In this essay I want to discuss though, the ways in which visual Communication is expressed in some areas such as, persuasion and propaganda, design and advertising.
Firstly I will discuss the ways in which I believe in actual fact it is the spectator who makes their mind up on what something is trying to say when being communicated. For example if you see a piece of video footage or a photograph that looks to be bad, it only is bad if we decide it is. In the ‘Reality is not Enough’ paper, it gives an example of a police officer shooting a male in the middle of a dusty villages’ road. Us the spectator assumes that this was just a cold blooded murder or a legal execution but in fact, just because this was recorded on video footage, we cannot just assume what the reason is, we do need a whole lot more information to come to the decision of what is being communicated and what in actual fact was the truth of what has been filmed. Therefore we are the ones that are deciding what has been communicated.
When reading the paper ‘Mindless Propaganda, Thoughtful Persuasion’. It talks about how there are two routes to persuasion, two ways in which the audience can be swayed into having an opinion on something, these being the Peripheral and Central routes. In the peripheral route, the spectator dosent need to put much effort into deciding on what something is trying to communicate. Therefore the campaign could be seen as pretty self explanatory, or could be listening to or watching something that they don’t care too much about. The central route however, is seen as something that the spectator takes care about when concidering what is trying to be communicated. Therefore in this case the ad could be more complex or in fact the spectator dosnt necessarily agree with what has been communicated and wants to argue against it. Within this paper it has given an example, it talks about the advertising campaign that took place in 1988, when George Bush was running for president against Michael Dukakis although it has focused on the ad campaign for Bush, which is trying to communicate to the American public that Dukakis is soft on crime. The ad is telling the story of Willie Horton, a black male who had been sent to prison for a murder but was then released on a prison furlough program when Dukakis became governor. When realeased Horton fled to a different state and raped a white woman after stabbing her partner. This ad is therefore peripheral as it required little thought and got the point strait across. It has given the point “Dukakis let Horton out of prison to rape and kill. Dukakis is weak on crime, especially those committed by bad black guys.” It is playing on prejudices, white Americans’ stereotypes on black Americans, and also emotions, this being the fear of crime. This has then given the spectator the impression that Bush will be able to protect us from the likes of men like this. Although like I stated earlier it is the audience who makes up their mind on what is being communicated within the ads. In the central route however, there could be questions asked like, was it Dukakis who personally decided on releasing Horton, and is the Furlough program actually mainly successful but this is one of very few cases that went wrong. Therefore if a spectator sees the ad through the central way of thinking it isnt as successful as the peripheral route as it raises questions upon the ad, therefore this ad could in fact bring damage to the Bush campaign to presidency. These ads are seen as propaganda persuasion, persuasion for the audience so they can make there own perceptions of what is being communicated. In a way propaganda and persuausion can include lying and decieveing in order to get the spectator on their side. In other words playing with the truth, making a subject out to be something that it isn’t, and it is affecting our decision.
When it comes to advertising, when we want to communicate something that is effevctive, the messages need to be selected carefully in order to have more of an impact on the audience. In the paper ‘How to find your Voice’, Hugh Mackay discusses that communicators want to communicate something to the spectator without questions being asked. They want to communicate something that is so interesting and important to them that they want to the spectator to understand this too, they want this to be done by the way the have communicated the subject too. He too agrees with my point that it is the communicators who are the ones who give the spectator the messages but it’s the spectator who decides what to think about the message. “Its not what our message does to the reader, but what the reader does with our message, that determines our success.” This could suggest to us that communication isn’t always that successful, because it is always the spectator who decides what they want to think about the subject at the end of it all.
From all of this I have come to a conclusion of ‘What is Visual Communication.’ Before I did believe that it was mainly clever advertising techniques and clever use of language from a designer or advertiser, although by reading papers like I have, I have been swayed to thinking more that it is in fact the audience or spectator who makes up there own mind of what is being communicated. All the communicator can do is put an idea into ones head, but we are the ones who decides what to do with it. Therefore I think that Visual Communication is what we want to make of it. Its just messages that we are given but we are the ones who decides what it all means.
When it comes to thinking where I fit within all if this, I haven’t yet come to a conclusion. I believe that I can see myself as a visual communicator, trying to send a message to an audience but by doing it to make it visually exciting so I believe that they are more likely to agree with my point of view and what I am trying to communicate. To elaborate I could see myself as more of an advertiser or designer, wanting to design advertising campaigns to communicate my point, although I am not so sure if this is seen as where I fit in.
Bibliography.
• How to find Your Voice.
• Mindless Propaganda, Thoughtful Persuasion.
• What Is Design? A definition of the Function Complex.
