Abstract
Use of photography as a medium of propaganda has been a much-debated subject. After all, the term propaganda holds a negative implication to it. A photographic image cannot literally say anything and are expected to communicate authentic information. Still, under the influence of the intention and propaganda, many argue that photographs often give inaccurate representations. The essay discusses the subject of the use of photography for propaganda and their ability to be manipulated. Democratic and authoritarian governments alike have exploited the potential of photography and used the camera as a tool to portray situation the way they want to the public. A lot depends on how the subject has been shot and for what purposes by the photographer and who is the audience. Other essential concerns that arise are if those images have been manipulated. Most photographs are shot with the purpose of providing information and education. The lines blur when they are shot and publicized for emotional blunting or to achieve political ends.
Introduction
Visual imagery is nothing new and ancient man has been using it in those Mesopotamian relief carvings, whether to advertise a victorious battle or a ritual. However, the first political poster was born only during the time of the First World War. Graphic art was used a powerful tool during the Russian Revolution (Power to the pictures 2010). The field of advertising and marketing have developed rapidly throughout the 20th century. Photographs are powerful tools today to make one think or feel a certain way.What is propaganda? When one hears the word “propaganda”, they immediately feel a kind of negative connotation attached to it. However, at the same time, it forces one to think of a certain visual style carrying the touch of modernist aesthetics. The purpose behind is to create a strong visual effect with a powerful image and bold text to convey a compelling message. Propaganda isn't just political in nature, and it could be any targeted information that provides to be beneficial to the sender. Today, propaganda could include promotional posters, safety campaigns, and advertising images, thus taking on a commercial nature too. The modern meaning of propaganda in the modern sense is a systematic propagation of information in a misleading or biased manner. The information may not carry political content but carries the intention of bringing about a political effect (Meyer, 2011).A powerful tool in Camera The camera has become a powerful tool for spreading propaganda. The image in itself often expresses statements such as the event or act really happened, independent of the photographer and the scene was representative. A photo shot with a camera is very unlike a drawing or painting (Meyer, 2011). A photograph is expected to depict reality, and the event takes place independent of the photographer. Thus, it is easily able to portray a scene that actually happened or assisted and thus wins credibility within no time among its audiences. Of course, photgr4pahs can be manipulated, but it is how the content and production of photographs are used, which is essential to their political effects. Photography, a new medium way back in 1850 had the ability to illustrate, interpret and record. Those photographers working in war zones were exploiting it as a military tool (Roberts, 2014). However, technology was limited then, and it was only until the late 19th century, were they able to exploit its power to the maximum. Soon, technology transformed photography into a thriving global commercial industry and changed photography into a mass medium.Photographs and Photographers Photographs are often used as a means of controlling and inflicting audiences. This is what makes them the perfect foundation for propaganda. As photographs are broadly accepted as factual, they are traditional means of control in democratic and authoritarian governments. Franklin Roosevelt promoted New Deal programs during the crisis of the Great Depression throughout the United States with pictures of poverty and devastation in rural America. The Nazi Party in Germany issued anti-Semitic propaganda to unite the population against Jews with the help of a photographic propaganda (Collins, n.d.). Unappealing images of Jews were displayed in an exhibition so as to dehumanize them. When discussing FSA photographs, it is essential to focus as to how they were made or if those subjects were manipulated as well as how the photographs were used. They were part of documentary photography in the late nineteenth century and aimed to record real life without any manipulation. However, this doesn’t mean that documentary photography was apolitical or neutral. The documentary photographers worked with an intention of creating awareness and bringing reforms via their work (Meyer, 2011). Photography is an influential tool in any society. The photographers get an immeasurable amount of power with their cameras and can portray a subject how they want it. Many propaganda photographs often give inaccurate representations of the facts and reality. For example, the FSA photographs, meant to improve the lives of rural Americans were politically motivated and intended to control the public and mold their views. The presence of the camera in itself and the way the photographer take a shot can be manipulative (Collins, n.d.). Moreover, the subjects are liable to change their behavior or mood in the presence of a camera. The photographer can shoot only negative scenes, thus creating an unappealing picture in the mind of the viewer. This, a photograph can be entirely factual. Before the First World War, military photography was not practiced on a large scale by any nation. However, soon, the new military techniques and aerial photography worked together would play a vital role in the war (Roberts, 2014). The well-known photographic record of the Great Depression in rural America has been a subject of controversy regarding its objectivity. It keeps one wondering if the purpose was solely to give information or the prime aim was to create propaganda. This was an important question especially during the time when the Soviet Union and Germany were getting infamous for controlling the flow of information (Meyer, 2011). When looking at the documentary methodology of the FSA photographers and the way those photographs were used, it is safe to say that they were used for propaganda. One can say that they were a legitimate form of political communication.
The lens of the camera is subjective, just like the lens of the human eye. Every photographer taking a picture has an objective behind and his intention in itself is sufficient to create bias in the picture (Collins, n.d.). The subjective eye of the photographer can create misconceptions through the work. Despite many limitations, professional and amateur photographers from all across the world have created a significant body of work over the years. It is how they shoot those images and with what intentions as well as how they are used that shape perceptions and fuel debate if they are meant for propaganda.
References
Collins, K. (n.d.).Photography in Propaganda. dickinson.edu, 1(1), 1–10.
Meyer, C. (2011). The FSA Photographs: Information, or Propaganda? Boxford, Massachusetts University, 1(1), 121–28.
Power to the pictures: The evolution of propaganda. (2010). A&C Black Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/power-to-the-pictures-the- evolution-of-propaganda-2075321.html
Roberts, H. (2014). Photography, encyclopedia.1914-1918 Retrieved from http://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/photography
