
In one of the films Dr. Schaeffer did a sequence that showed how the media can manipulate viewers by the way they cover events. To illustrate he showed a television news story covering a riot with footage of student protesters being beaten by police in riot gear. Close-ups of kids getting their heads bashed, blood flowing, and a newscaster expressing empathy for these non-violent protesters all worked together to make an impression that tugged at heartstrings. Conclusions easily included the sense that police were overreacting, unnecessarily violent, heartless.
Then, Schaeffer presented an newscast with scenes of police getting hit by bricks, with men in blue who attended to injuries their companions had suffered at the hands of radicals. The newsperson spoke of the need for more police to restrain the radicals, contain the violence and smash the perpetrators. This version ofevents created empathy for the police who had to deal with these unruly criminals.
Schaeffer then allowed the audience to see a third view of the very same event. In this third piece of footage, we saw both the violent students and non-violent, the injured police and the brutal. We saw how the camera angles and interpretation of events can create sympathy either for those in authority or to rebels and protesters.

Twitter proved to be an interesting tool with regard to the coverage of our recent presidential election. Twitter likewise helped break the news regarding the Mumbai massacre. Now, we have Gaza, and if you're interested, you can follow here what the Twitter community is saying regarding this current conflict which has now passed sixteen days. Dr. Schaeffer's admonition to be aware of the camera angle still holds true.
No comments:
Post a Comment