Is It The Goverment's Job to Filter Images?

Today the Supreme Court struck down a Federal Law that banned dog-fight and animal cruelty videos. The law was originally passed in 1999, but today the court decided that the law was too broad and sweeping and that it violated the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment.

A film producer, Robert Stevens, compiled and sold videos of pit bull dogfights, which are illegal in the U.S. Stevens did not partake in the dogfights themselves and the footage was taken in Japan, where dogfighting is not illegal. But because of the law, Stevens was sentenced to over three years in jail. The case is complicated and has many implications as to what the government can and should regulate according to the First Amendment.

This case reminds me of several of the articles we read in class, in particular, "The Great Atomic Cover-Up," and "What Education Might Mean After Abu Ghraib." In the first article Greg Mitchell tells the history of video taken just after the U.S. dropped atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Not long after video was taken, the American government went to great lengths to make sure the traumatic footage was not seen. It wasn't until decades after the bombs that American audiences saw any footage of the aftermath. Because of the suppression of these images, a shift in American attitudes towards atomic warfare didn't have the chance to take place in any significant way.

To the other extreme, in "What Education Means After Abu Ghraib," we learn about the integral role visual images played in shaping the public perception of the war in in Iraq. Henry Giroux stated: "The face of the American invasion was soon recast by a number of sadistic images, including the now infamous photos depicting the insipid, smirking faces..." of American soldiers in Iraq treating Iraqi detainees in unimaginably horrible ways. In this case, the images were at the forefront of debate over the war. Many believed the images highlighted the corruption and cruelty one would expect to result from a war fabricated in an abuse of power. Others believed it was unpatriotic to criticize or question American presence in Iraq.

In both these cases, we can see the considerable impact that visual images can have on culture and politics. The reason these two cases reminded me of today's Supreme Court ruling is that all three cases address issues that arise when the public has access to unfiltered images. Many of us would agree that cruelty to animals is something we wish didn't happen, but it's more difficult to decide what role the government should play, if any, the public's access to images. Can we agree on whether it's the government's role to pass laws that suppress images? How do we honor the spirit of the First Amendment in these complicated cases?

Visual Journalism We Can All Take Part In...

This morning I read an article that reminded me a lot of class and I thought it could be fun for us to participate in A Timely Global Mosaic, Created by All of Us.

The basic idea is that everyone is invited to join in taking a photo on May 2 at the exact same moment to create a mosaic of one single moment in the life of our planet. Then you're supposed to send your photo to Lens, the photography blog of the New York Times.

The photograph can be of anything, but you may want to think ahead a little to show how you can best represent yourself, your community, your culture or whatever it is you decide to take a picture of.

The timing of this is complicated, but basically, on the East Coast you will need to take a picture at 11 am on Sunday, May 2. Starting on May 2 and ending on May 7, there will be a form available on the New York Times Website so that you can submit your best image. For more information, check out the blog here.

How Do We Decide Which Images Cross The Line... What IS the Line, Anyway?

My husband is in the Jewelery Industry and runs a group called Gen-Next Jewelers. This group focuses on how the internet and social media have changed the jewelery industry forever. The jewelery industry is small and family centered. It was slow to change and is not neccessarily cutting edge in its ability to keep up with how the internet has changed businesses. The group focuses on how ignoring social media can be catastrophic as our culture changes and embraces these new ways of connecting with customers.

Recently, an ad appeared in a local newspaper in St. Paul, Minnisota in which a man held a gun to his head and the caption read, "My God, what have I done?" The ad implied that if you didn't go to the "right" jewelery store, you could get ripped off in buying or selling an engagement ring.

The image caused an uproar, with many stating that, although the intention was to be funny, that the image went too far. The drama spilled over onto the jeweler's Facebook page, where apologies and debate took place.

I find this interesting for a few reasons. One is the idea of an image going too far. Who gets to decide what crosses the line? What IS the line? It seems to be relative, and it depends on the taste of the image's creator. What are the implications for this in terms of the first amendment? This reminded me a little of the article we read in class that I presented about the Danish political cartoons.

I also was captivated by the idea that Facebook could be a public forum for debate and apologies. It's amazing how the internet has democratized our ability to access those whom were formerly inaccessible. Whether it's a store, a CEO (for example, the CEO of Zappos regularly talks with customers via Twitter), or a celebrity, the implications for the images we post and share are immense. More evidence that we truly live in an image culture!

Our Compulsion to Photograph What We Eat

In a recent New York Times Article, I read about people who regularly (if not compulsively) take pictures of what they're going to eat before they eat it. One person interviewed in the article claims that this current trend speaks to our culture's obsession with food. I think it speaks even more to our culture's obsession with digital photography.

There is a huge appeal to photo-sharing online because it's free and fun and it does not require the time, effort or demand of writing blog posts. Many, many people photo-share images of food online. In fact, as the article states, the group "I Ate This" is one of the largest and most active groups on Flickr. I know my facebook friends constantly snap and post pictures of really great meals they're eating. The trend has become so big that major camera manufacturers are even making a special "food" or "cuisine" modes.

One man who photographed every thing he ate for one year stated, “The pictures, I realize now, are incredibly personal, and by looking at them you can probably deduce the type of person I am.” Moreover, the pictures set off memories and emotions in a way a written journal could not. “I remember every single day, who I was with, what I was feeling,” he said.

This reminded me of the discussion we had in class related to blindness and memory. Images help us remember events and can even activate our other senses. We look at a picture of something we ate, and suddenly we remember the smell and taste of something we could easily forget. And what we eat says a lot about who we are and what we value.

Much of the article reminded me of the text we read in class "A Life More Photographic" by Katrina Sluis. In the article Sluis discusses the brief history of digital images and how they're revolutionizing and democratizing photography. She claimed that since many people have cameras in their phones, that, "...even the most banal moments of the day can become a point of photographic reverie, potentially shared instantly."

about me...

I am graduate of TC and I've been teaching 8th Grade Humanities in NYC for 6 years.

I'm taking this class because I have been teaching for a while and I want to be engaged as a student again. I feel like I haven't thought about anything other than 8th grade "stuff" in a while. I'm very interested in photography and I spend a lot of time with my camera.

As a teacher of reading and writing, I know how important it is to address issues of critical literacy. My students are in constant contact with technology and images and I want to help them think critically.

Looking forward to class!