Emotive Bollocks

[Borboski]

I think this 'discussion' of which photos should or should not have been used is a fucking waste of time.  

Its not a waste of time - if you think about how news is produced, in one sense editors take a conscious attempt to put a certain slant on things - the express and the way it reports immigration - the second way is the unconcious decisions that lead certain pictures or language to be used. It's the way culture and discourse is created.

Granted - the type of picture VM's talking about isn't earthshattering - but in the broader scheme of things this subconcious and consensus is far more important than the obvious headline screamers.

[Borboski]

but you still go on to say that there was probably still another underlining reason why they gave that photograph to the Police,

There can't not be be another underlying reason - be it conscious and conniving or more subtle.

F'ks sake - why doesn anaylsis of human behaviour intimdate people so much?

[Sherringford Hovis]

I bet some Vodaphone marketing wonks were pretty chuffed about all the free advertising that the photo in question got them. You can't buy product placement and market visibility like that. Maybe in future when kids go missing, the company whose overbranded polyester rags turned their poor little dismembered torsos into billboards should be forced to make a big payment to the bereaved parents?

[5 Knuckle Shuffle]

but you still go on to say that there was probably still another underlining reason why they gave that photograph to the Police,

There can't not be be another underlying reason - be it conscious and conniving or more subtle.

F'ks sake - why doesn anaylsis of human behaviour intimdate people so much?

Nobody is intimidated with human behaviour here. Well I'm not. Remember, when that photo was given to the police, it was done so before the families had thought that their daughters may have been killed. They were presumed missing and nothing less. It was no coincidence that the photo submitted might just look very similar to the two girls as that is what they EXACTLY looked like, just HOURS before they went missing and so could help immensly in the search for them. In this case, and this case alone, there doesn't seem to be an alternative or valid reason for submitting an alternative photo. It doesn't make sense in this case. That is why I find it insulting to the families to suggest otherwise.

[Borboski]

Sorry - it just seemed like VM and Untitled were making some pretty interesting if elementary points about the way the media works - and they were met with some stroppy souls saying:

"God! It's just a photo don't you know!"

Untitled's point about the family of the two picking a picture, while the accused not, is pretty fundemental to the way the story is then played out in the public arena.

Don't say its not because it is and you will be wrong.

[Vermschneid Mehearties]

I bet some Vodaphone marketing wonks were pretty chuffed about all the free advertising that the photo in question got them. You can't buy product placement and market visibility like that. Maybe in future when kids go missing, the company whose overbranded polyester rags turned their poor little dismembered torsos into billboards should be forced to make a big payment to the bereaved parents?

Ho ho! You evil, evil...boy.

[5 Knuckle Shuffle]

Sorry - it just seemed like VM and Untitled were making some pretty interesting if elementary points about the way the media works - and they were met with some stroppy souls saying:

"God! It's just a photo don't you know!"

Untitled's point about the family of the two picking a picture, while the accused not, is pretty fundemental to the way the story is then played out in the public arena.

Don't say its not because it is and you will be wrong.

Granted, I'll agree that initially, people can make judgements on the premise of a photo, but I honestly do not think it would in any way help the accused if they could supply their best photo. I reckon if Huntley put forward a photo of him smiling, people would interpret that as him being a sly and smarmy cunt. In most cases anyway, as far as I'm aware, I believe the accused are not arrested on the basis that they look evil on a photograph but the fact that there is a suspicion they may be involved with a crime being investigated. Something that the Police were ultimately vindicated in doing.

Once standing on trial, however many evil photographs are distributed via the media, I'm sure that the jury's opinions would be more influenced by actually listening and seeing Huntley in the flesh and thus give them more of an objective indicator as to whether they think he's an evil bastard or not. That, and his admission to dumping the bodies, and the remaining conclusive evidence against him, of course.

By the way, just because people don't necessarily agree with your views, that doesn't make them stroppy. Oh, and I'll admit when I'm wrong. I don't need you to tell me.

*Goes off to play with his Tonka :)

[Kingboy_D]

There are interesting points being made here, behind the various tirades. The media does warp our perceptions of people (and reality in general for that matter) via subtle uses of word and image, and United is right in pointing out that the use of first names for victims helps us empathise with them while surnames distance us emotionally from the individual. To be honest I I hadn't even though about this practice until he mentioned it.  

I think the Holly/Huntley example of image being used is perhaps not the best case study. How about the case of big bad John Leslie, who was falsely accused of rape by about a thousand women over a ten year period. Ruined his career, lost his job, the works. Remember the photo being widely used at the time?



Makes him look like a bit of a serial rapist really, and they weren't calling him "John" either. I think this is what United London is getting at.

Another example of trial by Media in general would be the saga of Genesis P'orridge, who was driven out of the country after allegations in Tabloids that he was keeping women as sex slaves, getting them pregnant and eating the babies. It reality he was having a small raves and making a bit of a racket. The Sun decided this was a satanic sacrifice. Easy mistake to make. I can only imagine the referred to him as "P'orridge" (or even better "real name Neal Andrew Megson" - that implies dishonesty as well) and displayed photos of him looking like a cunt.

[Johnny Yesno]

I can only imagine the referred to him as "P'orridge" (or even better "real name Neal Andrew Megson" - that implies dishonesty as well) and displayed photos of him looking like a cunt.

To be fair I don't think he'd be bothered about being referred to as P'Orridge. Aren't some of his vocals credited to P'Orridge? And as for finding photos of him not looking like a cunt, well...
Sorry. Couldn't help that. I have sympathy for his case but I can't stand the bloke.

WRT using first names or surnames, I wonder if it's anything to do with school. If I was being scolded teach would use "Yesno!". If teach was being helpful it would be "Johnny".

[Purple Tentacle]

Awww! Let 'em off!

[Ambient Sheep]

You sure its not just because they where kids? It woud have sounded wierd otherwise.

But then why "Holly & Jessica" but "Venables & Thompson"?

[elderford]

double child murderering child Mary Bell looks a bit sullen in this photograph.

She was released in 1980 with a new identity, so if you spot her tell The Daily Mail and claim your £5.

And these pair look fabulous:

Since their surrender, the twins have demolished the myth built around them that they possessed mystical powers to repel bullets.

The twins became icons for youthful rebels around the world after the circulation of an Associated Press photograph showing the angelic-looking Johnny next to his tougher-looking, cigarette-puffing brother, Luther.

[5 Knuckle Shuffle]

You sure its not just because they where kids? It woud have sounded wierd otherwise.

But then why "Holly & Jessica" but "Venables & Thompson"?

Yes, but Stephen Lawrence is mentioned as Stephen Lawrence, not just Stephen.
I would also argue that Myra Hindley is mentioned as Myra Hindley, just as much, if not more, than just Hindley. As was shown above, Fred and Rose West are also known as Fred and Rose West, not just West.
I just don't think it is consistent enough to say one way or another.

[MojoJojo]

You sure its not just because they where kids? It woud have sounded wierd otherwise.

But then why "Holly & Jessica" but "Venables & Thompson"?

Yes, but Stephen Lawrence is mentioned as Stephen Lawrence, not just Stephen.
I would also argue that Myra Hindley is mentioned as Myra Hindley, just as much, if not more, than just Hindley. As was shown above, Fred and Rose West are also known as Fred and Rose West, not just West.
I just don't think it is consistent enough to say one way or another.

Ah, with the Wests though, you can't describe them as the Wests, because it doesn't actually say much... such as how many people you are talking about.

Also, it may confuse citizens who have been told for the last 50 years "The West" is good.

Your honour, I would like to present Evidence B, behind the old chesnut:
B - American assassins being reffered to with 3 names. e.g.  John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, Mark David Chapman, sure there must be some more...

[TJ]

One thing I've never been able to understand - the newspapers and television referring to "Barry George, who changed his name by deed poll to Barry Bulsara". In which case he's called Barry Bulsara and not Barry George. Something very fishy going on there.

[Partridge's Love Child]

[Purple Tentacle]

One thing I've never been able to understand - the newspapers and television referring to "Barry George, who changed his name by deed poll to Barry Bulsara". In which case he's called Barry Bulsara and not Barry George. Something very fishy going on there.

Hmm, but he changed his name to Bulsara because of his Freddie Mercury obsession, which may go some way to explaining his actions re: obsession with celebrity.

So by mentioning his name change, you're subtly doing a bit of Big Brother style psychology.

Not that he did it anyway.

[El Unicornio, mang]

Awww! Let 'em off!

Strange as it may sound, Rose West was actually a very attractive woman when she was younger:
(these aren't very good pics but they give you a general idea)





The way an individual is projected via photos in the media, etc definetly has an effect on public sympathy.
Ted Bundy, for example, although he was generally hated throughout the land for killing dozens of girls, also received 200 letters a day from women who said they loved him, no doubt thinking "he's quite fit innee?"

[Kingboy_D]

The way an individual is projected via photos in the media, etc definetly has an effect on public sympathy.
Ted Bundy, for example, although he was generally hated throughout the land for killing dozens of girls, also received 200 letters a day from women who said they loved him, no doubt thinking "he's quite fit innee?"

You know what they say about women and bastards...

[Cerys]

Good ol' Charlie Manson.  Lovely bloke,really - even if he does seem to have a bum on his chin....

I think this 'discussion' of which photos should or should not have been used is a fucking waste of time.  

Its not a waste of time....

Okay, that statement was badly worded.  I agree that in general it is interesting to analyse how the media use images to support their portrayal of people in the news.  What I don't agree with is the way in which the discussion up to that point seemed to be hinged on assumptions similar to those for which we condemn the media in the first place.  It just struck me as presumptuous, judgmental and disrespectful - that's all.

[El Unicornio, mang]

The way an individual is projected via photos in the media, etc definetly has an effect on public sympathy.
Ted Bundy, for example, although he was generally hated throughout the land for killing dozens of girls, also received 200 letters a day from women who said they loved him, no doubt thinking "he's quite fit innee?"

You know what they say about women and bastards...

Heh, "I don't like nicey-nicey guys, I want a man who will whisk me off my feet (literally), beat me to death with a tire iron, have sex with my corpse, chop off my head and leave the rest of my body to decompose in some woods. That's a real man"

[The Plaque Goblin]

What do you see? A couple of mischievous little tarts who had it coming...

...or two friends having fun at the park?

These appear to be the pictures used by the police themselves:


And this seems to be the only other picture of them together which looks like an enlargement from a crowd scene:

[Partridge's Love Child]

What do you see? A couple of mischievous little tarts who had it coming...

There's no proof that he nobbed them anyway.  He just drowned them and burned their Manchester United shirts, the latter being the greater crime for which he should've hung.

[untitled_london]

i'm glad to see that it has clamed down a bit in here.

my point is this:

it disturbs me to see the way in which the majority of the media openly parade an agenda/ allegiance in order to be on the side of white van man.

i dont really care that they used this image or that, it largely irrelevant which image they use. how they use it is what makes me want to vomit.

i do care that the people being portrayed get little more than a release form, and a great deal of the time they dont even get that.

huntley (or any other high profile case) never stood a chance of a fair trial. only last week you saw the doctor who made up shit in courts based on stuff he'd seen on telly.

the jury might be denied media access, but the judges, barristers, police, court guards etc aren't and they all influece the treatm,ent of those who are 'innocent untile proved'.

thats what really gets my goat.

that and the fact that it has gotten to the stage that not only are you no longer presumed innocent by the press but in pursuing their 'human interest stories' they are fucking it up.

had huntley turned out to not be guilty his life was over anyway. he was portrayed as a thick padeo scum of a caretaker. had it not been the case i doubt you would have seen a retraction of any sort, and fighting for retribution is waaaaaay to expensive for joe soap.

that would be my point, & somewhere in between the flames that is what i was trying to point out.

[Still Not George]

I've just come back to this thread.

What did I spawn? I shall never start a thread again, I swear.

[Almost Yearly]

But then why "Holly & Jessica" but "Venables & Thompson"?

;-)


Edit: good, Sheepy, that's how you're meant to feel.

[Ambient Sheep]

;-)

Eeeeeek, that's the house from Paperhouse!!!!  <shivers>

I do feel that there's a subtle joke in there that I'm missing, though.

[5 Knuckle Shuffle]

I've just come back to this thread.

What did I spawn? I shall never start a thread again, I swear.

We love your spawn S.N.G, as I'm sure Cerys does too. It is/ was a healthy debate and I'm glad that you brought it up mate.

[Still Not George]

I've just come back to this thread.

What did I spawn? I shall never start a thread again, I swear.

We love your spawn S.N.G, as I'm sure Cerys does too. It is/ was a healthy debate and I'm glad that you brought it up mate.

Leave my spawn out of this...

Nah, the above was a fairly weak attempt at setting myself up for a joke by immediately posting another thread. Unfortunately a combination of someone turning up at the flat and my total lack of anything interesting to say (hence my presence on the thread of the same name) evily conspired to disrupt my evil plan. Evily.

[chand]

There's also the age-old media trick of using an innocuous photo and captioning it in such a way as to make it look bad. Carr was a textbook case, virtually all the tabloids had long-range snaps of her walking, arms-folded in a prison garden, which, the captions explained, showed that she was 'carefree' and was out to rub the Wells and Chapman families' noses in it with her mocking smiles.