Visual Culture and Public Policy

Towards a visual polity?

Victor Bekkers, Rebecca Moody

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317689553
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Public Policy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Traditionally, images have played an important role in politics and policy making, mostly in relation to propaganda and public communication. However, contemporary society is inundated with visual material due to the increasing ubiquity of media and visual technologies that facilitate the production, distribution and consumption of images in new and innovative ways. As such, a visual culture has emerged, and a number of authors have written on visual culture and the technologies which underlie it. However, a clear link to policy making is still lacking.

This books links the emergence of this visual culture to policy making and explores how visual culture (and the growing number of technologies used to create and distribute images) influence the course, content and outcome of public policy making. It examines how visual culture and policy making in contemporary society are intertwined, elaborating concepts such as power, framing and storytelling. It then links this to technology, and the way this can enhance power, transparency, registration, surveillance and communication.

Dealing with the entire cycle of public policy making, from agenda-setting, to policy design, decision making to evaluation, the book contains diverse international case studies including water management, risk management, live-stock diseases, minority integration, racism, freedom of speech, healthcare, disaster evaluation and terrorism.

1 Introduction

Living in a world of images

Introduction

On 12 January 2012 a small video went across the world. The footage, lasting just thirty-nine seconds, showed how four members of the American Marine Corps in full combat gear urinated on the bodies of three dead men, bearded and dressed in traditional Afghan garb.¹ At that moment it was not clear who had shot the video and who uploaded the film on YouTube. The user was identified as ‘semperfiLoneVoice’. The account was created on Tuesday and it included just this video.² The video quickly went viral, appearing on hundreds of websites. On Wednesday it was picked up by international news websites.^3,4 Military spokesmen confirmed that the video was authentic, although it was said the actions that were portrayed were not consistent with the Corps values. Moreover, they were not indicative of the character of the Marine Corps.⁵ The involved Marines were identified as members of the Third Battalion, Second Marines, which completed a tour in Afghanistan that autumn before returning to its base.⁶ Soon other media followed and public comments were made. Outrage was a returning issue in these comments, and it was also stated that this would have a ‘very, very bad impact on the peace efforts’ in terms of a ‘huge setback’.⁷ Moreover, the video was also labelled ‘a recruitment tool for the Taliban’.⁸

This incident did not stand alone. Several years before, another incident was breaking news. This time the incident took place in Iraq. In late April 2004, the CBS television news magazine 60 Minutes II and The New Yorker magazine launched a story regarding the allegations of severe maltreatment and abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American soldiers, US intelligence personnel and contractors in Bagdad’s Abu Ghraib prison. These were the first pictures to portray the way Iraqi prisoners were systematically tortured over a long time. Graphic photographs show how guards were beating prisoners and forcing them into humiliating and stressful positions.⁹ Dozens of digital photographs and grainy video clips followed, thereby providing graphic and horrific evidence of what went on. The media were able to locate and publish many of these controversial photos and videos. In the months before April, the US media did not pay much attention when the US military forces themselves reported on possible atrocities. Moreover, initially hardly any attention was paid to the first set of charges that were filed against the soldiers involved in the abuse and humiliation of prisoners. The issue became a public and political issue when the first publication by CBS and The New Yorker magazine set in motion a rather unbundled stream of similar images, which each time was gruesome front-page news.¹⁰ New investigations followed. As result the dominant frame – referring to pictures of US troops in combat and many of Iraqi casualties, but relatively few US casualties – was destroyed in seconds.¹¹

This brings us to another media event that was headline news in the US. It happened approximately forty years before the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. On 8 June 1972 napalm bombs were dropped in the vicinity of the village of Thrang Bang. There were many civilian casualties. One of these victims was Kim Phuc. Nick Ut, an Associated Press photographer, captured those horrific moments. The photograph he snapped of her agony was instantly transmitted around the world. The world saw a child, running naked down the road, screaming in pain from the napalm that was burning her skin. The picture was awarded the Pulitzer Prize, because it symbolized the tragedy of the Vietnam War. Although the incident did not involve any American participation, the impact of this scene was tremendous on the public support for this war. The persuasive power of this picture, in combination with a continuous stream of other photographed and televised pictures, changed public opinion.¹²

Figure 1.1 Kim Phuc, 1972 (source: reporters.nl).

These three cases show the power of the media in influencing public and political opinion, which also affected the issues being discussed on the public and political agenda. In all three cases it provided an incentive to evaluate the military policies regarding the involvement and presence of American forces in those countries, which led to a reassessment of the effectiveness and legitimacy of existing policies. These three examples also show the persuasive power of images that have been produced and have been picked up by different media. The media not only helped to distribute these images all over the world, but also contributed to the expansion of the story behind these images: the atrocities of war and this misconduct by soldiers.

However, these cases differ in one respect. What we see in the Kim Phuc incident and also in Abu Ghraib is that the traditional media, especially television, played a vital role in addressing the issue. However, in their coverage (graphic) photographs played an important role because they gave a witness account of what was happening. In the case of the urinating soldiers, as opposite to the previous cases, we see that the pervasiveness of multimedia in modern society contributed to the rapid and global expansion of the issue. The video was filmed by the soldiers themselves, who – for private reasons – recorded their own combat actions in order to show them to their friends and family, thereby making use of all types of social media networks. In the end, this led to their worldwide publication on YouTube. As such, YouTube can also be seen as a symbol for the omnipresence of multimedia technology in contemporary society. After the YouTube upload, other media picked up the video and the story behind it. In the Kim Phuc and Abu Ghraib cases, we see that well-organized and highly professionalized companies, like television broadcasting and newspaper companies, played an important role in the construction and distribution of the story and the images that supported the story. As such, these companies did have access to specific communication channels in order to distribute these images. Moreover, they possessed the necessary resources, like the necessary budget, the staff, the knowledge and experience, to produce and distribute these images. In the case of the urinating soldiers, large-scale and highly professionalized organizations did not play a significant role in the production and distribution of the images. The soldiers concerned, and their friends and families, were able to use rather cheap devices and communication channels which did not require sophisticated knowledge to operate them, owing to the fact that access to these channels has been radically democratized.

The role that media but also images play in modern politics has been described and analysed by several scholars, coming from either political science, sociology or communication studies (e.g. Bennett, 2007; Bennett and Entman, 2001; Stanyer, 2007; Negrine and Stanyer, 2007). At the same time we see that scholars of public administration and public policy have not paid substantial attention to the way in which the production and distribution of visual events influence the nature, content and course of specific policy processes. During recent years we have observed a shift in the practice of public policy making. Although policy makers were familiar with the power that resides in words and metaphors to persuade the general public, politicians and other policy makers, we observe the emergence of new persuasive practices in which pictures, videos, films, photos and (3D) simulations are being used to frame policy problems and policy actions. Policy making is increasingly embedded in a visual culture which also offers new possibilities. Policy makers make use of the strategies, tactics and instruments that this visual culture provides to them. Typical for this visual culture is that modern life and our human experience has become more visual and visualized than ever before. Life is mediated by and through images, characteristically in the tendency to picture and visualize our existence. In contrast with the past, in which pictures also played an important role, the present awareness of pictures seems to be compulsory: compulsory because images create and contest meanings, which relate to other meanings in the public and political domain (Mirzoeff, 1999). Hence, we expect that this emerging visual culture may also influence the content and course of different policy processes, simply through their embedding in this culture. This brings us to the question which role images and the process of visualization play in modern policy-making practices. Do they redefine the nature and course of these policy processes? What role do images play in the agenda-setting process, in the formulation of public policies as well as in the evaluation of existing policy programmes?

In order to address the relevance of these questions, we first need to describe a number of relevant characteristics of this emerging visual culture. Second, the emergence of this visual culture does not stand on its own. It seems to co-evolve with other social, economic, cultural and political practices in our society. Examples are the rise of the so-called ‘experience economy’ (Pine and Gilmore, 1999) and the ‘drama democracy’ (Elchardus, 2002). After discussing these two concepts we will return to the central research question of this book. Based on this question, a sequence of steps will show the outline of this book and research project.

The emergence of a visual culture

We are nowadays living in an environment in which prints and graphics, television and telecommunications, video and movies and computer displays convey information of such intensity that it seems to diminish the dominance of speech and print media (Marcum, 2002: 189). The screen seems to be a very appealing image that symbolizes this changing environment, which has also been described in terms of an emerging visual culture (Turkle, 1995). Mirzoeff (1999: 3) defines visual culture as follows: ‘Visual culture is concerned with visual events in which information, meaning or pleasure is sought by the consumer in an interface with visual technologies.’ Visual technologies are defined as ‘any form of apparatus designed to be looked at or to enhance natural vision, from the oil painting to the internet’ (Mirzoeff, 1999: 3). If visual culture refers to visual events, how should we then understand culture? According to Mirzoeff (1999: 24, 26) culture refers to practices or patterns of behaviour that become a realm where an individual or community is engaged, where individual and collective identities are being defined and redefined. Hence, visual culture refers to specific practices in which visuality plays an important role in the creation of identities, to specific social practices that shape the way people think and act. An example of such a social practice is the habit of people making use of their smart phones to take pictures of every aspect of their daily lives in order to share them with their friends. However, the emphasis does not lie on sharing pictures as such but on sharing visualized experiences that help to construct a specific identity, for instance to show how happy someone is, to show the pleasure or frustration somebody is experiencing.

Characteristics of a visual culture

The next step is to describe some characteristics of this visual culture. First, textuality no longer plays a dominant role in the way we communicate. This does not imply that the printed word has lost its significance. It only emphasizes that images have become increasingly important. According to Mitchell (1994: 11) a pictorial turn has taken place. An indication for the proliferation of visuality is the emergence of a complete industry which produces and distributes pictures (film, television, video, photos) as well as the infrastructure which is needed to produce and distribute them (knowledge, networks, applications). Another indication is the emergence of all kinds of consultancy firms which advise on how to use pictures effectively (e.g. marketing, public relations) (Mirzoeff, 1999: 3; Castells, 1996). Another indicator is also the amount of time that people watch television, make use of the internet, such as searching the internet, the number of YouTube videos that they upload or watch. For instance, each minute sixty hours of video material is being uploaded, or each second one hour of video material is being uploaded. Each day four billion videos are being watched, while 800 million unique visitors can be identified each month. YouTube can be watched in thirty-nine countries while it is accessible in fifty-four languages.¹³

A second characteristic refers to the changing ways of looking. These changes are based on the idea that, according to some scholars, nowadays society can be defined as an endless stream of divergent and convergent (thus) multiple pictures with which people are confronted (Frissen, 1996; Castells, 1996; Mirzoeff, 1999). For a long time our notion of viewing and interpretation was related to rather structured moments of looking, like watching television, reading a paper, going to the movies or visiting an art gallery. During all these moments pictures are presented in a planned manner, according a specific format and a specific line-up (Mirzoeff, 1999: 70). For instance, you go to a movie theatre, you pick a film that has been programmed to be started and ended at a fixed point, you watch the movie by sitting in a hall with other people, looking at a fixed screen. However, in today’s society there seems to be an overload of visual events that take place at random (Mirzoeff, 1999: 8). We seem to be confronted with an abundant stream of images that all try to catch our attention by using their imaginary power (Mirzoeff, 1999: 30). These visual events tend to be rather flexible events because they are open to different interpretations and readings. However, the question is how these pictures come together in the minds of people, how they create meaningful experiences, how they are read (Mirzoeff, 1999: 7). Visual images seem to succeed or fail to the extent that we can interpret them successfully in non-structured, predetermined contexts. This implies that there is no best, single, pure or uniform way of interpretation. The interpretation of visual signs is highly contingent; its interpretation depends on where the viewer is situated (Mirzoeff, 1999: 14). Furthermore, viewing does not take place in a vacuum. Viewing practices are also influenced by belief systems, social practices and power relations in a certain social, economic and political context (Sturken and Cartwright, 2001: 21–22). Besides, given the fact that we are confronted with so many visual events, looking should also be considered as an act of choice. Through looking we intend to give meaning to people, things and events. To wilfully look, or not, is to exercise choice and influence (Sturken and Cartwright, 2001: 10) Hence, looking involves a greater sense of purpose, direction and learning than seeing, which we do rather arbitrarily as we go about our daily lives. Discussing the emergence of visual culture, therefore, implies that we should be sensible to changes in the ways we look, to the ways we try to make sense of all these endless streams of images with which we are confronted.

Third, there seems to be a close relationship between visual culture and the emergence of new, digital media. Historically, the creation of visual events has always played an important role in society – for instance, when we look at the role that stained-glass windows in the medieval cathedrals played in the religious education of illiterate people. However, a driving force behind the omnipresence of visual events in today’s society is the emergence of the internet, hypertext, the World Wide Web, social media and other computer facilities used to create and share digital visual events. These new media are no longer perceived as mere channels of communication. They are conceived as an ‘infrastructure of the living environment’ that facilitates action and interaction and gives meaning and understanding through the creation and distribution of visual events (Marcum, 2002: 190–191). Unique in this infrastructure are four characteristics that stimulate the penetration of visual events. First, this infrastructure makes it possible to share and link visual events more easily (Marcum, 2002: 194). For instance, it is possible to share photos by making use of social media like Twitter, Facebook or Instagram. Second, we can increasingly witness or experience events. Traditionally, papers and the television news reported on events that took place. However, the internet made it possible for us to actually witness the recent landing and the exploration of the surface of the north pole of Mars by a robot – called Phoenix – which was looking for evidence regarding the existence of water. Third, there is interactivity. Digital photos and streaming videos are no longer a fixed entity. They can be split up into pieces (bits and bytes) and changed, manipulated and mixed with other photos and videos, thereby by adding new elements or even new meanings, in order to create new visual events (Marcum, 2002: 194). As a result, the production of visual events is not only a matter of creation but increasingly the outcome of a process of co-creation. Fourth, there is random-accessibility. People have access to visual events and can create visual events at any moment, just as they want. For instance, through digital television and the internet one can watch television programmes and movies whenever one wants. One is no longer dependent on fixed broadcasting schedules.

Given this endless stream of abundant images, visual culture is not static but dynamic. This is the fourth characteristic to be mentioned. The dynamic nature of visual culture can best be understood by the notion of ‘real time’ (Mirzoeff, 1999: 8). The internet and webcams present us with a real-time image of the daily behaviour in public squares or even in kindergartens. Webcams, placed on military vehicles and connected to the internet, gave us a real-time picture of the military advance of the American troops when invading Iraq in 2003. Real-time pictures show us a flow of events, in contrast to a photo or a painting, for instance, which represents an event that is fixed in time and location. Manuel Castells (1996: 464) has described this development as ‘timeless time’, which is the ‘systematic perturbation in the sequential order of phenomena performed…. Perturbation may take the form of compressing the occurrence of phenomena, aiming at instantaneity; or else by introducing random discontinuity in the sequence.’

Finally, visual culture is in essence a global c...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Foreword
• 1 Introduction: living in a world of images
• 2 Visual events and visual technologies: a brief historical overview
• 3 The power to visualize
• 4 Visual events and the policy process
• 5 Research strategy
• 6 Agenda setting: setting the wheels in motion
• 7 Policy design and decision making: unravelling complexity
• 8 Policy evaluation: who is to blame?
• 9 Visual culture and the policy process: towards a conclusion
• 10 Reflection: towards a visual polity
• References
• Index