I predict that, in 2020 and beyond, audiences looking at news photographs will be increasingly inclined to make symbolic readings rather than interpreting them literally and denotatively. But that shift will only come about as a result of continued controversies over the veracity of news images.
Some of the most impactful news photographs to circulate in recent years have been those that presented digestible, legible encapsulations of political crises far too expansive to depict within the space of a single frame. The winner of 2019’s World Press Photo of the Year Award is a case in point. It captures two-year-old Yanela Sanchez, who has just arrived at the United States-Mexico border with her mother, in the middle of an anguished wail. Bordered by a law enforcement vehicle on one side and the legs of her mother, who is being patted down by border patrol, on the other, Sanchez is the only figure depicted in full.
Presenting this moment from something like the child’s perspective — with the camera at her eye level, the adults are impossibly large and emotionally inaccessible — the photograph frames its central subject as isolated from the adults who surround her, and terrorized by this isolation.
The circulation of this image, taken by John Moore of Getty Images, was rapid and extensive, and it soon came to function as visual shorthand for a much broader crisis. As it ran on front pages and appeared in innumerable social media feeds, it was often characterized as a representation of the Trump administration’s policy of separating children from their parents at the border. Time’s use of this image in a photo illustration on its cover — which quite literally detached Sanchez from her mother, in order to present her against a photograph of a towering Trump — contributed this interpretation, cementing the photograph’s status as an iconic depiction of the crisis of family separation, though Time did not explicitly claim this particular family had been separated.
When reports emerged that Sanchez had not, in fact, been separated from her mother by border patrol, the backlash was swift. Centrist news sources hurriedly issued corrections, characterizing the image as misleading and Time’s use of it a “major mistake,” while a number of right-wing outlets cast the image’s spread as intentionally deceptive, further evidence of an anti-Trump media conspiracy. The correction, and the purported “debunking” of the image, quickly became the story.
But to view this image and its spread as merely erroneous is to miss a larger point about the ways readers experience and value news photographs now — and the ways they will continue to do so in the 2020s. Although readers rely heavily on photographs as sources of information about the world — and view their absence as suspect, in a cultural context characterized by the ubiquity of cameras and the prevalence of “pics or it didn’t happen” mentalities — many of the world’s most pressing problems fail to lend themselves compellingly to visual depiction.
Drawing on the terminology of the political theorist Ariella Azoulay, the photojournalism scholars Robert Hariman and John Louis Lucaites have described the representational problems attending the “regime-made disaster.” A mode of violence that is widespread in the 21st century, the regime-made disaster entails the ongoing suppression of a population in a manner that “usually operates below the threshold of demonstrable violence,” Hariman and Lucaites write, resulting in “a comprehensive assault on civil society, but in a manner that is visually banal.”
The crisis at the border is not unrepresentable, but much of the misery it has entailed has been spatially contained and protracted rather than explosive and visually dramatic. For this kind of suffering to become visible, affecting, and “real” to those whose privilege or geographical distance shields them from direct acquaintance with it, photographs that strikingly articulate the stakes of the problem can be highly impactful. Moore’s photograph of Sanchez was an image of this sort. As they circulate, images like these become iconic in a double sense: They both visually represent the event in the minds of spectators, and they come to analogize it, standing in for the broader crisis.
In response to the controversy surrounding this image, Time’s editor-in-chief, Edward Felsenthal, issued a statement calling Moore’s photograph “the most visible symbol of the ongoing immigration debate” and asserting that the cover “capture[s] the stakes of this moment.” While his words might strike some as airy or evasive, they point the discussion about news photographs’ functions in a productive, if contentious, direction.
First, they identify a role for the news photograph that is less rigid and more expansive than the proffering of visual facts. This is a necessary adjustment in the 2020s, amid inexhaustible opportunities for the manipulation of still and moving images. This manipulability — which is not new, of course, but is irreversible and expanding — along with reports concerning the prevalence of staging among photojournalists, suggests that predicating news photographs’ value on their denotative qualities is a tendency whose moment has passed.
Second, and relatedly, Felsenthal’s words prescribe a symbolic function for news photographs, suggesting that they can be tasked with encapsulating and visually performing the broad stakes of issues at hand. This reading of news photographs may seem disconcertingly subjective, given that not everyone will be in agreement about what the broad stakes of a given issue are. However, I’d argue that this statement is a good descriptor of how news photographs actually do operate in practice today — they just don’t tend to be described in terms that acknowledge this degree of ambiguity. This is not to say that news images have no obligation to tell the truth, or no informational value — only that their truthfulness and informational value are necessarily situated and contingent rather than absolute.
Debates surrounding the credibility of news images are highly generative, in that they allow a range of perspectives to be aired and make clear to spectators that there’s more than one way to look at a news photograph. I think that as controversies like the one I have been describing continue to emerge, viewing publics will grow more comfortable with an idea that is both unsettling and necessary: that news photographs can be suggestive and also informative, symbolic as well as truthful.
Annie Rudd is an assistant professor in the University of Calgary’s Department of Communication, Media and Film.
I predict that, in 2020 and beyond, audiences looking at news photographs will be increasingly inclined to make symbolic readings rather than interpreting them literally and denotatively. But that shift will only come about as a result of continued controversies over the veracity of news images.
Some of the most impactful news photographs to circulate in recent years have been those that presented digestible, legible encapsulations of political crises far too expansive to depict within the space of a single frame. The winner of 2019’s World Press Photo of the Year Award is a case in point. It captures two-year-old Yanela Sanchez, who has just arrived at the United States-Mexico border with her mother, in the middle of an anguished wail. Bordered by a law enforcement vehicle on one side and the legs of her mother, who is being patted down by border patrol, on the other, Sanchez is the only figure depicted in full.
Presenting this moment from something like the child’s perspective — with the camera at her eye level, the adults are impossibly large and emotionally inaccessible — the photograph frames its central subject as isolated from the adults who surround her, and terrorized by this isolation.
The circulation of this image, taken by John Moore of Getty Images, was rapid and extensive, and it soon came to function as visual shorthand for a much broader crisis. As it ran on front pages and appeared in innumerable social media feeds, it was often characterized as a representation of the Trump administration’s policy of separating children from their parents at the border. Time’s use of this image in a photo illustration on its cover — which quite literally detached Sanchez from her mother, in order to present her against a photograph of a towering Trump — contributed this interpretation, cementing the photograph’s status as an iconic depiction of the crisis of family separation, though Time did not explicitly claim this particular family had been separated.
When reports emerged that Sanchez had not, in fact, been separated from her mother by border patrol, the backlash was swift. Centrist news sources hurriedly issued corrections, characterizing the image as misleading and Time’s use of it a “major mistake,” while a number of right-wing outlets cast the image’s spread as intentionally deceptive, further evidence of an anti-Trump media conspiracy. The correction, and the purported “debunking” of the image, quickly became the story.
But to view this image and its spread as merely erroneous is to miss a larger point about the ways readers experience and value news photographs now — and the ways they will continue to do so in the 2020s. Although readers rely heavily on photographs as sources of information about the world — and view their absence as suspect, in a cultural context characterized by the ubiquity of cameras and the prevalence of “pics or it didn’t happen” mentalities — many of the world’s most pressing problems fail to lend themselves compellingly to visual depiction.
Drawing on the terminology of the political theorist Ariella Azoulay, the photojournalism scholars Robert Hariman and John Louis Lucaites have described the representational problems attending the “regime-made disaster.” A mode of violence that is widespread in the 21st century, the regime-made disaster entails the ongoing suppression of a population in a manner that “usually operates below the threshold of demonstrable violence,” Hariman and Lucaites write, resulting in “a comprehensive assault on civil society, but in a manner that is visually banal.”
The crisis at the border is not unrepresentable, but much of the misery it has entailed has been spatially contained and protracted rather than explosive and visually dramatic. For this kind of suffering to become visible, affecting, and “real” to those whose privilege or geographical distance shields them from direct acquaintance with it, photographs that strikingly articulate the stakes of the problem can be highly impactful. Moore’s photograph of Sanchez was an image of this sort. As they circulate, images like these become iconic in a double sense: They both visually represent the event in the minds of spectators, and they come to analogize it, standing in for the broader crisis.
In response to the controversy surrounding this image, Time’s editor-in-chief, Edward Felsenthal, issued a statement calling Moore’s photograph “the most visible symbol of the ongoing immigration debate” and asserting that the cover “capture[s] the stakes of this moment.” While his words might strike some as airy or evasive, they point the discussion about news photographs’ functions in a productive, if contentious, direction.
First, they identify a role for the news photograph that is less rigid and more expansive than the proffering of visual facts. This is a necessary adjustment in the 2020s, amid inexhaustible opportunities for the manipulation of still and moving images. This manipulability — which is not new, of course, but is irreversible and expanding — along with reports concerning the prevalence of staging among photojournalists, suggests that predicating news photographs’ value on their denotative qualities is a tendency whose moment has passed.
Second, and relatedly, Felsenthal’s words prescribe a symbolic function for news photographs, suggesting that they can be tasked with encapsulating and visually performing the broad stakes of issues at hand. This reading of news photographs may seem disconcertingly subjective, given that not everyone will be in agreement about what the broad stakes of a given issue are. However, I’d argue that this statement is a good descriptor of how news photographs actually do operate in practice today — they just don’t tend to be described in terms that acknowledge this degree of ambiguity. This is not to say that news images have no obligation to tell the truth, or no informational value — only that their truthfulness and informational value are necessarily situated and contingent rather than absolute.
Debates surrounding the credibility of news images are highly generative, in that they allow a range of perspectives to be aired and make clear to spectators that there’s more than one way to look at a news photograph. I think that as controversies like the one I have been describing continue to emerge, viewing publics will grow more comfortable with an idea that is both unsettling and necessary: that news photographs can be suggestive and also informative, symbolic as well as truthful.
Annie Rudd is an assistant professor in the University of Calgary’s Department of Communication, Media and Film.
Victor Pickard We reclaim a public good
Jake Shapiro Podcasting gets listener relationship management
Matt DeRienzo Local broadcasters begin to fill the gaps left by newspapers
Cindy Royal Prepare media students for skills, not job titles
Jakob Moll A slow-moving tech backlash among young people
Brenda P. Salinas Treating MP3 files like text
Rachel Glickhouse Journalists get left behind in the industry’s decline
Francesco Zaffarano TikTok without generational prejudice
Hossein Derakhshan AI can’t conjure up an Errol Morris
Tamar Charney From broadcast to bespoke
Meg Marco Everything happens somewhere
Sara K. Baranowski A big year for little newspapers
J. Siguru Wahutu Western journalists, learn from your African peers
Peter Bale Lies get further normalized
John Garrett It’s the best time in a century to start a local news organization
Gordon Crovitz Fighting misinformation requires journalism, not secret algorithms
Nathalie Malinarich Betting on loyalty
Eric Nuzum Podcasting finally creates another mega-hit show
Mira Lowe The year of student-powered journalism
Alice Antheaume Trade “politics” for “power”
Juleyka Lantigua A changing industry amps up podcasters’ ambitions
Carl Bialik Journalists will try running the whole shop
Mike Caulfield Native verification tools for the blue checkmark crowd
Tanya Cordrey Saying no to more good ideas
Lauren Duca The rise of the journalistic influencer
Helen Havlak Platforms shine a light on original reporting
Imaeyen Ibanga Let’s take it slow
Elizabeth Dunbar Frank talk, and then action
Mary Walter-Brown and Tristan Loper Power to the people (on your audience team)
Simon Galperin Journalism becomes more democratic
Margarita Noriega The platforms try to figure out what to do with single-subject newsrooms
AX Mina The Forum we wanted, the forum we got
Bill Adair A Nobel Prize, a Brad Pitt film, and a Taylor Swift song
Matthew Pressman News consumers divide into haves and have-nots
Jeff Kofman Speed through technology
Rasmus Kleis Nielsen The business we want, not the business we had
Cory Haik We’re already consuming the future of news — now we have to produce it
Christa Scharfenberg It’s time to make journalism a field that supports and respects women
Joni Deutsch Podcasting unsilences the silent
Doris Truong The year of radical salary transparency
Linda Solomon Wood Everyone in your organization, moving toward a common goal
Logan Molyneux and Shannon McGregor Think twice before turning to Twitter
Ståle Grut OSINT journalism goes mainstream
Sue Robinson Campaign coverage as test bed for engagement experiments
A.J. Bauer A fork in the road for conservative media
Elizabeth Hansen and Jesse Holcomb Local news initiatives run into a capital shortage
Jennifer Brandel A love letter from the year 2073
Brian Moritz The end of “stick to sports”
Alana Levinson Brand-backed media gets another look
Kristen Muller The year we operationalize community engagement
Nushin Rashidian Are platforms a bridge or a lifeline?
Ernie Smith The death of the industry fad
Errin Haines Race and gender aren’t a 2020 story — they’re the story
Meredith Artley Stronger solidarity among news organizations
Heidi Tworek The year of positive pushback
Steve Henn The dawning audio web
Julia B. Chan We 👏 take 👏 breaks 👏
Bill Grueskin Our ethics codes get an overhaul
Jeremy Gilbert and Jarrod Dicker A call for collaboration between storytelling and tech
Colleen Shalby Journalists become media literacy teachers
Felix Salmon Spotify launches a news channel
Logan Jaffe You don’t need fancy tools to listen
Stefanie Murray Charitable giving goes collaborative
Alexandra Borchardt Get out of the office and talk to people
Laura E. Davis Know the context your journalism is operating within
Cristina Kim Public media stops trying to serve “everybody”
Jeremy Olshan All journalism should be service journalism
Lucas Graves A smarter conversation about how (and why) fact-checking matters
Richard Tofel A constraint of the reader-revenue model emerges
Fiona Spruill The climate crisis gets the coverage it deserves
John Keefe Journalism gets hacked
Jonas Kaiser Russian bots are just today’s slacktivists
Greg Emerson News apps fall further behind
Whitney Phillips A time to question core beliefs
Sarah Schmalbach Journalist, quantify thyself
Irving Washington Leadership isn’t something you learn on the job
Sarah Stonbely More people start caring about news inequality
Kerri Hoffman Opening closed systems
Dan Shanoff Sports media enters the Bronny era
Jim Brady We’ll complain about other people living in bubbles while ignoring our own
Barbara Gray Join local libraries on the frontlines of civic engagement
Tom Glaisyer Journalism can emerge newly vibrant and powerful
Beena Raghavendran The year of the local engagement reporter
Alfred Hermida and Mary Lynn Young The promise of nonprofit journalism
Nicholas Jackson What’s left of local gets comfortable with reader support
Rachel Schallom The value of push alerts goes beyond open rates
Candis Callison Taking a cue from Indigenous journalists on climate change
Sarah Marshall The year to learn about news moments
Craig Newmark Formalizing newsrooms’ battle against disinformation
Joe Amditis Collaborative journalism takes its rightful place at the table
Emily Withrow The year we kill the news article
Monique Judge The year to organize, unionize, and fight
Mario García Think small (screen)
Kevin D. Grant The free press stands against authoritarians’ attacks on truth
Catalina Albeanu Rebuilding journalism, together
Michael W. Wagner Increasingly fractured, but little bit deliberative
Talia Stroud The work of reconnecting starts November 4
Joshua P. Darr All that campaign cash will make the media’s problems worse
Carrie Brown-Smith Engaged journalism: It’s finally happening
Dannagal G. Young Let’s disrupt the logic that’s driving Americans apart
Ben Werdmuller Use the tools of journalism to save it
Pablo Boczkowski The day after November 4
Rick Berke Incoming fire from both left and right
Monica Drake A renewed focus on misinformation
Seth C. Lewis 20 questions for 2020
Madelyn Sanfilippo and Yafit Lev-Aretz News coverage gets geo-fragmented
Kathleen Searles Pay more attention to attention
Masuma Ahuja Slower, quieter, more measured and thoughtful
Don Day Respect the non-paying audience
Heather Bryant Some kinds of journalism aren’t worth saving
Knight Foundation Five generations of journalists, learning from each other
Raney Aronson-Rath News deserts will proliferate — but so will new solutions
Mariana Moura Santos The future of journalism is collaborative
Zizi Papacharissi A president leads, the press follows, reality fades
Sarah Alvarez I’m ready for post-news
Jasmine McNealy A call for context
Tonya Mosley The neutrality vs. objectivity game ends
S. Mitra Kalita The race to 2021
M. Scott Havens First-party data becomes media’s most important currency
Rachel Davis Mersey The business of local TV news will enter its downward slide
Geneva Overholser Death to bothsidesism
Joanne McNeil A return to blogs (finally? sort of?)
Sonali Prasad Climate change storytelling gets multidimensional
Nico Gendron Make better products if you want to reach Gen Z
Moreno Cruz Osório In Brazil, collaboration in a time of state attacks
Anthony Nadler Clash of Clans: Election Edition
Kourtney Bitterly Transparency isn’t just a desire, it’s an expectation