in media res


NGO imagery narrated as development porn by meandomedar
March 5, 2008, 10:26 am
Filed under: anne, culture, media ethics | Tags: , , ,

brandon.jpg

This is just a short and a “linked” post following the idea of ethics and the display of dead bodies through the media. It was virtuously connected with the idea of porn and the fact that dead bodies resemble the male ejaculation – in a porn the spectator gets to see everything but the ejaculation. In a war, if we didn’t get to see the dead bodies, it would be like showing everything but the end of it. It thus would resemble the narration of porn. Please correct me, if I missed out on something.

I was intrigued by the idea of “porn” outside of porn, leaving the spectator to gaze at something/someone who is exhibited in front of the spectator and its connection to media ethics. I and started looking for resembling thoughts of “porn” imagery – and found an interesting article :

http://www.aidg.org/component/option,com_jd-wp/Itemid,34/p,488/

.meandomedar

Advertisements

3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

i’d really like to know where this idea comes from. paolo said it wasn’t his originally, and i’m sure i’ve heard it before somewhere.

i think my understanding of it would put slightly different emphasis to what you say here, though. its all about the voyeuristic aspect of watching news events, and the argument is that not showing the dead body or final image is like not showing the ejaculation/climax of the sex act which you would normally see (i’m told…). as such, the narrative is incomplete.

interesting article, though, what a depressing parallel: sex sells/ cute kids sell.

Comment by sam

I think that either way the parallel-metaphor news/porn is unlucky
since the news are not really a narrative and the story of a war still would go on even if the dead bodies were shown. Also, it would have to be always at the end of a program, the form should be ‘bla bla bla, images of dead bodies, the end, commercials’.

Also i find highly problematic the idea of voyeurism for the news and how this idea is overused by media workers. ‘The public gets what the public wants’ or the fatalistic ‘sex sells’ I think is just an alibi for legitimizing unregulated ‘creative’, or ‘journalistic’ or whatever freedom that workers enjoy when in positions of power–
and this photo shouts out a power relation-
so I m sceptical about the article

Comment by aristea F

I just came up the following:
The Adult Film Makers Association defines pornographic a film that includes male ejaculation only. Some lesbian producers that have sought to distribute through the association have been excluded
on the grounds that they do not constitute pornography because there is no filmed ‘cum’ shot.

see Drucilla Cornell,(ed) Feminism and Pornography, 2000, Oxford UP

Comment by aristea F




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: