Images & Political Agendas

I selected the April 25, 2005 cover of Time magazine to consider the concepts of denotative and connotative meanings, ideology, and the myth of photographic truth.

The image denotes a seated Ann Coulter, who is a prominent American political commentator and lawyer. Less specifically, the cover features a blonde woman appearing to be in her mid-40s sitting cross-legged on a brown, leather, modern-looking chair. She dons a conservative navy dress with stockings, and is making direct eye contact with the camera. The perspective makes her legs appear as long as or longer than her entire torso and face.

What Coulter and the image connote for most Americans are such descriptors such as conservative, right-wing, Republican. Yet, the image most certainly connotes different meanings for Republicans than it does for Democrats, or even Independents. Personally, its connotative meaning brings to mind a number of adjectives and trains of thought. I associate Ann with extremist beliefs, outlandish comments, and incredibly narrow-minded forms of expression. I’m also saddened by her, because for me, she represents the facts that our country is extremely polarized in political ideology, that citizens must choose one side or the other, and that people like her demonize other intelligent, well-spoken conservatives. 

The image’s connotative meanings go hand-in-hand with the concept of ideology and its relationship to the practice of looking at images. Obviously, any representation of a prominent political figure can provoke a discussion on differing ideologies. I’ve already touched some on the varying connotative meanings Coulter’s depiction may produce for people of opposing political parties or views. The social assumptions that Republicans make are often very different from the ones Democrat make; both ideologies are different ways of viewing the world, how it works, and how it can be bettered through political means. The way a person looks at an image is dependent on their individual ideology and way of viewing the world. The way a person frames an image is also dependent upon their ideology. The photographer who framed this shot portrays Coulter in a rather unflattering way. Arguably, that photographer could be influenced by a differing ideology from Coulter. 

Oftentimes, it is easy to determine if a news source has a political bias simply by looking at the images they choose to feature. For instance, Fox News tends to have a conservative viewpoint, and the photos they feature of liberal or left-wing policy leaders are typically unflattering angles, lighting, and coloring. The same can be said of more liberal news sources such as MSNBC. 

One of the most intriguing aspects of the Practices of Looking article is the myth of photographic truth. This concept applies to the image of Coulter if we consider that the photographer may have had some sort of ideological, albeit subconscious, bias against her. The image is not an unmediated copy of the real world.