Discussion about this post

User's avatar
OVS's avatar

I know Erik Hoel wrote about this recently with the rise of the "snuff clip" online, where images of war and violence pass around like our new global bloodsport, but I wonder how much images like this are shaping our response to atrocities. I can't help but think of the horror and visceral anger of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, an anger stoked by all the war footage shared freely on the world of Twitter, and how those images helped fuel the flames for a western policy that seems to have little care for its impact on the people in Ukraine itself as long as it hurts the Russians. And we are now seeing the terrorism of Hamas, the vicious images of violence toward those hostages and the reports of executions of even babies, likely leading to a brutal siege of the Gaza strip, one that is likely to decimate and displace its civilian population. Of course, it's worth adding that Hamas likely curated these images precisely to play to an audience looking for its own revenge against Israel, to fan their own flames of destruction.

Hell, my point doesn't need to stop at war. The recorded death of George Floyd, with its brutality laid bare for all to see, was followed by the most consequential and destruction riots in the modern history of the US, with the following rise in crime and loss of livelihoods still impacting people to this day. It's a modern kind of impact heuristic, real atrocities spread through images online followed by the inevitable righteous fury or glee (depending on who is destroyed) that calls for immediate action, no matter how destructive or unhelpful the consequences. And while there are political explanations I am glossing over, there's no avoiding that a picture or video can shape a policy.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts