Monday, June 28, 2010
Images or Words?
While reading Amusing Ourselves to Death, my attention was caught when Postman stated “For on television, discourse is conducted largely through visual imagery, which is to say that television gives us a conversation in images, not words.” I think this is somewhat valid because a commercial for example, has a goal of convincing consumers to buy something. A commercial could involve no speech at all but by simply glorifying a product with eye-catching methods could make it more desirable. On the other hand, words may be needed and very important for advertisement of medicines and medical solutions. Then again, the image of an AD or commercial comes into play once again because a man dressed poorly in some dark gloomy place wouldn’t be advertising his medical services, because he would not be seen as a credible source. So I think that Postman was accurate in saying that television gives us a conversation in images, not words because in this case appearance is very crucial in order to exhibit something presentable to the public. But this does not mean that words are not an important influence also.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Television gives us a conversation in images."
ReplyDeleteTrue. I think what you are saying about commercials being desirable, also has to do with time limit. You can say more with photos in 30 seconds than you can with words, no doubt. You can portray feeling, hurt, happiness, depression, love, betrayal..etc through a montage of pictures than you can with 5 pages of speech. I actually like commercials, they are colorful and somewhat informative and "cool", but then there is a point when you want to see something educating or less immature...
The other day I was watching T.V. and this man was ecstatic, playing football, then he was riding a bike, then he was boxing. In my mind I am thinking it is going to be a Time Share commercial or a Beer AD but it was advertising an anti-depressant. Really? C'mon, that is unrealistic and for some reason, upset me. Dealing with depression is more than honky-dory, frolic through flowers and sunshine, it's a serious thing. But you are right, Janae, commercials glorify their products 'til DEATH!! No matter what the product may be.
Janae, I also found myself analyzing Postman's words about television and visual imagery.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with what you posted. On television today, viewers often overlook an AD or a commercial's words, and simply base the 'quality' of a product or person off of the pictures- what they are seeing as opposed to hearing. This is, in many ways, a shame.
I have noticed this scenario in the media over and over again. Yesterday, for example, I was watching "Wipeout" when a car commercial came on. The car looked simply astounding, and the pictures for the car were highly persuasive. Shortly after, I realized that there was so much more to the car than the pictures- there's fine print. Nothing should simply be based off of pictures. It demotes its true value, and pictures can put a mask on for something, a mask that could send out the wrong message. A picture could potentially make something seem more than it really is. To conclude my agreement, different methods of media have often sent out the wrong message.
I agree with you, for the most part. Although images are very important when advertising for television, I think that the words are what really hold the ad or television show together.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, imagine watching a comedy show without being able to listen to the dialogue. Not so funny right? But then again, an action movie may not need dialogue because most of the viewers are there to see the special affects, not listen to the corny dialogue. So maybe, it’s not that words hold it all together, but I don’t think that a television network could run with only images either. So I guess what I’m trying to say is that you need both sound and images to successfully advertise through television.