How Does War Photography Affect Society

An artist's job is to interpret, and express the aspects of life in a creative fashion. War has played a big part in shaping our human history, and many artists have portrayed their feelings about art through paintings, and even monuments. Whether it be to show; the joy of victory, the sorrow of defeat, or to educate the public on the gory realities of war. Art about war can also show us a great amount of history of the kinds of weapons that were used at the time. It is necessary for artists to interpret, and criticize all aspects of life; even ones as tragic as war, It can make the public more aware of what goes on in times of war.

Question: In what ways did Mathew Brady change people’s perception of the Civil War? This investigation evaluates the ways in which photographer Mathew Brady changed the American perception of the Civil War. The focus of the investigation is on the growth of photography during the Civil War, a small bit of background on Mathew Brady, and his involvement on the battlefield as a “battlefield photographer”. The technological advancements in photography during the Civil War are noted in this investigation. Also, connections between the advancements in early photography and how Mathew Brady used these advancements to change the public perception of the War are explored. Different

Today, it is difficult to image a world without photography. Technology has made it easy to take an excellent quality photograph with just a cellphone. However, during the time of World War II through the Vietnam War, a lot of this technology was not nearly as advanced as it is today. The equipment that war photographers used was very primitive by today’s standards, yet there were many significant photographs that were taken, many of which are famous or infamous today. Many war photographers took their photographs in life-threatening situations. However, these photographs serve as a documentation of history and a source of influence. War photography from World War II to the Vietnam War influenced the world through its history, famous war photographers,

In the article “The Little Boy in Aleppo: Can One Photo End a War”, the author, Malaka Gharib, talks about the photo being shown of a five-year-old boy identified as Omran Dagneesh, who was rescued from a building hit by an air strike. The image caused many people to question how serious the wars in Syria have become and how to help solve the problem, but others feel as though this would not change anything, considering that the wars in Syria have been going on for years and most Americans have not shared any sympathy concerning the safety of Syrians. This paper will analyze the article by looking at things like credibility, reliability and persuasiveness.

The Vietnam War, is widely regarded as a conflict that divided public opinion in the United States and influenced civilian perceptions on international relations. The conflict lasted for over twenty years and began after a policy of communism was introduced in the North after the withdrawal of French imperialists. The American government was highly concerned with the spread of communism in Asia (known as the Domino Theory) and wanted to end the possible political threat. Over time, the war has became a part of American social memory and is especially known for its distribution of iconic imagery of civilian atrocities. Through these images, varying tales have been told and have brought into question American values, as well as possible hidden motivations of both the government and the press. Over the course of several decades, a popular myth has formed that photojournalism was a critical hallmark to the effectiveness of the anti-war movement, however the public perception of the imagery was commonly not out of sympathy for the Vietnamese people who were victims, but dissatisfaction with the influx of internal confusion and misinformation. This essay will argue the Vietnam War 's use of photojournalism, ultimately contributed to the questioning of American values, as well as the hidden motives of government and media outlets that remains a concern in modern America.

The established freedom within this uncensored war, unleashed an unprecedented amount of evidence, thus allowing the media to become a tool for oral and visual communication for the masses, ultimately changing the method of historical approach. The ‘nature of evidence’ significantly changed during the television age as the intensity of war coverage changed. Professor Phillip M. Taylor ascertains that the role of the media enabled the general public to be "take a front seat at the making of history on the shirt-tails of journalism”. Therefore, the public became histories witnesses - albeit indirect participants - through the media. Many theorists argue that the media did not create or script any events that played out in the war, rather the

The war that was to end all wars broke out in the summer of 1914, after the assassination of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire’s Archduke. World War One was so violent and so many men died; one could compare the war to the slaughtering of cattle at a butcher’s shop. The war opened the eyes of man to a new era of warfare. No longer would soldiers be worried about lining up in front of the enemy and engage in the age old traditions of European conflict. Now soldiers would have to face the age of machine guns, barbed wire fences, and gas attacks. The public would also be introduced into a new era of media coverage of the war. Unlike in wars past, pictures could now be taken and published in the newspaper and sold on the stands. The gruesome images of the

At the start of world war one the reactions were very positive. However after perspectives were released by corporals and grueling photos it changed a lot of people's minds. One instance of a grueling account was from Lance-corporal Baxter who wrote a first hand account of what he had seen on the battlefield. “We had no blankets, or great coats, or waterproof sheets nor any material to build new shelters” he describes the harsh reality that is fighting on

A young man in dirty olive drab, a pith helmet balanced precariously on his head, charging up a muddy hillside in Germany? Boys in uniform on the march through the French countryside, wildflowers blooming along the side of the road? These are the iconic images Americans got of our soldiers during the WW I and WW II. The American public was given their news from the front primarily through radio reports and newsreels and these featured film that was released by the government for such use (Steinman 10). The footage was accompanied by a rousing voice-over depicting the heroism and bravery of our fighting men and often had patriotic soundtracks. These images “gravitated toward the drama of combat rather than its disturbing outcome” (McClancy

The popularity of Vietnam movies as opposed to the photographs of war can also be simply the fact that photographs don’t offer much of a narrative. As Susan Sontag says in Looking at War, the problem with photography is that people will only remember the photographs, not the story behind the picture (Sontag 2004). Narrative is crucial when we construct our own view of the world, but a photographs without context does not help us understand the war, especially with people who have never experienced conflict of have even been to Vietnam. ‘To remember is, more and more, not to recall a story but to be able to call up a picture.’. By mixing up very real photographs of Vietnam War (without context) with Hollywood narratives is bound to confuse the

This entailed a repetitive presentation of similar points-of-view, violent motifs, tropes, and scenarios to the public, all tailored to specific types of terrain and combat activities. Additionally, most of the photography exhibited a lack of North Vietnamese, which reflected the insurgent nature of the war that lacked an explicitly defined enemy. Consequently, the perspective of the Vietnam War grew distant and increasingly stylized to focus solely on framing US forces against a desolate foreign environment. The photographs and televised content adopted an increasingly disheartening focus on the confusion, unrestrained chaos, and verging collapse in the conflict. And by concentrating solely on Americans in their lowest points of battle, the media’s negative focus came at the expense of neglecting Vietnamese culture and their way of life. This representation greatly contrasts the representation prior to 1968 of Vietnam’s character as a “clean” war fought through the effective use of technological strategies. This transition of the war’s general representation in the media thus serves to validate the role of the Tet Offensive as not only a development of the war, but the turning point in which

My dissertation will be looking at the censorship of the media during war predominantly in active conflict zones. I will look at the military’s policy on embedding and how it came to be implemented. In covering this topic, I will produce examples of embedding, specifically images produced by photojournalists in these environments. Alongside this, I will investigate how the embedding process occurred and the varying results it has produced. Two types of reporting will be explored the first being the alliance between soldier and photojournalist and how this can alter the photographic work a photographer produces. For this very example, I will look at examples from

“Necessity is said to be the mother of invention. In the twentieth century, necessity all too often arrived in the guise of war. Ariel photography was among the transformative technical innovations developed during the First World War” (“I Spy With My Glass Eye”). World War I represents a turning point in the history of war photography. It was the first conflict to be photographed in detail by all the participants and the first in which photography was actively used in support of the war effort. In the twentieth century aerial photography became an important element of warfare due to: the rise of airplanes, changes in fighting tactics, and ever improving technology.

Both types of media (newspapers and television broadcasts) shared one thing in common that went against every government control: lack of military censorship. In his book, Hallins describes, “The mobilization of of public opinion was increasingly seen as something that needed to be organized systematically, and the press was naturally considered central to that effort.” ((Hallin, The Uncensored War.)) With new forms of media growing ever to popular, such as television and photography, media networks had the tools to tell the true story to the American people. Journalists and reporters from all over the United States traveled to Vietnam to capture the escalating war. Many infamous and graphic photographs have been captured and even posted on

Images, such as paintings and photographs, are intensely visually striking and evoke strong emotions in those who view them.“Into the Jaws of Death” provides a perfect example of that intensity, having been taken by Robert F. Sargent during the early morning hours of the D-Day invasion of Normandy. Even today the famous photograph evokes strong emotional reactions in many people who view it. This photograph served a purpose more significant than was realized at the time, to the point of becoming a pivotal point in support for the war effort. How was this accomplished? By conveying personal themes of heroism, patriotism, and mortality through devices such as angles, colors, uniforms, and proxemics.