Vlaamse Geschiedkundige Kring-

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the Register link to proceed.


Historische kritiek van woord en beeld in massamedia

Boudry
Gebruikersavatar
Berichten: 413
Lid geworden op: 10 Jun 2012, 19:53

Historische kritiek van woord en beeld in massamedia

Berichtdoor Boudry » 15 Sep 2013, 13:59

Dit is een vak, gedoceer door G. Deneckere, dat geïnteresseerde studenten uit verschillende disciplines een theoretisch-methodologisch referentiekader biedt voor een historisch-kritische omgang met mediaboodschappen. Met behulp van theoretische inzichten uit andere disciplines (semiotiek, iconologie, cultural studies, …) worden de studenten gesensibiliseerd voor de retorische strategieën en de bewuste en onbewuste manipulatie van woord en beeld in een historisch perspectief. De relatie tussen (beeld)taal, macht en geschiedenis staat centraal.
Overzicht leerstof:
- Concepten en modellen voor de studie van massacommunicatie
- Historische kritiek van mediaboodschappen
- Objectiviteit en vertekening
- Methoden voor een kritische analyse van mediaboodschappen
- Historische veranderingen in de ‘publieke sfeer’
- Beeldcultuur, beeldvorming, beeldkritiek
- Onderzoeksjournalistiek

Nuttige links:
ECTS-fiche
Topic vorig jaar

Voorbeeldvragen:
- Bespreek de visie van Klemperer op de LTI
- Compassion fatigue
- Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. ~Abbott Joseph Liebling: bespreek deze stelling aan de hand van het Vlaamse mediadebat
- Artikel uit de Standaard over Hamza, de Syrische jongen die is doodgefolterd + een bijhorende foto. Bespreek het artikel en de foto aan de hand van wat we in de cursus zagen.: [quote]
- leg de termen 'flat earth news' en 'framing' uit
- "Het tonen van doden is iets dat de vijand doet". Bespreek deze vorm van censuur als onderdeel van de oorlogspropaganda in het licht van onderstaande foto *stuk foto van Obama in de situation room tijdens de operatie tegen Bin Laden*
- Bourdieux zei dat ondanks alle media (tv) de betekenis van beelden nog steeds gecontroleerd wordt door woorden en dat beelden zonder duiding/legendae betekenisloos zijn. Bespreek deze stelling adhv inzichten verworven in de cursus.
Time you enjoy wasting, is not wasted.

Jens.
Gebruikersavatar
Prosenior
Berichten: 5724
Lid geworden op: 10 Okt 2010, 12:49
Locatie: Gent
Contact:

Re: Historische kritiek van woord en beeld in massamedia

Berichtdoor Jens. » 18 Jun 2014, 11:11

Eerste zit 2013-2014

- Leg uit en breng met elkaar in verband: Flat Earth News en Slow Journalism
- Leg mythe uit volgens het denkkader van Barthes
- Entman heeft kritiek op 'journalistieke objectiviteit'. Hij denkt dat een goed begrip van framing dit zou kunnen verbeteren. 1) leg uit en 2) geef je eigen mening adhv andere concepten uit de cursus.
- Foto van #bringbackourgirls. De foto dateert van 2011 en is genomen in een totaal andere context dan het vandaag gebruikt wordt. Reflecteer over het hergebruiken van foto's adhv de cursus.
Laatst gewijzigd door Jens. op 29 Aug 2014, 17:54, 1 keer totaal gewijzigd.
“We cannot escape the fact that we are heirs and prisoners of the past we are endeavouring to excavate, or avoid the long shadows it casts.” Walsham

Jens.
Gebruikersavatar
Prosenior
Berichten: 5724
Lid geworden op: 10 Okt 2010, 12:49
Locatie: Gent
Contact:

Re: Historische kritiek van woord en beeld in massamedia

Berichtdoor Jens. » 29 Aug 2014, 17:52

Tweede zit 2013-2014

- Leg uit: compassion fatigue, oud model van massacommunicatie
- Entman beweert dat journalisten een meer actieve en gesofisticeerde rol moeten aannemen. Leg uit en bespreek hoe we de theorie van Entman kan leiden tot een kritischer benadering van beelden.
- Citaat van Robert Fisk. Hoe kan een historische reflex bij een conflict bijdragen tot een kritische analyse van de mediaverslaggeving? Noem een drietal knelpunten op die voorkomen bij de hedendaagse verslaggeving over de crisis in het Midden-Oosten.

De tekst van Frisk (just in case dat de link ooit verdwijnt)
Spoiler:
Once, we used to keep clippings, a wad of newspaper cuttings on whatever we were writing about: Israel, Lebanon, Iran, Gaza. Occasionally, we even read books. Maybe it’s because of the internet, but in most of our reports, it seems that history only started yesterday, or last week.
For snobs, it’s called the loss of institutional memory. We journos seem to suffer from it more than most. Our readers, I suspect, do not. So here we go…

“Israel has ignored mounting international calls for a ceasefire and said it will not stop its crippling assault on Gaza until ‘peace and tranquility’ are achieved in southern Israeli towns in the line of Palestinian rocket fire… Arab delegates have met the United Nations Security Council in New York, urging members to adopt a resolution calling for an immediate end to the Israeli attacks and a permanent ceasefire.” This is from a Press Association report.

Now here’s an editorial from the right-wing Canadian National Post: “We [sic] have a great deal of sympathy for the ordinary people of Gaza. Israel’s attacks this week on the terrorist infrastructure within the tiny, heavily populated area are undoubtedly extremely hard on them… as Hamas officials and operatives use them as human shields. But remember: all that was ever required to forestall these attacks was for Palestinians to stop their violence against Israelis.”

And here’s The Guardian: “Yesterday, as three of his children were laid out dead on the hospital floor, Samouni was in a bed upstairs in the Shifa hospital, recovering from wounds to his legs and shoulder and comforting his son, Mohamed, five, who had suffered a broken arm… ‘It’s a massacre,’ Samouni said. ‘We just want to live in peace.’”

And, just for good measure, here’s Reuters: “Israel expanded yesterday its fiercest air offensive in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip in decades and prepared for a possible ground assault, after a three-day bombardment that has killed 300 Palestinians… The [Israeli] planes also attacked the homes of two top commanders in Hamas’s’ armed wing. They were not there, but several family members were among the seven dead.”

And last but not least, here’s writer Robert Fulford in the Canadian Post: “Israel has already proven itself the most restrained nation in history. It has set an all-time record for restraint.”

Now of course you are familiar with everything you’ve just read above. Since last week, Israel has been bombarding Gaza to prevent Hamas rockets hitting Israel. Palestinians suffer disproportionately, but it’s all Hamas’s fault. But there’s a problem.

The Press Association report was published on 6 January 2009 – five and a half years ago! The Post editorial was printed on 2 January the same year. The Guardian dispatch was on 6 January 2009, Reuters on 30 December of the previous year – 2008. Fulford’s nonsense was published on 5 January 2009.

Oddly, however, no one reminds us that today’s carnage is an obscene replay – by both sides – of what has happened before, and indeed before that. The leftist Israeli historian Illan Pappe has recorded how on 28 December 2006, the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem reported that 660 Palestinians had been killed in that year alone, most in Gaza, including 141 children; and that since 2000, Israeli forces had killed almost 4,000 Palestinians with 20,000 wounded. But scarcely has there been a single mention of all of this in a single report on the latest slaughter in the Gaza war.

Why? Why do we as readers – let alone us journalists – allow ourselves to participate in what I can only call a collective memory-wipe? Because we are lazy? Because we don’t care? Or because we fear that explanations for the recurring bloodletting in Israel might lead readers to search for deeper reasons and that Israel’s “friends” abroad might accuse us poor harmless journos of suggesting that Israel – let alone the corrupt Hamas – is engaged in a far more pitiless, infinitely more wicked and obscene war than our bland agency-style reportage suggests?

There’s nothing new about memory-wipe. Take this warning of civil war in Lebanon, published in The Independent, no less: “For Lebanon, these are tense times… Since the Alawite community which dominates political power in Syria is in effect Shia and the majority of Syrians are Sunni, it is not difficult to understand the darker nightmares which afflict the people of this region. If the civil conflict in Iraq were to move west, it could open up religious fault lines from Baghdad to Lebanon… an awesome prospect for the entire Arab world.” Alas, this was written by one R Fisk, published on 7 July 2006 – almost exactly eight years ago – and printed on page 29.

But just to finish off, here’s a Reuters report from Mosul that will sound all too familiar to readers these past few weeks: “Insurgents have set police stations ablaze, stolen weapons and brazenly roamed the streets of Mosul as Iraq’s third largest city appeared to be sliding out of control...” A little problem, of course. This Reuters dispatch was filed in 2004 – 10 years ago! On that occasion, it was the US military, not the Iraqi army, which had to recapture Mosul from the rebels (for the second time, by the way).

I’m afraid it’s about context, this memory-wipe. It’s about the way that armies and governments want us to believe – or forget – what they are doing, it’s about ahistorical coverage, and it’s about – and here I quote the wonderful Israeli journalist Amira Haas – “monitoring the centres of power”.

The question we should ask – a question many readers and televison viewers have been asking – is: haven’t we been here before? And if so, why the repeat performance?
“We cannot escape the fact that we are heirs and prisoners of the past we are endeavouring to excavate, or avoid the long shadows it casts.” Walsham


Terug naar “Keuzevakken”




  Wie is er online

Gebruikers op dit forum: Geen geregistreerde gebruikers en 1 gast

cron