The role of photography in the production and problematization of online affective debates: Struggles over solidarity and identity during the 2015 refugee crisis in Denmark
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2020
The role of photography in the production and problematization of online affective debates: Struggles over solidarity and identity during the 2015 refugee crisis in Denmark
The article analyses two contrasting photographs that powerfully shaped Danish debates about the refugee crisis in September 2015. In the first, a civilian man is seen spitting at a group of refugees from a highway bridge. In the other, a police officer sits on the highway as he plays with a young refugee girl. Politicized photographs such as these offer unique and rarely utilized sociological prisms to probe the narratives and binary codes that define national value complexes and categories of ‘inside–outside’, ‘us–them’ and ‘civil–uncivil’. The spitting man and gentle cop photographs are particularly forceful in this regard as they do not simply portray refugees/migrants in isolation, but rather the reactions they generate in the host country. The article explores why and how these photographs became so resonant in stimulating affective public debates about refugees, Danish identity, and solidarity with strangers. Methodologically, the article focuses on debates occurring on Facebook, Twitter and in newspaper commentary tracks. This choice reflects a wider trend where the media ecology of Web 2.0 is transforming the way photographs are being politicized in affective publics. Finally, interviews were conducted with the journalists behind the photographs.
AlexanderJ. C. (2006). The civil sphere. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
3.
AlexanderJ. C. (2008). Iconic consciousness: The material feeling of meaning. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28, 782–794.
4.
Andén-PapadopoulosK. (2008). The Abu Ghraib torture photographs: News frames, visual culture, and the power of images. Journalism, 9, 5–30.
5.
BanksJ. (2012). Unmasking deviance: The visual construction of asylum seekers and refugees in English national papers. Critical Criminology, 20, 293–310.
BartmanskiD. (2014). The word/image dualism revisited: Towards an iconic conception of visual culture. Journal of Sociology, 50, 164–181.
8.
BayerlP. S.StoynovL. (2016). Revenge by Photoshop: Memefying police acts in the public dialogue about injustice. New Media & Society, 18, 1006–1026.
9.
BeckerH. S. (1995). Visual sociology, documentary photography, and photojournalism: It’s (almost) all a matter of context. Visual Studies, 10, 5–14.
10.
BenjaminW. (2003). Selected writings, volume 4, 1938–1940. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press (Original work published 1939).
11.
BennettW. L.SegerbergA. (2012). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication and Society, 15, 739–768.
12.
BeutinL. P. (2017). Racialization as a way of seeing: The limits of counter-surveillance and police reform. Surveillance and Society, 15, 5–20.
13.
BiggsM. (2005). Dying without killing: Self-immolations, 1963–2002. In GambettaD. (Ed.), Making sense of suicide missions (pp. 173–208). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14.
BleikerR.CampbellD.HutchisonE.NicholsonX. (2013). The visual dehumanization of refugees. Australian Journal of Political Science, 48, 398–416.
15.
BolterJ. D.GrusinR. (1998). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
16.
BoudanaS.FroshP.CohenA. A. (2017). Reviving icons to death: When historic photographs become digital memes. Media, Culture, and Society, 39, 1210–1230.
17.
BrantnerC.LobingerK.WetzsteinI. (2011). Effects of visual framing on emotional responses and evaluation of news stories about the Gaza conflict 2009. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 88, 523–540.
18.
ButlerJ. (2010). Frames of war: When is life grievable?London, UK: Verso.
19.
ChadwickA. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
20.
DarwinC. (1998). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press (Original work published 1872).
21.
DoerrN. (2017). Bridging language barriers, bonding against immigrants: A visual case study of transnational network publics created by far-right activists in Europe. Discourse & Society, 28, 3–23.
22.
DoerrN.MattoniA.TeuneS. (Eds.). (2013). Towards a visual analysis of social movements, conflict, and mobilization. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change, 35, xi–xxvi.
23.
FuchsC. (2018). ‘Dear Mr. Neo-Nazi, can you please give me your informed consent so that I can quote your fascist tweet?’: Questions of social media research ethics in online ideology critique. In MeikleG. (Ed.), The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism (pp. 385–394). Abingdon, UK: Routledge
24.
GrayT.MartinB. (2008). My Lai: The struggle over outrage. Peace and Change, 33, 90–113.
25.
GreerC.McLaughlinE. (2010). We predict a riot? Public order policing, new media environments and the rise of the citizen journalist. British Journal of Criminology, 50, 1041–1059.
26.
HalfmannD.YoungM. P. (2010). War pictures: The grotesque as a mobilizing tactic. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 15, 1–24.
27.
HannanJ. (2018). Trolling ourselves to death? Social media and post-truth politics. European Journal of Communication, 33, 214–226.
28.
HansenL. (2015). How images make world politics: International icons and the case of Abu Ghraib. Review of International Studies, 41, 263–288.
HarimanR.LucaitesJ. L. (2007). No caption needed: Iconic photographs, public culture, and liberal democracy. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
31.
IyerA.OldmeadowJ. (2006). Picture this: Emotional and political responses to photographs of the Kenneth Bigley kidnapping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 635–647.
32.
JohnsonH. L. (2011). Click to donate: Visual images, constructing victims and imagining the female refuge. Third World Quarterly, 32, 1015–1037.
MalkkiL. H. (1996). Speechless emissaries: Refugees, humanitarianism, and dehistoricization. Cultural Anthropology, 11, 377–404.
37.
MartinB. (2005). The beating of Rodney King: The dynamics of backfire. Critical Criminology, 13, 307–326.
38.
McAdamD. (2000). Movement strategy and dramaturgic framing in democratic states: The case of the American civil rights movement. In ChambersS.CostainA. (Eds.), Deliberation, democracy and the media (pp. 117–133). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
39.
MortensenM. (2016). ‘The image speaks for itself’ – or does it? Instant news icons, impromptu publics, and the 2015 European ‘refugee crisis’. Communication and the Public, 1, 409–422.
OlesenT. (2013). ‘We are all Khaled Said’: Visual injustice symbols in the Egyptian revolution, 2010–2011. Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 35, 3–25.
44.
OlesenT. (2014). Dramatic diffusion and meaning adaptation: The case of Neda. In della PortaD.MattoniA. (Eds.), Spreading protest: Social movements in times of crisis (pp. 71–90). Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.
45.
OlesenT. (2015). Global injustice symbols and social movements. New York, NY: Palgrave.
46.
OlesenT. (2018). Memetic protest and the dramatic diffusion of Alan Kurdi. Media, Culture, and Society, 40, 656–672.
47.
PapacharissiZ. (2016). Affective publics and structures of storytelling: Sentiment, events, and mediality. Information, Communication, and Society, 19, 307–324.
48.
PoyatosF. (2002). Nonverbal communication across disciplines. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: J. Benjamin.
49.
RistovskaS. (2016). The rise of eyewitness video and its implications for human rights: Conceptual and methodological approaches. Journal of Human Rights, 15, 347–360.
50.
SaidE. (1978). Orientalism. New York, NY: Random House.
51.
ShifmanL. (2014). The cultural logic of photo-based meme genres. Journal of Visual Culture, 13, 340–358.
52.
SmithP. (2005). Why war? The cultural logic of Iraq, the Gulf War, and Suez. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
53.
SontagS. (1977). On photography. London, UK: Penguin Books.
54.
SpivakG. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In NelsonC.GrossbergL. (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
55.
SunsteinC. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
56.
SzôrènyiA. (2006). The images speak for themselves? Reading refugee coffee-table books. Visual Studies, 21, 24–41.
57.
TeuneS. (2013). Imagining Heiligendamm: Visual struggles and the G8 Summit 2007. In CammaertsB.MattoniA.McCurdyP. M. (Eds.), Mediation and protest movements (pp. 203–226). Bristol, UK: Intellect.
WeberM. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.
60.
WilmottA. C. (2017). The politics of photography: Visual depictions of Syrian refugees in U.K. online media. Visual Communication Quarterly, 24, 67–82.
61.
WrightT. (2002). Moving images: The media representation of refugees. Visual Studies, 17, 53–66.
