Abstract
Visual images are extremely powerful, particularly in this media-saturated age of round-the-clock coverage. It is possible, in fact, that the United States' current emphasis on "zero casualty" missions is a response in part to the power of the images from Mogadishu and a fear of a collapse in public support should similar images appear again. This article argues, however, that such a view misunderstands the way images influence public response, assuming that they can be read in only one way, and forgetting that all visual images displayed by the news media are accompanied by words. The interpretation of even powerful images is neither inevitable nor predetermined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.