It's called "visual literacy".
The choice of picture is as relevant (and influential) as the choice of words in persuading the reader/viewer.
Back in the cold of January, when photojournalist Alan Chin was up in New Hampshire shooting for my "day job blog," BAGnewsNotes, he and I had absolutely no clue whether, come fall, the Obama story -- still electrified at that moment by the post-Iowa buzz -- was going to play out more like this or this.
Fast forward two months, and Alan (having spent another overnight on the lip of the Ohio primary developing film) sends me the shot above as part of a basket of pictures. Of course, I dismissed it immediately. "And what didn't you like about the Kennedy-esque one?" Alan asked the next morning from a roadside Bob's Big Boy somewhere, I think, between Columbus and Cleveland. And in phrasing it that way, he pegged the source of my problem, knowing that, as dramatic an image as he had recorded, it in no way reflected how a struggling Team Obama had given up the pep rally in favor of the townhall. (And so, this is the "more representative" pic I went with.)
But today, today.
Today, just 24 hours after the results from Indiana and North Carolina, at the moment at which the Democratic race apparently reached its tipping point, I saw as quick and dramatic a flip in the visual tone as I've ever seen before. For the past few week, Obama has been largely portrayed in tandem with his controversial former pastor, or with not the friendliest looking white blue-collar workers, or standing alone on both the literal and metaphorical "other side of the tracks." Looking at the images flying off the wire the past few hours, however, it seems suddenly like none of those other moments and picture were ever made.
So, before turning the focus to the return of Obama-mania and the visual media's tilt-on-the-dime purification, glorification and idolization of the man who just a few days ago was fighting the shadows, I felt (although it's hardly a digitally-appropriate description) like dusting off that Ohio image.
Our Man in Ohio (March 08 - Alan Chin on the campaign trail for BAGnewsNotes
Our Man in New Hampshire (January 08 - Alan Chin on the campaign trail for BAGnewsNotes)
(image: ©Alan Chin. Westerville, Ohio, outside Columbus. March 2, 2008. Used by permission)
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

It's called "visual literacy".
The choice of picture is as relevant (and influential) as the choice of words in persuading the reader/viewer.
GIVE IT A BREAK PEOPLE, WE'RE ON A NEW PAGE NOW! iT'S TIME TO COME TOGETHER AND BE THE DEMOCRATS THAT WE CLAIM TO BE. WE CAN DO THIS!
Sure we will give it a break. For two months I've followed the HUFFPOST comments and heard nothing but distain for Clinton supporters; but we are on the same page now. I've yet to hear anything positive from you Obama people. I guess there is only one choice. Ralph Nader for president 2008.
A few random observations -
1. I agree that the weathervane-like way the media tends to cover the candidates is despicable. I always thought the mission of the news media was to (a) report what happened and (b) explain why - and why it matters. The endless loop of the the Rev. Wright didn't serve that purpose.
2. But I don't think we can expect anything better from the media. They are what they are; and the best we can do is "become our own reporters", ask our own questions and then do our own research to ferret out the answers we seek.
3. A key undiscussed issue is "trust." When a candidate says: "Let me spend part of your tax dollars to reform health care", will he/she follow thru on that commitment? Or will the issue disappear down a "black hole?" When we hear- "stay the course in Iraq; give the surge a another 6 weeks, is this sincere? Or is it merely one more ploy to keep us there in perpetuity?
Trust. Which of the three candidates most deserves ours?
4. Fellow Obama fans - I suggest we follow the old football adage of "don't get too high when your ahead and don't get too low when you're struggling. Chill.
5. Finally, I skimmed thru most of the "tit for tat" throughout this thread and thought for a moment that I had entered a kindergarten classroom.
I was cleaning out my attic the other day and ran across an old American History book. (For you younger folks this was a subject that was taught in schools throughout the land in the old days.) Anyway, as I was flipping through the book it occurred to me that every President of the US since the founding of the country was a descendant of immigrants from the British Isles - Great Brittan and Ireland. And I thought, "Not bad leadership for going from an untamed wilderness to becoming the most powerful and prosperous nation on earth where most of the world tries to come to and would love to live." (Also I have not noticed a very long line of people wanting to leave.)
Now we are going into a campaign to elect as President either another of these old white guys or someone that little is known about and can point to no significant accomplishments and whose spiritual mentor for 20 years beseeched God to damn America. There may be an example of someone with such a background to have successfully run a country, large or small, somewhere in the world but I just can't think of one off the top of my head.
Most people will not see this as being a close call.
Your comment suggests a lack of real knowledge. You need to travel to other places besides Florida. How about Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Dubai? Start with Canada.
This country needs a president that looks into the future, lives in the present and closes the door on the past like one closes the coffin. The sad world of the past doesn't have anything in common with this fast changing world of today and tomorrow and that also goes for all the white anglo-saxon leaders of this country.
Oops--I meant to type "Punahou School."
Eww Woody, You'd better watch what you write on THIS blog. The spirit of political correctness gone insane will have you tarred & feathered faster than you can say "Obamamania." I agree with what you say, except that in fact, on his mom's side, Obama's forebears came from Ireland, and he's actually distantly related to Dick Cheney. His camp routinely disregards the negative aspects of the fact that he was educated in the finest private schools in America, from grade school at Pounahou in Honolulu through Harvard Law. How's that for an "old white guys" pedigree? Obama is, for better or worse, another typical politician, bought & paid for. I've pondered on this blog several times what will happen with all his rabid disciples--er--"supporters," when his myth is debunked, the truth comes out, and he's exposed as a mere mortal. Despite whatever the future holds for America, at least that part will be interesting.
A mere mortal is what we need. Someone in tune with the wants and needs of everyday
Americans, someone more in line with what Bill Clinton once was, a man of the people from a diverse background, and a person of real intelligence. That spells Obama. none of his supporters think he's some kind of superior being. We think he's a man much like us, and hope and pray he gets the chance to represent us, not the big money interests the republicans have traditionally represented and who seem to have co-opted the Clintons and the rest of the DLC democrats.
May I ask if anyone knows the exact number of soldiers enlisted now?
Are their numbers sufficient to sustain a war for 100 years?
If not, how will the USA get the needed soldiers? Draft? If so, does that mean it will include women as well? What is the drafting age?
If the number of soldiers now is not enough, then McCain needs to explain how he plans to get the numbers needed.
These are questions that McCain MUST answer!
Patriotism is a noble thing! Blind patriotism only allows the government to pull the wool over the eyes of the citizens and continue its tyranny.
The abortion question is NOT the only thing on the table when electing McCain! Americans NEED to see the coffins to that all the infighting within the Democratic Party can be put into perspective!
Clinton/Obama, whomever you are for, remember no one wants their child to die in a war concocted by a deceitful administration! Please STOP the infighting! PLEASE!!!
Refreshing to hear some truth in the midst of all this other rubbish and fear mongering.
Your absolutely right about abortion not being the only issue on the table when electing McCain . He does not stray that far from Bush's agenda and we all have seen where Bush brough this country in the near 8 years of his reign as king . Bush brought us war with the death of thousands of our men and woman and millions of displaced Iraqi citizens ,Bush brought us torture which is against the geniva convention,he brought a violattion of constitutional rights with his spying on American citizens and McCain agreed with all of these things .Do we want business as usual in our government or do we want change ?
When i was producing a TV news report on Detroit's Palestinians in the late 70's and wanted a still of Arafat to reflect his support, I figured it would take me a few minutes at the library to grab a picture from all of our major news magazines. Then I looked at how he was presented in the MSM-photo division. He was sneering, never clean shaven--he looked like a hood, gangster, low-life, a rat, not the leader of a people. It was a revelation to see how the selection of a photo prejudiced a story and that there was an unconscious conspiracy in all the news magazines to denigrate this man. It took me hours and hours to find a neutral photo where he didn't look like he was in a police line-up.
If you think Obama is going to create Obamamania with any more voters than he already has you're nuts. He's got the gullible among us already and there ain't no more fools to fool.
I see that Billary has a forty-three point lead over Obama in W Va. Not in and of itself relevant since I don't think Billary has a prayer anyway. However! Look if you will at the demgraphics of WHO ,these people ARE. They are the average American. The Democratic voter. And they plainly DO NOT like what they see. Any Obamabot who dismisses them as something else does so at his or her great peril. These people are saying that Obama is an effete academic type without a clue as to who real Americans are. I for one happen to agree with them.
W Va. is not an aberration but an actual reflection of a large school of thought. Think about it people. Think about it.
I hope your all aware that not all these posts against your candidate are Democrats .
Rush Limbaughs operation Chaos is still going on folks so don't buy into the baited arguements on either side .
Democrats your job is to chose a candidate of your party and not trash the other Democrat candidate and add fuel to the Repuiblican's fire.
If you want to fight then fight with the Republican's who want to see more of our children killed in this God foresaken war and who want to trash our constitution and take away all your rights.
Look at the how Limbaugh is trying to corrupt Democrats votes by telling his fellow Republican's to vote for Hillary and cause chaos in our party .He should be brought up on voter fraud charges .You want to fight then fight about that and come together for your party and the sake of this country .Should another Republican get in office and completely distroy this country you will only have yourselves to blame .
Let me start by saying i don't care who wins this ridiculous presidency, they all are pitiful politicians in their own right. But what is totally sickening is this Obamamania and Second coming crap. He is a deceitful, bitter politician with a hidden agenda that is going to rock your world if elected. Nothing more, period.
As opposed to all those good, honest politicians who've taken such good care for us for the past 15 years?
I am COUNTING on Obama rocking our world. That's what we need. Rock the corrupt war mongers crap outta the game.
HOW PROPHETIC. HOW MUCH DO YOU CHARGE FOR A READING?
Pathetic is a better term I think. This isn't some damn football game or rock concert. However! the terms honest and politician are mutually exclusive.
Boy, ya'll work those knee pads don'tcha? lol.
I was an Edwards supporter and still think that he is a better candidate and would make a better President than Clinton or Obama. I have been a loyal Democrat, have worked for equal rights, have supported the Southern Poverty Law Center which fights the kKK and white supremacist groups, physically protected abortion clinics, and been progressive and I take great offense at being labeled a racist and a bigot for not liking or respecting Obama for a good many legitimate reasons.
I grew up in WV and have family there, and I can remember passing out Kennedy things in 1960, when WV, the small, poor, white, rural, working class state was the only reason Kennedy was elected.
Most of our family is still there and I can tell you that HIllary Clinton is overwhelmingly supported there because they like her, know her, respect what Bill Clinton achieved. They went BUSH IN 2000 AND 2OO4, but they were ready to OVERWHELMINGLY go Democratic this time. The number of HILLARY SUPPORTERS would carry the state in the fall. Face that folks. Kentucky is the very same story. However, if Obama is the candidate, YOU CAN FORGET THE DEMOCRATS WINNING.
WV is a poor, working-class state with decent peoplewho don't believe that Obama knows or cares about what they need, and this stuff of slinging the racism thing at them has turned them completely off. I fear that Obama shall be the McGovern and Dukakis of 2008.
You said all you need to TX, " They went BUSH IN 2000 AND 2OO4" demonstrates the decision making skills of your kin in WV. That would explain their beliefs that " They knows or cares about what they need, and this stuff of slinging the racism thing at them." It all makes total sense.
And they'll go McCain in November as will Texas. And the Obama zealots are as clueless as their "Messiah" as to why. Care to place a small wager?
I did not see anything in your post that suggests you care about liberal values, meaning you are De-publican like Hillary is or a racist like any of her surrogates. Only a racist gets offended for being called one.
Actually, the line is:
People who call others racist are often the most racist.
Just thought I'd clarify that for you.
Why is it that you think that poor people in WV think that somebody who was raised by a single mom and who finished paying his university loans recently will care for them less than somebody who has been shmoozing big corporates, politicians, etc for 20 years or so and have a bank account of over $100millions ?
If someone has to answer that then you are as out of touch as Obama is. May I suggest you reexamine the situation. I don't think it wise to denigrate the people of W Va.Your "Red Herring" comment about single mothers and student loans notwithstanding.
When you think about it, who was the last presidential candidate who needed loans to attend college?
Bill Clinton.
Because people in WV are widely portrayed to be just inbred (read as: stupid, uneducated, unable to form opinions without being told what they are) and out-of-touch enough to buy what she's selling without looking into the matter. Of course, since most people in WV are poor, working-class, and politically involved enough to know, by now, that Obama's a far better choice, she's unlikely to carry as much of the state as hoped.
I do hope Senator Obama wins and is as intelligent as he appears to be and as his academic record says he is. Please, if you are racist and live in this world today, curb your ignorant bent and vote for the brightest bulb on the tree. We've had all the damned dim wits we need for the next while. He's beholdin' to not a soul and maybe will straighten out the pathetic mess we are in. At least we hope and pray he can and will. He will bring in around him the most intelligent, politicaly savy politicians available to advise him and help him make decisions to prevent us from destroying ourselves.
"He's beholdin' to not a soul "LOL
That is a joke, right?
I agree, in spite of stereotyping, the people you describe have an inate dignity and common sense. Obama will not win, but the margin will, I believe, suprise many.
Generally speaking candidates follow an unwritten rule: never destroy your challenger from within the party. Nonetheless Hillary chose the republican's signature strategy to use against Obama. Consequently those rovian tactics split the party into the Obama camp and the Clinton camp. It is fair to assume that Barack Obama is the presumed nominee so can she successfully convince her supporters to vote for him so democrats win the presidency?
Obama followed the rules and won. Include both Michigan and Florida he is still ahead. Theretofore if Hillary tries to reverse the outcome of the nomination by changing the rules it could cost the party the general election.
Many of Hillary's supporters (evidently did not do their research) fell hook-line-and-sinker for her "talking points" against Obama. So if she says, "Oh never mind -- forget what I said; it was just politics," how will her backers respond? Granted Obama is not entirely innocent, but he never attacked HRC with the vengeance her 'handlers and surrogates' have him.
Now the problem is two-fold: bringing the democratic party back together and getting Obama elected. It will take twice as much energy and it will be difficult. The goal, of course, is to win against McCain. A McCain presidency would be the same as a third Bush term only on steroids! So the last thing party members want is a party divided.
Yes, Hillary made the "unwritten" mistake of questioning and campaigning against the Messiah and now she must be cast away from the Democratic party and publicly stoned. Barack didn't have to open his mouth because he had the media and surrogates do his dirty work for him. All they had to do is whisper that the Clinton's intentions were racial and it spread like wild fire. He doesn't win a state, the people of the state must be racist and not want to vote for the Black candidate. She says that she is the stronger candidate; she must be saying that he can't win because he's black, not because people doubt his experience. He loses in november; it must be because she was too tough on the fragile messiah; it can't be that he just might not be a good candidate.
I guess you didn't hear what she said today. Have no fear, you will. She could hardly be more explicit than when she said she had the support of more hard working Americans, white people . . . could she?
Posted May 8, 2008 | 07:06 PM (EST)