If you want to paint a certain group as being needier and less fortunate than another, you simply use pictures. You get that group front and center at every opportunity. Whether it be on billboards, television, the Internet, magazines, newspapers, etc. Always, always, pretend that their story is one that should be shared with the world. That they are doing a service to their group by airing their difficulties. Make them feel that every group needs a hero, a voice, and they’ve been specially chosen to carry the torch.
Soon, even that group of people will believe they’re needier and less fortunate. Before you know it, that group will stop trying as hard to fend for themselves. They’ll depend on outside assistance to remedy inside problems. Outside groups will become their crutch, their live-sustaining breath. It goes back to the old adage, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”
In this instance, it is key that the group is given the fish, never a rod or a net or a spiked stick. Matter of fact, the group is never allowed to witness first-hand the catching, cleaning and preparing of the fish. Never a chance should one take that trade secrets aka true agendas might be revealed.
Which brings me back to the point of this commentary. Through the use of pictures, our victims and saviors have been painted. Evidence of this is a recent article on the increasing use of food stamps in America: USA becomes Food Stamp Nation but is it sustainable? The article includes quotes from three food stamp recipients of seemingly different ethnicities and backgrounds. In other words, a well-balanced article. *sigh*
But here’s where the pictures get painted: the only photos attached to the article are those of a Hispanic family and a Black mother and child. The article writers were sure to point out that the Black mother is 21 and her daughter 6. Nowhere else is parental age pointed out in relation to the children. Do the math and this mother gave birth around 15 years of age. Believe it or not, that’s a painted picture. One shaped in the mind based on the information provided. This helps paint yet another picture of Black women being promiscuous and having babies at young ages. Of course, this is supposed to only appear to be a coincidental part of writing the story when, really, it has nothing to do with the story. From the photo, we receive another subtle message: the young woman is not sitting at the dinner table with her family, so she must be a single mother. We actually glean more about this young woman from the photo than we do the article—or do we?
The last recipient quote of the article would lead one to believe that this might be a White family (the King’s) due to the mother’s “pride” and therefore reluctance to seek out food stamps. Enter her concern about adding to the national debt and it’s left to assume that only a White person would share that type of concern about their government due to them being more knowledgeable, more fiscally responsible and inherently more willing to sacrifice for their government. After all, she practically had to be hog-tied into applying for food stamps. *smirk* Notice that no picture of this couple is to be found in the article, which means either the family may have declined, they were made up to help balance the article, or someone didn’t want us painting pictures about this particular family. You decide which scenario suits you best.
Although there is a photo of a Hispanic family at the dinner table, there are no quotes from them. Why is that so?
Is this to push the anti-immigration message? “See, they’re here in this country eating our food, receiving our assistance. They’re taking food out of your mouths and the mouths of your children. You’re paying for them to eat. Look at the large plates of food and the big bowl of fruit on the table. Your generations will pay for these illegals to eat.” *eye roll*
So, we have to ask, why weren’t the photos only of those quoted? And why was only one photo of a quoted recipient provided, with that being the Black mother and child? Why not the King’s or Saucedo (another person quoted with no accompanying photo)? The answer is simple and goes back to what I said earlier. If you want to make a group of people the face of something, especially something that conveys a negative message to most other groups and within the targeted group, you paint pictures any- and everywhere you can.
This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available on a non-commercial basis in my effort to advance understanding of the link between mass marketing and media information dissemination and mental programming and psychological disturbance-related issues, etc. This constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material within this article is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. Note: If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Leave a Reply