Comments on: The Complexities of Modern Subjectivity in Reporting http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/the-complexities-of-modern-subjectivity-in-reporting/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-complexities-of-modern-subjectivity-in-reporting English 738T, Spring 2015 Sat, 12 Nov 2016 04:10:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Denis Dodson http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/the-complexities-of-modern-subjectivity-in-reporting/#comment-1346 Denis Dodson Wed, 13 May 2015 16:32:49 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1378#comment-1346 "The real in its unedited form is undesirable, not just because it is unproductive as it does not convey a particular political position, but because it is potentially dangerous" That is a fascinating observation. And I believe you are 100% correct in stating that, as soon as any discussion enters an "objective" situation, it loses its objectivity, creating simulated realities. If I recall correctly, there was even a push on twitter to focus on the truly peaceful protests that were happening around the city, but were overshadowed by the violent protests. What I have been considering is whether the focus on the violent necessarily a form of alternate reality to the situation as a whole. Does having a truly peaceful protest existing, though ignored, and having the situation as a whole defined as "violent" become problematic? I am not even entirely sure. “The real in its unedited form is undesirable, not just because it is unproductive as it does not convey a particular political position, but because it is potentially dangerous”

That is a fascinating observation. And I believe you are 100% correct in stating that, as soon as any discussion enters an “objective” situation, it loses its objectivity, creating simulated realities. If I recall correctly, there was even a push on twitter to focus on the truly peaceful protests that were happening around the city, but were overshadowed by the violent protests. What I have been considering is whether the focus on the violent necessarily a form of alternate reality to the situation as a whole. Does having a truly peaceful protest existing, though ignored, and having the situation as a whole defined as “violent” become problematic? I am not even entirely sure.

]]> By: Kayla Harr http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/the-complexities-of-modern-subjectivity-in-reporting/#comment-1329 Kayla Harr Sat, 09 May 2015 01:00:39 +0000 http://mith.umd.edu/eng738T/?p=1378#comment-1329 The point that individuals on both sides of the conflict demonstrated negative responses to potentially objective documentation is a great observation. I would question what it means for any form of documentation to ever be completely objective, and suggest that perhaps those reacting negatively to the filming did not perceive it as objective, but in the interest of discussing a question I find quite compelling in your post, let's assume that the live footage is objective. What I find intriguing about the distinction you're discussing between Twitter representations of the events, which both sides were enthusiastically posting as a form of subjective documentation, and unedited live footage without any particular commentary or focus, which both sides seem to have perceived as a threat, is that it demonstrates preference for crafted, or perhaps even <i>simulated</i> versions of reality. The real in its unedited form is undesirable, not just because it is unproductive as it does not convey a particular political position, but because it is potentially dangerous. The function of media (both social and news, though such distinctions are narrowing) is to represent reality to the audience. However, because objectivity dissolves as soon as decisions about what to represent and how are made, media ultimately simulates a representation of reality as the real itself. In a conflict, both sides create their own competing simulations to attack and discredit the opposing position. It would seem that those who object to objective documentation do not wish for the exchange of simulations to be disrupted. I'm reminded, (probably only because I'm writing a paper on it), of a line from T.S. Eliot's <i>Four Quartets</i>: "human kind / Cannot bear very much reality." It seems that those you observed attempting to obscure or discourage the live footage displayed just such a resistance to the peril of unfiltered reality and its potential to reveal the constructedness of simulation. It's a resistance that I would argue we have encountered in <i>The Matrix</i>, <i>Blade Runner</i>, <i>Frankenstein</i>, and other texts in which characters demonstrate preference for virtual, imagined, dreamed, or otherwise limited forms of reality. The point that individuals on both sides of the conflict demonstrated negative responses to potentially objective documentation is a great observation. I would question what it means for any form of documentation to ever be completely objective, and suggest that perhaps those reacting negatively to the filming did not perceive it as objective, but in the interest of discussing a question I find quite compelling in your post, let’s assume that the live footage is objective.

What I find intriguing about the distinction you’re discussing between Twitter representations of the events, which both sides were enthusiastically posting as a form of subjective documentation, and unedited live footage without any particular commentary or focus, which both sides seem to have perceived as a threat, is that it demonstrates preference for crafted, or perhaps even simulated versions of reality. The real in its unedited form is undesirable, not just because it is unproductive as it does not convey a particular political position, but because it is potentially dangerous. The function of media (both social and news, though such distinctions are narrowing) is to represent reality to the audience. However, because objectivity dissolves as soon as decisions about what to represent and how are made, media ultimately simulates a representation of reality as the real itself. In a conflict, both sides create their own competing simulations to attack and discredit the opposing position. It would seem that those who object to objective documentation do not wish for the exchange of simulations to be disrupted. I’m reminded, (probably only because I’m writing a paper on it), of a line from T.S. Eliot’s Four Quartets: “human kind / Cannot bear very much reality.” It seems that those you observed attempting to obscure or discourage the live footage displayed just such a resistance to the peril of unfiltered reality and its potential to reveal the constructedness of simulation. It’s a resistance that I would argue we have encountered in The Matrix, Blade Runner, Frankenstein, and other texts in which characters demonstrate preference for virtual, imagined, dreamed, or otherwise limited forms of reality.

]]>