The power of photographs in framing contests

The ways in which social and political issues are framed matters. The will to exert control over a public narrative to build consensus around a proposed course of action is apparent across the political spectrum, and in countries around the world.1

We do not yet know if the photograph of Mesut and Irmak will help stimulate increases in humanitarian aid or shift public policy. However, we do have evidence of the impact of other iconic photographs. When I saw the image from Turkey, I was immediately taken back to another tragic photograph from that country, that of lifeless 3-year-old Alan Kurdi washed up on a Turkish beach in September 2015.4 That image, taken by Turkish photojournalist Nilüfer Demir, immediately captured the humanitarian tragedy of the European migration crisis in a way that the millions of words and thousands of images that had previously been produced could not. The effect was immediate. Donations to charitable organisations drastically increased and, in the UK at least, the dominant discourse in the media shifted markedly. For example, on 17^th April, 2015, British tabloid The Sun published an article proclaiming: “What we need are gunships sending these boats back to their own country… Some of our towns are festering sores, plagued by swarms of migrants and asylum seekers, shelling out benefits like Monopoly money. Make no mistake, these migrants are like cockroaches”.5 While extreme, this sentiment was by no means unusual with politicians also using terms like “swarms” and “hordes”6 to describe those supposedly threatening our lifestyles – and even our lives. The Daily Telegraph, another right-leaning newspaper, though less sensationalist than The Sun, reported similar concerns, suggesting that “local services are said to have reached ‘breaking point’”, as the number of asylum-seeking children in Kent county council's care rose from 368 in March to 6297 and reporting: “Channel chaos as migrants exploit strike to get to Britain”.8

What is interesting in the case of Alan Kurdi was how a single photograph could shift the framing of a national conversation, and potentially government policy, so quickly. It also illustrates how social and political issues are not objective facts but are rather layered with meaning by those who have designs on particular outcomes. Therefore, to understand how frames are used to shape particular outcomes, we need to appreciate that the framing of issues is usually constituted by an ongoing struggle for power - and heavily influenced by the media that are able to help contour support for a particular position.

It is also important to understand how the ideological stance of different media organisations will shape how they frame an issue. Janina Klein and I explored these ideas in a study that examined the response in the UK to the Alan Kurdi photograph.11 What we found has clear implications for those interested in the ways in which policy construction takes place.

Erving Goffman, a Canadian-born American sociologist who did the empirical work for his doctoral dissertation in the Shetland Islands, defined frames as “schemata of interpretation” that allow us to bring together numerous pieces of information in a way that allows us to quickly make sense of even potentially complex issues.12 Photographs are particularly powerful in this process because they are able to convey a lot of information instantly, in contrast, for example, to the sequential consumption of written or verbal text. They are also able to elicit an emotional response that can engage us with an issue in a way that is qualitatively different, and often more piercing, than pure cognitive understanding.

When we see certain photographs, such as those of Phan Thi Kim Phúc, Mesut and Irmak Hançer, or Alan Kurdi, it seems that they convey a message that is so incontrovertible and emotionally powerful as to surpass any ideological positioning. To some extent this is true, but what we found in our work on the photograph of Alan Kurdi is that in fact the nature, duration and intensity of the impact will vary depending on the ideological and political stance of those involved.

The comments of prime minister David Cameron reflected a long-held Conservative position that was determined to stop the flow of migrants into the country, articulated in 2012 by home secretary Theresa May's ambition to create a “really hostile environment for illegal immigrants”.16

Following the publication of the photograph of Alan Kurdi, the rhetoric changed dramatically. David Cameron, for example, stated that “as a father” he was “deeply moved” by the photograph.17 He later announced that Britain would take 20,000 refugees from camps on the borders of Syria over the subsequent five years and that the UK would “live up to its moral responsibility towards people forced to flee Syria”.18

Newsrooms across the country were also dramatically affected, with a senior photo editor at one newspaper telling us: “The picture was shown in our midday news conference… the room fell very silent… Everybody who saw that picture, in the first instance they were very shocked, really moved.” An editor at a different newspaper told us, “people [in the newsroom] cried and were very upset by it”. We saw a corresponding change in the framing of the European migration crisis by all ten newspapers, with those fleeing Syria and other countries now being predominantly depicted as refugees, defined by the UNHCR as “persons fleeing armed conflict or persecution”.19 Several newspapers started campaigns to help refugees who arrived in the UK, and to get more admitted.20

As an aside, there are two further issues that are important to reflect upon when considering the impact of such photographs. First, the publication of such a photograph is always accompanied by ethical debates as to if and how it should be released. While this goes beyond the scope of this essay, debates on whether and how to use such photographs are had in editorial newsrooms, at academic conferences, and are raised by members of the public.21 A second issue is how race and ethnicity play into such pictures. The impact of Alan Kurdi, for example, was potentially increased in the west because he looked European and was not, therefore, ‘otherised’ but rather embraced as ‘one of us.’ 22 This issue has become prominent again because of how refugees fleeing wars in Ukraine and Syria have been treated very differently. Again, this is worthy of future consideration.

We can see that the framing of social and political issues really does matter to the way in which they are positioned. We can also see that photographs are particularly impactful in the framing process. However, ideology also matters: those who are already sympathetic will likely find their desire to maintain that framing magnified by an emotion-laden photograph that supports their position. By contrast, the impact on those that are opposed to this position, whether in the media or in government, will likely be short-lived as other ways to frame the issue in a way that supports the dominant ideology are found.