The impact of Photography on war and conflict

By Miles Fryett (202157178)

Photographs have undoubtedly shaped how people perceive war and tragedy. Advances
in camera technology have allowed for more shocking photos of conflict to be published.
Photographs are also a unique form of art as the most memorable photographs are not always
taken by a trained professional but rather by an armature. Photographs are also one of the
mediums where context is the most important, a caption can change what a photograph means
and represents. Susan Sontag explores these ideas in chapter 2 of her book regarding the Pain of
Others. Where she argues that Photographs have enhanced the way the general public views war
and conflict by making the conflict seem more real to them. This effect Is due to a photograph’s
perception as a medium of absolute truth which can be a dangerous assumption as context often
allows photos to be misused.

Conflict has always played a pivotal role in human history. War is often at the heart of
fables and legends where tales and songs pass on knowledge of critical moments in history.
These representations of the past were all oral or written until the advent of the film camera. For
the first time in history, a moment in time could be frozen, preserved exactly as it was for all
future observers to see. Photographs are the first-time machine humans have ever invented,
supposedly free from any artistic interference. A simple moment in time, showcasing exactly
what was happening at that moment. Initially, camera equipment was too large, and the exposure
time was too long to capture the rapid fast-paced action of combat. As a result, up until the
Spanish civil war (1936-1939), most war photography was simply after-action shots. Which were
able to portray the epic theaters of battles and the unprecedented destruction of modern war but
lacked the shock factor which makes photographs resonate with the average person. The Spanish
civil war changed the game when it comes to photography in the media. Film equipment had
finally become compact enough to move through a war zone and take action shots. This large
innovation moved the blood-stained front lines from Spain to living rooms across the world and
would go on to transform the public's opinion on war and conflict. Pictures are so transformative
as they bring “awareness of the suffering” that is happening elsewhere [1]. These photographs
help educate the reader about what is going on in the conflict by grabbing the reader’s attention.
Sontag states this clearly when she writes, “The understanding of war among readers that haven’t
experienced war is chiefly a product of these images” [1]. Personally, a photograph that has
inspired me to learn more about a conflict is also one of the most famous photographs ever taken,
the “Tank Man” photograph (Found in appendix A) was a picture taken by Jeff Widener on June
5th, 1989. The photograph depicts a man of unknown identity standing in front of a column of
tanks blocking their passage. The picture was taken the day after the Chinese government opened
fire killing hundreds if not thousands of unarmed peaceful Chinese protestors in Tiananmen
Square in an event now known as the Tiananmen Square massacre. Tank Man is the perfect
example of how “A photograph has only one language.” [1] A single picture taken a world away
that doesn’t contain a single English speaker in it has educated more people about the Tiananmen
Square massacre than a million words and interviews have. If there were no cameras, I doubt any
of us would even have the slightest idea about the events of Tiananmen Square as China has
banned the picture and any mention of Tiananmen Square from its history books and their
national internet. Upon first seeing the image, it doesn’t even seem real, something so large as a
tank stopped by something as small as a single man with 2 grocery bags. The photo contains so
many emotions, defiance, bravery, and cunning, these emotions help develop the photograph's
shock factor which helps ingrain it into the minds of the reader. Tank Man is a truly
unforgettable photo and that is why I believe it to be the climax of photojournalism concerning
conflicts and war. A single unforgettable photo that says so much but also so little about the
tragic events of Tiananmen Square which shaped the minds of the public forever.

The “democracy of photographs” is another pivotal idea Susan explores in Chapter 2.

Typically, with all forms of art a level of mastery increases the quality of the final product.
Photographs and videos can be a notable exception. A great photograph doesn’t always have to
be taken by a trained professional. The photograph is a captured perspective, a moment in time, a
great photograph is simply a great perspective at a great time. A less polished picture can also
have a “special kind of authenticity” to it [1]. An armature photograph can feel rawer, a better
more accurate representation of what you may see with your own eyes from their perspective.
Professional photography can create stunning high-quality images with bright contrast and high
dynamic range but sometimes these images can look too good. They lose a certain authenticity
because they look unrealistically good. When it comes to photographs of conflict and war, we
expect muddy blurry photographs as war is not clean and our perception of it should not be
either. This idea is summarized by Sontag when she writes “For the photography of atrocity,
people want the weight of witnessing without the taint of artistry”[1]. The Here is New York art
exhibit makes use of both amateur and professionally taken photos to showcase the events of
911. In the exhibit they hung thousands of uncaptioned and uncredited pictures and allowed
people to pay 25$ for them then they could find out who took the picture. Many of the
photographs purchased were not professionally taken but taken by amateurs, as thousands of
pictures sent to the exhibit were taken by amateurs at just the right time in just the right place to
create special pictures. One such picture contains a single man running down Broadway Street
being chased by tall consuming clouds of smoke taken during 911. This picture can be found in
Appendix A. This photograph was taken by an amateur photographer Kelly Price and is the
perfect example of the “democracy of photos.” While thousands of well-trained lenses fixate on
the fiery world trade centers this amateur photographer was able to get a uniquely human shot.
One that fills emotion with anticipation and fear. A great photograph stands alone, it doesn’t
need context or explanation or an author even to enact an emotional response. The terror can be
felt through the screen as you see the man look back as he runs away from a seemingly endless
plume of smoke. One aspect of this image that I love is how it is not perfectly clear; the quality is
enough to make out exactly what’s happening, but it retains its authenticity, and you can almost
feel the panic the photographer was feeling as they needed to run away shortly after taking it.
With photography both film and digital there is a large element of luck. Your photograph needs
to look good, not be too blurry, and be taken at just the right time from just the right place. Only
if you are truly lucky can you get an epic photograph like Kelly Price captured on 911. It is for
all these reasons that a great photograph can come from anywhere not just the lens of a
professional.

A photograph can be used as a great tool for manipulation if inadequate context is given
for it. The photographs of conflict and war that often make the front page are not the ones that
are the most objective or the most honest, they are the pictures that concern the largest group of
people possible and align with the narrative the news is attempting to push. Conflict and wars
that are “invested with the meaning of larger struggles” [1] attract more people and readership
for the paper so they are often used to headline stories and captivate audiences. The Tiananmen
Square tank man photo is an excellent example of this, the idea of rebellion against oppression is
a lot more commonly shared than ethnic differences between the people in the Darfur region of
Sudan at the center of the Darfur genocide, thus Tiananmen Square is well photographed and
documented while the Darfur genocide is under photographed and went more unnoticed by the
general population as it is less relatable to people. Captions and context are other aspects that can
have a drastic effect on the impact a photograph can have. Captions are a useful tool to help put
the photograph in context, especially useful when those far away from a situation may need help
interpreting what exactly they are looking at. Many photographs are used out of context which
can be extremely dangerous as we typically view photographs as a window of truth. Susan
Sontag was specifically appalled by the mainstream coverage and lack of context surrounding
the 911 terrorist attacks. She wrote in the September 24th, 2001, issue of the New Yorker,
“outrageous deceptions being peddled by public figures and tv commentators is startling” [2].
Sontag was upset with how the media used false context surrounding the events of 911 to paint
the events as a “cowardly attack on civilization or liberty or humanity or the free world” instead
of a “consequence of specific American alliances and actions” [2]. Sontag felt like the media was
using images and videos of the event to help create a false narrative around the terrorist attack
which she felt should have made Americans rethink their foreign policy and intelligence
capabilities rather than rain fire from above in an unnecessary future war. Sontag’s instance of
correct context and critical thinking skills is what made her a leader in the field of
photojournalism and the ethics that surround it. A great example of a photograph that’s meaning
is manipulated by the caption is a photograph taken by George Diack which depicts a young boy
sitting on a burned-down house. This photo can be found in Appendix A. The Doukhobors were
a Russian ethnic group who settled live in British Columbia, they were often the targets of
freedomites, other Doukhobors who still wished to live a traditional way. The Freedomites were
ethnically Doukhobors who would burn down non-aligned Doukhobor's houses and orchestrate
other terror attacks. Nick Kootnikoff is the child in the picture, and he claims the photograph was
taken out of context. He claims after picking him at random off the street they walked all around
the house to get the “right image” that the media outlet who took them wanted to portray [3].
They also picked out clothes that were somewhat representative of a prison uniform to portray
him as a future criminal of sorts. Nick claims the purpose of the photo was to be intentionally
used without context and to portray him and his ethnic group as terrorists which also lead to him
getting bullied in school while also degrading his culture. There are countless stories like Nicks's
where images are taken out of context and used in a harmful way to intentionally manipulate
readers by tricking them with a medium, they associate with objective truth.

Photographs are a powerful tool used by the media to bring conflict and war closer to the
viewer. The evolution of the camera has enabled this by allowing action shots that enact a shock
response from the viewer. Additionally, a great photograph doesn’t always need to be taken by a
professional as timing and perspective are vital parts of what makes an image memorable and
impactful. Finally, the context the media uses to describe an image has a large effect on how
viewers perceive it, this is very important as images are viewed as windows of truth so putting
them out of context can be a powerful tool for media manipulation. The advent of modern
cameras has played an instrumental role in educating the public about many conflicts and wars
by making them appear more real to the public. A photograph has the ability to open eyes and
make them look in the wrong direction. If used correctly a photograph can be a valuable tool
when trying to turn a skeptic into a believer. With the advancements in mobile phone cameras
maybe, just maybe if you find yourself in the right place at the right time you can take the next
opinion-shifting photograph with the push of a button.
References IEEE
[1] S. Sontag, “Chapter 2,” in Regarding the pain of others, London: Penguin Books, 2019, pp.
20–40

[2] S. Sontag, “Tuesday and After talk of the town,” The New Yorker, New York, Sep. 24, 2001

[3] C. Alcos, “When a photo is taken out of context, this is what can happen,” Matador Network,
https://matadornetwork.com/bnt/photo-taken-context-can-happen/ (accessed Jul. 14, 2023).
APENDIX A

Figure 1: The famous Tank Man photograph depicting a man stopping a tank after the Tiananmen Square Massacre

Figure 2: A Photograph taken after one of the twin towers fell, picturing a man running from a large column of smoke.

Figure 3: A photograph of a young boy taken on top of a burned down building taken to intentionally mislead viewers about the
culture and intentions of Doukhobor ethnic group.