visual argumentation

Pentagon Strike is a great example of argument in images, aided by some text, music and fast transitions. It’s a Flash piece that lasts for about five minutes and that uses a lot of images to argue that whatever hit the Pentagon on September 11 couldn’t have been a passenger jet. It’s interesting how this is a kind of visual argument that certainly could have (and probably has) developed for television, but that’s rarely seen there. On the web it’s perfect. It doesn’t take long to watch, it cites eyewitnesses (are we trusting the mass media less and ordinary people more?) and shows us evidence so we can draw our own conclusions. Or at least so we can feel that we’re drawing our own conclusions – I don’t know enough about the subject or who made this piece to know if the images are authentic, and they move so fast I’m not even quite sure if I saw what I thought I saw. Compare this to the other kind of web-based argument: the same argument made in words and links. As Torill pointed out about blogreading, the links are crucial: they not only give a sense of accountability but also genuinely allow the reader to read more and judge for herself – to do her own research. I found this through Kathleen – it’d be interesting to follow the links and see how it spreads. If only I had the time…

01. September 2004 by Jill
3 comments

Comments (3)

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *