politics

Visual Communication is an American Right

Wisconsin State Capitol and flags

In case you haven’t noticed, my wonderful state of Wisconsin is in a bit of turmoil.

I’m being rather facetious here, because unless you’ve been vacationing on Mars since February 11, you’ve certainly witnessed much more than you want of Gov. Scott Walker’s proposed budget repair bill. But no matter from what side one views this standoff-watched-round-the-world, everyone agrees it’s become one of great passion.

It’s also of historic proportion.

Each week as I photograph protesters, I can’t help thinking of the images we see in history books—images of early labor unionists protesting for safe working conditions, women suffragettes marching for rights to vote and civil rights activists standing up for human equality. In all those photos, people visually communicated their message with signs.

Isn’t it blessed that we live in a country where we have the freedom to do so?

Here’s a small sampling of the collective communication going on in Wisconsin (I have to admit, in spite of my journalist’s education, my photos are a bit one sided. I was unable to be in Madison the day Walker supporters marched).

we need more than free hugs

 

people over profit

 

my mom is a teacher and she deserves respect

 

AFL-CIO

 

post-it notes on doors

 

elevator construction local 2

 

greed is why we need unions

 

IBEW local 14

 

iron workers local 383

 

national nurses united

 

open these doors

 

painters allied trades

 

save medicaid

 

keep our futures safe

 

sweet on wisconsin

How (Un)Ethical is Our Design?

Yesterday, my daughter and I discussed a recent New York Times article regarding criticism of an Obama cover photo.

The photo was used by the weekly news magazine The Economist for its June 19 issue. It shows Obama standing, head bowed, hands on hips, with an oil rig in the background. And he’s alone. It’s a dramatic shot evoking a strong message.

Turns out, in the original photo, Obama isn’t alone. Reuters photographer Larry Downing shot the image with two people standing alongside Obama, participating in an apparent conversation.

The Economist’s decision to digitally remove these two has caused a bit of ruckus. Some, including Reuters, feel altering the image has also altered the message.

My daughter’s and my discussion was interesting.

As a visual communications professional, I surmised the magazine wanted to convey a sense of isolation, that Obama is alone in his responsibility of the Gulf oil mess. The Economist’s editor claims not, but given the headline “Obama v. BP” and the story’s content, it’s hard to imagine otherwise. Whatever their motive, editing the extras from the photo creates a very striking composition.

My daughter viewed the issue from a journalistic side. As an attorney interested in government and current affairs, she felt altering the image was a misrepresentation of the event as it occurred. It did not convey the truth.

With today’s sophisticated editing software, this conflict of ethics becomes commonplace. We define graphic design as the use of words and images to visually communicate a message. Photojournalism, on the other hand, is the use of photography to tell a news story. The question we must then consider is how blurred can the line between the two become?

When does editing a photo become unethical?

Is editing software a threat to photojournalism?

Is a magazine cover a journalistic piece or an artistic piece?

How do photojournalism, advertising and art differ, and how should editing ethics apply to each?

What’s your opinion?

Public Relations: For Churches Too?

Happy Inauguration Day!

Whether you’re Democrat, Republican or an Independent, you’ve got to admit President Barack Obama certainly has captured the public’s attention. Yesterday alone, on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Obama reiterated his strong stance on public service and thousands of Americans joined in volunteering.

As Christians, we can easily parallel this agenda with God’s command to love one another. Because he first loved us, we too reach out in love to others. But in doing so, how much attention do we attract? What kind of attention? Do we want attention? Does attention communicate the message of Christ?

Here’s where the term “public relations,” a.k.a. PR, comes in.

Yes, once again, we’re applying the business world to our church world. Can we rightfully do this?

Yes, we can.

Read my disclaimer

Will this business tool bring lost souls to Jesus? No, of course not. Only the Holy Spirit can do that.

Might the Holy Spirit use this tool for his purposes? Of course. Along with his command to spread the gospel, God also gives us knowledge—practical knowledge that can be used completely to his glory.

PR can be God’s outreach tool.

What is PR and how does it apply to our job of communicating Christ?

The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) gives a lengthy definition of PR. In college I learned a more succinct definition: Using communication to create a positive image of an organization or product to the public.

News articles, T.V. interviews, web site, advertising…these are a few of many ways we can communicate a positive image of our church, and ultimately Christ, to the public.

Has your youth group recently held a food drive? Send a press release to your local newspaper. Has a member participated in humanitarian work overseas? Promote it on the Internet. Is your church raising money for a mission? Put up a poster showing your results.
lighthouse1042571_65703912s

Isn’t this bragging?

Jesus tells us we are the light of the world. He describes us as a city on a hill that cannot be hidden. Furthermore, he says “…let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven,” Matt. 5:14 & 16.

PR can allow our light to shine. PR can glorify God.

In a time when the media commonly portrays Christianity in a negative light, it’s imperative we counteract with a positive light. It’s vital we communicate Christ.

Coming next: Writing press releases that get published.

Politics from the Pulpit?

I’m a writer, not a preacher, so I can’t authorize what comes from the pulpit. But “Politics from the Church Newsletter” just doesn’t have the ring to it, and as we all know, it’s all in the headline.

No matter. Whether it’s from the pulpit or the church newsletter, the same thought applies: Politics are a no-no.

As we approach this autumn’s political firestorm, it’s important to remember the tax-exempt status of churches, religious organizations and ministers. This “favorable treatment,” as the IRS refers to the special tax laws applied to non-profit organizations, does come with restrictions.

What does this mean?

Well, if your organization feels compelled to communicate a political endorsement, think again.

By law, Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations are prohibited in becoming directly or indirectly involved in campaigns of political candidates. Like all laws, this has become subject to interpretation, whether you’re preaching from the pulpit, publishing a newsletter or hosting a speaker.

Interpretations or not, apparently the IRS doesn’t overlook the law.

In Pasadena, CA., an Episcopal church nearly lost its non-profit status because of a stance on the Iraq War. In Minnesota, a suburban church came under scrutiny when it invited a candidate to speak on its premises.

So why take the chance? Why disobey the law? Our nation was founded on the ideals of separation of church and state. That includes us too.

“Render unto Caesar…” Luke 20:25.