Analysis

Conclusion

Through our research and analysis, we learned how to recognize the media’s framing tactics. We were able to see how different cartoonists voiced their opinion, as well as the public’s opinion on the issue of Net Neutrality. By answering the questions below, we were able to explain our findings and expound upon our analysis.

What does your dataset and analysis tell you about what the public is being told to think about your issue?

The public is being told that Net Neutrality is a good thing. The cartoons are framing ISP’s in a negative light and are encouraging the public to disagree with government involvement. Many people believe that the Internet does not need new regulations and ways to “fix” it. Most of the cartoons we chose support the public’s view on this issue.

How does examining mediated visual rhetoric help understand media frames?

By analyzing editorial cartoons we became much more adept at recognizing visual cues and media strategies. Cartoonists do not have the luxury of words and must convey their argument solely through images. As we examined the cartoons we saw the ways that the media framed the issue of Net Neutrality. We found that because the majority of the public agreed with Net Neutrality the media produced material to support that ideology. This project has helped us learn to more fully understand and analyze the logic behind images in the media, particularly in editorial cartoons.

How is visual rhetoric used by the media to influence public conversations?

The media uses controversial and diverse images to provoke the public and encourage strong emotions. Images can be very powerful, they cause people to feel raw emotions that cannot always be achieving in the written word. Editorial cartoonists are able to create a desired feeling or idea in their viewers that persuades them to think what the cartoonist wants them to think. In John H. McManus’ book Detecting Bull he says that “image logic differs radically from text logic”(McManus, 2012, p. 188). Meaning that when we look at images our minds process them differently than it would process a news story.

Why are editorial cartoons important for the public conversation surrounding your debate?

Editorial cartoons are good for society because they are able to start conversations on matters. Each individual cartoon is able to present only one side of the issue, whereas a news article can cover both sides. This obvious bias, not only helps protect our freedom of speech, but inspires the public to form their own opinions on a matter. For the most part, people are either for or against Net Neutrality, seeing cartoons that support only one side can motivate the other side to promote their ideas and beliefs.