Photographers commit a crime
I absolutely agree with the notion claiming that ?We, in all probability of photography, are able to control what?s being captured, but never how it?s published.? But what, then, is the original purpose of publishing? ?Intention? is obviously one of the answers. In prior era of photography, it mainly functioned to capture an evidence of occurrence and ?truth?, substituting words of mouth. In our modern time, most of them are being published to be ?propaganda? than merely evidence. The terrifying power of the propaganda is like one of a haunting ?phantom?, in the sense that they are both never perceived; still they do overpower the minds. Out of words being already told, we deduce that ?Ghosts are darn scary?, when that ghost is never actually aware of how scary it appears to us itself. What matters here is the ?words? delivered to us, words that lead to belief and imagination. We may never even confront with ghost, but we do believe that it exists, drawn out of fracture of stories we were told in our childhood, motion pictures we saw and literature we read. Consequently, the made believe notion causes the fear in us all along. Hence, I choose to relate ?ghost and photographer? in comparison, for both of them may not know that their ?products? are playing the role of ?propaganda?, either with or without awareness.
?Photographers commite a crime? portrays social commentary revolving around matter of adolescence. The first variable is ?specimen of people in advertising and media career? being compared as a ?ghost?. Targeting on adolescence that are quite convincible, they build up persuasive motivation to Thai teenagers. The media selfishly creates ?mythic? concepts in youngsters? minds, without careful consideration, only hoping for their own advantage.
You just couldn?t agree more, could you?
Grownups name ?Wans? riders as garbage, racing the night illegally out on street, falsely imitating their heroes in the ads.
Grownups never figure about the fact that 6 year old girl tried to whiten her complexion with detergent, for the media says women with fair skin are attractive.
Grownups curse kids doing prostitution, hypocritically all the deeds are done in exclusive clubs arranged by authority.
Grownups blame teenagers in trying to be westernized, forgetting that all Thai media is filled with everything western.
Grownups massively use teenage celebrities in car advertisements, despite awareness of young people?s lack of financial support.
Grownups advertise low-cost cosmetics with superbly beautiful female stars, regardless of obvious fact that they never actually use those cheap products.
Grownups disdain early sex act in teenagers, when sadly there are granted pornography displayed around on shelves.
Grownups say drug usage as social problem is caused by teenagers being won over, but liquor advertising is mainly led by young superstars.
Therefore, I?ve ferreted out that advertising and propaganda have been greatly influencing teenagers by unconcernedly convincing them.
?To figure what?s real and to have assertion of free thought? is somehow what?s perceived through the eyes of ?freedom?. Media agencies are well aware of the fact that people of young age crave liberty of mind, thought, a way to express themselves and to originate something at all. Those characteristics are captured as teenage Achilles? heels. They carelessly lead the kids astray, only hope for their benefits, neglecting bigger social problems that ensue and let the kids be their scapegoats.
I heartily anticipate seeing any responsibility from Thai media towards our society, either in the aspects of ethic and morality of their career, things to be concerned on rather than their own welfare and financial status.
?And may they realize how their blindingly superficial ?haunted? career has been sinning upon innocence and purity of youth?
