Capturing the Moral Imagination Proposal December 2006
-
Upload
james-greenberg -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Capturing the Moral Imagination Proposal December 2006
Capturing the Moral Imagination in the Age of Images and Spectacles: The Case of Animal Rights
Overview: As mass media has become dominant within post-industrial
societies, advocates of social causes of all shades have increasingly come
to rely on visual appeals in their efforts to shape and alter what the ideas
and images the public holds regarding a specific issue. This trend has
arguably manifested itself in political campaigns, social movement
advocacy, and social marketing campaigns intended to alter public
attitudes and behaviors about a given matter.
This trend towards the deployment and utilization of visual images
raises significant questions for advocates of social causes: how are visual
images utilized in efforts to shape the public imagination and perception?
What does this emphasis on the visual mean for social movements and
causes that originated in movements characterized by sustained linear,
rational argument?
The purpose of this book is to investigate the increasing emphasis on
the visual as a means to shape and transform the moral imagination of the
public through the case of the contemporary animal rights movement. The
animal rights movement provides an excellent case study for this
investigation and outstanding examples of the use of visual appeals in an
attempt to alter the moral imagination of the public. Emerging with the
publication of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation in 1975, the animal rights
movement gained public attention through its compelling use of visual
materials in attempts to alter public perception regarding the treatment
of animals. In sum, this book also raises the question: how does a movement
rooted in academic philosophy makes claims and attempt to influence public
opinion in the age of “images and spectacles”?
Media and the creation of social problems: One of the significant
aspects of the “cultural turn” in the social sciences has been the
increased analytical attention relating to how cultural phenomena and
artifacts have measurable impacts outside of explicitly cultural milieus. A
prime example of this blurring of boundaries between cultural
manifestations (especially within popular culture) and other aspects of
social life has been the increasing impact of visual media and
entertainment and how they impact public perceptions of social issues. For
example Glassner (1999) contends that the paradoxical growth in the
American fear of criminal victimization during the 1990s, while measurable
2
rates of violent crime were actually declining, is attributable to both
disproportionate news coverage of the violent crime, politicians who
actively inflamed public concerns about crime, and numerous popular
culture media artifacts (such as television programs and films) which also
emphasize violent crime. Glassner’s argument is compelling for two
reasons: it supports the importance of cultural variables as having
explanatory significance outside of explicitly cultural settings, and it
also suggests the importance of the “agenda setting” capacity of media
(McCombs, 2004). Glassner (1999) and McCombs (2004) are hardly alone in citing the
capacity of media coverage to influence public opinion regarding specific
social and/or political issues. Bob (2005) has cited the capacity (or
inability) of social movements to utilize marketing strategies as being
essential to explaining whether or not an event or phenomena (such as
famine or genocide) comes to occupy a prominent position within public
discourse; a position that may even lead nation-states to take action(s)
advocated by the social movements. What is significant here is not simply
that social movements or other advocates make factually compelling cases,
but that these cases also become visually and emotionally compelling
narratives for the public at large. A parallel case may be made regarding
recent political advertising campaigns in the United States. Brader (2006)
argues that the rise of televised political advertising has been
accompanied with visually and emotionally compelling appeals that are
often substantively weak or misleading: the appeals that are visually or
emotionally appealing command more attention within the public agenda. In
sum, those appeals which are more “spectacular” are more likely to attain
public attention.
The spectacle: In the Society of the Spectacle (1967), Debord
contends that contemporary developed societies have become dominated by
“the spectacle”: unrelenting waves of visually compelling and engaging
images and narratives whose sum effect is to pacify the public whom they
captivate. More recently, Kellner (2003) has continued the discussions of
“the spectacular”, supporting Debord’s arguments about the ubiquity of
the spectacle well outside of popular culture, as well as its distracting
aspects (such as the prominence given to the OJ Simpson trial). For both
Debord and Kellner, the spectacular is an entity that serves to bolster
and maintain current economic and political arrangements through
generating passivity with the general public. However, this account of the
3
spectacular in the context of agenda setting raises a question: can the
“spectacular” also become a zone for conflict and the transformation of
public perception?
The spectacular as a battleground over the moral imagination:
Edelman (1988) suggests that much of contemporary politics consists of
conflicts created through competing spectacles, seeking public legitimacy
and prominence. Edelman argues, for instance, that social and political
problems are not self-evident, but rather are created and sustained by
compelling spectacles that are generated by advocates. Moving beyond
Edelman, it is not a dramatic leap to suggest that public perceptions
regarding morality may also be influenced, and even shaped, by advocates
within the “spectacular”. Stout (2006) suggests that much of the
motivation that facilitated the social fissures that led to the American
Civil War – and later sustained the combatants – was generated through
appeals to the moral imagination that emerged within the mediated
“spectacular” of the day: newspapers, sermons, and appeals within the
popular culture like Uncle Tom’s Cabin. In short, Stout’s discussions of
the moral understandings and perceptions that led to and sustained the
American Civil War suggest that the role of the “spectacular” was not to
generate passivity, but rather was a zone of significant conflict.
The “spectacular” and advocating animal rights: The contemporary
animal rights movement makes a very compelling case to investigate within
the realm of the active “spectacular”. As the literature on agenda setting
suggests, one of the significant aspects of media coverage is that it brings
attention to issues and phenomena that may not be directly encountered by
most media consumers in advanced, (post)industrial societies. Just as most
news consuming North Americans have not directly experienced
international humanitarian disasters, but learn of these events through
media coverage, it is also unlikely that many of the concerns expressed by
animal rights advocates (such as the use of animals in medical and
commercial experimentation, the killing of animals for fur garments, the
slaughter of animals for consumption, and so on) have been directly
experienced. For example, the case of the head injury laboratory of Thomas
Gennarelli University of Pennsylvania in 1985 involved the release of
segments from Gennarelli’s own research tapes (captured by members of
the Animal Liberation Front) to both political leaders and the mass media.
These graphic images, in tandem with an energetic campaign of protest, and
evidence that Gennarelli had violated federal laws associated with
4
federal funding received by the laboratory, culminated in the closing of
the laboratory (Finsen and Finsen, 1994).
Beyond simply depicting graphic imagery of animals as a form of
“moral shock” (Jasper and Nelkin, 1992) the animal rights movement is also
engaged in an effort to cultivate and transform aspects of the moral
imagination of the wider public. In this sense, the utilization of images and
other cultural artifacts should be understood not simply at attempts at
persuasion, but rather as an attempt to build within the spectacular an
alternative moral imagination which contains within it new moral and
ethical understandings regarding animals, their treatment by humans, and
the moral status of those who are depicted as causing harm to animals. In
this manner, the “spectacular” become an active zone of conflict, within
which animal advocates struggle against other groups and organizations
who utilize animals for economic gain (as in research, etc.).
Sociological warfare and cultural domination. At the core of this
project is the hypothesis that the spectacle is one of the primary sites for
conflict and attempts to transform and manipulate the moral imagination
of the public. Efforts similar to this have been undertaken by state actors
for centuries, but are also distinct from (and inadequate for) the focus of
this study. Lasswell(1958) makes the distinction between psychological
and political warfare. Psychological warfare at its most elemental refers
to the utilization of “…the means of mass communication in order to
destroy the enemy’s will to fight “(Lasswell, in Daugherty and Janowitz,
1958: 22)(italics in original). Therefore psychological warfare includes
typical government propaganda (both visual and written) as well as the
“propaganda of the deed”: “a term borrowed from social revolutionaries,
which emphasized the importance of assassinating or the taking of
emotionally significant cities or the importance of surprise and the
cultivation of revolutionary aims against enemy governments” (Lasswell,
in Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 23). Lasswell argues that “political
warfare” is a more inclusive term which “adds the important idea that all
instruments of policy need to be properly correlated in the conduct of
war “(Lasswell, in Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 24). These instruments
include diplomacy to divide internally and externally to separate an enemy
from potential allies, and economic activities intended to weaken an
opponent. Whereas the main target of psychological warfare is the
“enemy’s will to fight”, the targets of Political warfare include “allies,
5
neutrals and the home audience” in support of the war effort (Lasswell, in
Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 24).
These terms are significant because they emphasize the importance of
ideological variables within armed conflict between states. These terms
are also useful because they indicate the relative limitations of these
concepts in addressing many of the activities of social movements,
subcultures, and other non-state actors. While the activities of such
actors may resemble psychological warfare in that they are intended to
encourage an opponent to withdraw from a conflict or acquiesce, or
political warfare in that they involve attempts to persuade third parties to
join forces and/or abandon a former ally or to divest economic resources.
However, there are significant limitations to these terms when applied to
non-state actors. Firstly, they are not necessarily part of an actual or
potential armed conflict (as in the case of the Cold War). Secondly, non-
state actors generally lack the communicative, economic, and other
resources of states. Thirdly, and most critically, non-state actors tend to
have a significant difficulty regarding legitimacy. Unlike political or
psychological warfare between states, where much of propaganda is
targeted at either encouraging existing behavior (such as soldiers
fighting) or emphasizing self-interest (encouraging enemy combatants to
surrender or desert a cause depicted as unworthy or unjust), non-state
actors must encourage outsiders of the legitimacy of their cause(s), often
without the benefit of nationalism or other existing cultural or moral
resources. Moreover, specific conflicts between non-state actors and
others often are indicative of a much broader clash of world views. For
example, a “fur-free Friday” protest by animal rights activist resembles
psychological warfare in that the protest may weaken the intentions of
both consumers and producers to possess or market fur garments. Such
protests also emphasize a central claim of the animal rights movement: the
killing of animals for their fur to be used in luxury goods is ethically
indefensible. In sum, many non-state actors are advocating ideals and
alternative visions of social life that are not paralleled by traditional
manifestations of psychological warfare. Since such protests and
propaganda campaigns are not simply attempts to resolve one specific
matter (such as the sale of fur garments), but are also advocating an
alternative consciousness (Gusfield, 1981) towards many related issues
which, if successfully implemented would dramatically alter the social
6
landscape, these types of efforts are best understood as “sociological
warfare” or efforts at cultural domination.
Sociological warfare and the moral imagination: The essence of
this project is to address how conflicts within the spectacular have as
their ultimate goal the shaping of the broader societal moral imagination.
Therefore, this project intends to transcend studies of social movements
and other claimsmakers that concentrate on the framing of issue, and
instead focuses on the wider scope of how tactics such as framing are
emblematic of more comprehensive efforts to transform the societal moral
landscape.
The contemporary animal rights movement is an outstanding vehicle
for examining this question. Obviously nonhuman animals are unable to
advocate for themselves within human societies; therefore the
contemporary animal rights movement becomes the primary means through
which efforts to shape and alter moral perceptions of animals and human
relations with them. Secondly, the history of the animal rights movement
provides an intriguing venue for questions of the creation of moral
spectacle. The animal rights movement emerged in the United Kingdom and
North America during the later part of the nineteenth century as urban
centers grew and daily contact with animals became narrowed to primarily
companion animals and animals utilized in labor. As the latter category of
animals shrank due to mechanization, increasingly the contact that North
Americans and western Europeans have with animals (beyond companion
animals) is through virtual spectacles, such as visual depictions and zoos.
Therefore, many of the perceptions about animals and moral questions
concerning animals are articulated within and through a created
spectacle. Thirdly, the contemporary animal rights movement is faced with
the stark reality of needing to transmute a philosophical and
scientifically rooted world view into a compelling vision that may capture
the moral imagination of the wider public. While this project will focus
centrally on the contemporary animal rights movement, its insights
regarding conflicts fought within the spectacular may be applicable to a
variety of other social movements, such as anti-globalization, anti-
abortion, environmental, and human rights organizations. All of these
movements share the commonality of social distance between themselves,
their subjects, and the public moral imagination, and the efforts to
control the content and focus of the moral imagination of the public.
7
Chapter Overview of Capturing the Moral Imagination in the Age of
Images and Spectacles
Chapter One: Introduction to the main thesis of the book: that the
“spectacle” has recently become a primary zone of conflict for activists,
moral entrepreneurs, public relations practitioners, and other agenda-
setters vie with each other to influence the moral imagination of the
public. This book will argue that the contemporary animal rights movement
is an excellent example of these phenomena.
Chapter Two: Origins and characteristics of the spectacle. This chapter is
primarily theoretical, and provides readers with an overview of the
philosophical and social scientific literature of “the spectacle. The
primary innovation of this chapter is that the “spectacle” is not best
understood as an environment which necessarily sedates the larger public
(as Guy Debord argues in The Society of the Spectacle) but is instead
understood as a zone of conflict.
Chapter Three: Cajoling and capturing the moral imagination. This chapter
is also primarily theoretical. It seeks to provide a sociological discussion
of the public moral imagination and provide a historical and historical
overview of different strategies intended to awaken or provoke it.
Chapter Four: Towards a theory of moralization. This primarily
theoretical chapter will examine a phenomenon that is arguably central to
efforts to shape the moral imagination of the public: what Paul Rozin
terms moralization. Moralization refers to how practices, phenomena,
and/or groups are given a moral status that they previously lacked. This
chapter will explore historical examples of how moralization occurs.
Chapter Five: Sociological warfare. This chapter is both theoretical and
substantive. It continues the discussion in chapter three, and focuses on
differing strategies of both states and non-state actors in efforts to
manipulate or alter aspects of the public moral imagination. In this
chapter I will argue that what the contemporary animal rights movement is
actually involved in is a form of sociological warfare, in that it is actively
offering an alternate vision of the interactions of humans and nonhuman
actors.
Chapter Six: Striving for cultural domination. This chapter is also a
mixture of the substantive and theoretical. Its primary focus will be on
how the contemporary animal rights movement has attempted to alter
aspects of the broader culture beyond traditional social movement
8
strategies of persuasion. This chapter will compare these efforts and
cultural domination with state-based efforts at public diplomacy.
Chapter Seven: Drama of the spectacle. This chapter will provide readers
with several case studies of conflict within the spectacle, and how these
measures (and countermeasures) are best understood as efforts to
influence and dominate the public moral imagination through moralization.
Chapter Eight: Conclusion: The spectacle as a measure of things to come.
While this book focuses on the contemporary animal rights movement, this
chapter will contend that much of what has been observed within the
animal rights movement is a harbinger for other social movements and
groups of claimmakers. This chapter will conclude that both the spectacle,
and the conflicts within it, is likely to remain in the postindustrial world
for the foreseeable future.