“To photograph is to frame, and to frame is to include.” – Susan Sontag

Did we learn to confabulate or view first? What came first – the syntax or the sight? Irrefutably so, the scene had us in gear forth. 

Have we ever been void of visuals? Visuals and people go hand in hand. 

From the illustration via print to illustration via audio-visual media, we have been so accustomed to shots since time immemorial. It has its roots sown since the time of the Renaissance. But, as a matter of fact, do all images unearth truth; uncover the cut and dried? This is a question worth requisitioning attention. 

Fortuitously, this matter of attention grants us the invitation to attention. That is to say, for every picture glanced upon, ideally, commands attention. We are aroused, alerted and stimulated by varied images. They are devoid of linguistic, cultural, racial or geographical impediments. This brings this phenomenon as part of an emotional bandwagon, which has a universal appeal. It is more easily perceived, processed and analysed as against text. As a testament, Zilmann, Gibson, and Sargent aver that portrayal through pictures is always greater than the most lucid of texts.

Visuals seem to expose our levels of consciousness and bring us closer to the touch of reality. A lot of studies affirm that newscasts with illustrations were better recalled from our semantic memory in comparison with non-illustrated reports. Visuals, in a way, are reservoirs of sound reflection, making them act as living-validation when the time requires. Photographs, as they exist now, have become the mirrors of real-time moments. (King and Lester) 

We often do not hesitate in skipping the documented stories and merely just scrutinise the images. Pictures thereby become virtual symbols and get associated with every happening, with every occurrence and with every instance of which the communities make use, as the hallmark of an event. From the worst-case sufferings, scenarios and disasters to glorious occasions and celebrations, there exists a cause-and-effect relationship between reading and pictures. Pictures, to a large extent, induce the audience to keep reading further and underscore a direct proportion between the two. 

But, circling back to the focal point of this disquisition, does every picture unravel verity, or are we framed by this visual framing? 

Referring to the premise of visual framing, this process relates to a selection of certain aspects and excludes other aspects from a storyline. It basically outlines this notion as an “attentional filter.” It elucidates that some core aspects are likely pre-decided and are chosen to create a cognitive dissonance amongst the audience and to distort the perceived reality. This facilitates solely those selected issues within a broad framework and camouflages other issues in a veil within the broad umbrella. 

This leads to absorption merely of those issues which are pressed upon by the news provider or the editor, or as a part of a covert mission. A lot of considerations, ranging from camera angle, lighting, subject, shot whether mug shot, long shot or close-up shot, background, editing biases and ethical considerations, among others, result in the formation of visual frames. 

“Images speak more, express more, and have significantly better outcry than words, phrases and sentences.” They are undoubtedly accepted as a better medium and act as a portal of proof by the viewers. This framing thus leaves some deep meaning or deep inferences left to be undisclosed, thereby altering the stimulus-response cortex of an individual and delivering them partially tuned information. The two I(s) of Visuals, being iconicity and indexicality, have a large role in influencing the ideological messages and manipulating our cognitions. (Messaris and Abraham)

Visuals, too, like literary devices, get converted into rhetorical devices by making use of literary tools like irony, metaphor, exaggeration, hyperbole and allegories, conveying meaning better than just text. Schwalbe is of the opinion that just like a filter conceals, sorts, and eliminates the redundancies, likewise, Visual Framing is nothing but a filter that continuously sieves and screens. 

From selection of camera angle to editing, refinement and cropping, everything is made picture perfect and aesthetically amending. To substantiate, front page photographs, close-up shots , and bigger images receive a greater span of attention as compared to smaller images and long shots. Acting as a paragon to this notion could be the calamities, for instance, a close-up shot of miserable and malnourished children in Gaza had inflicted far more emotional trauma. This leads to a framework referred to as “Priming”, where  certain components are exaggerated more than others, making a disconnect between what is instructed by the text and what the image captures.  

It indeed thus brings in “Visual Gatekeeping.” News editors, publications, and photographers all in unison have to fulfil the requirements of the recent tastes and trends of the audience, and have to sell all that has a wide appeal. They henceforth modify all the shots in a way that coincides with the aesthetic appeal, opens up the viewers’ visual cortex, linking them directly to the visual frame and something that is crystal clear. 

Reiterating the essence of the research, the recent atrocities on women from murders and rapes to abductions and abuses, were tailored to alter the responses of the viewers, diverting their attention on the victims’ injuries and wounds, collecting a number of close-up shots, highlighting some instances relatively more, to garner a mass appeal and using the power of frame to frame the perpetrators. 

In a nutshell, to use the power of the frame is bilateral. Using it to frame the fiend is a feat, but to use it for extrinsic profits and manipulating publicity is a prostration.