Facing Off

Abstract

Social media sites have become the new battleground in U.S. presidential politics. In helping to create an identifiable image for candidates, photographs on Facebook have become a convenient outlet for displaying both advertising and candid images of the candidate. While scholars have begun to recognize the impact of photographs on political campaign, Grabe and Bucy have identified potential frames that news photographs enable campaigns to use in hopes of casting candidates in a particular light. This essay utilizes a close semiotic analysis to understand how Internet images convey meaning that helps to create those frames. The essay concludes with a discussion of the utility of semiotic analysis in understanding campaign images and the potential for Internet images for framing campaigns.

Keywords

social media campaign Internet

If the 2008 presidential election was historic, in part, because of “the unprecedented use of technology to reach and influence the population” (James, Khansa, Cook, & Liginlal, 2011, p. 20), the 2012 election continued the history-making trend by deeply entrenching social media as an essential outlet in the campaign process. The day after the election, the Telegram reported that an image of Barack and Michelle Obama embracing and smiling after the victory became “the most ‘liked’ photo ever posted on Facebook” and was shared over 350,000 times (Bryant, 2012). Social media sites, such as Facebook, were once a way to connect to friends and families. However, in recent years, these sites have become a place to discuss politics, endorse politicians, and learn about candidate positions. In 2008, a Pew Internet and American Life Project study showed that 46% of Americans used the Internet to talk and learn about the campaign (as cited in James et al., 2011). Given the popularity of social media sites in disseminating information about political campaigns, it is appropriate to turn additional scholarly attention to this medium.

While recent scholarship has begun to consider the verbal content of social media as sites of campaign information (see, e.g., Hendricks & Kaid, 2011; Johnson & Perlmutter, 2011), little attention has been paid to the information presented in visual form, specifically campaign photographs. Print media and their use of photographs have received some attention. For example, some scholars have considered whether there is visual bias in election coverage, with mixed results. While Waldman and Devitt (1998) found no visual bias in the 1996 election, Moriarity and Popovich (1991) did find more favorable visual coverage for George H. W. Bush than for Michael Dukakis in the same election. More recently, Goodnow (2010) found bias in Time’s photo essays on Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, with the outlet favoring Obama. Barrett and Barrington (2005) conducted an experiment that revealed that readers preferred candidates with a more favorable image (smiling) than an unfavorable image (looking annoyed) despite the same written article. Glassman and Kenney (1994) considered the myths that campaign photographs perpetuate.

More pertinent to this study, Verser and Wicks (2006) conducted a statistical analysis of web photographs of Al Gore and George W. Bush found during the 2000 election. These authors analyzed the photographs using three general variables: “(a) visual imagery relating to human interaction, (b) visual imagery relating to photographic setting and appearance, and (c) visual imagery relating to photographic production values” (p. 186). Grabe and Bucy (2009) analyzed the general content of images to create frames that news photographs project of the candidates. The study by Grabe and Bucy goes further than the Verser and Wicks study in that the former breaks down the photographs for the general attitude the images produce. However, neither of these studies offers explanation as to why the content of the images could produce meanings for the audience.

Following on my earlier work (Goodnow, 2010), my purpose here is to consider the meaning that the candidate images found on their Facebook Timelines during the 2012 general election may convey to potential viewers. This essay is a first step in coming to an understanding of how content and frame relate. In this study, I first explain my methodology and then examine the images via a social semiotic perspective. Finally, I draw conclusions about the potential for social semiotic analysis for understanding why certain photographs create the political image campaigns desire and the potential for photo dissemination on social media sites as powerful campaign rhetoric.

Method

This study was conducted in two parts. First, the Barack Obama and Mitt Romney’s Facebook Timeline images were collected. Timeline images were analyzed because Facebook’s Timeline allows a viewer to see what images were posted in what order during a specific period of time. While it is difficult to ascertain if any images were removed at any time, the images provide a good record and sampling of how each campaign crafted the image (both figurative and literal) of their candidate. In each case, images posted between the end of their respective conventions (Romney images were collected from August 31, 2012; Obama images were collected from September 8, 2012) and Election Day, November 6, 2012. The images were then sorted to eliminate nonphotographic images (both sets of photos contained advertisements for campaign paraphernalia such as T-shirts or buttons and plain-text argument images such as those that compared policy plans of the candidates). Of the 126 Obama images, 115 contained photographs; 306 images contained photographs of Romney’s total of 360.

The political image a campaign projects, suggests Nimmo (1995), can serve to reinforce, alter or revolutionize the public’s preconceived notions of the candidate. Visual images are a way to codify that political image.¹ Grabe and Bucy (2009) offer three stances that visual frames offer in their book Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections. These authors suggest that images create a frame through which politicians hope to encourage voters to view them. Grabe and Bucy suggest three frames: the Ideal Candidate, the Populist Campaigner, and the Sure Loser. Political images, they suggest, gravitate toward one of these frames.

The Ideal Candidate centers on the character of the candidate based on the preferred qualities for the position. Within the Ideal Candidate are two themes, statesmanship and compassion. According to Grabe and Bucy (2009), “Visual manifestations of statesmanship signal the mythic proportions of the presidency, projecting, power, authority, control and active leadership” (p. 102). Images such as candidates in association with patriotic images (e.g., flags), appearances with high-ranking peers, appearances in celebratory displays, and appearances in dignified attire are some of the ways in which candidates can project the political image of statesmanship. Compassion can be visualized by linking candidates with “social symbols of compassion, such as children and families” (p. 104).

Populism evokes the ideal of the average person. Campaigns that trumpet populist ideas attempt to manage the political image of the candidate as one who understands the needs of the people because he/she is one of them. Consequently, visual images of candidates as the Populist Campaigner are manifested in two themes, mass appeal and ordinariness. Mass appeal is illustrated primarily through large crowds enthusiastically supporting the candidate. Ordinariness is depicted through appearances with average citizens, through “displays of physical activity or athletic ability” (p. 107), and through dress. Grabe and Bucy identify nine categories of images that further define both mass appeal and ordinariness.

The Sure Loser operates from a losing frame. In other words, the political image is constructed by missteps in the campaign and is manifested by the visual show of a loss of support, such as small or disapproving crowds. These and other types of images (such as inappropriate images or facial expressions such as frowning) can undermine a candidate’s credibility as a viable candidate.

While Grabe and Bucy (2009) analyzed visual framing in the 2000 and 2004 elections using statistical analysis of network news coverage images, the analysis I conduct is on photographs posted on each candidate’s Facebook Timeline from the 2012 general election. While statistical analysis offers insight into the primary frame that a candidate seeks to project, what Grabe and Bucy do not do is to illuminate how particular types of images create meaning for each frame. Consequently, in this analysis, I analyze images from particular frames for their semiotic meaning. This essay is a preliminary study to determine if semiotic analysis can help explain why frames work as projected. Because the subjects of study were images posted by the campaigns themselves, I performed social semiotic analysis on frames from the Ideal Candidate and Populist Campaigner frames. Images from the Sure Loser frame were not analyzed since the photographs examined came from the campaigns and were unlikely to post negative images of their candidates. Sample photos from the two main frames were chosen based on their potential for semiotic interpretation.

These photos were analyzed according to Kress and van Leeuwen’s (2006) social semiotic theory. This theory has three metafunctions: the ideational, the interpersonal, and the textual. These three metafunctions operate to construct meaning in the world. For example, the interpersonal metafunction considers the relationships between actors in the image, between the image and the producer, and between the image and the audience. These relationships construct meaning for the participants.

Social semiotic analysis can help to reveal how images within Grabe and Bucy’s (2009) schema work to create meanings associated with the frame.

The Ideal Candidate

Grabe and Bucy (2009) note that prior research indicates that voters have a “mental picture of specific characteristics that an ideal presidential candidate should have” (p. 101). This mental picture is then validated or invalidated in campaign photographs. The authors identified two types of attitudes within the Ideal Candidate: statesmanship and compassion. These are also broken down to identify typical image strategies within these attitudes. Interestingly, Obama and Romney both attempt to fulfill the Ideal Candidate image held by the electorate. However, they attempt to do so using different strategies and categories as defined by Grabe and Bucy.

Barack Obama and the Statesman Frame

In the Statesman Frame, Obama primarily uses the first strategy of appearing with elected officials and other influentials. Grabe and Bucy (2009) explain that in the elected officials and other influentials frame, the candidate appears with people with power, status, and money, whether on the national or local level” (p. 289). There are photographs of Obama with Bill Clinton, Colin Powell, and members of his cabinet. However, the authors fail to illuminate how these images reinforce the idea of statesmanship.

On November 1, 2012, the Obama campaign posted an image of the president, vice president, and former secretary of state Colin Powell in the middle of a conversation in the Oval Office (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151244336266749&set=a.53081056748.66806.6815841748&type=3&theater). A semiotic analysis of this image illustrates why this image gives an aura of statesmanship. Obama, Powell, and Biden form a triangle in the center of the image with Obama, turned so that the shot reveals his back and facial profile, at the bottom left, Powell, in profile, at the bottom right, and Biden, facing forward, at center, though further back. Physically Obama takes up the most space in the photograph, followed by Powell, and then Biden. Obama and Powell are shaking hands, thus physically linking the two. Biden’s left index finger points to Obama. There is movement in the photograph with Biden looking at Powell, Powell looking at Obama, and Obama, looking down, eyes almost closed. Here, the movement (“the buck”?) stops with Obama. Consequently, the eye movement follows the status of the actors and mimics the strength of their positions within the triangle. This movement creates a vector that Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) call presentational as the narrative of the image shows the actors doing something to or for each other. In this case, Biden and Powell convey authority to Obama.

The background images are blurred but depict the busy happenings of the Oval Office. The primary triangle illustrates that though Biden and Powell occupy status positions in U.S. political culture, Obama is still at the center of power. That these other two power positions are secondary to Obama illustrates how Obama’s statesmanship is highlighted.

Romney and the Statesman Frame

Romney’s primary visual strategy in the Statesman Frame is through the use of patriotic symbols, which Grabe and Bucy (2009) explain as the connection of candidate with patriotic images such as flags or monuments. Romney supporters are often shown with flags, and Romney himself is photographed often with flags in the back or foreground. One such image is particularly telling in regard to Romney’s association with statesmanship (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151082619771121&set=a.161403756120.123284.21392801120&type=3&theater). The image shows Romney in silhouette in the background while he gives a speech. His image, though silhouetted, is in sharp focus. The image in the right bottom foreground, taking up one third of the space of the photograph, is an American flag, slightly out of focus. There are also discernable American flags waving in the audience to which Romney speaks. Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) give keen guidance on interpreting this image.

Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) articulate that in composition there are three interactive and representational meanings evident: informational value, salience, and framing. In examining this Romney photograph, informational value and salience provide the best tools for understanding how this image establishes statesmanship. Informational value is transmitted through the placement of elements in an image. For example, the left side of an image represents what is given and the right represents what is new. Similarly, the top zone of an image represents the ideal while the bottom zone signifies the real.

In the Romney photograph, Romney is situated on the left and the flag on the right. Hence, using Kress and van Leeuwen’s (2006) schema, Romney’s political position is a given. Furthermore, the flag can represent the new direction of the United States under a Romney presidency. While the flag is clearly in the lower zone, representing the real, Romney is situated closer to the top zone, signifying the ideal. Taken together, Romney is seen as the perfect candidate to realistically lead the country.

These interpretations are furthered by considering the salience of the image or the ability of the elements to grab the viewer’s attention. This is done through an examination of the “weight” of the elements in an image; that is, larger images weigh more than smaller images in that larger images draw more attention. In the Romney photograph, the flag is the largest element in the entire image, with Romney but a small figure in the background. However, the fact that Romney is in sharp focus while the flag is blurred also provides salience and balance in the image. From the salience perspective, a viewer could conclude that Romney’s plans and policies are in balance with U.S. needs.

Given these potential interpretations, it is clear that Romney’s use of the flag does, indeed, enhance his statesmanship appeal.

Comparing Obama and Romney Statesmanship Strategies

When considering the potential meanings of Obama and Romney’s statesmanship visual appeals, Obama’s photos are more readily tied to the notion of statesmanship in that political ethos is awarded when a candidate can be associated with other respected statesmen. On the other hand, Romney’s use of the flag is an obvious and relatively easy nod to statesmanship. In Obama’s case ethos is given by the other person (in the case analyzed here, Powell), and in Romney’s case ethos is taken by using the flag. Grabe and Bucy (2009) do not evaluate the relative effectiveness of a candidate’s use of one strategy over the other. However, here we see how a semiotic interpretation can provide evidence that one strategy may be more effective than another.

Equally important to the Ideal Candidate frame, however, is the frame of compassion, which Grabe and Bucy (2009) contend is a desirable quality in a candidate. Candidates must run as “warm and benevolent personalities who should be loved and adored by voters” (p. 104). Compassion is most often illustrated through images of the candidate with children, either the candidate’s own or those of the candidate’s supporters. This link to children “supports the mythology of family, a dominant value in American culture” (p. 104). The analysis that follows illustrates how images of the candidate with children reinforce the idea of the candidate as compassionate.

Obama and Compassion

A photo published on Obama’s Timeline on October 27, 2012 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151233304196749&set=a.53081056748.66806.6815841748&type=3&theater) shows Obama comfortably holding a small child in his right arm with his left hand providing support across the baby’s front. The photo is shot from the side, slightly from behind. Consequently, the baby’s back is to the camera and Obama is seen only in profile. Because of the indeterminate skin color of the baby, his or her race is unknown. In addition, it is difficult to determine the gender of the child. Obama is directing his attention fully to the baby with a smile on his face. The crowd in the background is smiling and seemingly cheering.

That this photo exhibits compassion is illustrated through semiotic analysis. The first notable element is the angle of the photograph. Because the image is from the side and slightly behind, the image stands as one that is not posed. As a result, Obama looks to genuinely be engaged with the child, uncaring about other things around them. In addition, by exposing his back to the camera, Obama is vulnerable, much like the child.

Also providing status to the candidate as the Ideal Candidate are the race and gender of the baby. Because the baby’s face is unseen and the baby’s skin color is lighter than Obama’s, it is impossible to determine definitely the ethnicity of the child. Furthermore, the gender is also indeterminate. This allows the child to stand in for any child. Hence, Obama can be seen as caring universally about America’s children, regardless of race or other affiliated group identification.

The nonposed photo and ambiguous elements reinforce the Obama campaign’s depiction of him as a compassionate candidate, thus, reinforcing other frames from the Ideal Candidate.

Romney and Compassion

A comparable image of compassion comes from the Romney campaign in an ad photo posted to the Timeline on September 17, 2012 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151063358901121&set=a.161403756120.123284.21392801120&type=3&theater). The image shows Romney holding a little blonde girl in his left arm. They both look directly into the camera, smiling while giving the thumbs-up sign. In direct comparison to Obama’s image, Romney is shot from a front angle, which Kress and van Leeuwen (2006, p. 144) contend presents the viewer with “what is.” Photos such as these tend to be observed as objective and involving the audience since the subject looks directly at them. In addition, front-angle photos can be interpreted as honest since what you see is what you get.

The direct address of the front angle shot invites the viewer into a relationship with the subject, creating what Kress and van Leeuwen (2006) call an image act. The subjects create a vector with the viewers, thereby asking them to participate with them in their act. In Romney’s case, the smile on both subjects’ faces invites the viewer to have social affinity with Romney. The thumbs-up invites the viewer to rate the campaign in a similarly positive fashion.

Also important to note is the dress the child is wearing: dark blue with white polka dots and larger white stars with red- and white-striped trim and a red bow. The obvious reference to the American flag reinforces the patriotic candidacy.

This image is also the only image examined with words imposed on the photograph. The words “thank you” are superimposed over the image. Surprisingly, this is the only photograph in the sample of Romney holding a child. The sentiment of the words implies that Romney is thanking voters on behalf of the child.

Comparing Obama and Romney Compassion Photographs

Both the Obama and Romney photographs allow the candidates to be seen as warm and likeable. However, the tactics they use are different. Obama’s photograph hints at his warmth because the viewer is a fly on the wall, looking in on a compassionate scene, while Romney’s photograph confronts the viewer directly in an honest plea to participate in Romney’s likeability. Interestingly, the chosen photographs depict children who can also be interpreted differently. Because the child in the Obama photograph is not clearly identified, the child can more easily stand in for any child. The child in Romney’s photograph is Caucasian with blonde curly hair, perhaps more easily seen as representing mainstream America, certainly Republicans. Taken together, it is easy to see how campaign images can depict a compassionate candidate to the electorate.

The Populist Campaigner

The idea of populism is based on the notion that average people can stand up against the elite in society. Jimmy Carter was the prototypical populist campaigner, often pictured in overalls on his farm and speaking in simple sentences to his constituents. There are two subcategories in the Populist Campaigner frame, mass appeal and ordinariness.

Obama and Romney Mass Appeal

Images that indicate the mass appeal of a candidate are framed in a variety of ways. However, two of these methods can be combined in the same image: large audiences and approving audiences. It is not uncommon to see a campaign display images of large cheering crowds. In fact, considering the large number of crowd shots on both Obama’s and Romney’s Timeline albums, it is sometimes difficult to discern which images belong to which candidate. Consequently, in this frame, I consider Obama and Romney images together because of the general strategy used. In other frames, differing strategies were readily apparent; not so with the mass appeal frame.

In both images the candidates are difficult to see because they are not the center of the frame nor the main focus. In fact, in both of the selected images what immediately draws the eye is the large American flag in the background. In the Obama image (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151228719566749&set=a.53081056748.66806.6815841748&type=3&theater) the flag sits on the center line of the image with black framing it. In the Romney photograph (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151147995141121&set=a.161403756120.123284.21392801120&type=3&theater), the flag is centered on a white background and takes up nearly a quarter of the image in the upper-left-hand corner. In both images, the flag dwarfs the cheering crowds. While in the Obama picture the crowds can be seen clapping or waving as Obama speaks, in the Romney image the crowds cheer while what is presumed to be the person of Romney speaks. The crowd cheers and holds Romney/Ryan placards. Though the Obama crowd gathers outside and the Romney crowd inside, the layout of the photos is almost identical. Both speak slightly below the center line to the left (Obama is larger than Romney). The bulk of both images is of cheering crowds, in the lower half of the image. As has been discussed, the lower half of the image is considered the real while the upper half is the ideal. In this case, the real is the cheering crowd while the ideal is the promise of America as represented by the American flag. Using this strategy, the known (being on the left side) candidate connects the cheering crowd with the ideal of America. Thus, the candidate is what will bring the American ideal to the crowd.

It is interesting to note that both campaigns use an almost identical visual strategy to make the connection argument to viewers. Given that both campaigns have a large number of crowd shots in their portfolios, it is difficult to discern a different method of conveying mass appeal using large crowds. As a result, it may be concluded that rather than imparting a particular meaning, the mass appeal frame merely reinforces meanings established with other methods (e.g., polls, testimonials, etc.).

Obama and Ordinary People

In this frame, the candidate’s image is linked to common people. In the chosen Obama photograph (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151188220766749&set=a.53081056748.66806.6815841748&type=3&theater), Obama is seen in a hallway in the White House “fist bumping” one of the building janitors. Obama is in the center, with the man, dressed in overalls and a baseball cap, wearing disposable gloves, hidden slightly behind a pillar, on the right. Out of focus and in the background, an aide, wearing a suit and tie, is seen walking down the hall, reading papers. As in the Statesman Frame, Obama is at the center of a triangle, though the person in the background does not look at Obama. Obama is physically connected to the common person as their fists touch and they both look at the connection. Though Obama is dressed more like the aide walking down the hall, he clearly has more connection with the janitor. Consequently, this image illustrates that Obama is more connected to the common person than to those in the Washington inner circle.

Romney and Ordinary People

Romney photos are replete with images of heroes—war heroes, firefighters, police officers. The chosen image shows Romney in a dress shirt without a jacket, shaking hands with an older veteran, wearing a suit and tie with a garrison cap with medals and pins. Romney is on the right and the veteran is on the left. The veteran, the known, appears on the left while Romney, the unknown, is on the right (Available at https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151077750611121&set=a.161403756120.123284.21392801120&type=3&theater). In this case, Romney hopes to capitalize on the known qualities of the veteran by associating those qualities with himself.

Romney is taller, but they are looking directly at each other. Romney shakes with his right hand, but his left hand sits on top of the veteran’s hand. Handshakes like this are called the handcuff (Nonverbal World, n.d.) and imply that the person imposing the handcuff is expressing sincere interest. However, it can also be noted that politicians in political campaigns often use this grip, so it can also be viewed as untrustworthy. Hence, Romney’s handshake has two potential meanings: sincere and insincere. Furthermore, the formality of the veteran’s dress implies more credibility than Romney’s casual attire. Consequently, Romney appears subordinate to the veteran.

Comparing Obama and Romney Ordinary People Photographs

While both candidates use the photographs of ordinary people to raise the credibility of their claim of relating to average Americans, they both use aspects of the image to increase credibility in terms of the statesman appeal. For example, while Obama talks to the janitor, the conversation occurs in the White House. Hence, Obama calls on his benevolence as president to speak with the average guy. Romney relies on the credibility of the not-so-average person with whom he shakes hands. The veteran is not a famous veteran, just an average man who served his country. However, Romney’s borrowing of the veteran’s credibility ensures that he is associated with the noble pursuit of service to country. This allows the audience to equate the two men as in a position of service. While Obama is generally not considered part of the elite upper class of American society (his modest Midwestern roots attest to this), he uses the elite setting of the White House to straddle the line between elite and average. Meanwhile, Romney, who is considered of the elite upper class, uses the ethos of the veteran to position the candidate as really just average. Because the veteran is more formally dressed, in suit and tie and wearing medals, Romney’s jacketless suit visage looks common in comparison.

Discussion

One of the purposes of this article was a preliminary study to see if applying social semiotic theory to Obama and Romney campaign photographs would help explain why Grabe and Bucy (2009) found the patterns that they did in previous elections. As in any quantitative study, understanding why the patterns exist is almost as important as the recognition that the patterns do exist. This brief study is a first step in illustrating that by looking more closely at potential meanings of photographs can show that the images campaigns use may have more meaning than just a simple snapshot posted to Facebook.

Romney’s campaign posted over 300 images to the Timeline album on his Facebook page. Obama’s campaign posted fewer than half of that. The public clearly had a better picture of who Obama is as they had had four years to get to know him. Romney, on the other hand, had to provide more detail in the picture of him. Hence, posting more images allowed Romney to present a variety of facets to Romney the candidate. Certainly, examining the statistical trends in the images reveals a great deal about how Romney wished to be viewed. However, closer examination of certain images also reveals a different understanding of Romney the campaigner.

Because Romney had to establish credibility, as opposed to Obama’s assumed credibility as president, semiotic analysis reveals that Romney often borrowed credibility in the images by associating himself with patriotic images or revered veterans whose credibility was established previously. In addition, Romney directly sought support from the viewer by making eye contact with the camera. Obama, on the other hand, used symbols of his credibility (Oval Office, White House hall) that were given by election and authority as given by other noted political figures (Powell and Biden). Hence, from a semiotic standpoint and from a voter perspective, possessing is stronger than borrowing. While Grabe and Bucy (2009) have identified the frames, semiotic analysis may reveal how images can produce stronger identification within those frames.

While the intent of this study was not to make an argument about the effectiveness of social media political campaign images, conclusions about such can be made. It is likely that the majority of people who view the Facebook Timeline photographs of candidates are already supporters. For those people who are undecided, the meanings of the images could potentially reveal more than the candidate intended. For example, in the Romney/veteran photograph, Romney cedes power and credibility to the veteran. Instead of being the helper of the veteran from a position of power, Romney uses the veteran for his own credibility. Images such as the one examined may intend one thing but be interpreted as another.

Conclusion

This was a preliminary study to understand how certain images may fulfill certain functions for political campaigns. As this analysis reveals, photographs have the potential to convey meanings about candidates and what they hope to bring to American politics. Social media have the ability to produce without expense an image of a candidate. However, this study reveals that those images that are posted to social media sites may reveal more than the candidate intended. Scholars interested in further study would do well to determine if viewers actually receive these potential messages. For now, understanding how images potentially convey frames may be enough.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Erin Cook for preliminary collection of the Facebook photographs.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biography

Trischa Goodnow is a Professor of Speech Communication at Oregon State University with a research specialty in Visual Rhetoric.

References

Barrett

A. W.

Barrington

L. W.

(2005, Fall). Is a picture worth a thousand words? Newspaper photographs and voter evaluations of political candidates. Press/Politics, 10(4), 98-113.

Bryant

(2012, November 7). Obama photo becomes most “liked” on Facebook; A picture of Barack and Michelle Obama hugging after the president’s victory has become the most “liked” picture on Facebook. Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9661516/Obama-photo-becomes-most-Liked-on-Facebook

Glassman

Kenney

(1994). Mythe & presidential campaign photographs. Visual Communication Quarterly, 4(1), 4-7. doi:10.1080/15551393.1994.10387508

Goodnow

(2010). Visual bias in Time’s “The Great Divide”: A semiotic analysis of Clinton and Obama photographs. American Behavioral Scientist, 54(4), 406-416. doi:10.1177/0002764210381865

Grabe

M. E.

Bucy

E. P.

(2009). Image bite politics: News and the visual framing of elections. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hendricks

J. A.

Kaid

L. L.

(2011). Techno politics in presidential campaigning: New voices, new technologies, and new voters. New York, NY: Routledge.

James

Khansa

Cook

Liginlal

(2011, Spring). Technology and U.S. politics. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 30(1), 20-27. doi:10.1109/MTS.2011.940292

Johnson

Perlmutter

D. D.

(2011). New media, campaigning and the 2008 Facebook election. London, UK: Routledge.

Kress

G. R.

van Leeuwen

L. T.

(2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London, UK: Routledge.

10.

Moriarity

S. E.

Popovich

M. N.

(1991, Autumn). Newsmagazine visuals and the 1988 presidential election. Journalism Quarterly, 68, 371-380.

11.

Nimmo

(1995). The formation of candidate images during presidential campaigns. In Hacker

K. L.

(Ed.), Candidate images in presidential elections (pp. 51-64). Westport, CT: Praeger.

12.

Nonverbal World. (n.d.). Body language and nonverbal communication: What hand shake conveys about person? Retrieved from http://www.nonverbal-world.com/2010/11/what-other-handshakes-convey.html

13.

Verser

R. M.

Wicks

R. H.

(2006). Managing voter impressions: The use of images on presidential candidate web sites during the 2000 campaign. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 178-197.

14.

Waldman

Devitt

(1998, Summer). Newspaper photographs and the 1996 presidential election: The question of bias. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 75(2), 302-311.