Week 11: Theory and Symbolism behind a Message
Part 1. Symbolism and semiotics
Part 2. Case study
Part 3. Patrick Thomas Breaking News 2.0 Installation
Part 1: Symbolism and semiotics
With guest lecturer Martin Hosken
The theory and symbolism of ‘the message’
The world is overflowing with multiple messages, images and intentions. If we look at the way in which the meaning of words has changed over time, coming from the Latin missus – to send away, despatch, release; this original meaning emphasises the sender and the original intention but now we must also acknowledge the way which it is sent and ultimately the receiver of that message.
As advertising platforms and commercial markets grow, the way we promote messages of products, services or ideas becomes more competitive and complex, so, ‘communication designers’ pay particular attention to the intention, message, medium and understanding.
To look deeper, it is important that we consider the wider theory of communication. The first place to look would be where the message was missed and therefore communication didn’t happen. Just because a message is sent it can’t be presumed to have been received or understood.
“The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place”
George Bernard Shaw
How can communication fail?
We have to rely on language and the notion that the language we use is understood in the way it was intended. Implied meaning or the use of a colloquialism as an expression can be easily misunderstood causing the message to be delivered not as it was intended. For myself being from the Lancashire, and having one set of grandparents from Wigan, colloquialisms are the everyday. The next town would have its own names for everyday items, anyone know what a deggin can, a slopstone or a tallypow is?
The viewpoint of George Orwell in his essay: Politics in the English Language, was that “[Political language] is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind”, although written in 1948 it is still resonant today.
A useful question to ask of any message is ‘what is the intention of the sender?’. If the intention is in the meaning, it is the joint understanding of that meaning where communication works, ‘a physiological image’ or ‘an invisible shape or form’ that sits within language.
Think of the emoji as a perfect example of this. Emoji’s are used to convey a message or a response without the need for words, or to back up the meaning within the message we are sending and is a message via text or social media complete without an emoji to sign it off?
Another problem is that images carry meaning, and over time it’s meaning can change.
The usual and clearest example: the Swastika.
Its only possible meaning in the world today is the one which promotes the National Socialists; the Nazi Party. However it is a symbol which has been around for centuries in many cultures and has many different meanings. In Hinduism for example, if the ‘arms’ are pointing clockwise it’s called swastika and symbolised the sun, if counterclockwise it is called sauvastika and symbolises night, while in Buddhism it is a symbol of the auspicious footprints of the Buddha. In both these contexts it is a symbol of strength and positivity.
Left-facing sauwastika – a sacred symbol in Buddhist traditions.
45° – Nazi Hakenkreuz
Right-facing swastika appears commonly in Hinduism and Jainism
What creates meaning?
Semiotics is an established way of associating meaning through different mediums, the clearest way to explain it is to illustrate it:
The arrow is the signifier, the instruction.
The way it points is the signified, the direction it implies.
Combined the create the sign.
To complicate things further, a sign can be broken down into three more categories: icon, index and symbol…
An icon is an image or item which resembles something, it shows evidence or implies a character to the icon.
Next is the symbol, a symbol has no resemblance to the signifier and the original signified, the connection between them here is by cultural or implied meaning, a black cat for instance is a sign of good luck in some cultures but bad luck in others.
Further still, there are many more categories in semiotics;
Codes are a combination of signs, symbols and learnt meanings. Codes are collections of signs used to navigate our surroundings by decoding these signs. Here we’re show the way we can walk or cycle to the railway station.
Anchorage is when one signifier is needed to explain another, e.g. a direction sign telling you the way to the museum using both an icon of the museum alongside the word, re-enforcing the intention.
Relay – this is common to advertising. It is when words and image combine to give meaning.
Essentially, the meaning of a text is not within the text itself, it comes from the relationship between the words, the reader and the message which it was intended to deliver.
Part 2: Case Study
Olympic logos and what they represent
The Olympics are held every four years, it’s seen as such an important event for any country to hold that the bidding process goes way into the future. The bid for the 2028 Summer Olympics has been decided already, the sole candidate, Los Angeles.
One of the first ‘hurdles’ for any hosting country is to create the identity; the logo, opening up the hosts to a worldwide reaction of praise and criticism.
In this case study we look the identities of past games to see the different responses from the different countries.
The identities are broken down into three visual categories:
- systematic
- emblematic
- abstract
The systematic
The examples followed are the Games from 1968 in Mexico, by Lance Wyman and 1972 in Munich by Otl Aicher.
The 1968 Games are described as possibly the first event to look further into the use of graphic design to create a whole identity. References to culture are given, along with being based around the existing emblem of the Olympic Rings and is taken further by designing typefaces and wayfinding.
The Munich Games of 1972 also show a systematic approach. Although the logo itself is open to interpretation, the structure of the grid systems used in the flags, programs and mainly the icons to represent the events is very strong. Perhaps in the case of the icons, it is too strong as some appear awkward and overworked.
The Emblematic
Examples of emblematic logos, where something within the logo design represents the country or the event.
The 1964 Games in Japan has a very strong identity. The logo represents the country simply by its flag. The use of shades to suggest gold in the type and compulsory Olympic rings connect to the ultimate prize; the gold medal.
Next we have the Sydney Olympics in 2000. The identity here has a massive difference to the Japan Games in that it is very illustrative and its suggestions of landmarks and culture are very subtle. First you might see a figure running, maybe holding the Torch, but the shapes making this are the references: the Sydney Opera House waves over the top of a character made from boomerangs.
The boomerang it the part with is carried further to create more, eg. the icons representing the sports, etc.
Athens in 2004 doesn’t tie together well, elements of the identity just don’t gel. The laurel wreath refers to the country and also victory but it doesn’t sit with the text underneath. Perhaps if the wreath wasn’t sat inside the square it would work better?
Beijing is more successful, it looks like the history and culture of China; the ancient symbols calligraphy it refers to, as well as the running man raising his hands.
The Abstract
The London Olympics, this identity refers to the year of the event rather than anything to suggest the country, it caused massive controversy at the time with a BBC pole showing a negative reaction of 80% by the public.
The best-worst response I found in my research is: “that the logo resembled the cartoon character Lisa Simpson performing fellatio on her brother Bart Simpson”…
I was pretty nonplussed when I first saw it, but as the games got nearer and the supporting material was released I began to see a bigger picture. For me, the logo became a stamp or seal of approval which brought the whole system together.
Part 3: Breaking News 2.0 Installation at the London Design Festival
Patrick Thomas
A great installation, I love the freedom of the design and the content and the simple way in which anyone can take part. It’s a natural progression from the first event where messages where submitted but then had to be processed in that they needed to be retrieved and printed out before being displayed.
Above: Images of Breaking News 1.0
A similar approach was created for the International Poster Competition at the Graphic Design Festival Scotland in 2018 where an online poster generator allowed users to make a unique poster by making a series of decisions, spots/stripes, green/blue, left/right which then generated a completely random pattern for the background of your poster.
As with Breaking News 2.0, the resulting designs were kept consistent by using a single typeface to display the text or messages.
Week 11: Workshop Challenge
Case Study 1: Take one story to see how it is reported globally. Collect three versions of the same story from three different countries. How is it reported? Headline? Text? Unpacking meaning and distorting meaning.
NEWS: Hong Kong Anti-government Protests
Since April Hong Kong has been rocked by a bill which would allow extradition of people accused of crimes against mainland China. Protestors say those sent to the mainland could face unfair trials and violent treatment and that it could put people such as activists and journalists in danger.
I have chosen three different sources for their different views on politics, ownership or religion could these be a key factor in how news is presented?
The three sources are:
- The BBC
- Al Jazeera
- RT (Russia Today)
The BBC
Publicly funded, colloquially known as “The Beeb”, “Auntie”, implying a cosy, friendly organisation which you can trust.
Their headline is ‘Hong Kong protests: Flights resume amid new security measures‘
(29 minutes old)
Al Jazeera
A state-funded broadcaster, accused of being a propaganda outlet for the Qatari government. The broadcaster insists that they cover all sides of a debate.
Their headline is ‘Hong Kong airport reopens as order to remove protesters looms‘
(Four hours old)
RT (Formerly Russia Today)
A network funded by the Russian government, described as “waging the information war against the entire Western world” (by its own editor-in-chief) and claims to have the freedom to act independently but has been accused of spreading disinformation.
Their headline is ‘Hong Kong airport in CHAOS after protesters and police clash‘
(Published on the 13th August, edited on the 14th (today))
The three headlines give a different level of threat brought by the current situation in Hong Kong.
The BBC implies ‘don’t worry it’s all sorted, everything is calm. There was some trouble but now everything is ok’. Al Jazeera report hints at a possible threat from the authorities gaining permission to clear the terminal. RT however, raises the bar even more, stating the airport is in CHAOS (sic). They portray a higher level of violence and show the authorities as incompetent, reporting that riot police had to retreat and that reporters and travellers had been injured. They backed-up their report with photos, videos and the tweets of eye-witnesses as proof of the danger.
Each leading image follows a similar pattern, the BBC: there are only three people in the photo including a mother and her child, it looks very calm. The Al Jazeera photo also looks calm, but it’s an image of a long queue of passengers with one in particular looking at his watch emphasising the inconvenience. RT: the riot police are retreating into their van…
The Russian article mainly highlights the violence: officers using pepper spray and tear gas, police drawing weapons after losing their batons but still states ‘there was no bloodshed – for now‘. They even point out a protestor seen carrying an American flag.
The BBC and Al Jazeera give much more detailed reports, giving information on the actions and reactions from both the protestors and the authorities. Their stories are consistent, but the language is different. Again the BBC soften things by using words like ‘violent skirmish’ compared to ‘fierce clashes’ or ‘manhandling a woman’ compared to ‘pinning her on the ground’.
There are also different approaches to signing-off the newspieces, each concluding point could not be further apart:
The BBC
‘On Wednesday some [protestors] handed out apology leaflets and chocolate to people arriving at the airport’s train station’
Al Jazeera
‘Xu [Luying, spokeswoman, Hong Kong and Macao Affairs of the State Council] said the “extremely abominable violent crime must be severely punished according to the law”.’
RT
‘Occupied by Britain during the Opium Wars in 1842, Hong Kong was ceded back to China in 1997. It is currently administered under the “one country, two systems” doctrine of autonomy’
We can see clear differences in the way which an event unconnected with the chosen countries is reported. In the case of the BBC-vs-Al Jazeera their impartiality to the event is clear but it’s the tone of the language used which is different, I wonder if the BBC’s seemingly ‘played down’ version is to give reassurance to British citizens there?
However, the article shown in RT is used mainly to highlight failures and violence in another country, even managing to get in a ‘dig’ at the US and the UK. Could their images, embedded social media and lack of impartial information all pointing towards a social and political disaster be seen as propaganda? Earlier this year Russia was considering to disconnect from the global internet as part of its ‘cyber-defences’, so how much information gets through from sources outside Russia? Does it’s citizens trust it as much as the UK trusts the BBC…
