Media Matters

        President Zelenskyy is not only known as an extraordinary leader but after his recent virtual speech to the U.S. Congress, he will also be perceived as an excellent rhetorician. It doesn't even seem to matter if he wrote this public speech all himself. (We realize that  most politicians and heads of government do not. ) The point is, it had the hallmarks of an effective, eloquent and valuable contribution to Ukraine's fight for survival against Russia.    The address also proved that the TV medium is an effective, eloquent and valuable tool as well, particularly when war is evolved. Some of the reasons may be obvious. Some need more explanation.     First, as this "Media Matters" blog has pointed out in the last few weeks, TV can use persuasive emotional appeals, centering on strong visual imagery. Consider one outstanding example: Zelenskyy's integration of video into the body of his speech. Thus, it's likely that viewers will recall...

       TV coverage showing the Russian invasion of Ukraine operates on many levels, including information about various Ukrainian cities. The viewers are learning that Kyiv is not the only city in this country. As the war continues, broadcasters go back time and time again to report on what's happening in many of the same urban centers. Frequently, large maps help the TV audience follow the action. We begin to become familiar with the towns involved in the fighting. We even unconsciously select one place particularly that we feel as if we "know," that we can identify with.      Odessa, a southern port town on the Black Sea, is the place that this critic now "knows." First reason: because recent TV news showed residents covering its most famous monument  ( Duke de Richelieu )  with sandbags perhaps getting it ready for removal from the site. Second reason: the name, Odessa, recalls a real area in Brooklyn's Brighton Beach known as "Little Odes...

       To say that "persuasion" plays an essential part in all our lives is nothing special or earth - shaking. Nor does anyone need a lecture on the subject.      What is needed, however, is an understanding of the role it particularly imparts dealing with the TV coverage of the war between Russia and Ukraine.        Where do we start? How about in the distant past when Aristotle developed the idea of argumentation by observing it at work in the market places, the government and the courts? From there he evolved three types ( or proofs ) of persuasion which still operate today: emotional, logical and charisma/credibility.        Of all these various appeals, emotional ones seem to be the most potent over the years.  For instance, consider how TV has used finely crafted images to impact on our voting choices and politics generally.  And why not?  Emotional persuasion is probably the easiest one to ...

       It is now Day Six of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Up to this point, the TV broadcasts failed to catch my attention, although the event itself was important to me. If truth be told, my nationality lay rooted in Ukraine: my mother was born there and so was all her immediate family. As Jewish immigrants, she and her parents escaped from their homeland, her father carrying her on his shoulders across a river. To this day, I have yet to know which waterway. I only knew that it was 1908, and I was told all these years that my family ( and I ) were Russian.      As a media critic, I tend to see live broadcasts of war as "story telling," often replicating a Hollywood film. After all, wasn't the first Iraqi War during the early 2000's like a western or even horror movie, following a traditional narrative structure: introduction of a problem ( the enemy's takeover of Kuwait ); presentation of protagonists ( TV correspondents and particular military fi...