The America vs Russia ‘soft’ war remains (ML1)
On the 29th of May 2017, the Time magazine published an issue that targeted Russia directly, discussing the new cyber techniques of Russian spies. The cover page of the magazine was also related to that topic. This paper will therefore critique and analyze this specific cover page, as well as the story associated with it, written by Massimo Calabresi.
The cover image
As we look at the magazine, the cover picture (figure 1) pops into our eyes with a clear message: Russia is taking over the United States. This is due to the look of the image, and to the implicit meaning it carries.
The aesthetics
As we can see, the White House seems like turning into the Russian Saint Basil’s Cathedral, as if it has caught some Russian infection. The cathedral has ‘eaten’ more than half the White House, which alarms the audience to the danger imposed on the Americans by Russia.
The choice of colors was also well thought of; the creator of this image has chosen the white versus red contrast where the white symbolizes sanity and peace, and the red depicts blood, evil and danger.
He also played with the texture of the buildings where the White House is simple and plain, and the Russian building is complex, which enhances the contrast.
The message
Unlike most Time covers, if not all of them, this one does not have any headline or caption, only the name of the magazine and the image. This gives the picture more power and means that the image is self-explanatory. In fact, in this case, adding a title or giving an idea about the story related to the cover would diminish the power of the image. This is because the makers of the magazine know that this drawing exaggerates the situation and shows Russia very close of taking over the United States. However, they did this purposely to stimulate fear within their audience; thus, they will find the article more dramatic once they read it.
The article
The article related to the cover page also portrays Russia as evil, not only with the headline, but also with the entire content.
The headline
The headline of the article “Inside Russia’s Social Media War on America” is written as if Russia is the one declaring war on America. Here, the Americans are represented as the victims of the terror imposed by Russia.
The use of the word “War” may be associated with the “dramatization” of the news as explained by L. Bennett (2016). This means that the author has used dramatic words to accentuate the danger of the situation.
This title is very straight to the point and appears to be explicit, as he has not used any analogy or metaphor.
The content
The article is clearly written delicately to appear as objective as possible. After all, its aim is to give evidence of the Russian social media attacks. Therefore, we witness an excessive usage of dates, numbers and facts: “In 2016, Russia had used thousands of covert human agents and robot computer programs to spread disinformation referencing the stolen campaign emails of Hillary Clinton, amplifying their effect.” (M. Calabresi, 2017)
The stimulus of fear is clear, as Calabresi (2017) shows the danger as close as he possibly can: “At any given moments, […] accounts might send out false information.”
Calabresi (2017) also succeeds in identifying with his audience as he uses references that most Americans know about. This is by using “for many Americans” and by mentioning the cold war, whose consequences remain.
Alternative cover and headline
If I was to generate an alternative cover and headline for this story, I would have thought of something less biased than what Time designed.
The cover and the headline
An image idea that came to my mind is the, recent at the time, picture of president Trump and Russian foreign minister Lavrov shaking hands. The picture would be a drawn caricature of the two, and in the background would be two spies on each side, each using a PC, facing each other. Between them would be 0s and 1s (Binary code) colored in blue, red, and white, just like these countries’ flags.
The headline would be: Smiling at each other yet laughing at each other.
The meaning
What differs between the version I provided and the original one is that mine is more objective, whereas the original one is clearly more inclined towards the American perspective of the story. However, portrayed my way, the story would appeal neither to Americans nor Russians, but the target audience would be mainly the population of the third world countries. This is because the constant fight between the two poles of the world (USA and Russia) is perceived objectively from outside these two countries and more specifically in the third world countries whose destiny is in the hands of the USA and Russia; unlike Europe, China, and emerging countries. Examples of possible audiences may be populations of the Middle East, or some parts of Africa.
References
Bennett, W. L. (2016). News: The politics of illusion. Chicago, CHI: The University of Chicago Press.
Calabresi, M. (2017, May 29). Inside Russia’s Social Media War on America. Time. Retrieved from http://time.com/magazine/us/4783906/may-29th-2017-vol-189-no-20-u-s/
