Semiotic Analysis of the Icon - Pres. Donald Trump
SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF THE ICON, THE 45th PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
Twitter: @realDonaldTrump
< 1. INTRODUCTION
Semiotic analysis or semiotics is the study of signs and how those signs operate (Cobley & Jansz, 1999). 'Semiotics' as a word has its origins in Greek. Semiotics thus derives in part from the Greek word, 'seme' meaning interpreter of signs. These signs can be a picture, an icon or a symbol. For the purpose of this presentation, an icon shall be the focus of our semiotic analysis. The icon thus selected for this study is the 45th President of the United States of America, President Donald J Trump.
As an icon, President Trump is a controversial figure in US’ political landscape, so loved and so hated all at the same time. However, it should be noted that he was not always loved by those who now love him and also not always hated by those who now appear to hate and treat him unfairly. Prior to his winning the US Presidential Election, those who now appear to love him treated him with skepticism, whilst those who now appear to hate and resist him at every turn made him an object of ridicule and comic relief refusing to take him seriously. The Republicans now love him, the Democrats seek to resist him at every turn coupled with the mainstream US Media which are far quicker and readier to report the negatives than the positives as far as President Trump or any Republican president is concerned. However, the international media treatment of him as an object of mockery and ridicule, as adduced from the tone and framing of reportage on him prior to his winning the US Presidency, has now been replaced by a sense of wariness and caution.
In this presentation therefore, we seek to present the persistent attacks by US mainstream media on the icon of President Trump and all things Trump as an iconoclash and not an iconoclasm. The decision to view the icon of President Trump as an iconoclash is further buttressed by the fact that there has also been a wider gap between Republicans’ and Democrats’ views of Trump than for any other U.S. president in the contemporary era of polling (Dunn, 2018). The purpose of this presentation thus is to understand why the icon of President Donald Trump triggers so much passion on both sides of the political divide. We shall attempt to achieve this objective by conducting a semiotic analysis of the selected icon. The subsequent sections discuss the proposed notion in more detail. But first we shall distinguish between an iconoclash and iconoclasm.
< 2. DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN ICONOCLASH AND ICONOCLASM
Iconoclasm is when we know what is happening in the act of breaking and what the motivations for what appears as a clear project of destruction are; iconoclash, on the other hand, is when one does not know, one hesitates, one is troubled by an action for which there is no way to know, without further enquiry, whether it is destructive or constructive (Latour, 2002). In other words, in iconoclasm there is clarity of perception of purpose, whilst in ambiguity there is lack of clarity of perception of purpose in the smashing of an icon.
< 3. THE ICONIC SMASHING OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S PUBLIC IMAGE BY U.S. MAINSTREAM MEDIA: ICONOCLASH DESCRIPTION
In the United States of America, for example, the Free Press is an important institution and widely considered a pillar of democracy and one of their functions is to provide checks and balances on the government in power through fair, accurate and balanced reportage. However, following the ascendancy of Donald Trump to the US Presidency, the barrage of attacks by the media on his person has been hard-hitting and unrelenting, all this in the wake of a booming economy and improvement in the country’s national security home and abroad. A study conducted by Media Research Center found that, over the past four months, nearly two-thirds of evening news coverage of the Trump presidency by ABC, CBS and NBC (three mainstream media) has been focused on just five main topics: the Russia investigation; immigration policy; the Kavanaugh nomination; North Korea diplomacy; and U.S. relations with Russia. The networks’ coverage of all of these topics has been highly negative, while bright spots for the Trump administration such as the booming economy received extremely little coverage (less than one percent of the four-month total) (Noyes, 2018). In essence, the study found that broadcast news coverage of President Trump is 92 percent negative, give or take a percentage point or two, with positive coverage of the economy or other bright spots amounting to less than 1 percent (Harper, 2018).
The extent of negative coverage on Donald Trump leave us wondering where the true interests of the ‘Fourth Arm of government’ – the mainstream media in the United States – lies; whether giving voice to the voiceless or perhaps pursuing ‘a hidden agenda’ to subvert and destroy this man’s presidency via the instrumentality of their media platform. It therefore stands to reason that if the true intention of the anti-Trump media is to inform the US citizens and to actively seek their best interest, they would by all means provide a balanced and fair reportage to their listeners and viewers so that they the listeners or viewers can make informed decisions.
Unfortunately, this is not the case as the anti-Trump mainstream media appear to be skewing the news to project a narrative that best serves their own ‘hidden agenda’; or is it the case that President Donald Trump is so bad for the American people and that the American people don’t know what is good for them so they the mainstream media have to do everything it takes to undermine this President regardless of any good thing he is doing for the American citizens such as defending US’ borders from the onslaught of illegal migrants or migrants caravans coming towards its southern border (Voice of America, 2018; Webber, 2018), growing the economy to more than 3 % (Rusche, 2018) and putting the interests of the American citizens first above all else under his ‘America First’ Foreign Policy. At any rate, the responsibility of any President should be first to the citizens of the country over which he/she presides. Below is a tweet of Trump’s reaction to the migrant caravan coming towards the US southern border:
Our military is being mobilized at the Southern Border. Many more troops coming. We will NOT let these Caravans, which are also made up of some very bad thugs and gang members, into the U.S. Our Border is sacred, must come in legally. TURN AROUND!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 31, 2018
This situation leaves one to doubt the motives and intentions of the mainstream US media in the reportage of their own President. Herein lies our iconoclash since we do not know and are hesitant and troubled by US mainstream media’s action for which there is no way to know, without further enquiry, whether it is destructive or constructive. The question then is whether it is a destructive or constructive thing for the mainstream media to give the icon of US President Trump 92 % negative press coverage and what are the true motives of the mainstream media for doing this. In the next section, we do a detailed semiotic analysis of the icon, the 45th President of the United States America, President Donald J. Trump.
4. DETAILED SEMIOTIC ANALYSIS OF THE ICON, THE 45TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP
President Donald Trump is arguably the most controversial figures in the United States’ recent political history. A key highlight of this controversy that often make headlines are the confrontations between President Donald Trump and the mainstream media. This section thus takes a detailed semiotic analysis of the icon President Donald Trump in the light of how he is treated by iconoclasts, for the purpose of this study, the mainstream media in the United States.
The mainstream media in the United States, is conceptualized as iconoclasts, because of the ambiguity and lack of clarity in their societal role as information gate keepers.
A google search of the keywords, ‘trump and the media’ returned 899 million hits as at November 12, 2018 compared with the 267 million hits returned for the keywords, ‘Obama and the media’. To put this into perspective, the 267 million hits for ‘Obama and the media’ is after his two terms in office (8 years), whilst the 899 million hits for ‘Trump and the media’ is just for the first two years into his first term as President. The mainstream media argue that President Trump is trying to ‘shut them down’, a virtual impossibility under the American constitution, regardless of the best efforts of a sitting president to as it were ‘shut them down’. On the other hand, President Trump insists that the mainstream media coverage and characterization of him is often unfair, biased and smacks of character assassination, a narrative which appeared to have found further validation in the mainstream media coverage of his supreme court nominee hearing, the now Justice Kavanaugh (Fox News, 2018).
According to Latour (2002), there are five types of iconoclastic gestures and people who exhibit these gestures have been placed in groups labelled A to E. The first group is the A group which consist of people who are against all images. The second group is the B group which is composed of people who are against freeze-frame, not against images. The third group, the C group contain people who are not against images except those of their opponents. The fourth group, the D group comprises people who are breaking images unsuspectingly or unknowingly. The last and final group is the E group which is simply made up of the people - they mock iconoclasts and iconophiles. In explaining each of these groupings, we would draw heavily on Latour (2002). It should be noted however that the categorization is based on five key attributes namely (i) the inner goals of the icon smashers; (ii) the roles they give to the destroyed images; (iii) the effects this destruction has on those who cherished those images; (iv) how this reaction is interpreted by the iconoclasts; and, (v) the effects of destruction on the destroyer’s own feelings (Latour, 2002).
The ‘A’s are against all images. Members of the A group see attachment to all images as entrapment and thus feel the need to free these ‘unfortunate victims’ - those they consider believers. This group of iconoclasts break images more out of the indignation, hatred and the loathing those idols/images provoke in them. The As believe it necessary as well as wholly possible to get rid of all images. Purification is their goal. They believe images obstruct access to truth, objectivity and sanctity. The other issue with the As is that they see the horror and shock in the faces of the people who worship the images they have smashed as justification for such destruction. This is because they perceive the reaction of those who cherish the images as too much attachment to the images. But the deepest problem of the As, is that no one knows if they are not Bs! It is quite safe to say that images of President Trump evoke feelings of indignation, perhaps even hatred and loathing within many journalists probably more because of his direct and confrontational nature which gets triggered when he feels he is under attack, which is in sharp contrast with the way the media thinks a president is supposed to behave. As to the iconoclast, in this case the media as an A type iconoclast wanting to destroy all images of President Trump leaves room for doubt. As such, we can’t say for sure if the media in their critic of President Trump is an A type iconoclast.
The ’B’s are against freeze-frame not against images, although they are also regarded as idol smashers. They wreak havoc on images, break down customs and habits, scandalize the worshippers, amid horrified screams of “Blasphemer!, Infidel!, Sacrilege!, Profanity!.” But the huge difference between the As and the Bs is that the latter do not believe it possible nor necessary to get rid of all images. What they fight is freeze-framing, that is, extracting an image out of the flow, and becoming fascinated by it, as if it were sufficient, as if all movement had stopped (Latour, 2002). Members of this group have very little or no tolerance for fixation on a particular tradition or custom (a type of freeze-framing) regardless of the changes in their environment. In the light of the foregoing, we assess the mainstream US media iconoclast to determine whether they fit into the B type mold. Indeed, in recent times the behaviour of the mainstream US media appear to break down ‘customs and habits’ as it were as enshrined within the US constitution.
For example, the principle of presumption of innocence (i.e. innocent till proven guilty), a bedrock United States principle was thrown out the window when the mainstream media rushed to publish and run uncorroborated stories of accusations of sexual misconduct against President’s Trump’s supreme court nominee in the person of the then Judge Kavanaugh. In a report by the Media Research Center, it found that 90 percent of the news coverage on the then Judge Kavanaugh was negative (Fox News, 2018), suggesting that the mainstream media seem to have very little or no tolerance for fixation on a particular tradition or custom (in this case the principle of Presumption of innocence) even if that fixation serves the greater good. But why this hostility towards this kind and good judge as his track record attest to and the going against of every high journalistic standard they hitherto may have espoused? The simple answer: President Donald Trump. Kavanaugh is a Trump supreme court candidate. But this is not the end of our hesitation, of our ambiguity, of our iconoclash. As and Bs could, after all, be simply Cs in disguise.
The Cs are not against images except those of their opponents. The Cs are also after debunking, disenchantment, idol-breaking. They too leave in their trail plunder, wreckage, horrified screams, scandals, abomination, desecration, shame and profanation of all sorts. But contrary to the As and to the Bs, they have nothing against images in general: they are only against the image to which their opponents cling most forcefully (Latour, 2002). Flag-burning, painting-slashing, church burning, defacing, character assassination, hostage-taking are typical examples. The search for the suitable object to attract destruction and hatred is reciprocal. During this search, all recognize the image in question as a mere token; it counts for nothing but an occasion that allows the scandal to unfold. Political correctness is part of this attitude: scouting everywhere for good occasions to be scandalized. The C type iconoclastic gesture is most interesting. This is because it appears to best describe the relationship between President Donald Trump and the mainstream media. Could it be that the mainstream media view Trump as an ‘enemy’ possibly explaining the unusual hostility towards him in the face of his passion for the wellbeing of the ordinary American citizen. For the wellbeing of the ordinary American citizen, President Trump took on the entire Washington establishment, although it was not a popular thing to do. In spite of the negative press coverage he received during his campaign, he still emerged president to the shock of the world especially the mainstream US media. We argue “…especially the mainstream media” because the media continue to oppose, resist and criticize him in an unfair manner at every given opportunity while actively downplaying his achievements and hyping his shortcoming however trivia, although it is during his presidency that the US economy has made the most significant strides with record low levels of unemployment rate, wage rises, renegotiating NAFTA to benefit the US citizens more and the like (Rusche, 2018). The media prefer style over substance. As ‘crude’ as some may think President Trump, one cannot argue the fact that he does get results – economy, North Korea, moving US embassy to Jerusalem, renegotiating NAFTA, getting rid of ISIS, making America safe home and abroad and the like. Yet, the mainstream media is not impressed. Why? Donald Trump is still president. In the light of the foregoing, we can argue that the so-called information gate-keepers are not really interested about the wellbeing of the ordinary American citizen but rather in their having their own way through the pushing of narratives with ‘hidden agendas’. As such, any U.S. president whose actions and policies are out of sync with these hidden agendas becomes an automatic target for ‘elimination’.
Therefore, mainstream media in the United States has become ‘weaponized’ by the very people who should not – the mainstream media. Any wonder, President Trump under the pressure of intense hostility and unfair news coverage has tagged the US mainstream media ‘enemies of the people’ thus effectively dealing a reciprocal blow to the credibility of the mainstream media. This is a tag the media viciously oppose because the currency of any media house is credibility, once it is lost it is not easy to recover. Perhaps, the Trump winning the election virtually all mainstream media predicted he will lose hands down may have greatly dented their credibility in the eyes of the public and so feel the need to constantly fight him as seen in the case of Jim Acosta, a White House Reporter for CNN who after asking his questions was asked to pass on the microphone to the next person and proceeded to grandstand firing a barrage of questions at the President, further challenging the US president labelling of the migrant caravan approaching the US southern border as an invasion declaring it was not an invasion. He was rude and disrespectful to his colleagues and the president and so his White House Press pass was suspended. His behaviour could best be described as adversarial and not as one looking for information or clarity on issues that matter to his audience. Not too surprisingly, he arrived at CNN headquarters to a hero’s welcome, further validating our position that the U.S. mainstream media fit the type C iconoclast mold which have nothing against images in general as they are only against the image to which their opponents cling most forcefully. This image could be as varied as sticking with a supreme court nominee despite media attacks; embracing the ideology of nationalism as opposed to globalism; and belief in strong borders and law enforcement. Trump has been viciously attacked on all these key issues or ‘images’ even going as far as equating nationalism to racism. By the same token, would it then be correct to ascribe racism to the Founding Fathers of the United States who had strong nationalistic inclinations which was instrumental in the translation of United States into a nation – a great one for that matter. It is unsettling to note how the mainstream media are constantly using framing and tone to advance their ‘hidden agendas’. Take for example, this brief editorial/introduction to Bloomberg’s Evening News Brief emailed subscribers every day. Below is a sample:
The battle over the midterms isn't over. A U.S. judge ordered Georgia, where Democrats have accused the Republican-controlled government of voter suppression, to provide a tally of provisional ballots cast. And President Donald Trump attacked the integrity of ongoing vote counts in Senate races in Florida and Arizona, which happen to show Democratic candidates closing in on their Republican opponents. —Josh Petri (November 9, 2018)
With regards to the above exhibit, it would be noticed that no emphasis was placed on ‘Democrats have accused’ by way of including a hyperlink for more information on the issue should a reader be interested but rather a link was placed on the phrase “attacked the integrity” as it is connected to the name President Trump. This media framing tactic further pushes the media narrative of passing him off as a bad person. The use of the word ‘attack’ is loaded as the intention appear to project him as a confrontational leader and as a threat to US’ democracy. It is clear that the mainstream media is on an agenda to influence the perception of the American people on a whole range of issues and the election of Trump threw a major spanner into the works coupled with the fact Trump never shied away to confront the media headlong in a form which perhaps they are not accustom to.
Furthermore, several studies have uncovered the fact that many newsrooms in the United States are dominated journalists with democratic/liberal leanings. A 2014 study under the “American Journalist” banner found that 28 percent of 1,080 surveyed U.S. journalists claimed to be Democrats, as opposed to 7 percent for Republicans (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/01/27/dear-mainstream-media-why-so-liberal/, date accessed 11/12/2018). The Pew Research Center in 2004 undertook a nationwide survey of 547 local and national reporters, editors and executives. The result? Thirty-four percent of national press identified as liberal, as opposed to 7 percent conservative (“moderate” was the largest category). Liberal identification among national press types had shot up from 22 percent in 1995 (http://www.people-press.org/2004/05/23/iv-values-and-the-press/, date accessed 12/11/2018). The foregoing observation helps explain the general attitude and posture of the mainstream media towards President Trump and Republican presidents as opposed to President Obama and Democrat/liberal presidents.
There is another kind of icon smasher, a most devious case, those who could be called the “innocent vandals.” As is well known, vandalism is a term of spite invented to describe those who destroy not so much out of a hatred of images but out of ignorance, a lust for profit and sheer passion and lunacy. This group are described as ‘innocent vandals’ as in their attempt to restore works of art, beautify cities, rebuild archeological sites, they have destroyed them, their opponents say, to the point that they appear as the worst iconoclasts, or at least the most perverse ones (Latour, 2002). These are the ‘D’ people composed of individuals in the habit of breaking images unwittingly. It is hard to characterize the mainstream media in the United States as ‘innocent vandals’ as they appear to clearly know what they are doing. However, it stands to reason that some journalists wanting not to go against the populist trend of opposing all things Trump may opt for the anti-Trump narrative, in which case we may describe these ones as type D iconoclasts of the icon President Trump.
The last group is the E group made up of simply the people. This group mock iconoclasts and iconophiles. The mainstream media definitely does not belong to this group.
5. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the destruction of the icon of the President Trump by the liberal mainstream media on face value appear noble and sometimes altruistic, with the liberal mainstream media in the U.S. trying to come off as ‘friends of the people’ and not ‘enemies of the people’. On face value it is difficult to determine whether the media coverage of the icon under investigation was constructive or destructive. Our analysis reveals the liberal mainstream media have a ‘hidden agenda’ that which is divorced from informing the American public and they use framing and tone to a large extent to achieve it. They see the destruction of the icon of President Trump as crucial to the achievement of this ‘hidden agenda’. As they pursue this course of action, they see themselves more and more losing influence with the American people. Here is how a Boston University Professor, Tobe Berkovitz puts it: "The problem with the media is that the voters who support Trump hold the media in contempt. So for the media to try to pound The Donald just reinforces the idea that Trump is correct, and is the hero for a lot of people who are dissatisfied” (Coyle, 2015). Arguably, the only reason for the American people to hold the media in contempt and be dissatisfied with them is if they had stopped serving their core purpose, informing the public in an unbiased and non-partisan manner, in the truest sense.
REFERENCES
Cobley, P., & Jansz, L. (1999). Introducing Semiotics. (R. Appignanesi, Ed.). Icon Books Ltd.
Coyle, K. (2015). The media’s coverage of Donald Trump. Retrieved from https://ballotpedia.org/The_media%27s_coverage_of_Donald_Trump
Dunn, A. (2018). Trump’s approval ratings so far are unusually stable – and deeply partisan. Retrieved November 8, 2018, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/01/trumps-approval-ratings-so-far-are-unusually-stable-and-deeply-partisan/
Fox News. (2018). Analyzing the media coverage of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Retrieved November 12, 2018, from https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/analyzing-the-media-coverage-of-judge-brett-kavanaugh
Harper, J. (2018). Still hostile: News coverage of President Trump is 92 percent negative, study finds. Retrieved November 8, 2018, from https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/10/still-hostile-news-coverage-of-president-trump-is-/
Latour, B. (2002). What is iconoclash? Or is there a world beyond the image wars?
Noyes, R. (2018). Study: Economic Boom Largely Ignored as TV’s Trump Coverage Hits 92% Negative. Retrieved November 8, 2018, from https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2018/10/09/study-econ-boom-ignored-tv-trump-coverage-hits-92-percent-negative
Rusche, D. (2018). US economy growing at annual rate of 4.1%, fastest pace in four years. Retrieved November 12, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jul/27/us-economy-report-second-quarter-commerce-department
Voice of America. (2018). Migrant Caravan Continues Trek Toward US Border Despite Trump’s Suspension of Asylum Rights. Retrieved November 12, 2018, from https://www.voanews.com/a/migrant-caravan-continues-trek-toward-us-border-despite-trump-suspension-of-asylum-rights/4653013.html
Webber, J. (2018). Migrant caravan presses on towards US, defying Trump. Retrieved November 12, 2018, from https://www.ft.com/content/ed60d176-e44a-11e8-a6e5-792428919cee
.webp)
No comments: