Column #3

Why Syria’s images of suffering haven’t moved us

In this week's column, Kennicott ironically uses pathos to show his reader's how ineffective the current appeal to pathos, through horrifying images, is. He begins his argument with intense imagery, painting a picture of horror like the rest of the media is currently. His sentences are often very short for emphasis. It is brilliant the way he reconstructs an example of the portrayal of Syria with his own words, but he proves that it still has the same effect. His tone is very cynical and almost disappointed that Americans are so unmoved by these atrocities. He builds up his column with a distinctive periodic structure; not revealing his specific exigence until the very last sentence. Kennicott states many pieces of historical evidence for possible reasons for this, but his point remains unchanged: Americans are impacted very little by the appalling photo-journalistic images coming out of Syria. Even oral representations of them, as in Obama's speech, are dismally (as a side note - I ADORE the adjective dismal...) underwhelming to the public. So far, out of all of his columns that I've read to date, Kennicott's exigence and restraints for this subject are most clear. He seeks to inform the public about the slow pollution of media images that has changes our perception of the world and it's moral codes. His audience is completely, blind to this, and as the consumers of this information, are actually the source of the problem he is addressing. Once again, his column is stunning. Moving. And almost startlingly effective at bringing together so many different elements to construct an argument about and societal issue or event.

Kennicott, Philip. "Why Syria’s Images of Suffering Haven’t Moved Us." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 13 Sept. 2013. Web. 18 Sept. 2013.