Capturing the Moral Imagination in the Age of Images and Spectacles: The Case of Animal Rights

Overview: As mass media has become dominant within post-industrial

societies, advocates of social causes of all shades have increasingly come

to rely on visual appeals in their efforts to shape and alter what the ideas

and images the public holds regarding a specific issue. This trend has

arguably manifested itself in political campaigns, social movement

advocacy, and social marketing campaigns intended to alter public

attitudes and behaviors about a given matter.

This trend towards the deployment and utilization of visual images

raises significant questions for advocates of social causes: how are visual

images utilized in efforts to shape the public imagination and perception?

What does this emphasis on the visual mean for social movements and

causes that originated in movements characterized by sustained linear,

rational argument?

The purpose of this book is to investigate the increasing emphasis on

the visual as a means to shape and transform the moral imagination of the

public through the case of the contemporary animal rights movement. The

animal rights movement provides an excellent case study for this

investigation and outstanding examples of the use of visual appeals in an

attempt to alter the moral imagination of the public. Emerging with the

publication of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation in 1975, the animal rights

movement gained public attention through its compelling use of visual

materials in attempts to alter public perception regarding the treatment

of animals. In sum, this book also raises the question: how does a movement

rooted in academic philosophy makes claims and attempt to influence public

opinion in the age of “images and spectacles”?

Media and the creation of social problems: One of the significant

aspects of the “cultural turn” in the social sciences has been the

increased analytical attention relating to how cultural phenomena and

artifacts have measurable impacts outside of explicitly cultural milieus. A

prime example of this blurring of boundaries between cultural

manifestations (especially within popular culture) and other aspects of

social life has been the increasing impact of visual media and

entertainment and how they impact public perceptions of social issues. For

example Glassner (1999) contends that the paradoxical growth in the

American fear of criminal victimization during the 1990s, while measurable

2

rates of violent crime were actually declining, is attributable to both

disproportionate news coverage of the violent crime, politicians who

actively inflamed public concerns about crime, and numerous popular

culture media artifacts (such as television programs and films) which also

emphasize violent crime. Glassner’s argument is compelling for two

reasons: it supports the importance of cultural variables as having

explanatory significance outside of explicitly cultural settings, and it

also suggests the importance of the “agenda setting” capacity of media

(McCombs, 2004). Glassner (1999) and McCombs (2004) are hardly alone in citing the

capacity of media coverage to influence public opinion regarding specific

social and/or political issues. Bob (2005) has cited the capacity (or

inability) of social movements to utilize marketing strategies as being

essential to explaining whether or not an event or phenomena (such as

famine or genocide) comes to occupy a prominent position within public

discourse; a position that may even lead nation-states to take action(s)

advocated by the social movements. What is significant here is not simply

that social movements or other advocates make factually compelling cases,

but that these cases also become visually and emotionally compelling

narratives for the public at large. A parallel case may be made regarding

recent political advertising campaigns in the United States. Brader (2006)

argues that the rise of televised political advertising has been

accompanied with visually and emotionally compelling appeals that are

often substantively weak or misleading: the appeals that are visually or

emotionally appealing command more attention within the public agenda. In

sum, those appeals which are more “spectacular” are more likely to attain

public attention.

The spectacle: In the Society of the Spectacle (1967), Debord

contends that contemporary developed societies have become dominated by

“the spectacle”: unrelenting waves of visually compelling and engaging

images and narratives whose sum effect is to pacify the public whom they

captivate. More recently, Kellner (2003) has continued the discussions of

“the spectacular”, supporting Debord’s arguments about the ubiquity of

the spectacle well outside of popular culture, as well as its distracting

aspects (such as the prominence given to the OJ Simpson trial). For both

Debord and Kellner, the spectacular is an entity that serves to bolster

and maintain current economic and political arrangements through

generating passivity with the general public. However, this account of the

3

spectacular in the context of agenda setting raises a question: can the

“spectacular” also become a zone for conflict and the transformation of

public perception?

The spectacular as a battleground over the moral imagination:

Edelman (1988) suggests that much of contemporary politics consists of

conflicts created through competing spectacles, seeking public legitimacy

and prominence. Edelman argues, for instance, that social and political

problems are not self-evident, but rather are created and sustained by

compelling spectacles that are generated by advocates. Moving beyond

Edelman, it is not a dramatic leap to suggest that public perceptions

regarding morality may also be influenced, and even shaped, by advocates

within the “spectacular”. Stout (2006) suggests that much of the

motivation that facilitated the social fissures that led to the American

Civil War – and later sustained the combatants – was generated through

appeals to the moral imagination that emerged within the mediated

“spectacular” of the day: newspapers, sermons, and appeals within the

popular culture like Uncle Tom’s Cabin. In short, Stout’s discussions of

the moral understandings and perceptions that led to and sustained the

American Civil War suggest that the role of the “spectacular” was not to

generate passivity, but rather was a zone of significant conflict.

The “spectacular” and advocating animal rights: The contemporary

animal rights movement makes a very compelling case to investigate within

the realm of the active “spectacular”. As the literature on agenda setting

suggests, one of the significant aspects of media coverage is that it brings

attention to issues and phenomena that may not be directly encountered by

most media consumers in advanced, (post)industrial societies. Just as most

news consuming North Americans have not directly experienced

international humanitarian disasters, but learn of these events through

media coverage, it is also unlikely that many of the concerns expressed by

animal rights advocates (such as the use of animals in medical and

commercial experimentation, the killing of animals for fur garments, the

slaughter of animals for consumption, and so on) have been directly

experienced. For example, the case of the head injury laboratory of Thomas

Gennarelli University of Pennsylvania in 1985 involved the release of

segments from Gennarelli’s own research tapes (captured by members of

the Animal Liberation Front) to both political leaders and the mass media.

These graphic images, in tandem with an energetic campaign of protest, and

evidence that Gennarelli had violated federal laws associated with

4

federal funding received by the laboratory, culminated in the closing of

the laboratory (Finsen and Finsen, 1994).

Beyond simply depicting graphic imagery of animals as a form of

“moral shock” (Jasper and Nelkin, 1992) the animal rights movement is also

engaged in an effort to cultivate and transform aspects of the moral

imagination of the wider public. In this sense, the utilization of images and

other cultural artifacts should be understood not simply at attempts at

persuasion, but rather as an attempt to build within the spectacular an

alternative moral imagination which contains within it new moral and

ethical understandings regarding animals, their treatment by humans, and

the moral status of those who are depicted as causing harm to animals. In

this manner, the “spectacular” become an active zone of conflict, within

which animal advocates struggle against other groups and organizations

who utilize animals for economic gain (as in research, etc.).

Sociological warfare and cultural domination. At the core of this

project is the hypothesis that the spectacle is one of the primary sites for

conflict and attempts to transform and manipulate the moral imagination

of the public. Efforts similar to this have been undertaken by state actors

for centuries, but are also distinct from (and inadequate for) the focus of

this study. Lasswell(1958) makes the distinction between psychological

and political warfare. Psychological warfare at its most elemental refers

to the utilization of “…the means of mass communication in order to

destroy the enemy’s will to fight “(Lasswell, in Daugherty and Janowitz,

1958: 22)(italics in original). Therefore psychological warfare includes

typical government propaganda (both visual and written) as well as the

“propaganda of the deed”: “a term borrowed from social revolutionaries,

which emphasized the importance of assassinating or the taking of

emotionally significant cities or the importance of surprise and the

cultivation of revolutionary aims against enemy governments” (Lasswell,

in Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 23). Lasswell argues that “political

warfare” is a more inclusive term which “adds the important idea that all

instruments of policy need to be properly correlated in the conduct of

war “(Lasswell, in Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 24). These instruments

include diplomacy to divide internally and externally to separate an enemy

from potential allies, and economic activities intended to weaken an

opponent. Whereas the main target of psychological warfare is the

“enemy’s will to fight”, the targets of Political warfare include “allies,

5

neutrals and the home audience” in support of the war effort (Lasswell, in

Daugherty and Janowitz, 1958: 24).

These terms are significant because they emphasize the importance of

ideological variables within armed conflict between states. These terms

are also useful because they indicate the relative limitations of these

concepts in addressing many of the activities of social movements,

subcultures, and other non-state actors. While the activities of such

actors may resemble psychological warfare in that they are intended to

encourage an opponent to withdraw from a conflict or acquiesce, or

political warfare in that they involve attempts to persuade third parties to

join forces and/or abandon a former ally or to divest economic resources.

However, there are significant limitations to these terms when applied to

non-state actors. Firstly, they are not necessarily part of an actual or

potential armed conflict (as in the case of the Cold War). Secondly, non-

state actors generally lack the communicative, economic, and other

resources of states. Thirdly, and most critically, non-state actors tend to

have a significant difficulty regarding legitimacy. Unlike political or

psychological warfare between states, where much of propaganda is

targeted at either encouraging existing behavior (such as soldiers

fighting) or emphasizing self-interest (encouraging enemy combatants to

surrender or desert a cause depicted as unworthy or unjust), non-state

actors must encourage outsiders of the legitimacy of their cause(s), often

without the benefit of nationalism or other existing cultural or moral

resources. Moreover, specific conflicts between non-state actors and

others often are indicative of a much broader clash of world views. For

example, a “fur-free Friday” protest by animal rights activist resembles

psychological warfare in that the protest may weaken the intentions of

both consumers and producers to possess or market fur garments. Such

protests also emphasize a central claim of the animal rights movement: the

killing of animals for their fur to be used in luxury goods is ethically

indefensible. In sum, many non-state actors are advocating ideals and

alternative visions of social life that are not paralleled by traditional

manifestations of psychological warfare. Since such protests and

propaganda campaigns are not simply attempts to resolve one specific

matter (such as the sale of fur garments), but are also advocating an

alternative consciousness (Gusfield, 1981) towards many related issues

which, if successfully implemented would dramatically alter the social

6

landscape, these types of efforts are best understood as “sociological

warfare” or efforts at cultural domination.

Sociological warfare and the moral imagination: The essence of

this project is to address how conflicts within the spectacular have as

their ultimate goal the shaping of the broader societal moral imagination.

Therefore, this project intends to transcend studies of social movements

and other claimsmakers that concentrate on the framing of issue, and

instead focuses on the wider scope of how tactics such as framing are

emblematic of more comprehensive efforts to transform the societal moral

landscape.

The contemporary animal rights movement is an outstanding vehicle

for examining this question. Obviously nonhuman animals are unable to

advocate for themselves within human societies; therefore the

contemporary animal rights movement becomes the primary means through

which efforts to shape and alter moral perceptions of animals and human

relations with them. Secondly, the history of the animal rights movement

provides an intriguing venue for questions of the creation of moral

spectacle. The animal rights movement emerged in the United Kingdom and

North America during the later part of the nineteenth century as urban

centers grew and daily contact with animals became narrowed to primarily

companion animals and animals utilized in labor. As the latter category of

animals shrank due to mechanization, increasingly the contact that North

Americans and western Europeans have with animals (beyond companion

animals) is through virtual spectacles, such as visual depictions and zoos.

Therefore, many of the perceptions about animals and moral questions

concerning animals are articulated within and through a created

spectacle. Thirdly, the contemporary animal rights movement is faced with

the stark reality of needing to transmute a philosophical and

scientifically rooted world view into a compelling vision that may capture

the moral imagination of the wider public. While this project will focus

centrally on the contemporary animal rights movement, its insights

regarding conflicts fought within the spectacular may be applicable to a

variety of other social movements, such as anti-globalization, anti-

abortion, environmental, and human rights organizations. All of these

movements share the commonality of social distance between themselves,

their subjects, and the public moral imagination, and the efforts to

control the content and focus of the moral imagination of the public.

7

Chapter Overview of Capturing the Moral Imagination in the Age of

Images and Spectacles

Chapter One: Introduction to the main thesis of the book: that the

“spectacle” has recently become a primary zone of conflict for activists,

moral entrepreneurs, public relations practitioners, and other agenda-

setters vie with each other to influence the moral imagination of the

public. This book will argue that the contemporary animal rights movement

is an excellent example of these phenomena.

Chapter Two: Origins and characteristics of the spectacle. This chapter is

primarily theoretical, and provides readers with an overview of the

philosophical and social scientific literature of “the spectacle. The

primary innovation of this chapter is that the “spectacle” is not best

understood as an environment which necessarily sedates the larger public

(as Guy Debord argues in The Society of the Spectacle) but is instead

understood as a zone of conflict.

Chapter Three: Cajoling and capturing the moral imagination. This chapter

is also primarily theoretical. It seeks to provide a sociological discussion

of the public moral imagination and provide a historical and historical

overview of different strategies intended to awaken or provoke it.

Chapter Four: Towards a theory of moralization. This primarily

theoretical chapter will examine a phenomenon that is arguably central to

efforts to shape the moral imagination of the public: what Paul Rozin

terms moralization. Moralization refers to how practices, phenomena,

and/or groups are given a moral status that they previously lacked. This

chapter will explore historical examples of how moralization occurs.

Chapter Five: Sociological warfare. This chapter is both theoretical and

substantive. It continues the discussion in chapter three, and focuses on

differing strategies of both states and non-state actors in efforts to

manipulate or alter aspects of the public moral imagination. In this

chapter I will argue that what the contemporary animal rights movement is

actually involved in is a form of sociological warfare, in that it is actively

offering an alternate vision of the interactions of humans and nonhuman

actors.

Chapter Six: Striving for cultural domination. This chapter is also a

mixture of the substantive and theoretical. Its primary focus will be on

how the contemporary animal rights movement has attempted to alter

aspects of the broader culture beyond traditional social movement

8

strategies of persuasion. This chapter will compare these efforts and

cultural domination with state-based efforts at public diplomacy.

Chapter Seven: Drama of the spectacle. This chapter will provide readers

with several case studies of conflict within the spectacle, and how these

measures (and countermeasures) are best understood as efforts to

influence and dominate the public moral imagination through moralization.

Chapter Eight: Conclusion: The spectacle as a measure of things to come.

While this book focuses on the contemporary animal rights movement, this

chapter will contend that much of what has been observed within the

animal rights movement is a harbinger for other social movements and

groups of claimmakers. This chapter will conclude that both the spectacle,

and the conflicts within it, is likely to remain in the postindustrial world

for the foreseeable future.