During our lecture with George Abdilla, we were given a
query about an explorer and a writer. So the explorer and writer go to a new
land and the explorer says he saw a red dragon and took back with him a painting of
what he saw, on the other hand the writer says she saw a blue dragon and took back
with her a photograph. So, who do you believe? The explorer has a reputation to
say the truth, but his evidence is a painting that could be fake. The writer
has a reputation of lying to make the story interesting, but her evidence is a
photograph. Because the photograph is more believable, we believe the writer.
My take on this is that
nowadays an image can also be manipulated but I would still believe someone who
has a photograph, especially if it would be in an article. As Susan Sontag said in her book ‘On Photography’, “Photographs
furnish evidence. Something we hear about, but doubt, seems proven when we’re
show a photograph of it.” (Sontag, 1977). Sontag argues that a photograph is
proof of something that occurred, and I agree with her. Take for example the
protests that are going on in Catalan, there are a lot of images showing us
what is happening. The images are also proof of the events.
I think we depend a lot on
photography when it comes to the media whether it is for gossip or to share
information. The first thing you see when something big happens is the photographs
that prove what happened. The thumbnail of an article is usually an image. Therefore,
a photograph can go a long way in the media, it’s the first thing we look for.
![]() |
| Screenshot of the thumbnails |




