Memes and Media Law

One of the case studies included in this week’s reading, “How My Personal Photo Turned Into an Internet Meme” by John Mueller, recounts a story about how the author’s humorous photoshopped picture went viral. The final image depicts Mueller tossing his young son at an unreasonable altitude. Once available to the public, the digital manipulation went over most strangers’ heads, with some questioning his parenting and others manipulating the image further to comment (not particularly thoughtfully) on traditional gender roles.

This case study really illustrates danah boyd’s concept of “super publics,” which refers to our evolving perception of audience. Boyd contends that while in the past “public” could only be defined through its association with a location, we now need to account for changes in technology that allow “public” to exist without necessarily being a coherent entity, and for content creators to broadcast without being able to identify, even in general terms, who they are engaging. Mueller’s photo, once in the hands of the public, was misinterpreted by those who used it as a basis to evaluate his personal life and appropriated to make arguments that did not reflect his own viewpoints. An argument could be made that, because of the image’s “viral” quality, it could be hard to determine the original context of the photo, and the subjects of the photo could be seen as responsible for whatever form in which the photo was being viewed.

Mueller’s story was reminiscent of other individual-based memes, like “Ridiculously Photogenic Guy” and Alex from Target, whose likenesses were broadcasted without their knowledge (until, of course, the subsequent online activity could not be avoided). These stories lead to important questions about ethics regarding technology use and ownership of digital content. In Mueller’s case, his image should have been protected by copyright under other circumstances, but the nature of the Internet made those laws hard to enforce. Because Mueller, as the subject of the photo, became a point of curiosity and scrutiny, he and others like him have been prevented from exercising control over their privacy. Their images were captured and circulated without their knowledge, and the ensuing exposure to boyd’s “super publics” was probably unsettling for them at the least.

One thought on “Memes and Media Law

  1. d. o.

    I think the memetic quality of super public media can have incredibly troubling effects/implications, like when the mugshot of Jeremy Meeks was circulated without his knowledge or consent. Taking and reappropriating someone’s image is a fundamentally dehumanizing act.

Leave a Reply