Running Head: Money in Politics RWS 1301 MW 1:30-2:50

Visual Analysis

Marco Mejia

September 17, 2017

The University of Texas in El Paso

Money in Politics 1

Piece One: Nutrition Labels

Summary:

The political cartoon sketched by artist M. Wuerker is a perspective on "Money in

Politics". In the image we see a politician walking into the White House, with a nutrition label on

his back. The nutrition label then reads off the list on many top GOP super PAC/campaign

donors. The nutrition label is symbolic of all the money that politicians take in during their

election cycle. The label reads that sixty-nine percent of the politicians funding is earned through

a super PAC. It is clearly indicated that the politicians are a GOP, due to the color of this attire.

However, pass the U.S. Republican senator are even more politicians with nutrition labels, that

are indicated to be Democrats. Showing that money in politics is to remain a non-partisan issue,

that plagues both political parties. They bought politicians can all be seen walking into the White

House to work. Since all the Super PAC senators are expected to draft and approve laws for the

people: there is clearly an immediate conflict of interest. How can politicians be expected to

remain loyal to the people when taking in such large amounts of donations from corporations?

The main message in the political cartoon is clear; as long as we have money in politics, any

efforts towards democracy is futile. The audience is the American voters that unknowingly vote

for a candidate that takes in super PAC money. In an attempt, to inform and then persuade them

to take action against money in politics. There is no visual guidance on how to take these actions,

but it is clear the artist wants the American public to look the "nutrition facts", aka the political

donor list.

Logos:
Money in Politics 2

The information illustrated in the cartoon shows the percentage of super PAC money is

higher than the money given to politicians than that of the individual donations. Which was

displayed by the nutrition label of the politicians back, which was incredibly straight to the point.

The information provided is to create shock into the public to teach them the truth behind the

majority of politicians. Also, the list of super PAC's was also provided to inform the audience of

which cooperations to keep wary of. The use of logos in the political cartoon was to use facts to

catch the attention of the reader. And because only one politician was shown, it can be inferred

that the artist is encouraging the audience to see what politicians are taking super PAC's from

cooperations.

Pathos:

The portrayal of money in politics was drawn as a satire. One of the elements of satire

was the understatement made inside his cartoon. The atmosphere is shown as a bright clear day,

just as any other. And the White House is shown as a patriotic and peaceful establishment.

Which is ironic because the general atmosphere of the white house typically seems frantic and

hastened. The politicians are seen walking in calmly with smiles on their faces. The tranquility

shown in the cartoon is an attempt to show emphasize how our government down plays money in

politics. These elements of pathos false tranquility is meant to antagonize the audience

Ethos:

Matt Wuerker the political cartoonist from "Politico", seems to identify with the

independent party but favors progressive ideology. He proudly is willing to attack any candidate

regardless of their political identity and builds credibility by appearing unbiased. Mr. Wuerker is

unbeknownst to the majority of the public. So maybe the use of more recognizable politicians
Money in Politics 3

would have helped to further establish credibility; like the use of both Donald Trump, and

Hillary Clinton.

(Image 2)

Piece Two: Supreme Union

Summary:

The political cartoon purchased by Pittsburgh Post Gazette shows an artist's insight to the

protection of money in politics by the supreme court. The image shows the marriage of a happy

couple. The groom can be seen holding a bag full of money as compared to his groom how holds

a bouquet of flowers. As the groom appears to be dressed as a villain from an action movie from

the early twentieth century, but the bride is wearing the traditional dress. While the bride is made

to look like they are the traditional soon to be wife, the bride is clearly a man. Which does

enforce the construct of gender norms, but at a good and humorous expense. The priest that

solidifies the union between the happy couple, has Supreme Court Justice on this gown. This is

an allusion to when the actual supreme court justice reused up to hold the "checks and balances",

`and strike out money in politics. The audience is the American people that are frustrated by the

lack of results and broken promise from bought out politicians.

So the audience is expected to react by calling out the supreme court justice for allowing the

union between corporations and politicians.

Logos: While not many facts were shown in the image, it is clear the person marrying

"Money" and "Politics" is the supreme Court. The drawers had done this to inform the audience

of the supreme court's decision not to take action against corporations buying out politicians.
Money in Politics 4

Pathos: The image is funny and meant to show the impact the of complacency. The artist

personified the theme of Money in Politics as two separate but co-dependent characters. So that

the Americans public is better able to realize the connection between corporations and

politicians. By dressing the "Politics" as men, the artist uses gender rule that says men wearing

dresses are shameful and wrong; to say that politicians are wrong and shameful for selling out to

corporations. Then the corporations are shown as an evil business tycoon from the early

twentieth century. This is to help the audience associate them with a villain type character. Then

in the image, a humorous contrast can be made. While the bride hopes a bouquet of flowers, the

groom holds a bag of money. This is an inference saying that the bride is a gold digger. And

"her" groom even holds characteristics of a dirty old rich man. These comedic properties were

meant to demonize both parties at play. The artist wanted the audience to be aware, that there are

no innocent cooperation or politicians when involving money in politics

Ethos: The identity of the artist is unknown, and then there is little to no verification

found within the painting. However, by through the culture shock of the lonesomes groom and

swarthy bride, the image catches the audience's attention. However, if the audience did not

already have information prior to first seeing the art piece, it would be hard to misinterpret.

Because there is little to no credibility the painting can easily be ignored by the public. Thus

dampening the overall message of the message.

Reference Page

Wuerker, M. (2015, January 11) Nutrition Labels. [Cartoon] Politico. Retrieved from

http://www.politico.com/

Rodgers. (2016) Supreme Union. [Cartoon] FlipBoard. Retrieved from http:// flipboard.com
Money in Politics 5

Graphs and Figures

(Image 1)

(Image 2)