The Use Of Metaphors In Political Cartoons: The 2008 Financial Crisis

The financial crisis of 2008 occurred due to a number of complicated financial actions taken by bankers and wall street financiers paired with a deregulated system that allowed for the actions to be taken in the first place. The average American lacks familiarity with financial and economics jargon, therefore, this prohibits them from fully comprehending the financial crisis and what led to it. Horner’s piece investigates the terminology and metaphors used in public discourse to describe the governmental bailout and the financial crisis in the ten days leading up to the congress vote on The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. Bounegru and Forceville's piece examine’s the use of metaphors in political cartoons regarding the global financial

crisis in 2008. Both texts examine the metaphor of the financial crisis as a natural disaster or catastrophe which can be seen in the public discourse and political cartoons. The use of this metaphor leads individuals into understanding the financial crisis as something that could not have been stopped and places humans as victims. Both texts simplify the damage this metaphors circulation can create. The authors of the cartoons and those circulating the metaphor within public discourse should be held accountable as this metaphor implies many falsehoods regarding the crisis. If blame is placed on an ominous force like nature, then how can accountability be demanded and changes within the economic system be implemented?
Jennifer Horner’s piece discusses the many metaphors circulated within the public discourse through the media and political figures in regards to the government bail out plans as a reaction to the financial crash. She searched major world and U.S publications using the term “Wall Street bailout” over the period of time when Paulson’s Troubled Asset Relief Program plan was introduced until two days after it was rejected (Horner, 34). In her search, she came across many portrayals of the financial crisis as a natural disaster. In one example she cites the chief executive of the American Bankers Association calling the financial crisis a “category 4 hurricane” (37). Another example of this use is seen from a group of republicans who presented a competing bill to congress which labeled the crisis as a fire.
It is important to understand who is using this metaphor to their advantage. Horner presents the quotes along with who says them but does not significantly critique their personal motives for utilizing these metaphors. For instance, as mentioned above, a chief executive of the American Bankers Association utilized this metaphor and circulated it when he called the financial crisis a “category 4 hurricane” (Horner, 37). The overall function of this metaphor is to place blame on nature or an abstract force, therefore shifting it away from the actual humans at fault like the bankers and the system itself. Therefore it is clear that those who use this metaphor are people who would benefit from the blame being shifted away from bankers, ensuring the deregulated economy remain. Or, it is used by government officials who are for the bail out of these banks, who use it as a way to signify that cleanup and repairs must be done after this catastrophe has struck, just as it would after a real natural disaster.
I believe that Horner’s piece is attempting to flesh out how metaphors can be used in order to simplify things and convince the public. Horner quotes Lackoff and Johnson who state metaphors “highlight some features of reality and hide others” (32). The natural disaster metaphor for the financial crisis takes blame and accountability off of the real people who made poor financial decisions out of greed and takes the spotlight completely off of the current neoliberal capitalist system that allowed this crisis to occur. Horner’s piece should have highlighted who used these metaphors and for what purpose in greater detail. The catastrophe, or natural disaster metaphor convinces the public that humans are victims and repairs, in the form of bail outs need to occur. I believe this metaphor pushes falsehoods regarding the crash, and this needs to be critiqued stronger in Horner’s piece.
Bounegru and Forceville’s piece focuses on how verbal and visual metaphors are used in political cartoons in 2008. The most popular category of metaphors these financial cartoons used was the catastrophe or natural disaster. These cartoons explain that the crisis was caused by “forces of nature or by other circumstances beyond the control of human beings” (Bounegru & Forceville, 214). They analyze nine specific cartoons from around the globe that represent the crisis as a type of catastrophe. Within these nine examples, we see the financial crisis embodied by an ice age, a fire, a seismic wave and drowning. The nine examples connote slightly different meanings due to their different pictorial imagery, but essentially all embody the framework that the financial crisis was a catastrophe or natural disaster.
Their conclusions point to the strength and popularity of the use of metaphors in political cartoons. In regards to the natural disaster metaphors seen within the cartoons they claim “the question of who is or might be responsible for the crisis is not addressed” (Bounegru & Forceville, 220). I believe that this concluding remark is weak. The authors are downplaying the effect this metaphor has on the understanding of the financial crisis. Not only is it not addressing who is responsible, but it places the blame on something natural, unpreventable, and nonhuman. Therefore this takes the blame completely off of the real forces that created the real crisis.
Similarly to Horner’s piece, Bounegru and Forceville’s piece also fails to tell us where these cartoons come from. Therefore not discussing the potential bias these publications may have. Some of the cartoons discussed are related to the bail out, therefore the authors should have discussed who was purposely circulating these metaphors and for what purpose. Horner does a better job of connecting the metaphor with the motives of its users than Bounegru and Forceville, but both lack dialogue on how this metaphor can be used as a form of propaganda.
Both texts highlight the importance of metaphors when they are circulated into the public discourse, as they provide a simpler understanding of complex issues, like the financial crisis.

However, the real life implications regarding this simplified and skewed understanding are not discussed. The financial crisis as a natural disaster disseminates the idea that the crisis was not preventable and lacked direct human causes. This shifts blame and accountability away from the individuals and system that created the financial climate that eventually had to crash. Thus, making it harder for the average person to understand why certain changes should be made within our neoliberal capitalist system, and also quieting angry claims for greedy and shady bankers to be held accountable. Metaphors are a powerful way to disseminate ideas, but when these ideas cripple the populations factual understanding of an event metaphors can become problematic. They cause changes in understanding that hinders the call for progress and changes to our system that should come as a reaction to the 2008 financial

crisis.
Finally, it is important to analyze who is circulating these metaphors and for what purpose. Horner does a better job of attempting to lay this out, in regards to the government bail outs and how metaphors and language can convince the public of something. But Bounegru and Forceville’s piece lacks authorial accountability. It would have been impactful to understand what publications these cartoons were found in, and what kind of audience they have.
In conclusion, the financial crisis as a natural disaster metaphor frames the crisis as something unforeseeable therefore taking accountability off of the bankers, government, and the capitalist system that all played a part in the 2008 crash.

This metaphor utilized by the government when pushing for a financial bail out, and circulated around the globe in political cartoons has real life consequences. By convincing the general public that the government, bankers and the capitalist system are not to blame for the crash hinders pushes from the general public for any progressive changes to be made. The crash happened due to a lack of government regulations coupled with greedy bankers who thrive within the capitalist system. If the blame is placed elsewhere, it will be harder to convince the general public that stronger financial regulations must be put in place to stop this from occurring again. As we know, bankers who played a strong role in the crash often got huge bonuses and kept their jobs, this metaphor as it takes the responsibility off of the bankers, can explain why the average person may not be completely outraged by this fact. Metaphors easily convey complicated concepts, however, they can have real life consequences. The real life consequences of circulating the financial crisis as a natural disaster through metaphors are left out of Horner and Bounegru and Forceville’s

pieces.