A-Level Media Studies: Adbusters 125: front cover analysis

Layout

Very, very little information is included on the front cover, which insinuates a high expectation of socio-cultural knowledge of the readership
West as a concept can be defined as rich, post-colonial, including north America and Europe. There is also an assumption of democracy. The use of the term 'post west' could mean the collapse of the Western world, and the end of civilisation
Extremely vague, basic layout, with a big emphasis on the colours black white, green and brown
A highly polysemic layout which challenges the audience to come up with their own interpretations
White 'halo' effect around the soldier's head may have an angelic or religious connotation. Is this guy... the good guy?

Partially covered by a smear of 'mud', which completely subverts the point of a masthead: to attract a readership
Irregular masthead looks completely different from every other edition of Adbusters.
Here it is sans-serif, which is connotative of seriousness and masculinity
The masthead itself is damaged and partially unreadable, camouflaged. This suggests that Adbusters does not care about it's own brand identity
White, plain, sans serif, no nonsense creates an exciting contrast with the background

Lexis of cover line, 'post-west' may suggest a shift in political and economic views. Is the magazine suggesting that the 'west' is over?
Assumes a large political knowledge for the audience
West has connotations of stability, democracy and progress.

Mid shot of cover 'model' emphasises the anger and hatred in his facial expression, which is further anchored by his clenched fist. This magazine is clearly fixated on themes of aggression and violence
The main image is of a stereotypical 'terrorist'. With his big bear, middle eastern appearance, screaming face and camo jacket, he ticks off a lot of stereotypical
More typical of war photography than the front cover of a magazine. Here this challenges genre expectations. What genre is this magazine?
Canted angle of main image is highly reminiscent of action films. This is an example of intertextuality or a referential codes. This allows the audience to draw links between their own experiences of war and violence and the image
Shallow depth of field (background is blurry)
Fact the cover line is more visible than the masthead suggests that Adbusters is more concerned with politics than image
Polysemic meanings: is the soldier screaming or celebrating? Angry or happy? We just don't know
Mid shot of an unidentified soldier soldier positions the audience in a scary and uncomfortable mode of address
Through a lack of anchorage, the audience are forced to come to a number of stereotypical conclusions. Is this man a terrorist? A deliberately uncomfortable mode of address

MES of grainy is symbolic of war and violence, and makes the magazine look deliberately unappealing, which fits in to the magazine's independent, not for profit ideology
MES of camo green again is symbolic reflective of war, violence and death
Use of a dark colour pallet, black, brown, dark green. Very uninviting for the target audience
Front cover has been deliberately smudge, almost as if it has been damaged or destroyed. This is a clear symbolic code, referencing war, death and confusion
Black and brown: symbolic of death, dirt, mud
MES of clenched fist is a proairetic code, suggesting violence, hatred and action

The cover, much like Adbusters in general, lacks any significant anchorage which may allow an audience to come to a conclusion as to what this image may mean. So, is Adbusters deliberately confusing the audience? (answer: yes, lol)

A deliberately confrontational, upsetting and even offensive mode of address. The audience are forced to observe and to try and understand a stereotypical representation
Hermenutic codes: why is this man screaming? Why is his hand in a fist? What is he going to do? These questions are not answered

indirect yet still confrontational. The 'soldier' is deliberately not looking at the audience (highly unconventional for magazines), which suggests the insignificance of the target audience