Ana Paula da Rosa 160 procedure that historically has been adopted by the media. However, beyond the simple use of photography, we can notice, in recent years, there has been an increase in images of children’s faces put into circulation. If we take the Afghan girl as a reference that “installs itself” in the social and collective imaginary, we can think that other images of children published later carry a kind of symbolic power derived from this first production. When we look at images of children like Omran Daqneesh, five years old, rescued in Syria in 2016, Aya in Aleppo, in the same year, or little Fernanda Davila, two years old, an immigrant from Honduras in the United States, we can see that there is a kind of magic formula in execution: very young children are recorded alive despite being in all types of conflicts. Their media exposure attracts attention to the issues they suggest. That is: when we look at the image of Aya or Omran Daqneesh, we have a feeling as inquisitive as that brought by the Afghan girl. Preserving the differences in angles, in imagery quality, of those who produced the record, we have images of children affected in their rights who look at us, returning to the viewer not only the role of observer but of an agent of change. It is manifested by the possi- bility of the circulation of meanings about conflicts. Their faces are more than covers or photo registries. They trigger a complex process of assigning values (ROSA, 2019) in interactions. It happens, partly, because, unlike the 1980s, when we were at an early stage of technology, from 2010 onwards, images are rapidly propagated, but it is not their propagation that determines circulation, as they are distinct phenomena. Circulation, in our view, based on studies by Verón, Fausto Neto, Cingolani, and Carlón, reveals a more profound process that deals with the effective production of meaning and anchors in the impossibility of coincidence. Verón (1980, p. 201) indicates that “whatever level of production of meaning we place ourselves in, whatever the lapse of historical time we cut, pro- duction and recognition grammars never exactly coincide” because both grammars are subject to mismatches. In other words, the production of images is not enough to “manage” the sense of recognition, even more if we think that the very act of producing the image is already a second-degree observational movement (VERÓN, 2013, p. 403); therefore, it mobilizes grammars of rec-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz