
Bread & circuses
Propaganda is common and inherent in democratic
systems
May 5, 2004
iranian.com
"What is it men cannot be made
to believe!" - Thomas Jefferson, April 22, 1786.
What a strange
sight it must have been! On
Easter Sunday, March 31, 1929, a group of socially-prominent women including
former suffragettes went marching down New York's Fifth Avenue, self-consciously
waving their "Torches of Freedom" in full public view. The march was
promoted to be a declaration of womens' political equality and defiance of gender
repression, except
that the "Torches of Freedom" they were carrying and puffing were
actually just cigarettes.
Unbeknownst to them, the entire march had nothing
to do with freedom or women's rights, but was actually a propaganda
feat arranged
by Edward Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud and the public relations consultant
to American Tobacco Company, who had been hired to increase smoking among women
by breaking the social taboo on public smoking.
The now-famous "Torches of Freedom" campaign is familiar
to any student of public relations. It grew out of a previous campaign
designed by
Bernays and his bosses to convince women to smoke at home. His
tactic was to glamorize
the image of the smoking woman, and to equate smoking with remaining skinny
and attractive.
His advertisements encouraged the ladies to reach
for a cigarette
instead of reaching for a chocolate. And once women started smoking at
home, the next obvious move was to get them to smoke in public.
And that's how smoking became so related to gender equality and
attractiveness that, until quite
recently, a particular cigarette company was selling a "Slim" cigarette
to women with the motto, "You've come
a long way, baby!"
Baby indeed. Americans generally find it hard to
believe that they are the victims of propaganda. Such ideas are
usually attributed
the lefty types whose fashionably political views extend merely
to buying the latest
Chomsky book.
After all, the word "propaganda" is associated with totalitarian
states. It brings up mental images of conspirators in dark rooms plotting
to air-drop leaflets into enemy territory, or of Nazi soldiers
goose-stepping in
unison on black-and-white newsreel shows.
In fact it is only recently that propaganda
has had a negative meaning. The word originated in Catholic
Church's plan to "propogate" the faith in 1622, though historically
all governments have practiced propaganda, and not just during wartime
against enemy
troops. Aristotle's book on Rhetoric is a manual on the uses and abuses
of propaganda. Machiavelli advised rulers to mind appearances, because
people make judgments on appearances rather than on facts.
Leaders
have always known
that they can manipulate their followers through the skillful use of images
and symbols. What message do the Pyramids convey? "Look at
us Pharoahs! We're Gods! So don't mess with us!" Both Caesar
and Napoleon were skillful propagandists who published books and newspapers
containing accounts of their own military feats. So, the next time
you see a painting of
Napoleon riding a grand and beautiful horse as he crosses the Alps, remember
that in fact he
rode a donkey, but the humble donkeys doesn't make for stirring paintings
of military honor and glory, does it?
Propaganda is not only much more
common in democracies than in totalitarian states, it is also much
more sophisticated.
Totalitarian regimes don't need propaganda, because they can more easily
rely on simple coercion to control their people. Democracies, in contrast,
must rely on persuasion and opinion management to control their
people.
Indeed, propaganda
is so common and inherent in the democratic systems that one British
scholar recently suggested that a whole new phrase be added to
the political lexicon:
the Symbolic State. That's a state "whose directors recognise that,
in a sense, words speak louder than actions, and that the production of
the correct imagery is politically more significant than the creation and
execution of correct
policy, the old
concept of governing." (O'Shaughnessy, Journal of Public Affairs, November
2003, vol. 3, no. 4)
Yes, as Baudrillard predicted, the image has finally
overtaken the reality. And that's why today, there are hundreds of
thousands of
people employed in the so-called Persuasion Industry, getting paid
to manipulate the public mind, and to sell you everything from
cars to cigarettes to
tax-cuts and wars.
The first official, government-controlled propaganda
office in the
United States was known as the Committee on Public Information (also
known as CPI or the Creel Committee, named after George Creel,
a newspaper publisher
who
was appointed by President Wilson in 1917 to direct the internal
propaganda operation.) The purpose of the Creel Commission was
to convince the
American people to overcome
their isolationism and support US involvement in World War I.
Creel
hired the best and brightest from the fields of academia, business,
entertainment
and advertising
to push this message. CPI members included Edward Bernays as well
as Walter Lippmann, a prominent journalist and political commentator
who wrote the
founding text
of
the field of public relations, entitled "Public
Opinion."
Creel developed the CPI into a highly-sophisticated
public relations organization, utilizing a wide variety of propaganda
techniques including
films, books, cartoons, and a 75,000-member cadre of
volunteer speakers known as "Four-Minute Men" who would deliver
impromptu anti-German speeches at any location that people gathered, such
as in movie theaters
or bus stops.
These speeches relied on exaggerated or fabricated
anti-German atrocity
propaganda, such as claims that the spike-helmeted " Huns" were
throwing babies onto their bayonets and making soap out of dead
bodies. This war propaganda campaign was so successful that Hitler
wrote about
it approvingly
in Mein Kampf. The war fervor stirred up by Creel also resulted
in severe backlash against German-Americans who were often attacked
and forced to
prove their loyalty.
And for a brief time in the USA, hamburgers were called Freedom
Steaks. Sound familiar? With the end of the WWI and the return
of American soldiers
from the
front in Europe, Americans went through a period of disillusionment
as they learned that much of what they had been told about the
war had been
misleading or plain
lies.
The Institute for Propaganda Analysis was set up
in the aftermath, and attempted -- naively -- to educate the people
about propaganda
by documenting the "seven devices" of
propaganda: "Name-Calling, Glittering Generality, Transfer, Testimonial,
Plain Folks, Card Stacking, and
Band Wagon." But America's elites were hardly disillusioned
by propaganda.
In fact Creel wrote an
enthusiastic book about it entitled "How we advertised
America." It was now clear that men can be made to believe anything
by their leaders, through the skillful and scientific manipulation
of symbols
and images. In fact, some believed that since the right to vote
had greatly expanded
in the UK and US, propaganda was necessary to maintain order and
keep the great unwashed masses in line.
When the leaders realized
the potential
of modern
propaganda, they also found a way out of a paradox of democracy.
You see, democracy always claimed that the people, who are rational
beings all created
equal, should
rule over themselves. And yet political scientists had known that
the people are in fact far too ignorant and short-sighted to actually
do so.
As a
recent article in a legal journal state the problem of
the Demos in Democracy: "If six decades of modern public opinion
research have established anything, it is that the general public's
political ignorance
is appalling by any standard. As
one influential researcher concludes, ëthe political ignorance
of the American voter is one of the
best-documented features of contemporary politics.' And another:
'The verdict is stunningly, depressingly clear: most people know
very
little about politics, and the distribution behind that statement
has changed
very little
if at all over the survey era.' " [See: Rrighting
the ship of democracy]
So, what to do? The new art and
science of propaganda had the answer: Why, manufacture the people's
views for them, of course!
Jacques
Ellul, the
French sociologist
explained this process best in his 1965
book entitled "Propaganda: The Formation of Men's
Attitudes". "Even in a democracy, a government that
is honest, serious, benevolent and respects the voter cannot follow
public opinion.
But it cannot escape it either. The masses are there; they are
interested in politics.
So what can it do? Only one solution is possible: as the government
cannot follow opinion, opinion must follow the government. One
must convince the
present, ponderous,
impassioned masses that the government's decisions are legitimate
and good and that its foreign policy is correct. The democratic
State, precisely
because it believes in the expression of public opinion and does
not gag it, much channel and shape
that opinion."
Of course, today propaganda is a dirty word
so we prefer more euphemistic terms such as public diplomacy, public
relations, education,
marketing, advertising, lobbying etc. However, regardless of what
we call it, essentially the same propaganda tactics and techniques
which are used
to sell
products such as shoes, washing machines and cigarettes can be
employed to sell political candidates, policies and wars.
Every
year, government
agencies, corporations,
trade unions, political parties, social organizations and even
foreign countries spend billions of dollars specifically for the
purpose of influencing
American
public opinion. There are firms which specialize in various areas
of the persuasion business: Lobbyists use tactics such as the selective
use of
campaign contributions
to pressure lawmakers into enacting laws and promoting public policies
which are favorable to their clients; Opinion researchers conduct
surveys and polls
to identify the opinions of target populations and help determine
strategies to control and manipulate those opinions.
Crisis control
experts specialize
in minimizing the public relations damage associated with sudden
bad news for their
corporate clients, such as oil spills and sex scandals; Jury consultants
help lawyers determine the best way to present their cases in court;
Branding experts
specialize in promoting positive perceptions with their client
company's name or logo; Campaign managers
decide how the package and sell their "product" (the
political candidate) to the voters and the media; Image consultants
groom the appearances,
clothing
style, packaging color and mannerisms of their clients to promote
a particular view of the product, and Spin Doctors try to make
bad news sound good.
In America, you can find propaganda everyday, everywhere:
on every channel on TV, on every
station on the radio, and every article in every single last newspapers
or magazine. You can't get away from it. You grew up with it surrounding
you, just
as a fish
grows up in water. And since you're not aware of it,
you can't really fight it. The numbers are frightening: according
to AC Neilson, the average child views 20,000 TV commercials in
a year. The average
American youth spends 900 hours in school and 1,500 hours watching
television. All-in-all average American spends nine years of
their lives watching TV.
You can't spot the lies contained in the propaganda
either, because a good propagandist does not lie -- he merely manipulates
the
truth and uses
selective
emphasis of facts to shape perceptions. And despite
what you may think, you're not really smart enough to see through
it all, regardless of how many advanced degrees you may have.
In
fact, being educated
probably makes you more susceptible to propaganda because
you're more used to receiving information from
second-hand sources, you're more likely to identify
with "establishment" types, and you're too vain to think
that you may be wrong about something. And the most effective forms
of propaganda are specifically designed to get around the thinking
parts of
your
brain. That's why entertainment is so such an effective
medium of propaganda, as well as a means of
distracting public attention. Wasn't it a Roman emperor who claimed
that he could rule all of Rome with just bread and circuses?
The fact is that people -- all people -- are
susceptible to psychological manipulation. All people have biases
and perception
limitations which can
be exploited. Psychologists have known for generations that, for
example, people
tend to believe claims simply because they are repeated more often,
and that people tend to believe attractive spokespersons over ugly
spokespersons,
and
also that people tend to believe individuals who appear to be an
authority on a subject, even if they are really not an authority
at all. Psychologists
have
also known the less people know about a subject, the stronger the
opinions they hold on that subject.
Also, people tend to seek out
views which confirm
their
own pre-conceptions rather than information which challenges their
pre-conceptions. When people are presented with new information
which challenges their preconceptions,
they feel uncomfortable (a state known as "cognitive
dissonance") and tend to react by ignoring, down-playing or
intentionally misinterpreting the new information. No one likes
to think they
have been wrong. That's probably why most Americans still think
that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and
ordered the 9/11 attacks -- it is just to hard for Americans
to admit that their own government lied to them.
The bottom line
is that all people
are irrational
beings, and the ones who insist they are totally rational and immune
to manipulation are the biggest nuts. The tactics of manipulation
employed
by propagandists can
be as simple and overt as issuing press releases, arranging for
lecture tours by specific spokespersons, sending pundits to participate
in television
talk
shows, and providing all-expense paid trips for reporters. It can
also include covert means such as planting false or misleading
articles in newspapers,
intentionally
misquoting a competitor, promoting rumors about opponents and exposing
embarrassing personal information about them to undermine their
credibility, promoting falsified
scientific reports and burying bad news to ensure that no one sees
it or pays any attention to it.
A popular tactic is to use front
groups - organizations
pretending to be objective think tanks, research organizations
or volunteer citizens
groups - to promote the message of a hidden client such as a tobacco
or oil company. It wasn't so long ago that "scientific evidence"
said smoking was actually good
for you because it "soothed the throat." The scientists
who reached this conclusion, of course, were hired and paid by
the tobacco
companies. A well-known front group is the Washington Institute
for Near East Policy,
which according
to a Washington Post article claims to be "pro-American" think-tank but was
actually created by the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee
to promote
pro-Israeli views in Washington foreign policy circles.
Spinning
is the art of making
bad news sound good.
Specialists in this area are known as "Spin Doctors." When
the British portrayed their defeat at Dunkirk as a positive sign
of
British war-time
resolve, that was spinning. When the lobbyists for a coal company
says that global warming
is actually good for the environment because the extra carbon dioxide
helps the growth of trees, thatës spinning. When an American
general claims that the uprising in Iraq is actually a sign that
the US policy is a success,
that too
is spinning.
Another popular tactic is the "staged event" -- the
manufacture of an attention-grabbing event which is intended to
convey a particular
propaganda message. A famous staged event was the Boston Tea Party,
where rebel American
forces threw British tea shipments into
Boston harbor. The "Torches of Freedom" march down Fifth
Avenue mention at the start of this article was also a staged event.
Sometimes
the events happen on
their own -- like the events of Sept. 11 or the accidental sinking
of a US battleship in Havana harbor. When such events happen on
their own,
its up
to the skilled propagandist to exploit them to, for example, justify
the US invasions of Cuba and Iraq.
A more sophisticated propaganda
tactic using
front groups is
known "astroturfing". Astroturf is the brand name of
fake, plastic grass used in some sports arenas. An astroturf propaganda
campaign involves
the manufacture of fake grassroots organizations which
pose as "ordinary people" or "citizens groups." The
objective is to create the impression that a particular viewpoint
is supported by a wide segment of " ordinary people" and
not just greedy large
corporations, thereby giving the viewpoint greater legitimacy.
A typical astroturfing tactic is the mass letter
writing campaign, which is usually
easily exposed by
the fact that all of the letters sound alike, word for word. So,
for example, if a bunch of "ordinary soldiers" in Iraq
supposedly write almost
identical letters to editors across the US, claiming that the people
of Iraq have welcomed them with
flowers, who are you to say otherwise -- unless you happen to
do a Google search and discover the same letter was sent to many
editors, signed by
different soldiers (some of whom deny signing the letters at
all.)
And when a bunch of "volunteer groups" across America
were engaged in "educating" the public about the dangers
of Hepititis C, who knew that the moving force behind these false
citizens groups
was actually just a major drug company seeking to increase sales
of its expensive
anti-hepatitis
drug? As the Washington
Post wrote, "contrary to appearances, these coalitions
are not spontaneous gatherings of concerned citizens. They are
instead
a key part of a carefully
orchestrated marketing campaign funded by Schering-Plough Corp.
to sell the primary therapy for
hepatitis C, Rebetron, which costs $18,000 a year."
The latest
twist to astroturfing uses the internet to promote fake blogs and
to spam discussion
boards with promotional material. Framing is another tactic. Framing
an issue means
setting boundaries and context in the discussion of an issue to
promote a particular outcome. For example, when faced with lawsuits
by victims
of lung cancer, cigarette
companies often resorted to framing the
issue of smoking as one of "personal freedom": The
victims were "free" to stop smoking anytime they wanted.
No one forced them to smoke. Aren't laws
against smoking interfering with your "freedom"?
Israel
frames the Palestinians as the aggressors, and itself as a victim
which
is merely
seeking a "right to
exist." Another example of framing: when the USS Vincennes
was shot down, Time and Newsweek framed it
as an example of how technology can lead to "tragic
accidents" in wartime. Framing the incident as an " accident" means
that no one should be blamed -- it was
just and "accident". Only later did we learn that
there was no "accident" involved. (See "Framing U.S.
Coverage of International News: Contrasts in Narratives of the
KAL and Iran
Air Incidents" By Robert M. Entman Journal of Communication 41(4)
Autumn 1991) Burying
bad news is a skill required of any good public relations specialist.
One way to bury
bad news is to make sure that it appears on page D-12 of the newspaper
instead of the front page headlines.
Another tactic is the time
the release of the bad
new to correspond with some other more interesting event, making
sure that the bad news does not get noticed. When Sept 11th happened,
a British government
official
passed around a memo in which he explicitly stated " This
would be a good time to bury news" -- and do you think it
was a coincidence that
the very day the OJ Simpson verdict was released was also the day
that the US
Department of Energy officially apologized for conducting illegal
nuclear radiation experiments on unsuspecting patients without
their knowledge
or approval? Ordinarily,
that would have been big news -- but it was pushed aside by the
OJ Simpson story, so few people noticed it.
Of course, none of
this means that the
situation is hopeless and the people are doomed to be forever manipulated.
As Abraham Lincoln
once said, "You can fool some people all of the time; You
can fool all of
the people some of the time; But you can't fool all of the people
all of the time." Propaganda is just a tool and can be used
for positive ends,
such as convincing people to drive safely or avoid drug abuse.
Propagandists are themselves just humans, who suffer from the same
shortcomings as anyone
else.
The practice of manipulation has grown harder and
harder in recent years, as
people have grown more cynical.
While being educated doesn't totally immunize people from manipulation,
informed citizens are harder to trick. So the next time you hear
that the government has lied
to justify a war, don't be too shocked -- its happened many times
before. The next time a public relations firm like Hill and Knowlton
presents a fake "nurse" to falsely testify before Congress
that she personally
saw Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out of incubators,
don't be too upset. It has happened before. Spin, manipulation
and perception control is how things work
in America -- the truth or the reality of the matter is no longer
really relevant. It all just bread and circuses.
.................... Say
goodbye to spam!
*
*
|