Posts Tagged: response; propaganda

Though this strays from the the questions I asked in my framing post for this week, Lasswell’s Propaganda Theory in Chapter Five really grabbed my attention because my research topic deals with how interactive media facilitates fear-mongering. Fear-mongering, in some cases, is a form of propaganda, and many of the tactics that I refer to when I think of examples of fear-mongering are listed in Lasswell’s seven characteristics of propaganda.

Lasswell published most of his work between the late 20’s and 40’s, and even worked for the government during WWII to determine the effect of media on soldiers. But in 1927 he published Propaganda Technique in the World War (referring, of course, to WWI) and in that book he listed these characteristics of propaganda, summarized in Applied Mass Communication Theory: A Guide for Media Practitioners and grossly paraphrased by myself:

1. name-calling: giving an idea, a bad label to make people reject and condemn it without examining the evidence)

2. glittering generalities: associating something with a “virtue word” that make people accept and approve it without examining the evidence

3. transfer: carrying over the authority or prestige of something respected to something else to make acceptable, or carrying over disapproval to make people reject and disapprove of it

4. testimonial: having a respected person say its good or a hated person say its bad

5. plain folk: attempting to convince the audience that the speaker’s ideas are worthwhile because the speaker is a person of the people or a person of the “common man”

6. card-stacking: selecting and using facts and logical or illogical statements to give the best or worst possible case for an idea

7. bandwagon: attempting to convince people that everyone of a similar group as them has accepted the idea

I am a bit unsure as to how older mass communication theories are treated in present study. It seems like some of the theories we’ve discussed in class have been ruled as outdated and not useful anymore, but to me these characteristics of propaganda remain incredibly relevant today.

Think of any accusation from a radical political party or commentator and see if you can identify one of these traits in their speech. How about the accusation by staunch conservatives that Obama is a socialist? Sounds like name-calling. Or a glittering generality. Or card-stacking. Or even transfer. If it looks like propaganda and smells like propaganda…

This topic is of great interest to me because anytime someone evokes propaganda to forward their agenda, they are abandoning logic and facts and are not keeping the people’s best interest in mind. In an age where audiences are so smart, it’s a little shocking to see propaganda work so well, but propaganda (or fear-mongering) is the wolf and interactive media- social media, citizen journalism, viral videos, etc.- is the sheep’s clothing.

For an example, here is a clip from The Daily Show from May 12th, 2010. The clip highlights how Glenn Beck tends to relate anything- global warming; President Obama’s supreme court judge choice (“empathy leads you to bad decisions many, many times”); the National Endowment of the Arts; teaching kids about climate change; acorns; the Peace Corps; the economic stimulus package- to Nazi Germany and Hitler.

Card-stacking and name-calling much, Glenn? Many people watch and listen to Glenn Beck as if he provides a journalistic service, yet how can the information he delivers be true and impartial if propaganda and fear-mongering lurk behind his words? By exploring how fear-mongering is fueled by interactive media, I hope to expose to audiences how the media they consume is affected and make audiences even more judicial in what they watch/read/hear. Until then: “Glenn Beck has Nazi Tourette’s”:

back-in-black—glenn-beck-s-nazi-tourette-s