The final chapter of Timothy Glander’s book, Origins of Mass Communications Research During the American Cold War: Educational Effects and Contemporary Implications (2000) stands as a disappointing example of academic research becoming hijacked by the author’s personal opinion. Focusing on the hidden nature of propaganda in American life, his concluding chapter presents a very drastic view of the individuals who crafted the academic subject now known as mass communications. I see the need for investigating the status quo, for digging into the motivations behind the images and data churned out in the mass media, and for questioning the trivia facts that become common knowledge. For that reason, I am wary of completely discrediting the …show more content…
Circling any solid thesis, he claims that generations of Americans have been brainwashed by mass communications, ruining any “genuine community life” (2000, p. 214), a vague picture of the pre-Cold War era that never becomes defined. The Cold War era may have featured significant changes in the way American communities functioned, but summoning up a sitcom image instead of genuine examples to support one of his key arguments simply weakens his case. His one clearly stated goal is to revive the association of the phrase “mass communications” with the word “propaganda” – a word that appears thirty times in these fourteen pages.
Making the unfortunate choice of attempting to eliminate detractors of his claim without addressing their concerns, Glander frames them as being lost in the propaganda of their time. His claim, “people still remain largely unable to…understand the powerful ways in which [television] is used to shape and control their thinking” (2000, p. 207) means every generation since the Cold War is so permeated by mass communications that they are now incapable of external analysis. Using this logic, critics of his argument are brainwashed by this new establishment, a victim of social control that they cannot see or change, leaving us in a vicious circle at the mercy of the media.
Two accompanying book reviews echo my concerns with this logic. Found in History of Education Quarterly (2001) and
In her essay, “Propaganda: How Not to Be Bamboozled”, author Donna Woolfolk Cross explains the different types of propaganda and how it is used in the United States. The essay was first published in Speaking of Words: A Language Reader (1977). Cross defines propaganda as “simply a means of persuasion and so it can be put to work for good causes as well as bad” (247). In her article she discusses how propaganda works and explains how propaganda is used with thirteen different devices to manipulate people’s thoughts, opinions, and ideas. She uses this essay as an informative piece, giving advice on how not to be manipulated by propaganda.
Propaganda is about power and persuasion, and is used for many reasons by the government. This essay will explore the overt means by which the government uses systematic propagation to control the citizens of the society and the subtle ways in which information, independent thought, and their freedoms are restricted through radio and television.
The United States government has historically used propaganda to entice, encourage, and even shame a person into enlisting in to the uniformed services and/or supporting the war effort. The effective use of propaganda does not only affect the American public’s opinion of a war and its leaders, but also affects their commitment to the war effort. Ineffective use (or lack of) of propaganda can lead to resentment and undermine public trust in its leaders and their ability to lead the nation. This essay will show how the use of media has either supported or hindered the effective use of governmental propaganda in influencing the American public during times of war and why is it sometimes not important to know what is the “whole truth.” The areas that will be covered will be the propaganda used during the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World War I-II, the Cold War/Vietnam, and also it’s affect on public opinion.
Postman says that, as a result, "all public understanding of these subjects is shaped by the biases of television" (78) and that in the absence of rational discourse, cultural decay is sure to follow.
World War II is one of many, most horrific and crucial events in world history and one of the most important events in the 20th century. Leonard and John (2007) define propaganda as “notions, facts, or accusations that are spread purposely with the objective of furthering one’s cause or damaging an opponent’s cause”. (7) They used media and propaganda in order to increase support for their side of the war. An immense feeling of patriotism was building up, and the nations used all the resources at their disposal to get their nations ahead of the race regardless of how humiliating and misleading the allegations were. Throughout World War II, propaganda was used to maintain the heat in fights and create unity among the citizens of a nation to achieve a single cause. People receive information on a daily basis since the beginning of the war and the parties of the confrontation. United States of America used propaganda for the creation of massive advertisements in the course of the war that could be interpreted as degrading to rival forces (Cogan, Brian & Tony, 53). Propaganda and information were distributed through numerous sources—radio, films, books and newspapers. The major aim was to impose on people the way of thinking and acting, both consciously and subconsciously (Rhodes 5). Though news sources attempted to be objective, there has always been ways to influence the way in which people interpret information.
From the very early stages of the Cold War, the United States (U.S.) government realized that in order to run a successful propaganda against the Soviet Union, the information must be as credible as possible. President Harry Truman “called for a Campaign of Truth to counteract the Soviet Union’s “big lie”” . I argue that credibility was one of the key elements that enabled the U.S. to become the dominate Cold War super power. For instance, Radio Free Europe (RFE) and Radio Liberty (RL), radio stations that broadcasted outside the U.S., agreed that “if their message was to have any effect, it had to be fact based, balanced, and credible to an often skeptical audience” . In its effort to be credible, RL was criticized of being
The Cold War influenced every modern medium in society. Many new technologies came out of the Cold War, and every aspect of society was touched; the media was no exception. For the first time, the media seeped into and influence American and foreign lives. The media’s main role in the Cold War was to distribute political propaganda in order to manipulate citizens into detesting communism or protest the various wars that happened because of the Cold War. The media accomplished this in a variety of ways some of which were print media, film, radio, television, and education system.
We live in a world of technological innovation where mass media is a major part of us today. People make assumptions on what they hear. They do not try to analyze the situation to see who is right and who is wrong, and mass media is the main source of manipulating one's mind. The concept of propaganda has changed over time. Propagandists create ideas stereotypically through the use of propaganda and use media to promote it and target people's minds to have influence on their views towards a certain group of people. These ideas create negative or positive images in the intended audience's minds. However, it is notable that the information is only the one that is exemplified through media and therefore, can be
Postman (1987) claims that television is an evil that destroys the purpose and complexities of public discourse. He argues that important issues are oversimplified and drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Chaffee and Metzger (2001) confirm this assumption by remarking the evolution of print and radio into television and television into new media. Establishing the similarities between Postman’s chief complaints about the television medium and the new media then rearing its ugly head. Chaffee and Metzger indicate the shift in the denotations of mass, media, and communication. With technological advancements, it is impossible to ignore the new media and its impact on modern culture.
The fact that wars give rise to intensive propaganda campaigns has made many people suppose that propaganda is something new. The truth is, it is not. The battle with persuasion for power and men’s minds is as old as human history (Casey, 1994d)
Television, more so than any other form of communication, has been the ultimate tool of the propaganda effort. It is the trustworthiest
As discussed in class, one of the most influential agencies of socialization is the media. The way we see ourselves or the way other people see us come from what we are told by others and what we tell ourselves. In the Better world handbook, the chapter on media states that “the way we think and act in our daily lives is inextricably linked to the information we receive about the world” (Jones, Haenfler and Johnson). The chapter continues to discus how information delivered to us can be bias and this raises the issue on who controls the media and what we see through it. The problem with this could be that that whoever controls the media does not necessary have our best interest in mind and the content that is transmitted through the media is profit driven. . In the article “Lies my teacher told me: Everything your American history textbook got wrong” gives a perfect accept of how easy it is for information to get omitted based on what people what you to know and what they don’t want you to know. From a young age, people decide what they want you to know, so that they can decide on what they want you to think about certain topics whether its American history or something else, its like the
“A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth” – Joseph Goebbels, German Reich Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. This is the exact words of Nazis most famous propagandist in using media as a mass weapon of propaganda and mind control. Could you imagine Germany in 1930s, without Television channel, without the Internet, without every mobile device in your palm, what channel of information will you get? Of course, newspapers, flies, images, celebrities were used as tools for propaganda purposes, designed to provoke a reaction, and ultimately, a form of control over their citizen. Nowadays, with all the advanced of technologies, information can reach everyone in every corner of the Earth, the message is delivered in the subtlest ways, without people’s conscious, has shaped everyone’s decision, or at least shape their behavior toward the decision that the orchestrator want the audience to perceive. With the booming of internet, information sharing seamlessly, we must ask ourselves, the role of media in conveying, shaping the society that we are living in. Let look at few examples of U.S propaganda machine, and later, the particular case of fish sauce in Viet Nam back in October 2016.
George Gerbner’s *cultivation theory* a macro-level system theory that examines mass communication by studying institutions, message systems, and cultivation analysis (1967; 1970; Gerbner & Gross, 1973; Gerbner et al., 1980; Potter, 2014). Theorized during the “Age of Television” (Shanahan & Morgan, 2004), the theory has been applied to newspapers and other media formats, assuming that media institutions “cultivate facts, norms and values of society” (Gerbner, 1970; Gerbner & Gross, 1976). Specifically, frequent television viewers are more likely to be influenced by portrayals of the world than viewers who watch less. The theory’s popularity grew after the rapid integration of televisions into American homes in the 1940s and 1950s, it was
Throughout society, the mass media constantly changes over time. The mass media play a prominent role in informing the public about what occurs within the world, especially in areas which audiences do not acquire direct experience and knowledge. This essay will argue that the propaganda model is no longer valid as it has become outdated. This essay will also discuss the model in relation to the five filters and draw on Rampton's critique of the propaganda model in contemporary society.