Propaganda
2007-03-13 19:32![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
flexibeasti don't care much for propaganda, regardless of who's dishing it. For example, despite being *cough* less than enthusiastic about McDonald's, i felt Super Size Me was a poor attempt at critiquing the fast food chain: several times, whilst watching the film, i found myself poking holes in it without even thinking. Presumably one is supposed to suspend one's critical faculties for the dubious satisfaction of engaging in some mindless Maccas-bashing - as per the "Most propaganda is not designed to fool . . ." quote i posted recently.
Consequently, i'm not particularly impressed by Michael Moore. Moore has shown himself to play fast and loose in the supposed service of a higher purpose, as demonstrated by this and this. And now even his fans have discovered that he's not necessarily coming from the high moral ground.
Quite apart from the ethics of twisting information for propagandistic purposes, i actually don't think propaganda is an effective tactic for achieving political change in our society:
So i tend to think that propaganda is rarely (if ever) useful. Indeed, it often suggests to me that its propagator is ethically, morally and/or politically in the wrong.
1. Witness, for example, the stupid arguments between members and/or supporters of the ALP and the Coalition in Australia, or Labor and the Tories in the UK, or the Democrats and the Republicans in the US - when the reality is that history has shown all of these groups to be capable of lying, breaking promises, doing dodgy deals etc.
Consequently, i'm not particularly impressed by Michael Moore. Moore has shown himself to play fast and loose in the supposed service of a higher purpose, as demonstrated by this and this. And now even his fans have discovered that he's not necessarily coming from the high moral ground.
Quite apart from the ethics of twisting information for propagandistic purposes, i actually don't think propaganda is an effective tactic for achieving political change in our society:
- It usually doesn't take long for one's opposition to find the flaws in the information one is presenting (or purposely omitting, i.e. lying by omission), and that tends to lead to interminable arguments about which side in the discussion is the more dishonest1, detracting from the actual issue needing to be discussed. Moreover, being willing to publicly present flawed information suggests that one is getting desperate.
- Misrepresenting the position of one's opponent - which frequently occurs in propaganda - serves only to avoid getting to the nub of the argument, which basically gives the impression that one is not really interested in reaching a resolution.
- In trying so hard to make a particular point, one might metaphorically be 'shouting' over some very important and relevant arguments being made by one's opposition: arguments that one needs to either counter effectively, or to accept as valid such that one needs to alter one's own position accordingly.
So i tend to think that propaganda is rarely (if ever) useful. Indeed, it often suggests to me that its propagator is ethically, morally and/or politically in the wrong.
1. Witness, for example, the stupid arguments between members and/or supporters of the ALP and the Coalition in Australia, or Labor and the Tories in the UK, or the Democrats and the Republicans in the US - when the reality is that history has shown all of these groups to be capable of lying, breaking promises, doing dodgy deals etc.
