WPA – White Propaganda, Actually

WPA poster

Public Relations Unmasked!

John Stauber, founder of PR Watch, compares public relations with propaganda in this video.

PSAs and Commercials

Television has provided a way for organizations to promote their campaigns through public service announcements and commercials. Here are some examples.

I think we’re all familiar with this angry Rachel Leigh Cook:

The Truth anti-smoking campaign takes a walk on the sunny side:

In this Peta Ad, Alicia Silverstone reveals all…her feelings about vegetarianism:

And knowing is half the battle….

This one is pretty disturbing:

I want what she’s smoking:

Pee Wee doesn’t want you to smoke crack:

Or does he?

Out with the old, in with the new

I met JonRay via MySpace two years back. I don’t remember how we became acquainted… Anyway, I digress.

JonRay is the co-founder of PaperTank Productions. He’s a social media consultant/specialist, a producer, a writer, a…a-mazing and a lot of things.

At the moment, he’s shooting a music video for a Mother’s Anthem but he had enough time to squeeze in a vlog comparing old school propaganda techniques to the new. According to JonRay, social media is it. It’s the new buzz word in the PR/Marketing world. For all of you communication majors, you might want to check out what social media is about.

He has a ton of advice and videos on PR/Marketing and Social Media and other goodies. Don’t be afraid to find him. He’s everywhere.

Click here for Jon’s video blog.

Please be kind to cyclists.

 

 

Founder of Please Be Kind to Cyclists

 

Last Tuesday, Patrick and I interviewed Austinite Alvaro Bastidas. Al is the founder of Please Be Kind to Cyclists. He’s really friendly.

I think with a lot of social propagandists out there, I feel like there’s a lot of zealousness. But he wasn’t like that at all.

There are organizations out there that use scare tactics. But with Al, he is different. He wasn’t trying to scare anyone into doing anything really. He just wants awareness, plain and simple. His mission is increase the harmony between automotive and bicycle traffic on our highways.

I could tell that he was passionate about his work. Really, sharing is caring. He just wanted to share the road and return safely to his family.

 

 

These are the photos I took while Patrick was interviewing Al:

 

Al parks on the side of the road with his signs as a reminder to drivers.

Patrick and Al talk about lighting, the angles, and background noise for the interview.

 

Al cleans up the memorial, clearing away the weeds and tall grass.

Here's Patrick recording and interviewing Al about Please Be Kind to Cyclists.

 

Interview w/ Allen Demling

 

An Ordinary Guy

What is your name and mission?

Allen Demling. I ran for Austin City Council Place 1 in 2008. My mission was to win! I am a mechanical engineer. I ran for city council because I felt my peer group did not have an active voice on the city council, and I wanted to fill that void.

What forms of communication have you found to be the most successful
for delivering the message? Why do you think this is?

Word of mouth. People don’t trust what they hear on TV, radio, in print, etc. they trust what their friends say or what they hear in person. People are people, but we have this weird idea that politicians are some how “above” us. I went to as many events/places, and talked to as many people as possible. I wanted them to think “I remember that guy, I met him and he listened to what I had to say”. I wanted to gain trust, and I couldn’t do that through advertisements, cause smart voters don’t trust ads. 

How have you tailored the message to be most effective for persuading
the audience?

I chose to focus on issues that were important to the group I was targeting. My main issues were cycling, the environment, the live music scene and responsible growth for Austin. I used my unique appearance (shaved head, big beard) to grab peoples attention and then my message to show them that I am a regular person like them who wants to make the city better for everyone, and I had ideas on how to do that.

Why do you believe this message needs dissemination?

Because people in my peer group rarely trust people running for office, and thus don’t vote, which then perpetuates their mistrust of the system. My major goal was to give people an non traditional candidate who had the qualifications and ideas to serve, but who was not seen as “above” or “outside” of their social sphere. 

 

How do you present your message so that it can be discerned from other
similar messages?

From a visual presentation standpoint I used graphics, such as an image of my face to grab peoples attention and get them to dig deeper into my campaign. From a verbal presentation standpoint, I stayed positive throughout the campaign, and never attacked the other candidates. Much was written in local papers about the other candidates attacks on each other and I was told several times that I seemed to be the only candidate who consistently stuck to his message.

 

Campaign material

 

 

Have you found any methods of delivery to be ineffective? If so, what
was altered in order to increase effectiveness?

I had a hard time getting people to consistently visit my blog/website to check on new stories I posted. This was a problem throughout most of the campaign, until the final few weeks when people were starting to research the candidates on their own. I don’t think I adequately addressed this problem. 

Have you ever received negative press as a result of your message
campaign? If so, explain what it was and how it was addressed.

The only negative feedback I recieved was that since my campaign took a non traditional approach toward my advertising, image usage and personal appearance, some couldn’t tell if they should take me seriously or not. I addressed these concerns by challenging people to go farther than just judging me on the images I use, and instead listen to the message I espoused.

 

Do you see your campaign as propaganda?

I understand that all advertising is essentially propaganda. I didn’t feel like I needed to convince anybody of anything, but I did employ tactics that I thought would get them to look at my message.

Is propaganda a dirty word?

Yes.

Props for Smart Propaganda

Smart advertising by these security/glass makers

 

 

WWII Environmental Propaganda

 

 

British WWII Propaganda

 

 

Anti-Smoking Ad

 

 

Peta Ad

 

 

Famous Norman Rockwell WWII Propaganda

 

 

Wheat is the enemy!

Propaganda: She’s a little dirty.

Propaganda didn’t used to be a dirty word. Far from the half-baked lies (or truth) that the majority of us associate propaganda with today, it, in fact, had a pure, Pope-y origin. Yes… to bring peace on earth. Or, er, to keep Protestantism from spreading.

It came from Pope Gregory XV in 1622. He said of the sheep who were wretchedly straying that “it is to be desired that, inspired by divine grace, that they should cease to wander admist heresies through the unhappy pastures of infidelity, drinking deadly poisonous water, but be placed in the pasture of true faith, that they may be gathered together in saving doctrine, and be led to the springs of the waters of life.”

He really did have good intentions. The rather long sentence itself sounds rather negative but really, he was projecting good thoughts and love-thy-neighbor sentiments. He is the Pope, after all.

So how did it become such a dirty word? I’m thinking when propaganda transitioned from religion to politics is when it started to get a little dirty. Who’d have thought? Politics being dirty?! Say it ain’t so, Joe.

Think of Hitler and the Nazis and every single war we’ve been in. Each one used different techniques in brainwashing, I mean propaganda… but it was there.

So that leads me to another question: is propaganda bad?

Most people would answer yes. However, Sheryl Tuttle Ross in “Understanding Propaganda: The Epistemic Merit Model and Its Application to Art” (Yes, that’s quite a mouthful) says that propaganda doesn’t necessarily have the negative connotation every one generally believes it to have.

She says that if you believe in what you’re preaching, then it isn’t bad. Then again one person’s “bad” is different from the next.

Let’s take this another step. So if you believe in your propaganda, is your propaganda automatically credible?

I think I could go in circles here. Thoughts? Is “propaganda” a dirty word?

 

 

A Force for Good?

Welcome to our propaganda blog! This blog was created in order to examine and discuss propaganda and specifically how it is used by organizations generally thought of as positive. We’ll start with a brief overview of our subject, the basic concepts, historical uses and its place in our world today.

WHAT IS PROPAGANDA?

The book Propaganda and Persuasion defines propaganda as “the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.”

Generally thought of as negative and pejorative, propaganda can fall into three categories depending on how it is used: white, black, and gray.

HISTORY

In the late 16th Century, Protestant dogma spread through Europe and loosened the grip of the Catholic Church on the population. As a response to this threat to the Church’s control, Pope Gregory XIII assembled a commission of cardinals charged with the task of spreading Catholicism throughout the heathen lands. In 1922, with the outbreak of the Thirty Years War, the commission was made permanent, officially called Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith). This eventually evolved into the College of Propaganda, which existed to teach young missionaries how to go about doing their work. So the first official propaganda organization was created simply for the dissemination of religious dogma.

From the seventeenth century through the twentieth century, we see many uses of propaganda, but they generally occur only in times of political or social upheaval. During the lead-up to the American Revolution, pamphlets were disseminated, urging people to support the revolution and reject the views of colonial Loyalists. The campaign was highly successful, prompting John Adams to remark that a revolution in the minds of the colonists took place before a drop of blood was shed. The Ottoman Empire and its various rulers employed extensive use of propaganda over the course of the Empire’s existence, both as a method of legitimizing their rule and controlling the populations. Even before Pope Gregory XIII’s commission, the rulers of a growing Ottoman Empire were using displays of grandeur and pageantry to distract their newly acquired subjects from the nomadic and very non-divine origins of the ruling class. 

However, it is not until the outbreak of World War I that we see propaganda being used as a coordinated weapon of modern warfare. For the first time, whole nations were being pulled into “total war,” a war in which the whole population of each nation had to be mobilized for the war effort. A result of this inclusiveness of the population was a narrowing of the gap between the normal citizen and the soldier on the front lines and the public came to vocalize their opinions and take interest in state affairs. These nations’ governments realized the importance of maintaining public morale in support of the war and so began creating government agencies solely charged with the task of swaying public opinion. In 1917, Britain established the Ministry of Information and a separate Enemy Propaganda Department. It is interesting to note that these names imply that the British merely deal in information, while the enemy employs propaganda. Through strict censorship, government control the media and an extensive propaganda campaign, consisting of pamphlets, posters, and films, the British government executed a highly coordinated and largely successful method of disseminating state-approved information. 

Anti-German WWI propaganda

more….