Skip to main content

Propaganda

This is not journalism I'm doing.

Nothing against journalism. On the contrary, I’m a big believer in journalism's role — despite spotty performance of late — in keeping the powers that be in check and the social fabric intact. I admire its rules and standards, even as they’re increasingly honored in the breach.

But journalism isn’t me. As a career advertising professional, I have little use for objectivity. I am under no obligation to present two sides of anything. I do not default to fair and balanced. I am trained, in short, to write with an agenda.

Looked at another way, what I am is a propagandist.

Yes, propaganda is a loaded word, almost a pejorative. But propaganda is really just advertising in a political context. The word, as it has evolved, insinuates that it only comes from black hats, but I think that’s simplistic.  Every political stand — love it or hate it, white hat or black hat — has an agenda, and uses various marketing tools to move that agenda forward.

Call it advertising or call it propaganda, the process is the same. You identify a target audience. You tailor your message to that target. You find a way to deliver that message. You persuade that target to buy — or vote for — your product. The tools are ethically neutral. How they are used is not.

The messaging techniques haven’t changed. All the old stand-bys — Bandwagon, Name Calling, Glittering Generalities, Deck Stacking, Transfer, and especially Scapegoating — are as useful today, black hat or white, as they were in Machiavelli’s day. Or Goebbels’. Not a day goes by when Trump doesn’t tweet out a handful of them.

What’s new is the media. What’s new is the ability to pump out that messaging using digital media, social media, micro-segmentation, advanced analytics, and a profusion of new platforms coming online every day. What’s new is how easy it’s becoming to define your targets in ever more granular detail, and to customize your messaging accordingly.

Against tools like these, journalism is at a big disadvantage. Its standards for sourcing, verifying, and maintaining the integrity of the reporting make it hard to keep up with the nonstop flow of propaganda messaging that subscribes to no such standards. This is indeed a distressing development. But I would argue that while journalism needs to be propped up and defended wherever possible, the white hats also need to up their propaganda game. Democrats, I’m talking to you.

Republicans have always been far better at reaching their voters on an emotional level. The messaging is grotesquely dishonest, but they certainly understand their targets, and know how to move them. There’s a lot we can learn from that.

Democrats have, in my lifetime, been defined by a loose but important set of ethical values. You can argue whether those values have been clear or vague, real or naive, egalitarian or elitist, sincere or cynical, but whatever you think of them, they’ve long stood in stark contrast to Republicans, whose ethical challenges are off the charts.

Democrats need to grasp that there is nothing inherently unethical about political advertising, i.e. propaganda. There’s nothing unethical about accentuating the positive. About showing your candidate in the best light possible. About putting the best face on your candidate’s flaws. About drawing on emotion to make your sale. There’s also nothing unethical about calling out your opponent’s lies, or punching back at specious claims and tactics.

Advertising is about getting out the good news about your product. Whether that product is Jell-O, Chevrolet, or Joe Biden, your targets need to be shown how it fits into their lives. Fortunately, with Biden it’s relatively easy to be a white hat. What we used to think of as his unwanted baggage turns out to be so tame by Trumpian standards, it’s almost laughable — that’s how much Trump has obliterated our benchmarks for acceptable public behavior.

So Biden has a lot of good cards to play. For now, all his messaging can be positive, mostly because Trump — whose Twitter account has become the world’s largest megaphone — creates his own negative advertising every day of the week. Trump is selling Biden harder than Biden ever could. So Joe’s job right now is to sit back and let Trump self-incinerate.

This will change as the election approaches and Republicans start to panic. They are already working on all the dirtiest tricks of the trade, and they have a boatload of billionaire financing behind them. The clear goal is to steal the next election, whatever it takes. No ethics need apply.

Even so, they have a problem. They have no platform of truth or ethics to stand on. They have sold out both — as well as the rule of law — to accommodate Trump. All they have left is lies. Even for seasoned propagandists, all lies all the time is hard to maintain. It helps to have at least a little bit of truth to work with.

Democrats have plenty of truth, plus the aforementioned values, on their side. Republicans have money, plus a willingness to use it in nefarious ways, on theirs. Whatever you think of propaganda, the next four months will surely rewrite the textbooks.


Berkley MI

Tuesday, 06/16/20

Comments

  1. Along these lines, albeit crudely, I commend this article by Matt Taibi about overly-woke newsrooms in America: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-news-media-is-destroying-itself

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Merrick Garland is Living in Mitch McConnell’s Head

Last week, Mitch McConnell voted to confirm Merrick Garland as Attorney General. Twenty Republicans actually crossed the aisle to do the same, an amazing thing in this day and age. But without Mitch, it would’ve been just one more Kamala tie-breaker. The speculation is that this was Mitch’s way of telling Garland — and Joe Biden — that stealing that Supreme Court seat in 2016 was nothing personal. And it wasn’t. I have no doubt Mitch would have tanked anyone Obama nominated. Anything to further vandalize that administration. Garland just happened to be there. But while Mitch surely thinks, in his own head, that it was nothing personal, he knows Joe Biden holds no such illusions. Because when Mitch sabotaged the Garland nomination, he blew a hole through history, full stop. And for Biden that was personal. He was there, in the White House. It’s nothing new that the obstruction of that fifth reasonable voice on the bench was a major disaster, and it only got worse when Trump drew

Four Takeaways from the First Fifty Days

In just fifty days, Joe Biden has taken plenty of us — including me — by surprise. He is clearly rising to the occasion, displaying skills few knew he had. He has learned the trick of under-promising and over-delivering, and when he makes a promise, he knows ahead of time that it’s a sure thing. He also has an apparent gift for delegating the right jobs to the right people. He lets them do their thing while he gives them cover, benignly hovering above the fray. So far, it’s working. Let’s hear it for old white guys with something left in the tank. So the fifty-day mark seems a good time to step back and make a few observations, not so much about Biden, as because of him. Boring but Radical It was Ted Cruz, of all people, who nailed it, albeit unintentionally. In a tweet last week he proclaimed Joe Biden “boring but radical.” He was being nasty, of course, because nasty is all he knows. But to me, it was validation. After four years of total batshit craziness, it turns out b

A Peek Under the Hood at the Koch Agenda

It’s hard to feel sorry for a guy like Kyle McKenzie. Knowing he’s the research director for Stand Together, an advocacy group owned by the Koch family, I’m not inclined to sympathy. But as a former advertising guy, who once sat through too many focus groups to count, I know well how consumer research can undo the best-laid plans. In McKenzie’s case, the plans were to figure out how the Kochs should handle HR1 — the massive voting rights bill now reaching the Senate — where they are once again on the wrong side of history. McKenzie was charged with finding ways to undermine any positive perceptions the public might harbor about making it easy for people to vote. What they were looking for was a message — any message — that might convince the public that the right to vote is overrated. We know this thanks to the amazing Jane Mayer of The New Yorker . Somehow, she obtained this eye-opening audio of a ten-minute conference call, in which McKenzie presents his research findings to