Throughout
history, the term propaganda has always been heavily associated with a negative
message, often not only an exaggeration of the truth but to the extent of an
outright lie. Solely focusing on the idea of war, propaganda and bias has
always played a key role in forming or perhaps altering the perception of the
masses during these time periods.
In response to the chosen prompt, as a student I agree that
The term propaganda always refers to a negative message.
As previously mentioned, propaganda is mainly used to either exaggerate or alter the truth. To what extent should one simply alter the truth for positive reasons? I believe that being untruthful on it’s own is already a negative act, therefore it puts a negative aspect on the story or news headline.
The
media’s use of propaganda during the Iraq war in 2003 is worth the discussion
in this case to back up the statement above. In the documentary Control Room,
there are many different examples of opposing perspectives on the same issue.
The most important one being the conditions faced by the Iraqi population due
to the war. From the observations made by Josh Rushing, he pointed out that
Al Jazeera seemed to have mostly depicted
the sufferings of the people on the channel as opposed to the threats of Saddam
Hussein. This exaggeration of the truth (message) might have had good
intentions, to show that the conditions were bad for the people of Iraq but at
the end, this refers to a negative message critiquing the United States
involvement in Iraq.
Don’t
take my word for it, but my point is that even though the intention behind altering
the message (propaganda) in itself might be for the greater good, the
message it provokes will always refer to a negative message.
Good insight, i agree that Propaganda does have multiple message but is it wrong for a nation to inform their people of the government view? And how do you classify a negative message from a positive one?
ReplyDeleteYou had some good points, I agree with you.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, I totally disagree with you about the fact that propaganda has a negative message. Sure, there are a lot of propaganda under negative connotations, however, these might not be necessarily negative to all perspectives. For example, in feminism, there is a lot of female based propaganda, or patriotic propaganda in certain books (read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-snow/positive-propaganda_b_393843.html). However, it is not considered to be negative by EVERYONE. Then again, this is just my perspective.... and you're free to form your own.
ReplyDeleteAndrew. I love you, but I also disagree. During the First World War, propaganda was used to encourage, and instil confidence and patriotism in the hearts of civilians. It could make them feel proud, without necessary showing negativity towards their enemy. However, I disagreed with the fact that propaganda is always referring to a negative message. Obviously, some propaganda does, but not all. <7 <7
ReplyDeleteInteresting read because we chose the same statement and approached it differently so this was nice to read. Well done on your approach though, i enjoyed reading it
ReplyDelete