PROPAGANDA PART III OF III

CONCLUDING REMARKS

                     There are very few areas of life or the world that propaganda, public relations or marketing has not affected in some way. While this piece has ostensibly looked at the American issues, the global development of modern propaganda and advertising is inextricably linked to the American development. The progenitors and expanders of the ideas discussed were in large measure American, and wrote about American conditions. However as democratic forces expanded throughout the world narrow bands of elites, both in politics and business, have sought to control and guide public attitudes and thought to particular causes, products or figures. As a simple thought exercise one need only ask themselves how many politicians they can think of, which in the pursuit of an office of power and influence, have not had public relations consultants at the core of their campaign to do so? Indeed, while politicians were slower in adapting the methods that had emerged during and after World War I they now on occasion beat out business in terms of the potency and emotional appeal of their message. This was in evidence with the awarding to Barack Obama of Advertising Age’s Marketer of the Year in 2008, placing ahead of the seemingly omnipresent marketing of the late Steve Jobs’ Apple.

                       There then remains the question of the implications this has for democracy. The fundamental conflict arises when asking is propaganda itself an implicitly undemocratic idea or is it only in its misuse that it can become undemocratic. As evident through innumerable examples such as the aforementioned NAM, propaganda can certainly be utilised towards undemocratic ends. It has however throughout its modern life had a gentler face as was encapsulated in Franklin Roosevelt’s immense publicity campaign to implement the social reforms of the ‘New Deal’. What remains then is the question as to whether, owing to the abstract nature of its practice for a majority of people, whether, as Harold Lasswell discusses, the greater danger lies in licence or abuse? In asking this it suffices to know whether public relations or propaganda can advance or facilitate an enlightened public debate, or whether its sole function is to bewilder and marginalise the public. Most people should wish to feel themselves as actively involved in the direction of politics in their country. However as public relations and propaganda remain active forces in politics the question must remain open as to whether the enlightened public debate can exist in, to borrow Lippmann’s phrase, ‘the world outside the pictures in our heads’, or to modify it somewhat; the world outside the pictures that are -placed in our heads.