The reading of Rampton and Stauber to me, was definitely the hardest of the readings thus far. In the beginning of the first chapter they started to discuss Microsoft and the claims against them in general. Microsoft's idea behind their public backing of the product is actually ingenius in itself. Getting the public to be all for their product so that no other product could pass them in sales. They also use software that is specific to Microsoft and will only work with other Microsoft products, which is actually really annoying for any college student who has to work with not only their own computer, but the computers of their university as well.
One part of the reading that I thought was interesting was when they say that advertisement are the obvious kinds of propaganda, and they're what we're used to seeing every day. But the third party technique in its more subtle forms is designed to make their audience numb to what they're hearing or seeing or experiencing. They say, "You'll never know when a PR agency is being effective, you'll just find your views slowly shifting." This is kind of scary to think about; that we might be that numb to some kinds of advertising that we don't even see it as advertising at all. We just view something in a completely different light and we assume that it's because our attitude has shifted. Really though, it's someone elses attitude or views. They state, "Every new means of communication carries within itself a means of deception."
They talk about how public relations industries have become invisible because their ideas and persuation is virtually everywhere. We don;t even see them as advertisements anymore, more of a way of life.
They talk about expert opinion as opposed to the feelings of the general public. But really, the general public has no say because we see things like, "nine of of ten doctors agree..." and we believe it because we are not experts, ourselves. So we are generally an easily manipulated public. But how far will these experts go to manipulate and control our perceptions of reality? It's actually kind of scary, if you think about it. They talk about how whoever gets its version of the truth out there most effectively, wins. So then really, are we believing someone who lies extremely effectively, or do we really make our own decisions?
The section of science and the "intelligent few" really shed some light for me. The "democracy" that we have is seen as dangerous, and that's why we leave the decisions up to a select few. Bernays added to this theory by saying that being herdlike led people to be remarkably susceptible to leadership. Therefore, he saw public relations as an applied science. So our leaders could use this idea and bring order from chaos.
John Scalon really made me think when he stated that truth can be liquid, not solid. "What seems to be true is not necessarily the case when we look at it and we dissect it...whose truth are we talking about, your truth, or my truth?" That basically states the fact that sometimes we are not even conscious of our own decisions, even attitudes and beliefs because of all that is going on around us. We have people trying to persuade us in one ear, and then we have our inherent morals and beliefs, but who wins in the end?
No comments:
Post a Comment