For starters Lippmann bored the crap out of me. I had to read the article multiple times just to comprehend it. The first few tries my mind wandered so much that I read whole pages without processing more than a sentence. Eventually I suffered through, but it was blah as all heck. On the other hand I found Bernays' article to be very interesting and easy to read. I also found Bernays' article to be more relevant. I agree with all the other people who categorized Bernays as persuasive and Lippmann as coercive. I definitely got a sense of forceful compliance with Lippmann. I feel that Lippmann's article was more of an attack. Lippmann seemed more interested in scare tactics while Bernays seemed more interested in informing and educating. I also felt a sense of hope while reading Bernays, whereas Lippmann made me feel like there is none and we might as well just accept that life sucks, we suck and everything sucks. I am not trying to say that Lippmann did not have a point. Hey I am all for the truth no matter how bleak it is, but I felt that he was doing a lot of stating the obvious and harping on things that everyone knows sucks. I mean it just seemed like a 7 page bitch session and it got on my nerves after a while. Kudos to Bernays and Boo to Lippmann.
Jamie Himmelreich
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment