The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline and Fall of Truth from 9/11 to Katrina

Book Description

New York Times columnist Frank Rich examines the trail of fictions manufactured by the Bush administration from 9/11 to Hurricane Katrina, exposing the most brilliant spin campaign ever waged.

When America was attacked on 9/11, its citizens almost unanimously rallied behind its new, untested president as he went to war. What they didn't know at the time was that the Bush administration's highest priority was not to vanquish Al Qaeda but to consolidate its own power at any cost. It was a mission that could be accomplished only by a propaganda presidency in which reality was steadily replaced by a scenario of the White House's own invention-and such was that scenario's devious brilliance that it fashioned a second war against an enemy that did not attack America on 9/11, intimidated the Democrats into incoherence and impotence, and turned a presidential election into an irrelevant referendum on macho imagery and same-sex marriage.

As only he can, acclaimed New York Times columnist Frank Rich delivers a step-by-step chronicle of how skillfully the White House built its house of cards and how the institutions that should have exposed these fictions, the mainstream news media, were too often left powerless by the administration's relentless attack machine, their own post-9/11 timidity, and an unending parade of self-inflicted scandals (typified by those at The New York Times). Demonstrating the candor and conviction that have made him one of our most trusted and incisive public voices, Rich brilliantly and meticulously illuminates the White House's disturbing love affair with "truthiness," and the ways in which a bungled war, a seemingly obscure Washington leak, and a devastating hurricane at long last revealed the man-behind-the-curtain and the story that had so effectively been sold to the nation, as god-given patriotic fact.

Customer Reviews:

Too much sarcasm.......2007-09-10

Too much sarcasm from start to finish. It's a far-left view of the Bush administration where author Frank Rich seems to be visibly upset at any Republican administration. He uses references to Jon Stewart's, The Daily Show along with Saturday Night Live numerous times to back his opinions on current political events. In my view, an author of his age background and experience should not have written this farcical, liberal montage of jabs at the office of the President of the United States. Better luck next time Frank.

BRAVO!! Succinct yet complete, and thoroughly absorbing........2007-08-23

By his piece-by-piece dismantling of the façade that is the Bush administration, Rich offers the most plausible and perhaps definitive explanation of Bush-Cheney-Rove & Co.'s rush to war, leaving an unparalleled trail of destruction - Manhattan, New Orleans, Iraq, our constitution and civil liberties, our treasury, our international prestige, and perhaps our way of life - so massive in scope we may never recover from the hubris, deception, cynicism, incompetence, and lawlessness wrought by this gang of crooks.

Approximately since LBJ, television has had the effect of focusing then magnifying the character flaws of our presidents, until, appropriately, professional actor Reagan came along and made the camera work for him. With personal guru Rove behind the curtain directing Bush's every move, word, and decision, W. shamelessly honed this skill to big-brother perfection, until the façade could no longer outpace the complete lack of substance - character, wisdom, intellect, ability - beneath. The consequences of Bush being so exceptionally unqualified for the ultimate responsibility he so unlikely attained became too much for even the Wizard to keep up the ruse. And it all came crashing down.

Rich also pays attention to the cultural context - our infinite indulgence for infotainment, the Enron values - that allowed these charlatans to lead us not just into temptation (endless wars, tax cuts and debt that will break us) but infernal damnation.

There's a case for impeachment and conviction on nearly every page. We can sit it out and pray that W. doesn't wreak more devastation before it's all over, or we can impeach him and Cheney now. That's assuming we can evict them both without them taking us down with them. More than Nixon and all the crooks before or since, these guys belong in prison.

Kudos to Rich for a thorough chronicle of our national nightmare since September 2001. Read it and weep for our country and all we've lost.

Hubris Without Limits.......2007-07-22

There can be little doubt that George W Bush is a lightweight. I can say this from a distance as I am not an American but simply an observer of events. It is a great shame that so many people judge America by his actions. This is most unfair. America is so much more than this simpleton.

I read "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" with keen expectations of gaining some insight to the machinations of American political life. Unfortunately, this was not to be the case. This book is very superficial. Even with the benefit of hindsight where we can see events with greater clarity than when they are actually unfolding, Frank Rich sheds little light on matters. This is unfortunate. He was working with such potentially great material.

We all know what a monumental error it was for Bush to land on an aircraft carrier with a "Mission Accomplished" sign in the background. This was hubris of immense proportions. A wiser head would never have been involved in such stupidity. I'm certain earlier presidents would have at least thought twice before going ahead. But not this man. His naivety is without bounds.

Where to now? Iraq seems like a giant vortex. Civil war has been unleashed and outsiders seem to hold no sway. Perhaps it is best to just stand back and let time determine an outcome.

Overall, Frank Rich's book has value only in so far as we are reminded of Bush's mendacity. But do we really need reminding? How could we forget?

Best Yet on Iraq and Bush.......2007-07-14

I've read one book after another in my effort to understand how America has gone so wrong so fast. This is the best, right up there with Fiasco and One Percent Doctrine. I look forward to Rich's next foray of book length and hope he will attack the most important and as yet unanswered question of this era --- in the face of a cheerleading national press corps, how did the American people nevertheless reject this war and its leaders even before Katrina,etc. had disclosed their utter incompetence, stupidity, and disdain for us all.....in the answer to this question lies the future of all that is decent in our nation.....

A Soldier is Surprised When He Wakes Up One Morning.......2007-06-20

Imagine if you were one of several soldiers wounded in the Iraqi war who woke up one morning to find that there was a letter to the editor in your newspaper that supported the war and had your signature on it, but you didn't write that letter, and knew nothing about it.. The letter was written by the PR team in your federal government. Or picture this: President Bush is standing at night in the now brilliantly lit Jackson square in New Orleans talking optimistically about the city. Well at least the square seems lit up nicely so we guess the electricity is back on. The speech ends, the flood lights go off, and the square is plunged into total darkness.

This is a book detailing how the government lied and created propaganda to further their cause in both the war, and in the aftermath of Katrina. It's a fascinating book because it follows a time line that shows clearly how the public comments made by public officials changed over time. In fact there is a 78 page time line appendix in the book that details these morphing statements date by date. The book tells about the fake reporters at press conferences, the fake news columnists, and the fake "news" articles that the government distributed to gullible media. As one government person stated, "we create our own reality." When Specialist Wilson asked Rumsfeld why he and his men didn't have adequate armor Rumsfeld said it was a matter of production and capability. That was a lie that was outed quickly when it was revealed that one supplier, ArmorWorks said it could quickly increase production by 100%. During the battle in Falluja we were told that there were 3000 Iraqi soldiers fighting the battle. Reporters on the scene said that the Iraqi soldiers showed up after the fighting was over, posed in their neat, clean uniforms and departed. Certainly you remember the frequent comments about the thousands of Iraqis that have been trained or are almost completely trained. Somehow they never seem to materialize.

You've probably heard a lot of this stuff, but Mr. Rich brings out the deceit of all the Washington shapeshifters in wonderful - or perhaps the word should be horrible - detail. You see the action flow, and learn about a lot of governmental skullduggery that will make you cringe. It's spellbinding reading.

History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)

Average customer rating:

Calculations are only as good as your numbers
Pants on fire?
Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed.
Very Interesting
History as Science Fiction

History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
Anatoly Fomenko
Manufacturer: Mithec
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Chinese | Ethnic & National | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Irish | Ethnic & National | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Japanese | Ethnic & National | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Women | Specific Groups | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

Doctors & Medicine | Humor | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Lawyers & Criminals | Humor | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Love, Sex & Marriage | Humor | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Assyria, Babylonia & Sumer | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

Early Civilization | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

General | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

Historiography | Historical Study | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

French | Erotica | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Victorian | Erotica | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Epic | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

German | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Russian | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Spanish | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Chinese | Classics | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Conspiracy Theories | Current Events | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

War on Drugs | Crime & Criminals | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

English (All) | Dictionaries & Thesauruses | Reference | Subjects | Books

Science | Dictionaries & Thesauruses | Reference | Subjects | Books

Online Research | Genealogy | Reference | Subjects | Books

Native American | Earth-Based Religions | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

General | Science | Subjects | Books

General | History & Philosophy | Science | Subjects | Books

History of Science | History & Philosophy | Science | Subjects | Books

Magic & Wizards | Fantasy | Science Fiction & Fantasy | Subjects | Books

Sailor Moon | Popular Characters | Children's Books | Subjects | Books

Pilates | Exercise & Fitness | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

History | Fashion | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 2913621058

Book Description

Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.

Customer Reviews:

Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03

Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.

Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09

There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.

For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.

Very Interesting.......2007-03-07

It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.

History as Science Fiction.......2007-01-10

Anatoly Fomenko has written a very intriguing book, full of pictures, charts, and computer 'proof' of his thesis: backwards of AD900 we don't really know what happened or when. Between AD900 and AD1600 there is more certainty, but there is still a lot of fuzzy ground, and things don't get reliable until we get past the 1600's where the printing press made it very difficult for the perpetrators of this timeline manipulation to change anything that had been committed to print. The Dark Ages did not happen. Books were burned for a reason. One organization has doubled the actual length of its existence by expanding the real chronology. Read why.

I had always wondered why Christ died about AD33 and yet men waited until the 11th century to form the Knights Templar, the Cathars, etc and go after the Holy Land by force. Why the 1000 year gap? Turns out there wasn't more than a 10-12 year gap and he proves it using astronomy. This also implies that the planet is not as old as we have been told, and current Christian and other creationist scientists are already championing that idea without being aware of Fomenko's book. The two groups, creationist scientists and the Russian mathematical analysts corroborate each other. Fascinating.

Of course, all this flies in the face of what we have been told traditionally is the 'proper' chronology of western civilization, and most readers will experience 'cognitive dissonance' in reading this book. It means that our history going backwards from AD1600 becomes progressively more incorrect and unreliable until it cannot be trusted at all... in the space of 700-800 years.

Naturally, the curious, open-minded reader will want to know WHO did this, WHY, and did any of the events we think of as really ancient ever happen?
Dr. Fomenko is a respected scientist/mathematician at Moscow State University who has already answered these questions to the satisfaction of his initially skeptical colleagues. Most of them are now believers, a few still refuse to believe (the usual diehards), and of course the western press has ignored Fomenko's work -- for obvious reasons when you read the book. The ones who perpetrated this chronology ruse have a lot to answer for. They are still with us. That's why this book is a well-kept secret.

I gave the book a 4-star rating because I was unable to check out some of his claims; those I checked were as he said. But if even 1/3 of his claims are true, this punches a big hole in what we think is our history, the meaning of western civilization, our educational process (for repeating the ruse as gospel), and the trustworthiness of the organization that perpetrated this ruse, well-intentioned or not.

This book relates to current research into a Young Earth paradigm, to John Keel's discoveries about our planet, and Fr Malachi Martin's insights (in his now out-of-print books). We are indeed sheep who are manipulated and kept ignorant -- for a reason. While knowing what these men have to say may be the "booby prize" (as in: 'what can you do with this knowledge?'), it will provide interesting reading. Didn't someone say: "...and the Truth will set you free."?? For you to judge if this book contains the truth.

Average customer rating:

Brilliant - but he already knew that
Insightful and Essential
Conceptually Brilliant
Very Revealing Expose of Present Day Government
Propaganda and the manufacture of consent!

Propaganda
Edward L. Bernays , and Mark Crispin Miller
Manufacturer: Ig Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Media Studies | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0970312598

Book Description

"Bernays' honest and practical manual provides much insight into some of the most powerful and influential institutions of contemporary industrial state capitalist democracies."-Noam Chomsky

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."-Edward Bernays, Propaganda

A seminal and controversial figure in the history of political thought and public relations, Edward Bernays (1891Ã¢Â€Â“1995), pioneered the scientific technique of shaping and manipulating public opinion, which he famously dubbed "engineering of consent." During World War I, he was an integral part of the U.S. Committee on Public Information (CPI), a powerful propaganda apparatus that was mobilized to package, advertise and sell the war to the American people as one that would "Make the World Safe for Democracy." The CPI would become the blueprint in which marketing strategies for future wars would be based upon.

Bernays applied the techniques he had learned in the CPI and, incorporating some of the ideas of Walter Lipmann, became an outspoken proponent of propaganda as a tool for democratic and corporate manipulation of the population. His 1928 bombshell Propaganda lays out his eerily prescient vision for using propaganda to regiment the collective mind in a variety of areas, including government, politics, art, science and education. To read this book today is to frightfully comprehend what our contemporary institutions of government and business have become in regards to organized manipulation of the masses.

This is the first reprint of Propaganda in over 30 years and features an introduction by Mark Crispin Miller, author of The Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder.

Customer Reviews:

Brilliant - but he already knew that.......2007-10-04

Edward bernays laying the groundwork for the control of population via descrete means. Enjoy BEING the product, TV watchers!

Insightful and Essential.......2007-01-30

A master of his craft, in "Propaganda" Edward Bernays splendidly advocates the art he defines as the "consistent, enduring effort to create or shape events to influence the relations of the public to an enterprise, idea or group." (p.52). Some may recoil from his assertions that propaganda is necessary to give order to a chaotic world and that in a democracy an intelligent minority must "regiment and guide the masses" ... "to clear understanding and intelligent action." (p.127 & 128)

As refreshing today as when he wrote eighty years ago, Bernays explains that, contrary to what many believe, propaganda is not confined to corporate advertising, but is indispensable to political parties, special interest groups, news media, and some government agencies. Indeed, today's global warming "crisis" would cease to exist without it.

Bernays declares propagandists should maintain certain principles including refusing clients believed to be dishonest, products that are fraudulent, and not engaging in deceit or outright lying. Though severely criticized for establishing the successful cigarette advertising campaigns for tobacco companies, he demonstrated his integrity by dropping the companies as clients when he became convinced of the strong association between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. Unfortunately, many modern practitioners are not as scrupulous.

This concise book is compelling for those who dare to think on their own rather than being told by an elite few what to think and how to act.

Conceptually Brilliant.......2006-11-28

From the creator of public relations, Edward Bernays describes how he discovered to manipulate and engineer the consent of public opinion. This book is a conceptual model for governments, corporations, and lobbying firms to show the principles behind swaying public thought and opinion and controlling the masses. As the nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays was able to learn from the master of psychoanalysis and through his many opportunities working for various of the United States largest corporations.
This book was incredibly useful and informational. I would recommend it to anyone interested in swaying opinion or being able to identify it in advertising, news, or public figures. Edward Bernays is the utmost authority on the subject so much so that even the Germans in the Nazi political party used this book to spread their policy beliefs. This book is still relevant today in a world of spin.
Edward Bernays runs through the psychology of developing public opinion and runs through several different areas where it could be applied from government to being implimented in the education system. Regardless of the brilliance this book contains, it still was written as though a lay-person was the intended audience. I would highly definitely recommend this book.

Very Revealing Expose of Present Day Government.......2006-11-04

This book clearly shows how those in power think of the every day citizen. Bernays provided a "peek" into the world of propaganda where what you eat, drink, watch, and drive is really managed to the extent that you do not really know what is going on. In additioin the attitudes that brought this about are clearly explained.

If you want a primmer on how the elite looks at you, check this out.

Propaganda and the manufacture of consent!.......2006-09-10

Bernays, the Guru of prapaganda who pioneered the technique of shaping and manipulating public opinion which he named "engineered consent," has written an iteresting book on this topic that might be worth reviewing. His book has superficially tackled the propaganda techniques, and gave the reader a taste of the mass manipulation machine.
However, I found the cover page to be the most profound and enlightening. It contains Bernays' views which reflect the reality and the condition of the masses or the bewildered herd (as called by Walter Lippmann, another propagandist), as well as the genuine elitist view on the stupidity of the people. Here are some examples from the cover page: "Only through the active energy of the intelligent few can the public at large become aware and act upon new ideas." "A presidential candidate may be drafted in response to overwhelming popular demand, but it is well known that his name may be decided upon by half a dozen men sitting around a table in a hotel room." "Democracy is administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses."
This book might be an eye opening reading for the oblivious person.

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media

Average customer rating:

A brilliant critique of the American mass media
Presents Examples; Model is Too Theoretical
Best book to read if you want to understand how the media works
A socialist idea from a socialist
Manufacturing Lies

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
Edward S. Herman , and Noam Chomsky
Manufacturer: Pantheon
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Shopping & Commerce | Reference | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Practical Politics | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Media Studies | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 0375714499
Release Date: 2002-01-15

Amazon.com

An absolutely brilliant analysis of the ways in which individuals and organizations of the media are influenced to shape the social agendas of knowledge and, therefore, belief. Contrary to the popular conception of members of the press as hard-bitten realists doggedly pursuing unpopular truths, Herman and Chomsky prove conclusively that the free-market economics model of media leads inevitably to normative and narrow reporting. Whether or not you've seen the eye-opening movie, buy this book, and you will be a far more knowledgeable person and much less prone to having your beliefs manipulated as easily as the press.

Book Description

In this pathbreaking work, now with a new introduction, Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky show that, contrary to the usual image of the news media as cantankerous, obstinate, and ubiquitous in their search for truth and defense of justice, in their actual practice they defend the economic, social, and political agendas of the privileged groups that dominate domestic society, the state, and the global order.

Based on a series of case studies—including the media’s dichotomous treatment of “worthy” versus “unworthy” victims, “legitimizing” and “meaningless” Third World elections, and devastating critiques of media coverage of the U.S. wars against Indochina—Herman and Chomsky draw on decades of criticism and research to propose a Propaganda Model to explain the media’s behavior and performance. Their new introduction updates the Propaganda Model and the earlier case studies, and it discusses several other applications. These include the manner in which the media covered the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement and subsequent Mexican financial meltdown of 1994-1995, the media’s handling of the protests against the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund in 1999 and 2000, and the media’s treatment of the chemical industry and its regulation. What emerges from this work is a powerful assessment of how propagandistic the U.S. mass media are, how they systematically fail to live up to their self-image as providers of the kind of information that people need to make sense of the world, and how we can understand their function in a radically new way.

Customer Reviews:

A brilliant critique of the American mass media.......2007-09-30

In this critique of the American Mass Media, the authors present a "propaganda model" and then go on to support it with a variety of examples. The model is based on five "filters" that news passes through:

1. That of corporate/profit-minded ownership

2. Of advertising as a revenue model, which makes media reliant on big advertisers

3. Of the necessity to be close to common "sources" of news and PR (because the media can not be present themselves everywhere that news is made at the time it's made), many of which are controlled by Government and big corporations

4. The aversion to Flak, i.e., negative responses to media programs and

5. Anti-communism as a control mechanism (yes, the book is fairly old - it was originally written in 1988, I think)

These forces cause the media to behave in certain strange ways towards news. One of these, the authors point out, is the treatment of "worthy" and "unworthy" victims, the former being those that are oppressed by/in countries aligned with Communists, and the latter being victims of policies supported by the United States. For instance, the murder of Jerzy Popieluszko, a Polish priest murdered by the Polish police, attracted far greater attention in the media than the murders of several other priests murdered in countries that were within the American sphere of influence.

Unlike other treatments that suggest a conspiracy theory, the authors have chosen to analyze the forces (the five filters) that make journalists and others internalize the principles of distortion.

The Propaganda Model in the book is very powerful, and comes alive through the numerous case studies. As the authors point out, a freely functioning media is often thought to be central to any notion of a democracy, and hence the importance of this deep understanding of the ways the media operates.

The book leaves me hanging with a few thoughts:

1. How does this thinking apply to media in other countries where the models of ownership, legal structures, market economy and many other variables are very different? Especially, I am curious to know if someone has done a similar analysis of media in my home country, India.

2. Is the web helping democratize news? The authors talk a fair bit about the consolidation of mainstream media in a few hands, and the reasons for that which are primarily around the economics of distribution. I feel that the web has changed the economics sufficiently for news to become more open, but I'd love to see a more academic treatment of the subject.

Presents Examples; Model is Too Theoretical.......2007-08-13

This book presents a "propaganda model" which is designed to predict (and has held up remarkably well) what stories will be covered by the press and what ones will go uncovered. The model is made by filters, which a story must pass through - the more filters a story collides with the less likely it'll be covered. The problem with the model is that it's nothing new - it explains what we've already known; that victims of the state get less coverage and victims of our enemies are exaggerated. But, no new insight will arise about what causes it (editors blocking the story, journalistic incompetence, etc.) and it might be naive to think anything one model can, because circumstances are highly individual.

Furthermore, the rest of the book (which is just individual analyses of overseas conflicts and how they were depicted back home) hardly addresses the model - because it can't. The only way a book could have incorporated the thesis (propaganda model) would be to investigate what at home, in the newsbereaus went wrong. Instead, the authors examine overseas situations and who the media sided with. Regardless of your views about whether Chomsky's and Herman's view of the truth about these situations is, the model seems like an excuse to write about these overseas situations.

With that being said, the book is very helpful in describing what really happened overseas, particularly Indochina and Central America. Not only will you learn a lot about what actually happened, but also about the unreported and misreported events.

Don't get the book to understand anything more about how the media operates (you'll learn nothing new). Get the book if you want another side to the presented overseas situations. This newer edition talks about the IMF and World Bank protests in 1999 and 2000, and also the Kosovo Crisis.

Best book to read if you want to understand how the media works .......2007-07-07

Manufacturing Consent

Manufacturing Consent pretty much sums up how the media works within the United States model of democracy. Far from a "conspiracy theorist" (which Chomsky is not) evaluation, the authors explain that the control of the media is systematic within a corporate-controlled framework; that is to say that, since the media is essentially run by large corporations, they wont go too far to the left, exposing the crimes of the country that allowed them to be subsequently rich. So this book is as much of a "conspiracy" analysis as an analysis of capitalism itself it, which is ludicrous, as neither are "conspiratorial" (in the sense of people who think, for example, the U.S. government faked the 1969 moon landing), but rather the expected, systematic outcome of what takes place under such a system; YOU own a newspaper - you get YOUR views across (or something close to it).

Chomsky and Herman vociferously reveal that political debate is framed within certain bounds that are mainly applicable to how far "left" you can go. For example, the question is always asked, "What are `we' going to do about Iran's nuclear program?" The question is almost never asked whether they have the right to even have a nuclear program, so there definitely won't ever be any debate within that framework. So in other words, the media makes presuppositions we're just supposed to accept, and if we don't debate within that structure, we'll be labeled "marginal" and thus our opinions shunned.

This book is far better than, say, Slander, by Ann Coulter, as she apparently fails to understand the role of the "liberal" intellectuals and reporters, which is to set the bounds on how far to the left you can go in political debate - and if you cross that line, there will be a whole list of words you'll be called, like,

-socialist
-communist
-anti-American
-terrorist sympathizer
-and a slew of other silly buzzwords, which have been completely evacuated of any substance, and utilized purposely to dismantle any further discourse.

Anton Batey
Anton_Batey@yahoo.com

A socialist idea from a socialist.......2007-06-28

Now im going to sate this right out: i dont have any negative feelings for Noam Chomsky as a person. He seems well intentioned and his work does bring out facts about american foreign policy that are interesting. My problem with most of his works are his scholarship. This book i have read more then once and it is a severe blunder in an attempt at media analysis. The basic theory behind this book is that The News corporations are beholden to the advertising companies who give them money and the the government who not only helps the news corp with "Selective" news leaks but is sinisterly connected to the corporations. Not to mention the monopoly of only a few media corporations controlling the news. Since Big business (which owns government) is controlled by elites, They mold the news to fit what they want people to hear.

This is supposed to be a free market view. Actually this is very much the view a person steeped on socialist thinking would have. The idea of elites managing a system from the top down could be nothing farther from a freemarket view. As a editor states in the documentary, this view could only come from someone who doesnt understand the way a newspaper or news show works. This book is interesting if you believe in capitalist conspiracies

Manufacturing Lies.......2007-06-05

Manufacturing Consent is poorly researched, shoddily organized and replete with attempts to mislead and deceive the unsuspecting reader. This is not hyperbole- one can find falsehoods on nearly every page.

A typical example of the book's deceit is Chomsky and Herman's analysis of "legitimizing versus meaningless" Central American elections. They attack the fairness of the 1984 Salvadoran elections on the grounds that voting was required by law and that the government defense minister Guillermo Garcia stated abstention would be treasonous. They state that a "climate of fear" which worked to "encumber free debate and free choice... was rarely even hinted at in the mass media" (Manufacturing Consent p. 108).

They also provide a footnote (n. 69, p. 359) stating: "Warren Hoge did quote Garcia, but only to suggest an open election: 'Without any lies, you can see here what it is that the people want...' ("Salvadorans Jam Polling Stations," New York Times, Mar. 29, 1982)".

There are two problems here:

1) The Warren Hoge NYT article (the actual headline is "Salvadorans Jam Polling Stations; Rebels Close Some" - the latter part curiously omitted) cited in the footnote proves just the opposite of what Chomsky and Herman claim about the US media:

a) It explicitly mentions that "[t]he left had refused to run any candidates, arguing that they would not be safe from retaliatory violence in the current atmosphere in El Salvador."

b) It explicitly quotes a woman at a polling place who said "that people had voted out of fear that officials would threaten those whose names did not appear on the voting lists."

c) It explicitly mentions that after a guerrilla attack on a polling place, "soldiers pulled residents from their homes and beat them." Other articles from the same day mention guerrilla threats to kill those who voted ("Rural Voters, Despite Fears, Hike for Miles," New York Times, Mar. 29, 1982)

And from these sources Chomsky and Herman would have the reader believe that a "climate of fear" in the Salvadoran elections was "rarely even hinted at" in the major media. Ridiculous.

2) Chomsky and Herman also do not mention Daniel Ortega giving the same treason warning as the Salvadoran defense minister to Nicaraguans in 1984: "The only ones who will not vote will be the enemies of Nicaragua, the traitors, the turncoats... and [they] will expose themselves to the fury of the people at the moment of intervention" (Robert Leiken, Why Nicaragua Vanished, p. 136), nor that this threat at a campaign rally was not cited in major press accounts (ibid. p. 135), a fact which would seem to directly contradict their propaganda model. Instead Chomsky and Herman's analysis of coercion in Nicaragua's 1984 elections descends into utter hypocrisy and absurdity: they cite a Time magazine article that says failure to vote was considered a counter-revolutionary stance, and which quotes Ortega as saying those who did not vote would be "sellouts". To this they lamely reply that Ortega's statement "was an insult but not a clear threat... not clearly a warning" (p. 124). And this rubbish is held up as penetrating analysis?

Anyone who reads this book should take the time to fact check and verify each citation, if only to see how badly they're being conned. Better yet, save your time and money and look elsewhere for scholarly and intellectually honest treatments of media bias.

Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion

Average customer rating:

It's very informative
I can't recommend this book enough...
Propaganda exposed!
Securing Your Compliance = No Great Hurdle
Soft Insight

Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion
Anthony Pratkanis , and Elliot Aronson
Manufacturer: Holt Paperbacks
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Human Rights | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Media Studies | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Social Psychology & Interactions | Psychology & Counseling | Health, Mind & Body | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 0805074031

Amazon.com

Drawing on the history of propaganda and modern research in social psychology, this book reveals mass persuasion in action -- not just the tactics, but why they work so well, and how we can protect ourselves from manipulation.

Book Description

Americans create 57% of the world's advertising while representing only 6% of its population; half of our waking hours are spent immersed in the mass media. Persuasion has always been integral to the democratic process, but increasingly, thoughtful discussion is being replaced with simplistic soundbites and manipulative messages.Drawing on the history of propaganda as well as on contemporary research in social psychology, Age of Propaganda shows how the tactics used by political campaigners, sales agents, advertisers, televangelists, demagogues, and others often take advantage of our emotions by appealing to our deepest fears and most irrational hopes, creating a distorted vision of the world we live in.This revised and updated edition includes coverage of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal, recent election campaigns, talk radio, teen suicide, U.F.O. abductions, the Columbine shootings, and novel propaganda tactics based on hypocrisy and false allegations.

Customer Reviews:

It's very informative .......2007-08-24

here are my notes

The successful persuasion tactic is one that directs and channels thoughts so that the target thinks in a manner agreeable to the communicator's point of view; the successful tactic disrupts any negative thoughts and promotes positive thoughts bout the proposed course of action.

Two routes to persuasion - peripheral and central
Peripheral - a message recipient devotes little attention and effort to processing a communication. Persuasion is determined by simple cues, such as the attractiveness of the communicator, whether or not the people around you agree with the position presented, the pleasure or pain associated with agreeing with the position, or whether a reason is given for complying with the request.
Central - a message recipient engages in a careful and thoughtful consideration of the true merits of the information presented. The person may actively argue against the message, may want to know the answer to additional questions, or may seek out new information. The persuasiveness of the message is determined by how well it can stand up to this scrutiny.
What determines which route to persuasion will be adopted? - the recipient's motivation to think about the message - the personal relevance of the issue. * we are cognitive misers, forever trying to conserve our cognitive energy, we adopt the strategies of the peripheral route for simplifying complex problems.

Rationalization trap = first intentionally arouse feelings of dissonance by threatening self esteem, for example, making the person feel guilty about something, by arousing feelings of shame or inadequacy, or by making the person look like a hypocrite or someone who does not honor his or her word. Next, offer a solution, one way of reducing this dissonance, by complying with whatever request the propagandist has in mind. The way to reduce that guilt, eliminate that shame, honor that commitment, and restore your feeling of adequacy is to give to that charity, buy that car, hate that enemy, or vote for that leader.

Almost every war in modern times has been accompanied by characterizations of the enemy as less than human. Dehumanization succeeds in resolving any dissonance that may be aroused by our cruelty toward our enemies. However, watch out; the more we justify our cruelty, the easier it becomes. The rationalization trap becomes an escalating spiral: "I committed an act of cruelty; I justified this act by believing that the victim deserved it. If the victim deserved that cruelty, well maybe they deserve more and maybe I am just the one to give it to them.

Four stratagems of influence
The first is to take control of the situation and establish a favorable climate for your message, a process we call pre-persuasion. Pre-persuasion refers to how the issue is structured and how the decision is framed. If fully successful, pre-persuasion establishes "what everyone knows" and "what everyone takes for granted" By cleverly establishing how an issue is defined and discussed, however, a communicator can influence cognitive responses and obtain consent without even appearing to be attempting to persuade us. Next, the communicator needs to establish a favorable image in the eyes of the audience. We call this stratagem source credibility. In other words, the communicator needs to appear likable or authoritative or trustworthy or possessed of any other attribute that would facilitate persuasion. The third stratagem is to construct and deliver a message that focuses the targets' attention and thoughts on exactly what the communicator wants them to think about - for example, by distracting the targets' attention on a vivid and powerful image, or even by inducing the target to persuade themselves. Finally, effective influence controls emotions of the target and follows a simple rule: Arouse an emotion that just happens to be the desired course of action. In such situations, the target becomes preoccupied with dealing with the emotion, complying with the request in hopes of escaping a negative emotion or maintaining a positive one.

The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world view and mental habits proper to the reader, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak have been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought - should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words.
Language, words, labels, categories organize our realities and serve to divide up the world into neat little packages and to imply the range of appropriate courses of action to take. Words have the power to pre-persuade. It defines our reality, our thoughts, our feelings, our imagination and thus influence our behavior.

Agenda setting is of great importance in maintaining power - by determining what issues will be discussed and when, what criteria will be used to resolve disputes, who will sit on what committees, and, which information will be widely disseminated and which will be selectively ignored.

Defining the issue as "losing something" was more persuasive than stating it in terms of a gain
Never ask a question for which you don't know the answer. Never ask a question that doesn't get the answer you want.

Card stacking - the order in which questions are asked and the order in which information is received can distort and bias the decision making process.
Question asking can be a powerful persuasion device because questions structure our decision making process. They do this by directing our thoughts about the issues at hand and by implicitly specifying the range of possible answers.

Context makes a difference, judgment is relative, not absolute. Depending on the context, objects and alternatives can be made to look better or worse. Often we do not pay much attention to the influence of context, must less question the validity of the alternatives presented.

One of the important tasks of media research is to keep tabs on the "reputation and credibility" of public figures. Advertisers want to know which figures are most believable, who is most liked by the public. The answers to such questions determine the figures value as a spokesperson for the advertiser's product. Credibility has become a commodity not only to be feigned but also to be bought and sold on the open market.

Advertisers know that we believe what we believe and buy what we buy in the service of self image. They imbue their products with a "personality". To claim the desired persona, all we need to do is to purchase and display the right products.

Communicators can make themselves seem trustworthy by apparently acting against their own self interest. If we are led to believe that communicators have nothing to gain and perhaps even something to lose by convincing us, we will trust them and they will be more effective.

When the message conflicted with their expectations, listeners perceived the communicator as being more sincere and they were more persuaded by his statement

Not only do we tend to take more notice to unexpected events, but we also attribute more credibility to speakers who appear to resist the pressures of their colleagues and who take stands in opposition to their backgrounds.

Another way of increasing the perception of credibility: The apparent trustworthiness of a person can be increased and the apparent bias of the message deceased if the audience is absolutely certain the person is not trying to influence them.

Specific advice for making yourself likable: say what the audience thinks (which you can find out through polling), make others feel comfortable, and control the atmosphere (the situation) for your best advantage.

For increasing credibility - set easy initial goals and then declare victory (this will create the perception that you are a strong leader); use setting to support image; choose the negatives that will be written about you; and understand how people see things, then appeal to what they prefer.
Float an idea without attribution (that is, circulate a rumor). If everyone likes the idea, then claim it as your own. If it gets shot down, then deny your campaign ever said it. In this manner, you can always be sure to say exactly what everyone wants to hear. Another piece of advice: make sure you appear consistent in the media. And the best way to do this? Just say a few things over and over again (that way, you don't contradict yourself)

Credibility is manufactured, not earned. Credibility is created by carefully managing the situation so that the communicator, looks just the way he or she is supposed to look - likeable, credible, strong, expert, or whatever image is needed at the time.

Models are effective for two primary reasons. First they teach new behavior. Second we behave like our model because we believe the rewards received by a model for a given behavior will also come to us. It serves as a cue to indicate that a certain behavior is legitimate and appropriate. It can shape and twist our understanding of what is right and wrong. A model is most effective when he or she is high in prestige, power, and status, is rewarded for performing the behavior to be learned, provides useful information on how to perform the behavior, and is personally attractive and competent in facing life's problems - the model is a credible and attractive source.

Confidence of the speaker - the more self assured and confident a communicator appears, the more likely that we well accept what is said - low rates of speech error, an authoritative tone of voice, and a steady body posture, are positively related to persuasion.

Load a speech with the "correct" symbols and buzzwords as a means of informing the recipient that the message is acceptable and worthwhile.

Heuristic - a simple cue or rule for solving a problem
Five conditions that are most likely to lead to heuristic rather than rational decision making
1 When we do not have time to think carefully about an issue
2 When we are overloaded with information that it becomes impossible to process fully
3 When we believe that the issues at stake are not very important
4 When we have little other knowledge or information on which to base a decision
5 When a given heuristic comes quickly to mind as we are confronted with a problem

Self generated persuasion - getting someone to role play an opponent's position, or by asking a person to imagine adopting a course of action - is one of the most effective persuasion tactics ever identified. It gains its power from providing subtle social cues and directions that ask the target of influence, in effect, to think up as many positive cognitive responses about the issue as you can and, if you do happen to come up with some counter arguments, to be ready to refute them. The resulting message will come from a source that you almost always consider credible, trustworthy, respected, and liked - yourself. The act of generating arguments is an act of commitment to the cause. After all, they're your ideas, aren't they?

Vivid messages affect our cognitive responses in at least four possible ways
Attracts attention - it helps the communication stand out in the message dense environment
It can make information more concrete and personal
Its appeal directs and focuses thought on the issues and arguments that the communicator feels are most important
It can make the material more memorable. This is especially important if we do not reach an immediate conclusion but base our later judgments on information that comes readily to mind.

Frequent repetition of an advertisement helps to meet multiple marketing objectives in a cost efficient manner. Repeatedly exposing consumers to an ad is a good way to introduce a new product or to remind customers of the value of an older brand. Often, repeat exposure is an unintended consequence of attempting to present an ad to multiple target audiences (the members of which may overlap). With the high cost of creating and producing new advertising ideas and slogans, its makes sense to stick with proven winners.

The rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious. In the long run only he will achieve basic results in influencing public opinion who is able to reduce problems to the simplest terms and who has the courage to keep forever repeating them in this simplified form despite the objections of intellectuals.

Advertisers know that repeated exposure can leas to what is known as "wear out" - when an ad loses its effectiveness because consumers find repeated exposures to be tedious and annoying. Wear-out effects are most likely to occur with ads that attract much attention, such as humorous ads and informational messages. Advertisers attempt to eliminate wear-out by using a technique known as "repetition with variation". In this technique, the same information or theme is repeated many times, but the presentation format is varied.

If you don't have anything to say, sing it. In other words, a mild distraction can disrupt counter arguing and increase the effectiveness of a persuasive message. A lively song can make us happy and thus help use think happy thoughts about a product. At other times the song may get stuck in our head, reminding us of the brand name. At still other times a catchy song or a big production number can attract our attention to the ad so that we don't change the channel or go to the bathroom and we at least hear the advertisers message.
The trick for the advertiser is to provide just enough of a distraction to disrupt counter arguing but not so much that it eliminates the reception of the message.
Distraction increases the effectiveness of weak arguments (because it disrupted counter arguing) but decreases the impact of strong arguments (because it disrupted the ability to pay close attention to the cogent argument being made).

People are less able to develop counter arguments to a time compressed message and that time compressing a message consisting of strong arguments reduced persuasion whereas it increases the persuasive impact of a message containing weak arguments.

Most of us have a strong desire to be correct - to have "the right" opinions and to perform reasonable actions. When someone disagrees with us, it makes us feel uncomfortable because it suggests our opinions or actions may be wrong or based on misinformation. The greater the disagreement, the greater the discomfort.
But this does not necessarily mean the members of an audience will change their opinion.
There are at least four ways in which the members of an audience can reduce their discomfort:
1 Change their opinion
2 Induce the communicator to change his or her opinion
3 Seek support for their original opinion by finding other people who share their views, in spite of what the communicator says
4 Derogate the communicator - convince themselves the communicator is stupid or immoral - and thereby invalidate that person's position.

One sided or two sided argument
If a communicator mentions the opposition's arguments, it might indicate that he or she is an objective, fair minded person; this could enhance the speaker's trustworthiness and thus increase his or her effectiveness. On the other hand, if a communicator so much as mentions the arguments on the other side of the issue, it might suggest to the audience that the issue is a controversial one; this could confuse members of the audience, make them vacillate, induce them to search for counter arguments, and ultimately reduce the persuasiveness of the communication.
It depends to some extend on how well informed the audience is and on the audience's initial opinions on the issue. The more informed the members of the audience are, the less likely they are to be persuaded by an argument that brings out the important opposing arguments and then attempts to refute them. This makes sense: a well informed person is more likely to know some of the counter arguments; when the communicator avoids mentioning these, the knowledgeable members of the audience are likely to conclude that the communicator is either unfair or unable to refute such arguments. On the other hand, an uninformed person is less apt to know of the existence of opposing arguments. If the counter argument is ignored, the less informed members of the audience are persuaded; if the counter argument is presented, they might get confused.
Another factor is the partisanship of the audience. If a member of the audience is already predisposed to believe the communicator's argument, a one sided presentation has a greater impact on his or her opinion than a two sided presentation. If, however, a member of the audience is leaning in the opposite direction, then a two sided refutation argument is more persuasive.
The more frightened a person is by a communication, the more likely he or she is to take positive preventive action. Fear can be a powerful motivating psychological force, channeling all our thoughts and energies toward removing the threat so that we don't think about much else.

People who had a reasonably good opinion of themselves were the ones most likely to be moved by high degrees of fear arousal. People with low opinions of themselves were the least likely to take immediate action when confronted with a communication arousing a great deal of fear - but after a delay, they behaved very much like the subjects with high self esteem. People who have a low opinion of themselves may have difficulty coping with threats to themselves. A high fear communication overwhelms them and makes them feel like crawling into bed and pulling the covers up over their heads. Low or moderate fear is something they can more easily deal with at the moment they experience it. But, given time - that is, if it is not essential they act immediately - they will be more likely to act if the message truly scared the hell out of them.

If the recipients of fear appeal perceive that there is no way to cope effectively with the threat, they are not likely to respond to the appeal but will just bury their heads in the stand.

In sum, a fear appeal is more effective when
It scares the hell out of people
It offers a specific recommendation for overcoming the fear arousing threat
The recommended action is perceived as effective for reducing the threat
The message recipient believes that he or she can perform the recommended action
The recipient's attention is first focused on the painful fear. In such a frightened state it is difficult to think about anything other than getting rid of the fear. Next, the propagandist offers a way to get rid of that fear - a simple, doable response that just happens to be what the propagandist wanted you to do all along.

Creating granfalloons - proud and meaningless association of human beings.
People acted as if those who shared their meaningless label were their good friends and close kin. They indicated that they liked those who shared their label. They allocated more money and reward to those group members who shared their label and did so in a competitive manner.
What makes a granfalloon tick - two psychological processes, one cognitive and one motivational. The knowledge that "I'm in this group" is used to divide up and make sense of the world. Differences between groups are exaggerated, whereas similarities among members of the granfalloon are emphasized in the secure knowledge that "this is what our type does." One serious consequence is that out group members are dehumanized; they are represented in our mind by a simple, often derogatory label, as opposed to unique individuals. It is a lot easier to abuse an abstraction. Second, social groups are a source of self esteem and pride. To obtain the self esteem the group has to offer, members come to defend the group and adopt its symbols, rituals, and beliefs.
Herein lies the secret to the persuasiveness of the granfalloon. If the professional persuader can get us to accept his or her granfalloon, then we have a ready made way to make sense of our lives - the propagandist's way - and as our self esteem becomes increasingly linked to these groups, we have a strong motivation to defend the group and to go to great lengths proudly to adopt its customs. What the propagandist is really saying is: "You are on my side (never mind that I created the teams); now act like it and do what we say."
Sometimes granfalloons come ready made. Each group is associated with a certain self image and lifestyle. Products are given a "personality" that fits the image of the target market; this advertising then goes on to create further the image of each granfalloon by specifying what needs to be done to maintain a certain image.
Shared emotion and feeling can also create a granfalloon. A sense of oneness with others can be produced by sharing a fun time, a sad situation, or a harrowing experience.

Co option tactic - subtly to change a person's granfalloon - corporation gives active critic a new position, often highly visible but without real power within the organization. Gradually, the critic becomes increasingly isolated from old "activist" friends and increasingly dependent on the corporation for material resources and a sense of identity. The opposition is defused as ties with the old granfalloon are dissolved.

Guilt - the feeling that we are responsible for something wrong whether real or imaginary - leads to compliance
Why it works
Sympathy, or feeling sorry for the victim
Restitution, or feeling the need to compensate for the wrongdoing
Generalized guilt, or the desire to repair a self image tarnished by a transgression
When we feel guilty we typically pay little attention to the cogency of an argument, to the merits of a suggested course of action. Instead, our thoughts and actions are directed to removing the feeling of guilt - to somehow making thing right or doing the right thing. We fall into the rationalization trap.

Commitment can be self perpetuating, resulting in an escalating commitment to an often failing course of action. Once a small commitment is made, it sets the stage for ever increasing commitments. The original behavior needs to be justified, so attitudes are changed; this change in attitudes influences future decisions and behavior. The result is a seemingly irrational commitment to a poor business plan, a purchase that makes no sense, a war that has no realistic objectives, or an arms race gone out of control.

When made to feel like a hypocrite, these people found the one sure way to restore their feelings of integrity: to begin to practice what they were preaching. If we are not made starkly aware of our hypocrisy, we all share the tendency to push the hypocritical behavior out of sight and do nothing about it.

When we discover that a commodity is scarce or may be unavailable, one of first inferences is that is must also be desirable. Why else would it be so rare? We tend to use a simple rule, or heuristic: If it is rare, if it is unavailable, then it must be valuable.
Scarcity and unavailability can do more than just make an object appear more desirable. When a phantom alternative is present, it can also result in a change in the perception, evaluation, and ultimate choice of the available options.
The presence of an attractive phantom made the other options look less attractive - a contrast effect similar in nature to, but opposite in direction from, that found with decoys. Second a phantom changed the relative importance given to the criteria for making a decision. Specifically, the attribute on which the phantom was superior was rated as most important for making the decision.
Owning an object that is scarce for or unavailable to everyone else is a means of defining one's self: "I am unique and special because I won something that no one else (or at least not many) has been able to obtain." Just hearing about a phantom may induce worry and concern: "If they bring out a better product, I'll be stuck with this thing. Maybe I should wait."
Phantom trap - fixation - focus attention on the scarce or unavailable item By concentrating on the scarce or unavailable, we may forget or overlook the possible. The presence of an attractive but currently unavailable object can focus our attention and resources on obtaining the desired prize. Settling for less than the phantom becomes a conflict that can only be resolved by "strength of willpower," a test that many of us often fail.
In many cases, phantom fixation can be a waste of time and energy, especially when the phantom is really a "red herring" of sorts - a truly unavailable option.
Consumer catch 22 carousel - obtaining a scarce and rare product adds to one's self image as a unique and special person. Manufacturers know this and design and market their products accordingly. If the marketer does a good job of creating a perception of the product as unique, then you desire and acquire it. But the catch is, so does everyone else; suddenly you are no longer an original. Instead of acquiring a product that makes you unique, you have obtained one that makes you just like everyone else. This further heightens the need for uniqueness, and off we go in an endless pursuit of the next faddish phantom. Once we begin using material goods to define ourselves, we are doomed to be on an endless treadmill of dissatisfaction.

Selectivity of news - without some form of censorship, propaganda is impossible. In order to conduct propaganda there must be some barrier between the public and the event. Access to the real environment must be limited, before anyone can create a pseudo environment that he thinks wise or desirable. For while people who have direct access can misconceive what they see, no one else can decide how they shall misconceive it, unless he can decide where they shall look, and at what.

Everyday news - selection of news
News reporters typically work beats - they are assigned a group of institutions to cover. This immediately injects one source of bias into news coverage - something that happens off or between beats has a lower chance of being covered unless it is a major disaster or other spectacular event. Off beat stories rarely are covered and aren't considered news.
Most reporters are on a deadline; they must prepare a given number of stories by a certain time regardless of what is happening. In order to meet their deadlines, reporters place a premium on sources that can be easily contacted and trusted. This also creates bias in at least two ways. First, the reporter develops a routine for covering a story - ignoring potentially relevant avenues of investigation. Second, the reporter's routine results in the same type of people appearing on the news repeatedly.
Increasingly, reporters work for a corporation. This concentration of ownership results pressure on the reporter; certain stories are encouraged or not encouraged depending on their implications for the parent corporation. More subtly, however, corporate ownership biases programming and coverage.
As difficult as these pressures may seen, the journalist faces one more pressure that may mean her or his livelihood - the ability of the news story to hold the audience's attention. All television programming, including the evening news, must strive for profits - and that translates into securing ratings and viewers that will attract advertising dollars. And what induces people to watch the news concludes that most viewers want to be amused and diverted; being informed is only a secondary motive for watching. To guarantee high ratings and revenues, mass media content tends to be agreeable and to require little effort on the part of consumers, while still being arousing, emotionally engaging, and above all entertaining.
What makes a great news story? Stories that
Are new and timely
Involve conflict or scandal
Concern strange and unusual happenings
Happen to familiar or famous people
Are capable of being made dramatic and personal
Are simple to convey in a short space or time
Contain visual elements
Fit a theme that is currently prominent in the news or society
The result of this itch for entertainment is sound bite and photo op news - a montage of brief visual images that play to the crowd. Each event and every idea must be part of a dramatic story amply illustrated with visual displays. Stories that are easily dramatized and visualized are readily covered. More complex issues receive little attention unless they can be made concrete and visual.

As one's confidence is weakened, a person becomes less prone to listen to arguments against his or her beliefs. Thus the very people you most want to convince and whose opinion might be the most susceptible to being changed are the ones least likely to continue to expose themselves to a communication designed for that purpose.

People tend to acquire information mostly about things that they find of interest and tend to avoid information that does not agree with their beliefs. Should someone find that they have been unavoidably exposed to uninteresting and disagreeable information, a common response is to distort and reinterpret that information, thus ignoring its implications for updating beliefs and attitudes.

The use of entertaining programs to disseminate a point of view has been successful in achieving high audience ratings and in changing people's attitudes and behaviors. Not appearing to be explicit attempts at persuasion, they should arouse little resistance, inhibiting the formation of counter arguments by distracting the audience. Most importantly, people will probably watch them without switching channels.

Information campaigns can succeed if they follow these simple rules:
Make the program entertaining
Do not directly attack a viewer's attitude and beliefs

Effective propaganda relies on heuristics and appeals to the emotions.
Its propaganda's effect for the most part must be aimed at the emotions and to a very limited degree at the so called intellect. We must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public. The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, by their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.

AND much more. Its very informative. I highly recommend this book.

I can't recommend this book enough..........2006-12-16

I am writing a thesis for a my master's on myths, and relating that to propaganda, which led me to this book.
I can't say enough great things about this book. I relates all of the ideas to everyday occurances common to the "layman".
This book is great for research, and also just to learn how the world is really ran.
Get it.

Propaganda exposed!.......2006-05-06

I agree with the critics that this book is not all that scientific in its study of propaganda. That aside the book illustrates a 'real world' approach. The authors reveal everyday propaganda by contrasting debunked stats and figures(+ satire). There are a lot of opinionated theories which should be taken with a pinch of salt. Keep in mind that you won't get any reasons for why people react the way they do to propaganda, you'll only find demonstrations of propaganda at large. This is in part due to the authors dissection of the pop-cultural and not the psychological aspect of propaganda.

Securing Your Compliance = No Great Hurdle.......2005-12-06

"Age of Propaganda" spells out in plain terms [contrary to another reviewer's finding of the book as being too "wordy"] how mass media is as a leveraging tool used by those in positions of power to coerce "decision by persuasion."

To quote the authors, "the goal of modern propaganda is not to inform and enlighten but rather to move the masses toward a desired position or point of view...these appeals persuade not through the give-and-take of argument and debate but through the manipulation of symbols and of our most basic human emotions...[and that]...the most important determinant is the thoughts running through one's head as a persuasive communication is seen and heard[and]in general, we humans seek to conserve our cognitive energy by taking mental short-cuts whenever we can, and we attempt to rationalize our thoughts and behavior so that they appear reasonable to ourselves and others. Most propaganda appeals attempt to take advantage of these two human tendencies."

Anthony Pratkanis and Elliot Aronson really put together a humdinger here. I'd like to offer a personal thanks to them as their book had a profound influence on me. In the early 90s I was working as a janitor at a college and found a stack of "free for all" books, and, being a reader, rummaged through and came up this dandy heavy hitter. Although, say, much like Mark Achbar and Peter Wintonick's in depth documentary on dissident Noam Chomsky and media propaganda, "Manufacturing Consent," also from that era, some of the info has in a short time span become not so much obsolete as it's become more dire and omnipresent in governmental/corporate policy and application.

For instance, if I recall, at the time when "Manufacturing Consent" was released, there were some forty parent corporate giants controlling mass media worldwide, as where now power has been consolidated, and that number is around five or six. That in itself should deeply concern everyone, yet most people probably aren't aware of it, and would only give you a blank stare if you brought it to their attention. And that's precisely why "Age of Propaganda" is such a useful book; it simplistically lays out the historical foundation of propaganda, and how and why it's used against us. The statistics presented to show how many mass media messages are consumed annually by the average person alone is quite disturbing and offers a clear example - hopefully to those who refuse to acknowledge the magnitude of the process - of how the power of persuasion works.

As of 1992, the U.S. spent four-hundred million per year on propaganda {imagine what it must be now!}. 1-4 headings are taken from the book, the explanations aren't.

1)"The message must attract the recipient's attention."

Often this is the classic Problem/Reaction/Solution ruse: government *creates* the dilemma, misdirects and places blame elsewhere, uses the media to exploit the public's fears over the dilemma, and as the public demands resolution, even if they're truly in the dark as to how/why the dilemma came about, then government can implement draconian measures to "solve" the problem, when in reality, their "fix" is merely Big Brother's way of further stacking the odds in power's favor over democratic interference.

2)"The arguments in the message must be understood and comprehended."

This one's a no-brainer, just play off of the public's general ignorance and lack of knowledge and awareness. Dumb the message down and exploit the public's fears while simultaneously making the them feel better, stronger, for believing the lies. If you have a whole bunch of idiots all believing the same lies, the collective ignorance and adhered-to unreality is in turn reinforced. ...*pssst,* this is truly a BAD, SCARY thing, k?

3)"The recipient must learn the arguments contained in the message and come to accept them as true."

People have been culturally trained to watch TV. They generally believe what TV instructs them to believe, even though such psychological gymnastics aren't cast in stone, and most people would voice the opinion that TV lies. So, in order to get around that, the powers that be, through media "de-regulation" policies {go look it up yourself!} forged a stronghold within mainline media over the past twenty years in order to help shift public opinion to their Rightist, lunatic position. This explains the "need" for 24/7 cable "news," talk radio, and even the allowance of an illusory "lefty" democratic party which works to establish the Right's agenda by calling itself "moderate." The repetition of lies and propaganda leads to mass acceptance of lies and propaganda as "truth." Plus, a handful of scoundrel's make big money from the chaos, misery and war profiteeering.

Which in turn leads to 4)"We act on this learned knowledge and beliefs when there is incentive to do so."

The incentive is obvious: IT MUST BE REAL IF IT'S ON TV! Strength in numbers, that is, United We FALL. So, people give up civil liberties for the illusion of security.

Security from whom, exactly? Those who ordered NORAD and the FAA to stand down for ninety minutes during the attacks of 9/11?

And that, unfortunately, is the dark heart of the matter.
In an illusory democracy, if Big Daddy Boss Goliath wants to further decimate poor little David, then Goliath will need to justify doing so, right? Which, given the grotesque military and economic discrepencies between the two, which should be an obvious elementary truth, is going to require A LOT of persuasion on Goliath's part to convince everybody that David does indeed pose a terminal threat.
And if, say, Goliath doesn't just have his deadly sights set on David, but on many other people too, well then, the "justification" and deceptive staging of David and Co. as 'Hitler's' and 'Satan's' is going to have to be utmost convincing. Repetition of lies, right? And since the factual reality of the situation could easily be picked apart, then the agenda-setting media need be tucked securely in Goliath's pocket to shut out reality, and a violent, devestating, emotional shock would certainly be helpful in clouding everyone's instincts and moral judgement ...wouldn't it?

"One of the most important determinants of learning is incentive; a persuasive message is learned and accepted if it is rewarding to so." ~ from "Age of Propaganda"

In this age of unprecedented social change and cultural and political upheavals, of mind boggling numbers of unwary, uninformed people who have bought into our government's phony "war on terror," who've ignored the perilous, unconstitutional, 'Orwellian' surveilance system which has permeated our world like a bad rash, now more than ever do people need to educate themselves as to how propaganda works and why those in positions of power use it against us.

The primary dilemma people have with discerning and acknowledging propaganda is that Establishment Power has naturally adopted the refutation of it as one of its main talking points. The socio/political fabric of America's environment is so utterly dense with Right wing propaganda that many can't see beyond mainstream media's criterion, although, as an institution that cannot afford to completely ignore the rising tide of dissenting voices, it's collectively been forced to "allow" various "framed" criticisms. However, these criticisms, framed as such, only serve as further misdirection while making cosmetic attempts at democratic appeasement by setting up the straw man to be torn apart by the Right.

Psychologically, the Right's agenda is rooted in imputing to all opponents of its unconstitutional, theocratic state-bound, treasonous, war-profiteering agenda, that which it collectively is most guilty of itself. What's happened here is actually far worse than any mere "conspiracy;" we exist in an age where most of us have unprecedented access to oodles of information, yet, according to our actions, or more revealing, our lack-of-proper-reaction-to, this country is laboring under a heavy toll of a spiritual and mental illness that has enabled millions to believe Goliath's monumental B.S. ...and not just to believe it, but for many to actually cheer on the debauchery. Wowzer bowzer.

In my copy of "Age," I count twenty-one reference pages, so to answer the reviewer, "sportsguy," who boasted that this book isn't sourced and that its authors used it as a vehicle to smear republicans, the reviewer, if he even read the book, should note that it was written on the tail end of twelve years of shady republican rule, and that just because the book doesn't reflect the reviewer's version of "reality," that in itself doesn't in any way invalidate the numerous sources that the authors *did* reference.

Soft Insight.......2005-08-19

Well written, interesting and worth reading, but a bit dated and fluffy in content

The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust

Average customer rating:

The Jewish Enemy:Nazi Propanda during WWII and the Holocaust.
Arresting, scholarly and profoundly unsettling
Just superb!!!!
Suggestive New Interpretations

The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust
Jeffrey Herf
Manufacturer: Belknap Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0674021754

Book Description

The sheer magnitude of the Holocaust has commanded our attention for the past sixty years. The extent of atrocities, however, has overshadowed the calculus Nazis used to justify their deeds.

According to German wartime media, it was German citizens who were targeted for extinction by a vast international conspiracy. Leading the assault was an insidious, belligerent Jewish clique, so crafty and powerful that it managed to manipulate the actions of Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin. Hitler portrayed the Holocaust as a defensive act, a necessary move to destroy the Jews before they destroyed Germany.

Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda, and Otto Dietrich's Press Office translated this fanatical vision into a coherent cautionary narrative, which the Nazi propaganda machine disseminated into the recesses of everyday life. Calling on impressive archival research, Jeffrey Herf recreates the wall posters that Germans saw while waiting for the streetcar, the radio speeches they heard at home or on the street, the headlines that blared from newsstands. The Jewish Enemy is the first extensive study of how anti-Semitism pervaded and shaped Nazi propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust, and how it pulled together the diverse elements of a delusionary Nazi worldview. Here we find an original and haunting exposition of the ways in which Hitler legitimized war and genocide to his own people, as necessary to destroy an allegedly omnipotent Jewish foe. In an era when both anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories continue to influence world politics, Herf offers a timely reminder of their dangers along with a fresh interpretation of the paranoia underlying the ideology of the Third Reich.

Customer Reviews:

The Jewish Enemy:Nazi Propanda during WWII and the Holocaust........2007-10-11

Although I haven't as of yet read the book(due to being a Finailst at Uni.), it arrived in an immaculate condition, just like it's brand new!
Only problem is cost of having to pay shipping when buying from abroad!If, however you're like me and don't mind paying that little extra as long as you get that book you really want, then this isn't that much of a problem!

Arresting, scholarly and profoundly unsettling .......2007-03-18

There are so many interesting and revealing facts and analyses in this work that it is hard to approach a review without leaving large chunks of information aside. On a personal note I found this one of the most interesting books I have read on the anti-semitism of the period. Moreover, many of the illustrative examples dredged up by Herf still echo sharply today.

The book charts a gradual adaptation of anti-semitism to lubricate the goals of Naziism. Traditional charges of racial impurity and economic shiftiness were reshaped to meet eugenic and planned economy policies. What comes across very strikingly is the sheer amount of anti-semitic propaganda produced by the Nazis. Jews were aligned with Bolshevism, the Allies, International Banking, etc. Typically the enemy was associated directly with any threat to Nazi hegemony.

Herf's very careful annontation of instances was disturbing at times, and as a reader rather than a professional historian of the period, it was hard to set aside one's emotional and ontological revulsion. Very troubling, in the light of Israel's modern travails, is Herf's extended acount of the propagandistic support given by Grand Mufti al-Husseini for the Nazi machine. Herf cites his address at the opening of the Islamic Institute in Berlin in December 1942. The Mufti, consistent with his Nazi hosts' anti-semitism, lays the blame for all evils at the door of Jews. In 1944, Goebbels, having noted the Grand Mufti's "absolutely Nordic appearance", was puzzling over how to the get the "right" propaganda into the Mufti's hands. While the Mufti's intimate collaboration with the Nazis is despicable and shocking it is worthwhile recording that the vast majority of those staffing the extermination programmes were of Christian origin.

After Stalingrad, anti-semitic propaganda ratcheted up a gear - hard to imagine - and Jews were routinely blamed fro the war (even though at this point the Nazis had eliminated half their final total of Jewish victims).

In the end, Herf concurs with other historians that the true extent of knowledge in German society of the Holocasut will probably never be known. It seems that most Germans were indifferent to the fate of Jews, and presumably as the reich fell in on itself that indifference increased. One can't however leave this book without the nagging suspicion that all too often people failed to ask the right questions.

Just superb!!!!.......2006-07-25

Jeffrey Herf's THE JEWISH ENEMY is a masterpiece. It is meticulously researched, beautifully written and solidly argued. Above all, it is a true original in that it tells us something genuinely new about the much-researched world of National Socialism and the Nazi genocide of the Jews. To be sure, age-old anti-Semitism DID play a major role in framing the Nazis' singular crime. But as Herf shows irref