Propaganda? Are you Kidding?

MEMRI TV
After watching this, I was scared stiff. After watching a Muslim Shia cleric preach to thousands of Iranians about the upcoming American elections, I was scared. It was eerily reminiscent of the speeches Adolf Hitler used to give to German citizens. Throughout the speech, whenever the cleric reached a rallying cue, the assembled audience, as if hypnotized, would all shout at once, much like the “hate-hour” in the opening of 1984, “Death to America! Death to Israel! Allahu Akbar!” I found while watching the short clip that words which we use to define certain groups of people are turned on their heads by this cleric. We refer to groups of people desiring the death of others as closed minded and intolerant, but I saw quite clearly through his words that simply by using terminology such as “open-minded” and “terrorist”, you can twist the truth of any reality. The cleric said, for example, that Bush is secretly collaborating with “terrorists” and has murdered about 600,000 Iraqis. Now, lets examine this. Unfortunately, we live in a very confused world, with unclear definitions. According to N.J. O’Shaughnessy, a terrorist has an agenda. His motive is not just to wreak havoc, but to make a political statement. I think a terrorist, in the American world-view is an individual or group of people who seek to intimidate using means of, not coercion, but force. To force their political ideology on others. Now, Americans also have a certain image of a terrorist. But, if we were to enter the mind of an Arab Muslim “terrorist”, he would have no idea who we are talking about – he would think it’s the US. In any event, getting away from the argument over who is right and who is the real bad guy, this speech by the cleric is a clear example of deception and persuasion to a certain attitude to people.
Another example comes from Germany. I don’t know the political state of Germany (we’re actually going to get into it in Professor Daves’ class today), but they seem to be having fun harping on the immoral state of American politics, particularly the medial campaign ads. They discuss the most extreme ads, but they do not say whether or not the ads were actually aired, which leads the readership to magnify the perceived stupidity of these ads. If there were any agenda behind these ads, I think it is pretty clear – to deride the American political leaders. But, as O’Shaughnessy stresses, the line between entertainment and propaganda is fine. This could very well be an article just to get people to laugh. But, regardless, to paraphrase, “any entertainment could be construed as propaganda (Media and Politics).”