One the classic works on propaganda is Walter Lippmann’s Public Opinion: An Important Work on the Theory of Public Opinion in Relation to Traditional Democratic Theory, first published in 1921. Lippmann’s thesis is just as clear as it is frightening. He asserts that democracy in America is finished, that the decisions to be made in the political realm are far too complicated for the average American to understand and that future politicians must rely on the tools of propaganda to move the public in the “right” direction. In one of his most disturbing comments, he says: “It is no longer possible…to believe in the original dogma of democracy” (p. 231). I maintain that Lippmann’s sentiment is widely held today by the leaders of both major political parties. Certainly, the corruption within the Democratic Party has made it abundantly clear that the Democrats have long since abandoned the notion of democratic process.
Since the 1920s, much has changed in the US, and the methods of propaganda have become much more sophisticated. In this article, I would like to concentrate on two methods that are proving particularly influential in the present campaign: the use of polls and the use of pictures.
Polls: The first presidential polls were conducted in the 1930s by the Gallup Organization, and since that time, considerable effort has been expended in order to improve the accuracy and reliability of pre-election polls. Surprisingly, however, there has been much less concern about the influence of polls on the actual outcome of elections. This is even more surprising when one considers that psychologists have known for a long time that there is a strong tendency of human beings to conform to the majority opinion. Moreover, the limited research that has been performed in this area confirms clearly that the polls do in fact have a measurable impact on voting. Not only do many voters have the (perhaps unconscious) need to be on the winning side, but a low polling score for their preferred candidate may well discourage them from voting at all. If the rival candidate is up 10 points in the polls, why go vote?! This effect has been augmented through the introduction of exit polls. When the early exit polls in one region of the country indicate that a particular candidate is losing, the supporters of this candidate in other regions tend to lose interest in voting. In my opinion, exit polls should be prohibited by law. They don’t simply serve as information; they manipulate the public. Finally, there is the problem of manipulation in the structuring of the polls. Not only the selection of regions, but also the formulation of the questions can have a dramatic impact on the poll numbers themselves. As one study suggested, polls tend to be self-fulfilling prophecies.
Pictures: “A picture is worth a thousand words” is not only a well-known phrase in the English language; it also expresses quite well the prominence of pictures or images in the thinking of contemporary Americans. Significantly, the phrase originated in the early part of the 20th century, i.e. it is of modern origin, and I venture to say that the Concord writers of the 19th century such as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau would have found the phrase very disturbing. In a linguistically oriented culture, the suggestion that a picture communicates more than words sounds misleading, if not downright offensive. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that our culture has become more and more visually oriented since the advent of the television. It is probably no coincidence that the phrase: “a picture is worth a thousand words” was coined in English around the same time that the television was invented and the first television station was founded. In any case, the process of replacing words with pictures has progressed to the point that literacy is no longer a requisite for ordering a dinner in many chain restaurants. Reflect on this when you next dine at Red Lobster, for instance. It’s not necessary to read the menu; just point to the pictures.
The result of this shift in cognitive ability has had a tremendous impact on politics. As far back as the days of Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy, it was recognized that the image projected on television was crucial for political success. In 1960, these two candidates appeared before a television audience to conduct the very first televised presidential debate, and the superior image of Kennedy proved to have a significant impact on the outcome of the election. It is reported that Nixon refused to accept makeup before the debate and that he projected the image of a weary candidate of questionable ability. Nota bene: It was not his policies that proved disastrous for him in this debate, but rather his image, i.e. the picture portrayed to the audience at home. The Kennedy-Nixon debate was historic in that it inaugurated a new era of propaganda whereby the emphasis was placed on appearance, not on substance, on the picture, not on the words.
When I survey the campaign “news” today in the various media outlets, I recognize immediately the attitude of the author by the pictures attached to the articles. Is the candidate presented in a dignified pose? Or does the candidate appear angry, perhaps even dangerous? The most insidious pictorial propaganda in this presidential campaign has been without doubt the picture of Donald Trump beside Adolf Hitler. Regardless of the content of the text, the picture itself destroys the candidate’s credibility. One could argue that an educated public should be immune to such propaganda, but unfortunately, propaganda knows no limits. Studies on propaganda have indicated that education is no guarantee against the negative effects of pictorial propaganda.
So my advice is this. Try not to dwell on the pictures and try to ignore the polls. Perhaps Walter Lippmann is right that democracy in America is finished, but I am not yet willing to concede the point because the alternative to democracy is rampant corruption.
Villager Jack Brush is a frequent contributor to Villages-News.com
