All warfare is based on deception: The Art of War
When one considers the definition of war, it's hardly ironic that it's everything we know to be true of it. What? I'm not making sense...am I? We know that in most cases war is disproportionate levels of aggressions. We know it involves mortality. We know that we have come a long way since waging them for survival and preservation of our species. And yet, we can't seem to apply this understanding to refrain from engaging in meaningless wars. At the surface of it, this might seem like a terribly simplistic thing to say. But, really, did anyone ever benefit from them? Nope, I'm certain the answer is no. How is then that most leaders feel no remorse or guilt in leading their own countries, and being responsible for massacre?
For our contemporary issues in PR class, we were shown a documentary produced by BBC, called War Spin, narrated by war correspondent John Kampfner. It's subtitled as Saving Private Jessica: Fact or fiction? From focusing on the story of Private Lynch who was allegedly saved from Iraq through a mission carried out by American troops, it then continues to detail the systematic way in which the American government, followed by the British government led its people into believing that the Iraq war was an honest mission to find WMD, and Saddam Hussein. Many things have been long since established, among them the fabricated nature of the war.
But the documentary in itself is instructive of many things. It tells us that with a very adept communications strategist you can convince the world of anything, even a war. It's all about changing perceptions and painting the right kind of picture. At the same time, it also calls into question the morals (or lack of them) of the people who played key roles in creating this mirage of a war.
Propaganda, and public relations have been associated, and questioned as two sides of the same coin for many reasons by academics and practitioners alike. In this case, the propaganda was to paint a different picture of a country that was simply looking for a reason to plunder an oil rich nation, and created one. This they did using some novel, and classic techniques.
Step 1: Announce it to the world
Step 2: Find some allies to help prop your story
Step 3: Invite journalists, and embed them, but be very careful about what they have access to
Step 4: Make sure that they receive only that information that you want them to know. Nothing more; nothing less
Step 5: If the people of the country, and other nations start asking questions, cook up stories about great war heroes and their tales of bravado: e.g.—Saving Private Lynch.
After watching the documentary I felt awed by the sheer genius, not to mention magnanimity of the ruse. It does take exceptional skill and brilliance to orchestrate something like that. And while there's no denying that propaganda (in context of war) and persuasion are wrong, we should stop faulting Public Relations practitioners. It's not about condoning them, or criticising their actions but making sure the reprehensible ones don't get away with a change in government. Above all, it poses one very big question: whom can you trust to do the right thing?
When one considers the definition of war, it's hardly ironic that it's everything we know to be true of it. What? I'm not making sense...am I? We know that in most cases war is disproportionate levels of aggressions. We know it involves mortality. We know that we have come a long way since waging them for survival and preservation of our species. And yet, we can't seem to apply this understanding to refrain from engaging in meaningless wars. At the surface of it, this might seem like a terribly simplistic thing to say. But, really, did anyone ever benefit from them? Nope, I'm certain the answer is no. How is then that most leaders feel no remorse or guilt in leading their own countries, and being responsible for massacre?
For our contemporary issues in PR class, we were shown a documentary produced by BBC, called War Spin, narrated by war correspondent John Kampfner. It's subtitled as Saving Private Jessica: Fact or fiction? From focusing on the story of Private Lynch who was allegedly saved from Iraq through a mission carried out by American troops, it then continues to detail the systematic way in which the American government, followed by the British government led its people into believing that the Iraq war was an honest mission to find WMD, and Saddam Hussein. Many things have been long since established, among them the fabricated nature of the war.
But the documentary in itself is instructive of many things. It tells us that with a very adept communications strategist you can convince the world of anything, even a war. It's all about changing perceptions and painting the right kind of picture. At the same time, it also calls into question the morals (or lack of them) of the people who played key roles in creating this mirage of a war.
Propaganda, and public relations have been associated, and questioned as two sides of the same coin for many reasons by academics and practitioners alike. In this case, the propaganda was to paint a different picture of a country that was simply looking for a reason to plunder an oil rich nation, and created one. This they did using some novel, and classic techniques.
Step 1: Announce it to the world
Step 2: Find some allies to help prop your story
Step 3: Invite journalists, and embed them, but be very careful about what they have access to
Step 4: Make sure that they receive only that information that you want them to know. Nothing more; nothing less
Step 5: If the people of the country, and other nations start asking questions, cook up stories about great war heroes and their tales of bravado: e.g.—Saving Private Lynch.
The documentary also informs one about how beguiling the rest of the world bought these stories. This wouldn't have been possible without the crucial cooperation of the media around the world that dutifully fed back information that was "drip fed" through daily briefings. At long last, many journalists did smell a rat, but the economics of running media conglomerates and need to be the one who got the story trumped the need to be accurate and questioning. While one can't point fingers at the media for the same reasons, there will be others who will be looking to maul the strategists, and reputation managers.
After watching the documentary I felt awed by the sheer genius, not to mention magnanimity of the ruse. It does take exceptional skill and brilliance to orchestrate something like that. And while there's no denying that propaganda (in context of war) and persuasion are wrong, we should stop faulting Public Relations practitioners. It's not about condoning them, or criticising their actions but making sure the reprehensible ones don't get away with a change in government. Above all, it poses one very big question: whom can you trust to do the right thing?
No comments:
Post a Comment