Select and complete at least one question from Part A and two questions from Par
Select and complete at least one question from Part A and two questions from Part B. Remember, your answer for Part A is worth one per cent of your final grade and your answers for Part B are worth four per cent.
Each answer should be about three well-written paragraphs long and make clear to your tutor that you have read, understood, and thought about the topic. You will be marked on the quality of your analysis, assessment, and creativity, as well as on your expression.
Submit your journal to your tutor in this assignment drop box.
Part A Reflections
For your own purposes, summarize your understanding of the genesis, development, and analysis of propaganda. What is your own experience with propaganda?
Part B Analysis
Respond to at least two of the following questions.
Do you agree with Leonard Doob that a fine line exists between education and propaganda? If so, can you explain where to draw that line? If not, why not?
What are your views about the ways in which propaganda operates? Do you agree with Ellul that propaganda is only possible in the presence of mass media? Do you agree with Doob or Ellul about group membership and susceptibility to propaganda? Do you think that propaganda has permeated all aspects of modern life to the extent that we hardly notice it? If so, when did that happen, and how has it changed society?
Some would claim that propaganda perverts the moral world of rhetoric, breaks the contract of trust and understanding that exists between speaker and audience; others would maintain that propaganda is never successful unless it has found a receptive and co-operative ear. Where would you place propaganda with respect to rhetoric?
Philip Wander claims that fascism has an attractive side that makes it appealing on an aesthetic level, and that this appeal is partly what makes fascism work. Do you agree? Explain.
Jowett and O’Donnell provide us with a recipe for analyzing propaganda (much as we were provided with the ABCs of propaganda from the 1930s). Does the tendency toward the cookbook approach to detecting, analyzing, and otherwise dealing with propaganda strike you as odd? What is it about the nature of propaganda (or the context of propaganda) that might lead people to propagate such defenses?
Do you agree with Lippmann and Boorstin that the media give the public what it wants: a manufactured, standardized image of the real world? Do you think that Lippmann’s and Boorstin’s claims, based on the example of the American media, are true for media in other countries?