Propaganda’s goal is political success
The po li tical air in the country brings back to the consciousness of the electorate the word “propaganda.” The term is generally defined as the dissemination of information. But more specifically it connotes the distribution of data — truthful or otherwise — with the goal of persuading people about a commercial brand or a political product, or an advocacy of an issue, a position or a program.
In the second presidential debate, the name of Joseph Goebbels, a universally famous or infamous German propagandist — depending on your appreciation of what he has done in his communication career — surfaced. One presidential contender accused another of using “Goebbels-like” tactics in running his campaign against the accuser.
To put things in perspective, Goebbels has been written about as “the most brilliant propagandist” of Adolf Hitler during his run as chancellor of Germany. He turned the Germans against their “enemies” by creating and spreading lies and hatred. He depicted the Jews as subhuman creatures who were the Germans’ greatest enemies. Goebbels thought that people would only believe lies if they were repeated often enough, and that the bigger the lie, the greater the chance it would be believed.
When Hitler won, he named Goebbels, a trusted friend and colleague, to the key post of minister for public enlightenment and propaganda. Since then Goebbels’ name has been associated with campaigning and winning elections. One of his most notable quotes reads: “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly — it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”
Today, to be effective in propaganda work, your program must carry the basic communication elements of simplicity, imagery, repetition and sentiment. Simplicity requires crafting messages that connect with, or are readily understood by the masses. Imagery is projecting pictorial or descriptive images that can evoke emotions and provoke actions. Repetition is the continuous propagation of selling propositions to promote
collective consciousness. Sentiment is designing an emotion-led projection that attracts a strong feeling like empathy, sympathy, anger, support or love. These propaganda elements dovetail with what veteran international political consultant Joseph Napolitan said: that to win every campaign, “decide what you are going to say, decide how you are going to say it, and say it.”
There are seven propaganda techniques identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, and by researchers and authors on the subject like Carl Dorje, Alfred McLung Lee and Elizabeth Bryan Lee. The current proliferation of multimedia political communication applications in the forthcoming presidential election can be scrutinized against these identified methods.
• Claiming full
or half- lies. This technique requires a lot of “assertion.” It is an enthusiastic or energetic statement presented as fact, although it may not necessarily be true. It often implies that the declaration requires no explanation or support for any claim, but that it should merely be accepted without question. Talk about badgering your way in, armed with halftruths and half-lies. Political advertising, unlike brand communications, does not pass through a review by the advertising standard council. Thus, there is no way to check the veracity of any protestation used by a candidate. Another challenger usually confronts a questionable claim by making a statement contrary to what has been communicated.
• Linking highly valued concepts. The method is called “glittering generalities,” which entails the use of words that have different positive meanings for individual buyers or voters, but are linked to highly valued concepts such as honor, glory, and love of country and freedom. When these words are used, they demand approval without much rationalization simply because such an important concept is involved. This approach helps in making messages resonate with constituencies but only if the goose bumps they get from hearing or seeing a highly charged message is translated into concrete, realistic, and applicable platforms.
• Using namecalling and derogatory language. This scheme requires the use of disparaging language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. It attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labeling the competitor with something that the public dislikes — that he or she’s a liar, an opportunist, incompetent or a foul- mouthed. Most often, it is implemented using sarcasm or ridicule, and shows up in online memes and video clips, editorial cartoons, radio commentaries, or column mentions. When examining name-calling propaganda, the electorates must be able to separate feelings about the name and impressions about the manifested idea or proposal.
• Pinpointing the enemy, simplifying or stereotyping. This scheme tries to simplify a complex case by presenting one specific party or person as the enemy. Although there may be other factors involved, the public is urged to merely view the case in terms of clearcut right or wrong, black or white. No middle ground. No gray area. In this case, the audience is encouraged to seek more information or clarify hazy pronouncements. An informed choice usually results from an accurate understanding of key messages.
• Transferring blame and ill feelings. It attempts to make the target voter view a certain item the same way a candidate sees the same item. In politics, it is called transference, which is most often used to move away blame and bad feelings from one politician to another of his friends or party mates, or even to the party itself. In the end, the political product is sheltered from getting stained and is protected from negative associations.
• Generating testimonials and borrowing values and
interest. This mode uses quotations or endorsements — in or out of context — striving to link a famous or credible person with a political candidate. The use of celebrities in mainstream or political advertising is a common communications strategy. The brand or candidate gets a lot of help from personalities that possess certain phenomenal characteristics to tell the story. All the popularity, glamour and charisma attached to a movie star, a sports hero, a TV personality or even a co-politician are sold and bought as the candidate’s own. There are upsides and downsides to using testimonials, but the technique has been proven to be effective in increasing a candidate’s ranking in surveys, and more important, win the election.
• Jumping on the bandwagon. A bandwagon is a form of information that exploits the desire of most people to join the crowd or community or be on the winning side, and avoid winding up on the losing side. It is essentially trying to convince people that one side is the winning side, because more people have joined it. People are meant to believe that since a large majority has thrown in the much-needed support, that victory is inevitable, and defeat is impossible. Literally, a bandwagon is a wagon that carries the band in a parade. Riding on its popularity, one can enjoy the music, conveniently without walking. The phrase “jumping on the bandwagon” is therefore used in the sense of “joining an increasingly popular need.”
In modern-day practice, “bandwagon” has taken on a new twist. The public is to be convinced that since everyone else is jumping in, they will be left out if they do not hop in. This is effectively the opposite of the earlier practice, but usually precipitates the same results. It is also seen as an appeal to buyers or voters, authority of the many, argument by consensus, a plea to the gallery, a supplication to popularity or an “argumentum ad populum.” Voters support those candidates or parties that are likely to succeed. Fund contributors put their money on seemingly winnable seekers. They are called llamadistas — those who bet on aspirants who lead in credible surveys, have a consistent following or who project stable political machinery.
In the 2016 Philippine presidential and senatorial derby, the use of the bandwagon is a major propaganda tool. It is aimed at three types of bandwagon fans: the frontrunner, the follower and the uncommitted. The frontrunner switches gleefully from candidate to candidate, always in search of an opportunity to associate himself with a winner. Any political communication aimed at him must provide assurance that the candidate being projected is a victor that he must support. The follower is somebody who has already invested a lot emotionally in the candidate. Any propaganda material directed at him should strengthen his resolve to help bring the candidate to the political office he aspires to. The uncommitted or the undecided, on the other hand, need to be guided and enlightened into making the choice. His support can be earned if a candidate brings to the fore his vision and program of action.
Goebbels declared, “That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”
Political communication, in whatever form, provides the additional fuel for the grueling political dash. Let’s see which among the current crop of advertising and merchandising materials and social media campaigns can bring an aspirant to political triumph.
***