I love the early-Fall smell of propaganda.

Me too.
Have you seen the "All those evil arabs want every Amercian dead (and every American girl raped) and all the Wal-Mart stores shut down" ads that the Right wing are running on teevee? See, that's propaganda. Hell, it's agitprop. I just pointed out unpleasant facts. There is a difference.

"Anyone capable of reading a newspaper knows the Al Gore was the real winner of the 2000 presidential election." is not a fact.

I have not seen the ad that you quote. is it an actual quote or are you paraphrasing?

besides, it's ALL propaganda.

"Anyone capable of reading a newspaper knows the Al Gore was the real winner of the 2000 presidential election." is a fact. By 'election' I obviously am referring to the popular election and not the electoral college. Of course, an argument can be made that Gore was the 'rightful' winner of both. Al Gore won the popular vote 48% to 47% (51,003,926 votes verses 50,460,110). Bush's margin in the electoral college was less than the number of electors from Florida. The Fla recounts (although unofficial) showed that had the Supreme court not interfered, Al Gore would have received the electoral votes from that state and become president.

No one sane can rationally argue that what I have just stated is untrue. It's interesting that that is the portion of my argument that you choose to attack.

And yes, that was a hyperbolistic paraphrase. The actual wording is more along the lines of " Islamo-Fascists want to kill Americans. Only Republicans can keep you safe."

While we're talking, though, is there a more bizarre non sequitor than 'islamo-fascist'?

For the record, by the by, it's only propaganda if you twist or misrepresent facts. Simply stating what you believe to be true doesn't count.

You seem a bit defensive. I didn't attack. I made a vow not to argue political positions anymore.

I just stated that "Anyone capable of reading a newspaper knows the Al Gore was the real winner of the 2000 presidential election." is not a fact.
It's an opinion.
It could be argued that Al Gore was the real winner of the 2000 presidential election, but not that anyone cabable of reading a newspaper knows it.


The definition of propaganda is "the dissemination of information in an effort to sway opinion."
so yes, you are engaging in propaganda.

Propaganda is a slippery, hard to define term. Frankly, merely disseminating information in an attempt to sway opinion or belief is much too broad a definition. Using that definition would mean that every advertisement, book, movie, TV show, record, class, lecture (and most conversations) would count as propaganda. It seems simply too obvious that that cannot be the case.

For instance, when I say: "Cheese fries are tasty," that would count as propaganda under the common definition you offer.

Here are two other definitions (both flawed):

"is a specific type of message presentation directly aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of people, rather than impartially providing information. An appeal to one's emotions is, perhaps, the more obvious propaganda method, but there are varied other more subtle and insidious forms. On the other hand, a most common characteristic of propaganda is volume (in the sense of a large amount). Individually propaganda functions as self-deception. Culturally it works within religions, politics, and economic entities like those which both favor and oppose globalization. Commercially it works within the (mass)market in the free market societies."

-Wikipedia


Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV died 1623
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect
- pro·pa·gan·dist /-dist/ noun or adjective
- pro·pa·gan·dis·tic /-"gan-'dis-tik/ adjective
- pro·pa·gan·dis·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

-Websters


Here is a better definition:

Propaganda is a sustained effort by an institution to manage public opinion.

That one is much better, as it actually gets to the heart of what we mean when we say propaganda.

Here is it in toto:

Propaganda is a sustained effort by an institution to manage public opinion.

sustained effort: a campaign, not a single communication
institution: not an individual; could be an
• organization (CPI, VOA) or a
• movement (an anti-war movement) or
• society as a whole (sociological propaganda)
manage: not (necessarily) reason with
not interact with (monologue)
includes reinforcement, conversion, etc.
public: mass audience (though it might be narrowly targeted)
opinion: expression of belief or attitude

Notes:

1. The definition avoids value judgments--applies to American Lung Association campaigns (white propaganda) and to Philip Morris (Altria) campaigns.

2. The definition is conventional. It does not try to identify the essential character of some thing, but says in effect, "Let's agree to use the word 'propaganda' to mean the following...."

That's from http://web.utk.edu/~glenn/Definition.html



*************************************

And I'm not defensive. You're picking a semantic nit with the least arguable section of my post.

The word propaganda is used in some languages the same way we use the word advertising. I still stand by my definition.

why, by the by, would you refuse to argue politics?

"Political debate is the fools idea of intelligence."

I still love this quote.

Sadly, I don't like either of my choices for the open legislative seat up here. I'll vote the Dem though, just because it will give another vote to the hive mind that agrees with more of my personal ideals than not.

I will say that if this election should happen to create a Democratic majority in the Legislative branch that doesn't move to impeach the president, I will be sorely disappointed.

It sucks too much of my time away. I've spent more time on the blog today than I should have actually.

Beside, it makes my head hurt to read phrases like
"by the by".

it's in the same class as "old bean", ballyhoo, posh, and muckety muck

This election will create a dem majority (in both houses).
Impeachment, sadly, is off the table.

Off of what table? Did I miss something?

You can read it HERE and many other places.

no impeachment

It remains on the table, they just have a choice to pursue it or not. Like I said, if they don't, I'll be dissapointed. It's not just a political move, it's their duty.

Sadly, I don't believe that it will happen.