Highway 61
Revisited
After "the fall" in the Berlin bunker, Goebbels goes to Heaven.
Once arrived, after a long trip, he has to choose between two doors : A or B.
"What's behind each ?", he asks.
Then an angel comes and tolds him : "Door A is the Paradise. Quiet fields of always green grass, music, beautiful young ladies all around to take care of you, wine, grapefruits, and the like. And forever".
"Hmmm, well...... and what's about Door B ?".
"Door B is Hell. You will be roasted, tortured, and suffer some kind of pain you never encountered on Earth. And - it will never cease."
"Okay, Goebbels says, I choose Door A !".
"Not a problem, get in" says the angel, and he opens the Door A.
As soon as Door A has got closed and locked behind him, Goebbels is taken away by two small red devils and brought into the central oven of Hell.
Then he yells "What's up, I had chosen the Paradise ! I have been betrayed ! Please get me out of here, immediatly !".
Then The Devil himself comes in and says : "Ach, Dr Goebbels... Propaganda !".
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Bill,
A lot of people might disagree with that. Remember the old saying: all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Do you really believe that there is no merit in helping causes you believe in?
Cheers,
Roger
lZr
L&M
Good job you did. I think the photos here are like the one some PJ Director will want to publish in the newspaper as close as possible to the event happening. These are out of context some time in the near futures. Sometimes even tomorrow morning they will expire.
I can't say this is propaganda. It is some kind of report to the public to gain exposure and receive help by pushing the idea to max.
Propaganda is massive brainwash and must have feedback. The feedback is checked, rechecked and the source takes care to accomplish some target.
Tibetians are doing good work, but they have not tools to check the feedback and do something about to force solution to their idea.
They hope the world will help them. I hope this will work for them
I can't say this is propaganda. It is some kind of report to the public to gain exposure and receive help by pushing the idea to max.
Propaganda is massive brainwash and must have feedback. The feedback is checked, rechecked and the source takes care to accomplish some target.
Tibetians are doing good work, but they have not tools to check the feedback and do something about to force solution to their idea.
They hope the world will help them. I hope this will work for them
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Mentor
And for much lighter propaganda, telling people to get off their bums and do something, here are 3 shots from the Spectacle de Danse by the local dance association -- all shot with a Noctilux on an M8, incidentally. I gave the Association a CD and permission to use the pics as they wanted.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Attachments
BillP
Rangefinder General
Interesting thread.
I personally regard the term "propaganda" as even-handed - "we" do it and "they" do it. "Propaganda" is, after all, if I remember my Latin correctly, "information to be propagated". The pejorative interpretation seems to spring, as has already been discussed, from wartime usage and has continued to this day. Another word that I can think of that has acquired negative connotations in a similar way is "ersatz" - in German it means "substitute" or "replacement" (please correct me if I am wrong) but in general usage it has taken on an "inferior" spin, to imply that the substitute is a poor one.
I work in sales, so propaganda is part and parcel of what I do. We refer to "themes" and "core messages", but what we are actually mean is "information we wish to propagate". That information will by definition be true - lying about your products or services is not an option these days - but it will be couched in terms that are either directly advantageous to us, or detrimental to our competitors. In other words, "spun".
I am paid to deliver a positive result for my employers; I am under no obligation to be even-handed, and nobody in their right mind would expect me to be. With journalists, however, I would contend that it is a different and more complex story. If I want a right-wing slant on what is going on I will pick up a copy of the Daily Telegraph. If I want a left-wing slant, I shall reach for a Guardian. If I want a (nominally) unbiased view I will read The Independent (If I want to know which celebrities look like their pets I will pick up a Daily Mail, but that is another story). Point is, I know the political stance of each of these titles. Impartiality is not a given. It is up to me to choose the slant I want to read, and source it accordingly. Where I have an issue is where some individual, title or broadcaster *purports* to be impartial, but is not. The "information" they provide is then - to me, at least, both suspect and of limited value. Is it propaganda? Of course. but a knife can be used to cut tomatoes or to murder a human being. It is not the fact that it is a knife, it is how it is used that makes the difference.
Regards,
Bill
I personally regard the term "propaganda" as even-handed - "we" do it and "they" do it. "Propaganda" is, after all, if I remember my Latin correctly, "information to be propagated". The pejorative interpretation seems to spring, as has already been discussed, from wartime usage and has continued to this day. Another word that I can think of that has acquired negative connotations in a similar way is "ersatz" - in German it means "substitute" or "replacement" (please correct me if I am wrong) but in general usage it has taken on an "inferior" spin, to imply that the substitute is a poor one.
I work in sales, so propaganda is part and parcel of what I do. We refer to "themes" and "core messages", but what we are actually mean is "information we wish to propagate". That information will by definition be true - lying about your products or services is not an option these days - but it will be couched in terms that are either directly advantageous to us, or detrimental to our competitors. In other words, "spun".
I am paid to deliver a positive result for my employers; I am under no obligation to be even-handed, and nobody in their right mind would expect me to be. With journalists, however, I would contend that it is a different and more complex story. If I want a right-wing slant on what is going on I will pick up a copy of the Daily Telegraph. If I want a left-wing slant, I shall reach for a Guardian. If I want a (nominally) unbiased view I will read The Independent (If I want to know which celebrities look like their pets I will pick up a Daily Mail, but that is another story). Point is, I know the political stance of each of these titles. Impartiality is not a given. It is up to me to choose the slant I want to read, and source it accordingly. Where I have an issue is where some individual, title or broadcaster *purports* to be impartial, but is not. The "information" they provide is then - to me, at least, both suspect and of limited value. Is it propaganda? Of course. but a knife can be used to cut tomatoes or to murder a human being. It is not the fact that it is a knife, it is how it is used that makes the difference.
Regards,
Bill
kevin m
Mentor
The late, great comedian, Bill Hicks, had some lovely things to say about marketing.
From a show in London, I believe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
From a show in London, I believe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
bmattock
Mentor
I agree, but I do not 'do nothing'. I just choose not to fix the world through my photography. I am not making statements - I am taking photos that (hopefully) please me.
The 'good things' which I do and have done in the world to make it better have nothing to do with photography, and many here on RFF have decided that they are not good things, but rather are evil things, so I will not discuss them (I've been asked not to by various members).
But they were my choice to 'make the world better' and I feel that my actions did so and do so.
Apres moi, le deluge. But I try to help anyway. Just not through my photography.
For what it might be worth, I did define a new school of American photography, for which I will be famous after my death. I suppose that's something.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Bill Mattocks: Quote.... “For what it might be worth, I did define a new school of American photography, for which I will be famous after my death. I suppose that's something.”
That almost slipped past me but not quite. Please elucidate.
That almost slipped past me but not quite. Please elucidate.
bmattock
Mentor
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ruralist/
I am unfortunately the only member at this time. Like I said, after my death...
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Dear Bill,
Perhaps this supports Frances's assertion that there is a difference between American and English perception of the word. Any further thoughts from English speakers on this?
Cheers,
R.
kram
Well-known
"propaganda", "PR" - should we also include the 21st C form (in the UK anyway) "Spin"?
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Oh, I think so. 'Spin' is just a euphemism for either anyway -- and I suspect that the euphemism is more despised in the UK than the alternatives.
Certes, I'd rather be an honest propagandist than a 'spin doctor'.
Cheers,
R
Limpovitj
Established
It may be more ironic than relevant, but the notion that Mussolini made the trains run on time is just a product of fascist propaganda. The italian railways were improved a great deal following WWI (having been completely shattered during the war), but most of the work was done already before Mussolini's rise to power. The fascists of course credited their Duce with the improvements, but as it were he had nothing to do with them. Improvements and all, it's just part of the myth that the italian trains suddenly ran on time. They still didn't.
Somehow "Honest Propagandist" seems to be a contradiction in terms. You can turn anything into a convenient truth by eliminating essential facts that would detract from your position. All of us do this to a point, but a propagandist takes a position on a subject and then supports it by presenting partial truths and neglecting or discrediting any evidence to the contrary.
bmattock
Mentor
And that differs from the average discussion on RFF how?
Nh3
-
In this age of cynicism anyone who wishes to convey a message through their pictures would be called a propagandist or an activist. No wonder most of the stuff out there is sterile and boring because the photographer is trying to be 'objective'. To me that's nonsense, a photographer must take a position and stand by it; however, that does not mean he fake his pictures to further the said cause.
Salgado is a great example of a photographer who has taken a stand and he makes no qualms about which side his on.
Salgado is a great example of a photographer who has taken a stand and he makes no qualms about which side his on.
BillP
Rangefinder General
bmattock
Mentor
So is whiskey.
Strong emotion is a mind-killer.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Roy Stryker was open about the fact that FSA mission was not to create an objective record but to generate images that would elicit public support for the farmers.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
influencing actions
influencing actions
Roger: my style is documentary photography of disappearing local cultures or non-mainstream social groups. While my primary objective is to create some form of historical document, there is a subliminal or secondary objective in having mainstream society understand and therefore appreciate these groups. It's no where as direct as a war photographer but it is there.
To put it another way, I only photograph those people that I personally feel strongly about. Therefore I want others to feel the same way.
influencing actions
Roger: my style is documentary photography of disappearing local cultures or non-mainstream social groups. While my primary objective is to create some form of historical document, there is a subliminal or secondary objective in having mainstream society understand and therefore appreciate these groups. It's no where as direct as a war photographer but it is there.
To put it another way, I only photograph those people that I personally feel strongly about. Therefore I want others to feel the same way.