(no subject)

[feotakahari]

The thing I don’t get about all those “propaganda” posts is how writers benefit from propaganda. Like, Paw Patrol is cop propaganda. But scriptwriters aren’t cops. Wouldn’t they benefit from scriptwriter propaganda, not cop propaganda? Or are cops making the big bucks by doing accuracy consulting for Paw Patrol?

Comments

[wingedcatgirl]

1. Cops maintain the status quo
2. Somewhere in the chain of production are people who benefit from the status quo
3. These people will be biased towards pro-cop ideas, making those ideas more likely to succeed by virtue of being pro-cop, in turn influencing people who don't even know there's an issue into producing pro-cop ideas or something

... is the idea, I guess??? I don't recall anyone actually trying to explain why copaganda exists; I guess it seems less important next to that it exists.

It's more obvious for stuff backed by the Pentagon or the like, but I'm not sure how that filters down to stuff like Paw Patrol.

[feotakahari]

If nothing else, knowing why it exists would help figure out how to make it stop existing. If we find the people who think they're benefiting, maybe we can convince them they're not benefiting after all.

[sigmaleph]

yeah, same. I want people to spell out what causal chain they have in mind when they insist some piece of media is designed to promote some bit of the ideology in power (or some other nefarious social control goal, cf. all those people claiming TV is designed to make audiences stupid)