This week we’ve been talking about Public Relations and its effects on public opinion. One issue that certainly caught my eye that I never noticed before was President Bush’s press conference stating that he was going to declare war on Iraq. The entire conference was staged. President Bush knew what questions he was going to get asked by the reporters and how he was going to respond to them, and the reporters knew that President Bush knew the questions they were going to ask. Apparently it was so noitceable that President Bush was saying that “so and so reporter, don’t you have a question for me?” On one side I can see the media acting in this way as not to appear unpatriotic in very turbulent times, but on the other side I don’t necessarily agree with siding with the president on an issue such as going to war with skeptical evidence so willingly.
The Bush Administratoin public relations team knew that President Bush was going to go to war with Iraq no matter what so they knew it was their duty to make sure the media didn’t create a division between the Administration and the publics opinion.
Rodman points out some other times during the war where public relations was used to bolster support for the war. One was the staged-managed cameras at the hospital where Jessica Lynch was released, another was the video of the toppling of the Hussein statue in Baghdad, and another was of President Bush landing on an aircraft carrier in a fighter jet and declaring “Mission Accomplished.”
I know that any powerful and prominent organization, including governments need a public relations team to handle issues that become unpopular or controversial in the publics eye. I’m okay with legally and rightfully exploiting a situation that would otherwise go unnoticed to improve opinion, but I disagree with bending or twisting the truth like “Big Lie’s” or whitewashing. Both of these actions create none or very short term gain and never fully help the issue at hand.
Pregnancy in the media
-
Question: Does the media glorify teen pregnancy?
Thesis: The media portrays pregnancy unrealistically, thus negatively
affecting teenagers and their likelih...
17 years ago
3 comments:
The thing that bothers me about the 9/11 press reaction was that they didn’t question the government’s decisions at all for fear of being unpatriotic. However, in my opinion, in order to be patriotic you have to question your leaders. Blind faith doesn’t do the world any good. The American government is expecting American citizens to simply follow whatever they say because of their nationality and patriotism, when in reality is was the principles of citizens controlling the government that founded this country. When the American public stops trying to influence the government or stops questioning because of their feeling of required patriotism, that’s when patriotism goes out the window.
What sucks about press reaction to 9/11 that led to the War in Iraq is that one of the things that President Bush openly said was that if you weren't with the US you were against it. What bothered me the most about that sentiment was that it was very effective in silencing the press. Sure, at this point we know that it is a logical fallacy but it the press is supposed to ask the tough questions, especially those that ordinary people don't get the chance to ask. And its hard to ask a question when you know that the response is that you are defying the President. What bothers me is that the government couldn't just be honest with us and had to use a fallacy to silence the public.
Ya, this is an interesting situation.. Its a perfect example of Public Relations doing their "job", and who not better to protect and make look good than the President. I agree when you say that no matter who it is, "big lies", and "staged events" shouldnt occur.. No matter who they are trying to protect, make look good, or cover up a mistake, it should be handled using the truth and correcting situations honestly.
Post a Comment