Irma's essay : Formula of credibility based on Noam Chomsky

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki

Formula of credibility based on Noam Chomsky

Intro

In this essay, I would like to research how communication strategies could be used to increase the credibility of the information that is being presented. Hereby I would like to summarize and analyze a formula based the propaganda theory of Noam Chomsky. This essay is part of my self-directed research, I aim to compare communication strategies within different fields. In my work, I strive to use this knowledge to play with the credibility of information I present.

Noam Chomsky

Noam Chomsky is known as a leading philosopher, linguist, and anti-war activist. He is very critical of media coverage of politics and state power, as a citizen of the U.S. they are often involved in his examples, although he, during his lectures abroad, points out there are many similarities all over the world. As an intellectual, he sees his role to educate people on a broad scale. Therefore you can find him often on a stage giving lectures or interviews, his goal is to make people aware of how the media filters the news, who plays ar role in this system and what is their purpose. Chomsky presents several examples in his book The Manufacturing of Consent, a striking point in his researched was how frequently the five major printed media (Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek, and Time) are using the word "genocide" to describe victimization in five examples.

" The table shows that the five major print media surveyed engage in a similar biased usage, frequently using "genocide" to describe victimization in the enemy states, but applying the word far less frequently to equally severe victimization carried out by the United States or its allies and clients. We can even read who are U.S. friends and enemies from the media's use of the word "


(Manufacturing Consent,page 16)


Chomsky makes a clear substantiated conclusion on how the media covered during the Indonesian mistreatment of the East Timorese. This gives te reader a relevant insight of the power that journalist have when covering a story.

“The double standard reflected in the politicized use of "genocide" is applicable to the treatment of news events more broadly, with the media regularly focusing on the abuse of worthy victims and playing down or neglecting altogether the plight of unworthy victims.”


(Manufacturing Consent,page 18)

In the documentary 'Manufacturing Consent' based on Chomsky's book, made in 1992 by Mark Achbar and Peter Wintonick, they asked Karl E. Meyer, Editorial Writer at the New York Times to respond to Chomsky comments. He says that the process of making a selection are a much more mysterious process that is suggested in Chomsky's research. He gives them a saying about legislation.

“Legislation is like making sausage, the less you know on how it's done the better for you appetite, the same is true in this business.”


(Manufacturing Consent - Noam Chomsky And The Media-The Companion Book To The Award-Winning Film, page 56)

I consider this as a missed chance to give an insight of your profession. He could have taken the chance to explain his methods and, I assume in his own perception, good intentions to give the public a worthy selection of the news. Instead he said, you don't want to know how we do it, just trust us. This makes him suspicious and makes Chomsky's point stronger.

The Propaganda Model

Together with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky developed The Propaganda Model that traces the routes by which money and power are able to filter out the news that fit's on the print, influence the publics opinion, and allow the government and dominant private interests to get their messages across . The essential ingredients of their propaganda model are based on the following points:

The targets:

In a radio interview by David Banamian, Manufacturing Consent - Noam Chomsky And The Media-The Companion Book To The Award-Winning Film, Pages 52 (1994) Chomsky explains that there are two targets for propaganda:

  • 20% is the so-called political class. They usually participate in social life, either as managers, or cultural managers like teachers and writers. They're supposed to vote and play some role in the way economic and political and cultural life goes on.
  • 80% follows orders and do not think and they're the ones who usually pay the costs.

The rules:

  • Ownership: 'Keep the boss happy and rich.' Who owns the platform that brings the news is very relevant. For them, this "company" needs to create a profit.
  • Advertising: 'Don't offend the "persons" that put's the food on the table. 'The main advertisers, who cover the cost of the media platform, are sponsoring this specific platform because they aim for a similar target audience. Stories that conflict with the "buying mood" of this audience is not of any use to the advertiser's interests of selling his product.
  • Sourcing: 'Don't be too critical about your main sources, scratch his back ones every while and he will throw you a bone.'
  • Flak: 'Always create a space for negative responses to a media statement, treat other opinions with respect, therefore you come across as an open-minded platform.'
  • Anti-communism: 'Don't mention positive observation about communism.' The communism is an ultimate evil because it threatened the superior positions of the elite.

Propaganda Model 2.0

I think the structure of Chomsky and Hermans is still usable nowadays, but the cards are divided differently. Their model was based on the news that fit's on the print, you could say social media is used as a source of information by the public, the media and politicians in western society. The extra communication platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, changed the structure of the propaganda model. Let's suggest a Propaganda model 2.0, I would like to use Facebook to demonstrate this:

The targets within society did not change in my opinion it is still conceivable that it is divided by 20 % political class next to 80% working class.

The rules:

  • Ownership: Facebook is owned by Mark Zuckerberg, an owner with an outspoken opinion on society and future generations as we can read in his public letter to his newborn daughter posted on facebook on the 1st of December 2015. An online essay by Robert Epstein describes several studies done on the influence of Zuckerberg's platform on the public opinion. A study lead by Robert M Bond, a political science professor at Ohio State University, published in Nature in 2012. On election day in 2010, Facebook sent ‘go out and vote’ reminders to more than 60 million of its users. The reminders caused about 340,000 people to vote who otherwise would not have. Jonathan Zittrain, professor of international law at Harvard University, pointed out in the in the New Republic (2014) , that Facebook could easily send such messages only to people who support one particular party or candidate, and that doing so could easily flip a close election, and nobody would have to know.
  • Advertisement: Targeted advertising is how Facebook makes its money, although facebook is a very interesting platform for company's, you could say that this makes them less influential by selecting news-post and therefore manipulating the news.
  • Sourcing: You could say this social platform gives the opportunity to talk directly to the public, politicians use social media to communicate frequently and often journalist even refers to social media instead of the direct source.
  • Flak: This rule,refer to the negative responses, stay's very relevant nowadays.
  • Anti-communism: I notice there is not so much fear against the word 'Community' since facebook offers the option to create a Community Page.

Conclusion

Chomsky advises people to develop an independent mind, you can not trust only one source of information. In the media, a journalist could think he is doing a great job informing the public, but he could also, subconsciously or not, filter the information. It seems logical to not trust just one source, if you can't trust a journalist, you have to be a journalist yourself and use your surroundings to discuss different points of view. Fair enough, but this is where the problem is. People don't want to spend time on checking everything, this was the responsibility of the journalist. Even if the journalist wants to take this job and starts his own newspaper, let's say the public takes the information seriously, he needs to earn a living to do this job in a proper way and then we are back in the propaganda model of Chomsky and Hermans.

Knowing more about Chomsky's point of view I can imagine him being exhausted in these days. Trying to educate people all those years, motivating them to think critically for themselves and, you could say, it only got worst.

In 2010 Chomsky predicted

“If somebody comes along who is charismatic and honest this country is in real trouble because of the frustration, disillusionment, the justified anger and the absence of any coherent response. What are people supposed to think if someone says ‘I have got an answer, we have an enemy’? There it was the Jews. Here it will be the illegal immigrants and the blacks. We will be told that white males are a persecuted minority. We will be told we have to defend ourselves and the honor of the nation. Military force will be exalted. People will be beaten up. This could become an overwhelming force. And if it happens it will be more dangerous than Germany.”


(April 19, 2010) Article on Truthdig.com Posted by Chris Hedges.

And there came Donald Trump, in my opinion not so charismatic, but his charm and anger worked, he persuaded the majority of the U.S. to let him be their next president. The "normal man" in the U.S. is very angry, not afraid to express his beliefs but still too lazy to do some research.

I think it's wonderful how Chomsky dedicate his life to make the public aware, taking his role as an intellectual serious by informing the "normal" men. The role of an artist within this subject is different, I think it's interesting to create a discussion in an artistic way but with to tools of the media, maybe chaos or irritation that could raise questions of propaganda. The Propaganda Model is a very helpful structure to work with.

Bibliography

  • MANUFACTURING CONSENT The Political Economy of the Mass Media by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky (1988)
  • Manufacturing Consent - Noam Chomsky And The Media-The Companion Book To The Award-Winning Film by Peter Wintonick and Mark Achbar (1994)
  • The Propaganda Model: a retrospective by Edward S. Herman (2003)
  • Noam Chomsky on Propaganda - The Big Idea - Interview with Andrew Marr BBC (2012)
  • Robert Epstein, The new mind control, AEON (Feb. 18, 2016)
Retrieved from "https://pzwiki.wdka.nl/mw-mediadesign/index.php?title=Irma%27s_essay_:_Formula_of_credibility_based_on_Noam_Chomsky&oldid=119654"