Government use of Facebook Effectiveness
Propaganda is derived from the term Congregatio de Propadanga Fide (Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith), which was a missionary organization established by the pope in 1622 (Merriam-webster). It is defined as an organized mass communication, derived from a hidden agenda on mission to conform belief and action by manipulating mechanisms-drawn from a hidden agenda on instrumentality - to circumvent individual reasoning and rational choice (Koppang). Some forms of propaganda are lobbying, advertising and missionary activity; however the term is mostly used in political grounds. Furthermore, how propaganda is portrayed has evolved through the centuries as technology advanced, such as the radio, television, motion picture, and now the internet. Propaganda is now featured in social networking websites such as Facebook, in hopes of influencing public opinion. However, is the government use of Facebook as a propaganda instrument in hopes of swaying the public in favor of their position affective?
In general, why is propaganda used in the first place? Media analyst, Shari Graydon, in her analysis article, "Tobacco companies puff a little propaganda," published in 1995 by Infomart, addresses the topic of propaganda and argues that tobacco companies are using propaganda as a way to persuade the audience to look at a situation from a different perspective, and in turn have a different belief. She supports this claim by giving evidence of cigarette companies taking out full-page ads in newspapers across the country to convince readers that tobacco companies are not the blame for health care cost, and asserts this portrayal of belief that they are sensible and reasonable. She adopts a logical tone for her audience, the readers of Calgary Herald and others interested in the topic of propaganda, by stating a claim and proving the claim in the contexts of her article. Graydon's piece, not only illustrate the functionality of how a propagandist works, but also portrays that propaganda is a way to sway individual's belief towards the propagandist favor. Although this does not fully answer if the government use of propaganda in Facebook is affective, however it does give reason for using propaganda. The tobacco companies used the propaganda in newspaper ads in hopes of changing the belief system of a person, while having the intention of not having the blame for the health care cost. Therefore one can deductively conclude that the effectiveness of a piece of propaganda is by how much have the propagandist influenced the individual in favor of their opinions and thereby causing a shift towards their means.
From the previous article we sought the reason why someone or something will use propaganda; however what is the government doing on Facebook that express the use of propaganda? Government reporter in Seoul for Bloomberg News, covering news for South Korea and North Korea, Sangwon Yoon in her article "North Korea Facebook Account Latest Effort in Propaganda War," published in 2010, addresses the topic of North Korea's use of the social networks as a propaganda method, and argues that this method is a way to praise and promote North Korea and mock other countries. She supports this claim by giving examples of the multiple posts in which the North Korean government posted on Facebook, such as links that criticize South Korea and the U.S. as "warmongers," photos of picturesque North Korean landscapes, and a YouTube video of a dance performance celebrating leader Kim Jong IL. Furthermore, the account username is "uriminzokkiri," meaning "on our own as a nation," and the profile picture is set as monument in Pyongyang. Yoon's purpose is to make people aware of the propaganda that is occurring in North Korea, and how using the social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube is a useful tool in hiding the truth. She does this because on the Facebook page, it suggests for a peaceful reunification, however in truth, it has only boasted North Korea, while humiliating other countries, Yoon in turn wants the audience to look through some of the propaganda that is being suggested. She adopts a dominating tone for her audience, the readers of Huffington post, a political website mostly read by liberals and left leaning and others interested in the topic of world news, so readers can easily adapt a position in this predicament, and a possible call to action of combatting this attack of propaganda by the North Koreans. This article discusses and brings up the main issues of propaganda and how it is used to persuade the audience while also hiding the truth. Through Yoon's article, she demonstrates that although the government suggest a position in an opinion such as the "yearning" for a peaceful unification, the propaganda suggest otherwise. This correlates with Graydon's piece, of how tobacco companies are using propaganda to sway the people towards a different position of belief, such as agreeing with the company in its stance as sensible and reasonable, while at the same time having a hidden agenda of targeting future generations for cigarettes. Graydon's claim will strengthen Yoon's argument, of how propaganda can be used to persuade people while hiding the truth. This is perfect because it somewhat correlates with my argument that some form of government is using Facebook as a way to manipulate public opinion in favor of their position while hiding the truth. This piece also shows what the government is doing to portray propaganda: such as images, YouTube video posts on Facebook, their Facebook name, and demeaning posts. However is does not answer if their use of propaganda is affective. How much have they swayed to people of North Korea into believing that American's are warmongers, and convinced the world of wanting a peaceful unification through these images, video, and posts.
With all these images posted by the North Korean government, or any form of government on Facebook, we are asked how affective an image can be? At the University of Michigan, issued this news release, "Peer influence: Facebook, Twitter, Alcohol and Drugs," published in 2012 by HT Media Ltd, addresses the topic of social network's influence of drugs and alcohol, and argues that Internet social platforms that shows alcohol and marijuana images has correlation to the amount of alcohol and marijuana usage. He supports this claim by bringing studies done by Journal of Studies, and by people at School of Public Health, that portray such instances of this correlation. In order to support his claims, University of Michigan, brings up research done by professionals about the correlation between social network's alcohol and marijuana content versus the amount of usage of these items. This source will help complement many of my other sources about propaganda and its affects. Although images of alcohol and marijuana are not propaganda, based on the study, it illustrates that just by the amount of images can cause the amount of usages of this content. If an image can cause such actions; why not propaganda in the social networks? This article resonates with how the tobacco companies took out one page ad space for propaganda use, and how in Yoon's piece, the North Korean government are constantly putting up images that suggest that Americans are the enemy. If an image can cause people do more alcohol and marijuana what can propaganda make people do?
A successful piece of propaganda is one that will sway the person. Social networking websites, allow people to create groups, and post such propaganda. The effectiveness of propaganda on Facebook is decided upon if the person will join or like the group. Professor at Haifa University, Gabriel Weimann, in his essay, "Terror on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube", published in 2009, addresses the topic of communication interfaces, and argues that terrorist is using these interactive online communications - from chat rooms to Twitter and Facebook. He supports this claim by giving multiple examples of specific terrorist group using these forms of communication, and specific groups and statements that occur in such interactions, and bring in many statistical evidence, as well as bringing multiple experts in counter terrorism. Weimann, brings up multiple issues of terrorist group's use of Facebook. Firstly, he argues that Jihadist terrorist groups are targeting youth for propaganda, incitement, and recruitment purposes. In addition, Facebook allows terrorist groups to look at people's information, and judging by their information, they befriend these people, as possible recruited members of this organization. Furthermore, these groups realized the potential of this easily accessed platform for dissemination of their propaganda and radicalization videos, therefore posting them on the Facebook group, for people to read information, look at discussion boards, click links to propaganda videos, and join the group. With the use of propaganda and this online global audience, terrorist can lure people to come across their website, or they can target individual to their site. With this evidence we can see that propaganda in Facebook is actually affective in the sense that it is causing people to do something, even as taboo as joining a terrorist group. With support from the University of Michigan's study of how an image of drugs can make people do something, we can see that such propaganda from terrorist groups can cause people to join, and possibly harm people in the future. Although, the government isn't a terrorist organization, the government like the terrorist organizations can successfully use propaganda by targeting people with propaganda into joining their campaign through this evidence.
If joining a Facebook group due to a piece of propaganda suggest the effect of it, why not sharing. Reporter and breaking news blogger at The New York Times, J. David Goodman, in his blog article, "How the Kony Video Went Viral," published in 2012, addresses the topic of social media, and argues how the Kony video went viral. He bring in statistical facts by "Times," stating that Invisible Children's 30-minute documentary film has gotten 40 million views on YouTube, however currently the video has 97 million views. This video is a perfect example of how powerful propaganda is at this day in age. The reason for this is because of social media platforms such as Facebook can spread such a message. In addition, during 2012, people were arguing to get the troops out of the Iraq war, however in this video, that has caught the attention of millions of people, has directly changed the minds of people and were ready to tell the government to send troops to Uganda. Goodman's piece supplemented with the study by University of Michigan and Weimann's piece, we can see that with a piece of propaganda and a global audience of billions of people in the social sphere, it can spread, and sway the people in favor of the propagandist favor, and possibly have a call to action. Based on this evidence, the government use of propaganda can be affective due to the access to billions of people Facebook offers, and the ability to share and communicate with others. If the government had posted the Kony 2012 video on their wall, the amount of people that would have watched it would have been 97 million people at this day, and people will tell the government for a call to action, which they have.
Shedding a different perspective, of people using propaganda is important as well. Although the government or other sovereignty may use Facebook as a propaganda tool to sway the people, the people can also use the same to tool to sway other people, and the government. Multimedia journalist, Lauren E. Bohn, in her article, "Israel 'Media Bunker' Peppers Internet With Propaganda Tweets and Facebook Posts," published in 2012, addresses the topic of media propaganda versus propaganda by the people, and argues that the people of Israel are fighting back in the war of propaganda against the media's propaganda with the use of social network, such as Facebook. She supports this claim by giving an example of a Facebook page that opened up and got 24,000 "likes" over a period of a week. Bohn's purpose is to convey that the media's use of propaganda suggests its anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian; therefore in order to allow the audience to realize the significance of the propaganda used by the people to fight back, and show what the real truth is, she portrays the Israel people use of Facebook as a weapon of propaganda to portray the truth or what is occurring from a Israeli point of view. She adopts a biased tone for her audience, the readers of Huffington Post, and others interested in the topic of social networking propaganda, because the media offers a bias report of the people of Israel. Bohn reflects on her claims by giving tactical evidence by the people of Israel, such as the Facebook page, "Israel Under Fire," and bringing in dialogue by the several people in various positions in life. This gives a deeper insight into what is occurring rather than stating the issue. This article sheds a different perspective in my argument of how government plays a role with propaganda. Instead it shows how people's use of social networks such as Facebook and propaganda will be used to convince the world in favor of their own opinion. Bohn's argument, complements to Yoon's piece about Government use of propaganda against people.
Based on the multiple evidence gathered, one could conclude that the government use of propaganda in Facebook is affective. The reasons why propaganda is being used can be seen by the tobacco companies, in hopes of swaying the public in favor of their position. In addition, how the government uses Facebook as a propaganda tool is illustrated by the North Korean government using Facebook to put up images, videos, and demeaning posts. Also the effect of these images is portrayed by the University of Michigan's study of pictures of drugs and people's usage of such drugs is related. Furthermore one could see the effect of how propaganda on Facebook, can target people to join such group, such as terrorist groups. Through the evidence of the viral video of Kony 2012, one could see how a social network platform can help explode such a video, and how a propaganda video can change the minds of millions of people. Lastly, Bohn's piece sheds a different perspective of how the people can use propaganda in an effective manner. Through all these evidence, one can image what the government can do with such a platform as Facebook, and affect the millions of people that use it.
Propaganda is derived from the term Congregatio de Propadanga Fide (Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith), which was a missionary organization established by the pope in 1622 (Merriam-webster). It is defined as an organized mass communication, derived from a hidden agenda on mission to conform belief and action by manipulating mechanisms-drawn from a hidden agenda on instrumentality - to circumvent individual reasoning and rational choice (Koppang). Some forms of propaganda are lobbying, advertising and missionary activity; however the term is mostly used in political grounds. Furthermore, how propaganda is portrayed has evolved through the centuries as technology advanced, such as the radio, television, motion picture, and now the internet. Propaganda is now featured in social networking websites such as Facebook, in hopes of influencing public opinion. However, is the government use of Facebook as a propaganda instrument in hopes of swaying the public in favor of their position affective?
In general, why is propaganda used in the first place? Media analyst, Shari Graydon, in her analysis article, "Tobacco companies puff a little propaganda," published in 1995 by Infomart, addresses the topic of propaganda and argues that tobacco companies are using propaganda as a way to persuade the audience to look at a situation from a different perspective, and in turn have a different belief. She supports this claim by giving evidence of cigarette companies taking out full-page ads in newspapers across the country to convince readers that tobacco companies are not the blame for health care cost, and asserts this portrayal of belief that they are sensible and reasonable. She adopts a logical tone for her audience, the readers of Calgary Herald and others interested in the topic of propaganda, by stating a claim and proving the claim in the contexts of her article. Graydon's piece, not only illustrate the functionality of how a propagandist works, but also portrays that propaganda is a way to sway individual's belief towards the propagandist favor. Although this does not fully answer if the government use of propaganda in Facebook is affective, however it does give reason for using propaganda. The tobacco companies used the propaganda in newspaper ads in hopes of changing the belief system of a person, while having the intention of not having the blame for the health care cost. Therefore one can deductively conclude that the effectiveness of a piece of propaganda is by how much have the propagandist influenced the individual in favor of their opinions and thereby causing a shift towards their means.
From the previous article we sought the reason why someone or something will use propaganda; however what is the government doing on Facebook that express the use of propaganda? Government reporter in Seoul for Bloomberg News, covering news for South Korea and North Korea, Sangwon Yoon in her article "North Korea Facebook Account Latest Effort in Propaganda War," published in 2010, addresses the topic of North Korea's use of the social networks as a propaganda method, and argues that this method is a way to praise and promote North Korea and mock other countries. She supports this claim by giving examples of the multiple posts in which the North Korean government posted on Facebook, such as links that criticize South Korea and the U.S. as "warmongers," photos of picturesque North Korean landscapes, and a YouTube video of a dance performance celebrating leader Kim Jong IL. Furthermore, the account username is "uriminzokkiri," meaning "on our own as a nation," and the profile picture is set as monument in Pyongyang. Yoon's purpose is to make people aware of the propaganda that is occurring in North Korea, and how using the social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube is a useful tool in hiding the truth. She does this because on the Facebook page, it suggests for a peaceful reunification, however in truth, it has only boasted North Korea, while humiliating other countries, Yoon in turn wants the audience to look through some of the propaganda that is being suggested. She adopts a dominating tone for her audience, the readers of Huffington post, a political website mostly read by liberals and left leaning and others interested in the topic of world news, so readers can easily adapt a position in this predicament, and a possible call to action of combatting this attack of propaganda by the North Koreans. This article discusses and brings up the main issues of propaganda and how it is used to persuade the audience while also hiding the truth. Through Yoon's article, she demonstrates that although the government suggest a position in an opinion such as the "yearning" for a peaceful unification, the propaganda suggest otherwise. This correlates with Graydon's piece, of how tobacco companies are using propaganda to sway the people towards a different position of belief, such as agreeing with the company in its stance as sensible and reasonable, while at the same time having a hidden agenda of targeting future generations for cigarettes. Graydon's claim will strengthen Yoon's argument, of how propaganda can be used to persuade people while hiding the truth. This is perfect because it somewhat correlates with my argument that some form of government is using Facebook as a way to manipulate public opinion in favor of their position while hiding the truth. This piece also shows what the government is doing to portray propaganda: such as images, YouTube video posts on Facebook, their Facebook name, and demeaning posts. However is does not answer if their use of propaganda is affective. How much have they swayed to people of North Korea into believing that American's are warmongers, and convinced the world of wanting a peaceful unification through these images, video, and posts.
With all these images posted by the North Korean government, or any form of government on Facebook, we are asked how affective an image can be? At the University of Michigan, issued this news release, "Peer influence: Facebook, Twitter, Alcohol and Drugs," published in 2012 by HT Media Ltd, addresses the topic of social network's influence of drugs and alcohol, and argues that Internet social platforms that shows alcohol and marijuana images has correlation to the amount of alcohol and marijuana usage. He supports this claim by bringing studies done by Journal of Studies, and by people at School of Public Health, that portray such instances of this correlation. In order to support his claims, University of Michigan, brings up research done by professionals about the correlation between social network's alcohol and marijuana content versus the amount of usage of these items. This source will help complement many of my other sources about propaganda and its affects. Although images of alcohol and marijuana are not propaganda, based on the study, it illustrates that just by the amount of images can cause the amount of usages of this content. If an image can cause such actions; why not propaganda in the social networks? This article resonates with how the tobacco companies took out one page ad space for propaganda use, and how in Yoon's piece, the North Korean government are constantly putting up images that suggest that Americans are the enemy. If an image can cause people do more alcohol and marijuana what can propaganda make people do?
A successful piece of propaganda is one that will sway the person. Social networking websites, allow people to create groups, and post such propaganda. The effectiveness of propaganda on Facebook is decided upon if the person will join or like the group. Professor at Haifa University, Gabriel Weimann, in his essay, "Terror on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube", published in 2009, addresses the topic of communication interfaces, and argues that terrorist is using these interactive online communications - from chat rooms to Twitter and Facebook. He supports this claim by giving multiple examples of specific terrorist group using these forms of communication, and specific groups and statements that occur in such interactions, and bring in many statistical evidence, as well as bringing multiple experts in counter terrorism. Weimann, brings up multiple issues of terrorist group's use of Facebook. Firstly, he argues that Jihadist terrorist groups are targeting youth for propaganda, incitement, and recruitment purposes. In addition, Facebook allows terrorist groups to look at people's information, and judging by their information, they befriend these people, as possible recruited members of this organization. Furthermore, these groups realized the potential of this easily accessed platform for dissemination of their propaganda and radicalization videos, therefore posting them on the Facebook group, for people to read information, look at discussion boards, click links to propaganda videos, and join the group. With the use of propaganda and this online global audience, terrorist can lure people to come across their website, or they can target individual to their site. With this evidence we can see that propaganda in Facebook is actually affective in the sense that it is causing people to do something, even as taboo as joining a terrorist group. With support from the University of Michigan's study of how an image of drugs can make people do something, we can see that such propaganda from terrorist groups can cause people to join, and possibly harm people in the future. Although, the government isn't a terrorist organization, the government like the terrorist organizations can successfully use propaganda by targeting people with propaganda into joining their campaign through this evidence.
If joining a Facebook group due to a piece of propaganda suggest the effect of it, why not sharing. Reporter and breaking news blogger at The New York Times, J. David Goodman, in his blog article, "How the Kony Video Went Viral," published in 2012, addresses the topic of social media, and argues how the Kony video went viral. He bring in statistical facts by "Times," stating that Invisible Children's 30-minute documentary film has gotten 40 million views on YouTube, however currently the video has 97 million views. This video is a perfect example of how powerful propaganda is at this day in age. The reason for this is because of social media platforms such as Facebook can spread such a message. In addition, during 2012, people were arguing to get the troops out of the Iraq war, however in this video, that has caught the attention of millions of people, has directly changed the minds of people and were ready to tell the government to send troops to Uganda. Goodman's piece supplemented with the study by University of Michigan and Weimann's piece, we can see that with a piece of propaganda and a global audience of billions of people in the social sphere, it can spread, and sway the people in favor of the propagandist favor, and possibly have a call to action. Based on this evidence, the government use of propaganda can be affective due to the access to billions of people Facebook offers, and the ability to share and communicate with others. If the government had posted the Kony 2012 video on their wall, the amount of people that would have watched it would have been 97 million people at this day, and people will tell the government for a call to action, which they have.
Shedding a different perspective, of people using propaganda is important as well. Although the government or other sovereignty may use Facebook as a propaganda tool to sway the people, the people can also use the same to tool to sway other people, and the government. Multimedia journalist, Lauren E. Bohn, in her article, "Israel 'Media Bunker' Peppers Internet With Propaganda Tweets and Facebook Posts," published in 2012, addresses the topic of media propaganda versus propaganda by the people, and argues that the people of Israel are fighting back in the war of propaganda against the media's propaganda with the use of social network, such as Facebook. She supports this claim by giving an example of a Facebook page that opened up and got 24,000 "likes" over a period of a week. Bohn's purpose is to convey that the media's use of propaganda suggests its anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian; therefore in order to allow the audience to realize the significance of the propaganda used by the people to fight back, and show what the real truth is, she portrays the Israel people use of Facebook as a weapon of propaganda to portray the truth or what is occurring from a Israeli point of view. She adopts a biased tone for her audience, the readers of Huffington Post, and others interested in the topic of social networking propaganda, because the media offers a bias report of the people of Israel. Bohn reflects on her claims by giving tactical evidence by the people of Israel, such as the Facebook page, "Israel Under Fire," and bringing in dialogue by the several people in various positions in life. This gives a deeper insight into what is occurring rather than stating the issue. This article sheds a different perspective in my argument of how government plays a role with propaganda. Instead it shows how people's use of social networks such as Facebook and propaganda will be used to convince the world in favor of their own opinion. Bohn's argument, complements to Yoon's piece about Government use of propaganda against people.
Based on the multiple evidence gathered, one could conclude that the government use of propaganda in Facebook is affective. The reasons why propaganda is being used can be seen by the tobacco companies, in hopes of swaying the public in favor of their position. In addition, how the government uses Facebook as a propaganda tool is illustrated by the North Korean government using Facebook to put up images, videos, and demeaning posts. Also the effect of these images is portrayed by the University of Michigan's study of pictures of drugs and people's usage of such drugs is related. Furthermore one could see the effect of how propaganda on Facebook, can target people to join such group, such as terrorist groups. Through the evidence of the viral video of Kony 2012, one could see how a social network platform can help explode such a video, and how a propaganda video can change the minds of millions of people. Lastly, Bohn's piece sheds a different perspective of how the people can use propaganda in an effective manner. Through all these evidence, one can image what the government can do with such a platform as Facebook, and affect the millions of people that use it.
Do You Need