Words: 1915
The Positive Effects of Propaganda in World War One Edward Mobley Word Count: 1673 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Plan of Investigation B. Summary of Evidence C. Evaluation of Source D. Analysis E. Conclusion F. List of sources G. Bibliography A. Plan of Investigation To what extent did the propaganda in World War One on European countries such as Germany and other countries as well? In World War One there were many side actions that took place and had an influence in the war. One these actions was propaganda in several European nations, in which it was used to persuade the people of its countries.
Propaganda was used through cartoons, posters, and billboards. Propaganda was viewed as having a big effect in the homeland; it helped recruit men for the army and persuade women to help out in protecting and working in the homeland. Some propaganda gives off important info dealing with its enemy’s war plans. They might release info that their allies can understand but not the enemy. “Throughout the war Germany was targeted was the focal point and was used to keep Germany from becoming powerful and keep everyone informed about the country. “( Partridge 2248) B.
Summary of Evidence To begin, in the First World War subliminal messages were often used by many countries involved, in which subliminal messages were passed through most political cartoons. To clarify, countries needed troops and didn’t want to let that information get to the enemy. So they made posters with these drawings that got men attention but at the same time made war look “fun. ” In the drawing they may have had pretty women all around and had the men at war living a great life. Also in war you have to keep your allies informed of what is going on in your country.
The only way that was for sure going to reach the other countries and be secretive about it was political cartoons. The enemy didn’t know what they were trying to say just simply because it had nothing to do with them. Some treaties were brought about through these political cartoons. Also, powers were maintained and were updated often merely like the enemies were. “Musician and artist in the war found ways to play a big part in the influence of the people. Through their music and other works their lifestyle was made aware of. ” (? zan 7) Often what was talked about in the music was how the people were treated; either it was good or bad. They also had stated things that they thought the government should do about the war problems. For instance, some people were for the war and most were against it. Through the music they let it be known what they thought about the war itself. In comparison through other works like paintings and famous portraits artist displayed their opinions. Often in these paintings it was based off what the people of a certain nation needs were and as well as their wants.
Things like food and shelter was the obvious but things like protection from the “undercover enemy”, the government didn’t know about had to be brought to their attentions. Something more like a subliminal message like the paragraph before. A type of propaganda is called “bandwagon. ” This term is used in many ways, in which someone starts a trend or “movement” and developed followers. Like historian Edward Filene explained, “Propagandists use this technique to persuade the audience to follow the crowd. This device creates the impression of widespread support. It reinforces the human desire to be on the winning side.
It also plays on feelings of loneliness and isolation. Propagandists use this technique to convince people not already on the bandwagon to join in a mass movement while simultaneously reassuring that those on or partially on should stay aboard. Bandwagon propaganda has taken on a new twist. Propagandists are now trying to convince the target audience that if they don’t join in they will be left out. The implication is that if you don’t jump on the bandwagon the parade will pass you by. While this is contrary to the other method, it has the same effect: getting the audience to join in with the crowd. (edward22) C. Evaluation of Source In most of my sources the author was more focusing on the positive effects of propaganda more than the negative. In the paper I’m comparing the two sources, The History of a Modern World and the Post-War Propaganda, written by Barukh Hazan. The origin of my sources was basically report generated by many historians pasted on from generations. The sources were made to show the best effects that showed an influence in the war. The source wasn’t greatly valued because it’s not a primary source, but it does give good examples of propaganda. It lacked different views.
It would have been better if the effects were evened out between good and bad. Also, the source focused on Europeans countries instead of others. D. Analysis In more details in order to recruit soldiers they needed to be persuaded or attracted by some means. “The women on the posters bring in the men. The women on the posters trick the men into joining the army by portraying that it will be a lot of pretty women at war. ” (? azan 7) In some posters there were soldiers laying around, not doing much. This told the men being recruited that being in the army was “a breeze”. In action to keeping others countries informed of one’s country.
Logos, pictures, and other works were displayed for others to know what’s happening. Like stated before treaties were worked out and further explained in propaganda as well as other things. In comparison in political cartoons, countries made their enemy look horrible. In the cartoons there was a lot of “name calling” which was a technique used in the war. Further explained by Marlin Randall, “Propagandists use this technique to create fear and arouse prejudice by using negative words (bad names) to create an unfavorable opinion or hatred against a group, beliefs, ideas or institutions they would have us denounce.
This method calls for a conclusion without examining the evidence. Name Calling is used as a substitute for arguing the merits of an idea, belief, or proposal. It is often employed using sarcasm and ridicule in political cartoons and writing. When confronted with this technique the Institute for Propaganda Analysis suggests we ask ourselves the following questions: What does the name mean? Is there a real connection between the idea and the name being used? ” (Marlin49) The names being used may or may not been connected with an idea or some meaning behind it.
Some names used may have been code names or even just simply trying to put that enemy down. In other situations “name calling” had let who was the enemy and was a friendly. This helped out with the people back at home and one’s allies. This gesture kept everyone informed of what was going on. Some people were persuaded into thinking their country was on the come up or were in complete control. “Through songs and art, many got the chance to communicate their opinion and those they represented. Most musicians during this time period were in the lower class, so they explain through their music how hard life is during the war. (Robert 42) Others talked about what the people in the country needed and what they didn’t have to survive. Artist usually had illustrated on what their thoughts were on the war. “Most musicians were against war because it had a bad effect on the lower class. “(Robert 43) For example all supplies needed to survive were going to the troops which left the people back home to suffer and make a living the hard way. The songs were significant because most governments want their people to be happy. So what the people were saying they may have used it in the war. E. Conclusion
In brief, in World War One there were many side actions that took place and made a statement. One of these actions was propaganda in the European nations. Political Cartoons and billboards had the most impact on the countries success if used right. The songs and arts were just to put opinions out to the public. The propaganda had given off good and bad information, which some of the info was miss-leading. Bashing other countries was also part of propaganda and targeted enemies. Explained in an excerpt written by Anthony Rhodes, “Others think especially of techniques, of slogans, catchwords, and other devices, when they talk about propaganda.
Still others define propaganda as a narrowly selfish attempt to get people to accept ideas and beliefs, always in the interest of a particular person or group and with little or no advantage to the public. According to this view, propaganda is promotion that seeks “bad” ends, whereas similar effort on behalf of the public and for “good” ends isn’t propaganda, but is something else. Under this definition, for example, the writings of the patriotic Sam Adams on behalf of the American Revolution could not be regarded by American historians as propaganda. (Rhodes77) Propaganda was used through political cartoons, posters, and billboards. F. List of Sources 1. “Sacred Congregation of Propaganda”. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913. http://www. newadvent. org/cathen/12456a. htm. Retrieved 15 May 2011. 2. “Origins: A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English”, by Eric Partridge, ISBN 0-203-42114-0, 1977, p. 2248 3. “Olympic sports and propaganda games: Moscow 1980”, by Barukh ? azan, ISBN 0-87855-436-X, 1982, p. 7 4. Filene, Edward. Institute for Propaganda Analysis.
Propaganda Analysis. New York: Columbia, University Press, 1938. 5. Marlin, Randal. Propaganda & the Ethics of Persuasion. New York: Broadview Press, 2002. 6. Rhodes, Anthony. Propaganda. The Art of Persuasion World War II. New York: Chelsea House Publications, 1976. BIBLIOGRAPHY Blum, John et al. The National Experience. A History of the United States Since 1865. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World. 1968. Cole, Robert. The Encyclopedia of Propaganda. New York: M. E. Sharp, Inc. , 1998. Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: The Age of Napoleon.
New York: MJF Books, 1975. Ellul, Jacques. Propaganda. The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. New York: A. Knoph, 1965. Filene, Edward. Institute for Propaganda Analysis. Propaganda Analysis. New York: Columbia, University Press, 1938. Hacker, Diana. A Writer’s Reference. 4th ed. New York: Bedford/ St. Martins, 1999. Jenkins, Roy. Churchill. A Biography. New York: Farrar, Straus and Girox, 2001. Lay, Mary et al. Technical Communications. 2nd ed. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill, 2000. Marlin, Randal. Propaganda & the Ethics of Persuasion. New York: Broadview Press, 2002.
Pratkanis, Anthony and Aronson, Elliott. Age of Propaganda: The Everday Use and Abuse of Persuasion. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1991. Rhodes, Anthony. Propaganda. The Art of Persuasion World War II. New York: Chelsea House Publications, 1976. Smith III, Ted J. Propaganda. A Pluralist Perspective. New York: Praeger, 1989. Taithe, Bertrand and Thornton, Tim. Themes in History: Propaganda, Political Rhetoric, and Identity 1300-2000. Great Britain: Sutton Publishing, 1999. Return to TopInternet SourcesAristotle. http://classics. mit. edu/Aristotle/rhetoric. . i. htmld’Aymery, Giles. Then and Now, Swans Commentary, November 12, 2001. http://www. swans. com/library/art7/ga120. htmlDelwich, Aaron. Propaganda. September 2002. http://www. propagandacritic. com Mertz, Gail and Lieber, Carol. What is Propaganda? Excerpted from Conflict in Context: Understanding Local to Global Security. 2001. http://esrnational. org/whatispropaganda. htmPetraglia-Bahri, Joshep. A Brief Overview of Rhetoric. 1996. http://www. lcc. gatech. edu/gallery/rhetoric/essay. html”Propaganda. ” American Heritage Dictionary Online.