Have you ever thought about this when you are watching an advertisement: Why would I be influenced to buy this item? If you do, you may be able to understand another term: Propaganda. Propaganda is kind of a presentation that mainly focuses on influences ones’ attitudes toward subjects or person. “Propaganda is expression of opinion or action by individuals or groups deliberately designed to influence opinions or actions of other individuals or groups with reference to predetermined ends”(How to Detect Propaganda) It is mostly used for political or religious purpose to make you feel the same way as they do and to gain your support. While there are different types of propagandas, visual propaganda is more effective than the written one. Unlike
…show more content…
As most of the normal people will do, they walk away from this hater and think of he/she is an insane. This is what exactly happening in the “Why George W. Bush Is THE WORLD’S LEADING TERRORIST”. In this article, the author is showing exceptional hatred toward Bush, for example, “The invasion launched by George W. Bush was heralded by the most frightening and powerful use of force and military violence in recent history.” (Terrorist In Chief1) The author uses words like ”invasion”, “frightening” and “powerful” to describe Bush as a horrible person. Such strong words make us feel nervous and serious, and you probably do not want to read such an article in a beautiful day, do you? What is more, being extremely critical makes people feel sorry for the subject that the article is describing, and this violates the purposes of a propaganda. For example, it described Bush like “Is there any doubt at all that the Bush administration committed acts of terrorism when it unlawfully used force and violence against the nation of Iraq to intimidate and coerce its government and the civilian population, in furtherance of the Bush/PNAC political and social objectives.”(Terrorist In Chief1). It makes Bush as a terrorist without valid proof, or the proof are just the author’s imagination. When the readers read this, …show more content…
First, being more detailed would not make people interested, for example, would a driver, a walker or a student pay close attention to a poster with thousands words on it? Probably not since people are tired of long essays, and they expect something entertaining in their life which makes an exaggerating picture popular because it makes people laugh. Moreover, people nowadays have critical minds, if they read something, they will filter the information they receive. This is bad for propaganda since you want your readers to be influenced totally by your words but not to make them think deeply and filter the idea you tried to enforce. But a picture achieves this goal successfully because it does not have any words or few words for readers to even judge. Even more, since pictures make the information easier on eyes since they do not require the viewer to analyze from words to words, and therefore, our brain will accept them comfortably. All the readers have to do is to laugh and allow the picture to stay in their brains for a long period since they cannot think of any bad about the picture. Some people may argue that the pictures could be horrifying and writing propaganda can be funny. That is true that some of the picture propagandas are terrifying, but the viewers will just think of them
As most of the normal people will do, they walk away from this hater and think of he/she is an insane. This is what exactly happening in the “Why George W. Bush Is THE WORLD’S LEADING TERRORIST”. In this article, the author is showing exceptional hatred toward Bush, for example, “The invasion launched by George W. Bush was heralded by the most frightening and powerful use of force and military violence in recent history.” (Terrorist In Chief1) The author uses words like ”invasion”, “frightening” and “powerful” to describe Bush as a horrible person. Such strong words make us feel nervous and serious, and you probably do not want to read such an article in a beautiful day, do you? What is more, being extremely critical makes people feel sorry for the subject that the article is describing, and this violates the purposes of a propaganda. For example, it described Bush like “Is there any doubt at all that the Bush administration committed acts of terrorism when it unlawfully used force and violence against the nation of Iraq to intimidate and coerce its government and the civilian population, in furtherance of the Bush/PNAC political and social objectives.”(Terrorist In Chief1). It makes Bush as a terrorist without valid proof, or the proof are just the author’s imagination. When the readers read this, …show more content…
First, being more detailed would not make people interested, for example, would a driver, a walker or a student pay close attention to a poster with thousands words on it? Probably not since people are tired of long essays, and they expect something entertaining in their life which makes an exaggerating picture popular because it makes people laugh. Moreover, people nowadays have critical minds, if they read something, they will filter the information they receive. This is bad for propaganda since you want your readers to be influenced totally by your words but not to make them think deeply and filter the idea you tried to enforce. But a picture achieves this goal successfully because it does not have any words or few words for readers to even judge. Even more, since pictures make the information easier on eyes since they do not require the viewer to analyze from words to words, and therefore, our brain will accept them comfortably. All the readers have to do is to laugh and allow the picture to stay in their brains for a long period since they cannot think of any bad about the picture. Some people may argue that the pictures could be horrifying and writing propaganda can be funny. That is true that some of the picture propagandas are terrifying, but the viewers will just think of them