The problem is that you (plural) seem to think propaganda is necessarily negative. Do you think the US did not have a doctrine of winning the war. Do you think they thought they had pacified I island when the photo proclaiming a victory was made? Do you think that the US used the photo purely as a news photo with no intention of rousing a positive response from the populace? If so I have an island in the Hudson River to sell you, cheap.
propaganda propaganda (pròp´e-gàn´de) noun 1. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those people advocating such a doctrine or cause. 2. Material disseminated by the advocates of a doctrine or cause: the selected truths, exaggerations, and lies of wartime propaganda. 3. Propaganda. Roman Catholic Church. A division of the Roman Curia that has authority in the matter of preaching the gospel, of establishing the Church in non-Christian countries, and of administering Church missions in territories where there is no properly organized hierarchy. [New Latin, short for Sacra Congregâtio dê Propagandâ Fide, Sacred Congregation for Propagating the Faith (established 1622), from ablative feminine gerundive of Latin propâgâre, to propagate. See propagate.] - prop´agan´dism noun - prop´agan´dist noun - prop´agandis´tic adjective - prop´agandis´tically adverb The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from INSO Corporation; further reproduction and distribution restricted in accordance with the Copyright Law of the United States. All rights reserved. Bob Sullivan wrote: > Bill and Tom, > > What is a propaganda photo? > The flag raising at Iwo Jima was an inspirational moment by design. > It was a premature 'celebration' of victory, 2 days into a grim 30 day battle. > The flag was raised to inspire those fighting on the island below. > > The photo took on a propaganda aura based on how the media handled it, > the events themselves (a difficult battle), and the qualities of the > photo itself. The US government used the photo as the centerpiece of > a massive War Bond drive - the kind of promotional campaign that would > make Nike look like a lightweight in comparison today. (Imagine > financing Vietnam from 'donations' to War Bonds instead of deficit > spending!) > > Propaganda is a loaded word. > > Regards, Bob S. > > > On 9/27/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "graywolf" >> Subject: Re: Chicken or Egg Photo Story - NY Times >> >> >>> >>> If the Iwo Jima photo was taken in a studio in California is it an any >>> less >>> powerful image? Would it have less meaning to a people at war? It is easy >>> to sit >>> in our comfortable living rooms decades later and talk about it as if it >>> were >>> some kind of conspiracy, but it was a powerful wartime propaganda photo >>> regardless of when and where and how it was taken. >> We should compare notes to see how many people called you out for listing >> that photo as propoganda compared to me. >> >> William Robb >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
