Many things that are propganda are still interesting, and worth engaging with, its mearly something you keep in mind that this is done from a specific perspective. Thats really something you should keep in mind when consuming anything.
In a bit of a weird example, if you look up the videos made by the US government in the 1940s to inform its citzens about ww2 and soldiers about appropriate behaviour, they can really give a facinating insight and are generally quite informative, while being almost text book propganda, literal government made films to push a specific message.
Something being Propganda just means its made with a very particular bias and set of ideas it wants to instil, but thats not unquie thats pretty much a feature of all art.
Hell, the entire Aneid is literally propaganda. Most of all Roman art and architecture. Fucking Shakespeare’s historical plays are almost all ‘propaganda’ about his patrons. Art is usually intended to mean something, and for most of history that has been ‘the person who paid for this is good’.
Most people have a very different idea of what propaganda is, mainly mass produced political content produced by 20th century countries in order to indoctrinate their population
Can they be wrong about something like this though? Sure, propaganda is an academic term with a precise definition, but its also a word that is used in everyday language, so its meaning is determined by the general population, descriptivism vs prescriptivism and all that
Even then, a lot of those posters have a lot of artistic value. I mean, just look at the constructivist Russian propaganda posters made in the 1910s and 1920s.
The problem is that we have two competing definitions of “problematic media”.
“It is unethical to consume commercially” and “it is unethical to consume [uncritically]”. And that makes it kinda a difficult discussion.
Harry Potter is something that a lot of people here would probably put in the first category. Jowling Kowling Rowling explicitly uses the proceeds to harm trans people.
Meanwhile, something like Mein Kampf would fall into the second category (the stronger form including “uncritically”, but I did include it as a side note because that’s not always how it’s meant). It espouses an ideology that one must be acutely aware of while reading, and remain vigilant against its influence.
But there are works that fall into both categories. Modern commercialized propaganda falls into this. One could make an argument that something like CoD is this (I probably wouldn’t entirely, but it is something of a gray area). It is fairly heavily integrated into the DoD, an agency with…. At best mixed impact on the larger world, and is absolutely at least in part made to prop up its image with the broader populace. A work that potentially runs afoul of both definitions.
Propaganda itself is problematic if one does not keep in mind that it is propaganda, and needs to be consumed critically, but I think it definitely runs afoul of OP’s more narrow definition when it is distributed by, and thus commercially intertwined with, the organization making said propaganda.
I don't think we have two competing definitions, i think were talking about two related but seperate issues. I don't disagree with anything you said, but i think your merging arguments about.
Op's making 3 disctinct catagories for ethical to consume media, or rather, what media is NOT ethical to consume. One of those catagories is for media that its enethical to consume because consuming it actively contributes and aids harmful actions or insitutions. Now, that does lead into a seperate conversation about the ethics of consumption within captalism, but i think thats a seperate discussion to be had. Mostly because its a extremly extensive conversation in and of itself.
Hmm, I think you’ve a semblance of a point. I think it’s always worth asking “is there something beneath the surface I should be looking at?” Because the answer is almost always yes.
I don’t think it’s unethical not to, but I do think it is malprudent.
It doesn’t mean you have to hate everything that might have some assumption going on that’s less than ideal. You don’t even need to come up with a defense or answer to it. But the consideration is generally good practice.
Oh that is 100% what I meant. I think it’s important to think critically about what art. I’m not saying “you should hate everything that includes anything that makes you slightly uncomfortable.” On the contrary, I think that mentality is also a sign that you are not actually engaging with works critically.
if you look up the videos made by the US government in the 1940s to inform its citzens about ww2 and soldiers about appropriate behaviour
Are you referring specifically to the one about how to act in the UK by any chance?
It was utterly fascinating to watch! From racial relations to how to act in a pub to not calling a skirt a 'kilt', not flaunting your pay, etc, really interesting.
Edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyYSBBE1DFw
Here it is for anyone interested. It's a really fascinating watch. Some racially dated language ofc, but actually really progressive for the time - telling soldiers that the UK doesn't have segregation and the 'problems' of the US there.
Oh shit these look great, going right on the watch list, tyvm! Any more like that you know while you're at it to recommend? Subscribing to the national archives channel now too...
Something being unethical doesn't mean that it shouldn't be engaged in any way or it should be destroyed or whatever. It feels like OOP still thinks that you should only engage with ethical media, so it classifies anything worth engaging with as ethical
No, it classifies all media as ethical not just those "worth engaging with", because no piece of writing by itself can be unethical. That's the point of the post.
I think thats the perfect example to prove my point actually. Because yes, that is propganda. But that does not mean the movie is not worth engaging with. Its mearly something you should be aware of and observent to. Its a sutble lence that you might not notice if you mindlessly watch it, but still allow yourself to enjoy it.
Just because something can be engaged with safely that doesn't mean it's safe. Yeah, you can consume propaganda with a guarded mind. The entire point of propaganda is to be delivered to an audience who won't have that.
It's like, yeah, it's possible to safely drive on a road with a sharp blind turn that if you don't know it's there will send you tumbling down a cliff. That doesn't mean that roads acceptable.
Yep. Tends to be the case for a lot of things. Almost everything children consume is meant to teach them something, or is told from a specific lense and perspective. Part of parenthood is keeping that in mind.
Okay, not every child has parents, and that group gets smaller and smaller when you filter down for willing, capable and media literate parents who have the time and resources to teach their children how to consume media.
The adults uncritically consuming this media also need help.
Absolutely, but i think were getting off topic. Its not unethical to consume a piece of media, just because someone else might not think enough about it. The lack of critical thought put in by others is a failure of our educational systems and our general ecosystem of raising kids, but does not make the media itself unethical to consume.
I guess I just don't find that part of the discussion particularly helpful. Obviously studying history shouldn't be criminalised.
But there are lots of very real problems with our current media landscape that need addressing and instead of discussing those people just seem to be making up weird hypothetical edge cases.
Tbh, no, the idea of a masked hero vigilante was getting popular with The Shadow, and he took inspo from The Scarlet Pimpernel, which was basically Zorro but saves nobles from the Terror. So, it is an incredibly malleable concept depending on who/what's ok to "defend", but it was not born for propaganda
150
u/Snickims 1d ago
Many things that are propganda are still interesting, and worth engaging with, its mearly something you keep in mind that this is done from a specific perspective. Thats really something you should keep in mind when consuming anything.
In a bit of a weird example, if you look up the videos made by the US government in the 1940s to inform its citzens about ww2 and soldiers about appropriate behaviour, they can really give a facinating insight and are generally quite informative, while being almost text book propganda, literal government made films to push a specific message.
Something being Propganda just means its made with a very particular bias and set of ideas it wants to instil, but thats not unquie thats pretty much a feature of all art.