IP: re: Here comes the propaganda

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:35:31 +1100
> From: Nathan Cochrane <ncochrane () theage fairfax com au>
>
> (I appear to have had a mail meltdown when I tried to send this earlier, 
> so just in case it didn't get through)
>
> Hi Dave
>
> My understanding is it has long been the practice for the ruling 
> administration in Washington to sponsor certain messages in films and TV 
> programs. Producers hand copies of screenplays to the White House, which 
> vets them for appropriate messages.
>
> You could characterise it as product placement for politically correct 
> thought. The less kind would call it "propaganda", some might go so far as 
> to say it is "brainwashing".
>
> Here is a Salon.com yarn on the process with the WB's "Smart Guy":
>
> Asked whether it's proper to have government consultants shaping a TV 
> program's scripts, WB programming chief Litvack says, "Sure, absolutely. 
> It's a good idea if he knows more than we do."
> http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2000/01/13/smart_guy/
>
> More info from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy 
> (ONDCP) testimony Feb 9 last year:
>
> Citing "the undisputed influence of popular culture on attitude 
> formation," particularly among adolescents, the White House Office of 
> National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) has initiated an aggressive anti-drug 
> media campaign to educate American youth about the dangers of illicit 
> drugs, says ONDCP Deputy Director Donald Vereen.
> "Congress requires media outlets to match federal anti-drug advertising 
> dollars on a one-for-one basis. Networks, magazines, and newspapers may 
> elect to make this match with content, public-service activities, or free 
> advertising."
> http://www.usembassy.ro/USIS/Washington-File/300/00-02-09/eur313.htm
>
> Federal funding may be forthcoming if, for instance, an anti-drugs message 
> is inserted into the program. It was quite common under Clinton, I 
> believe, but may have started back with the first Bush (Sr.) 
> administration, or even earlier in a less structured way.
>
> According to ONDCP testimony, $178,584,000,000 dollars was spent in 1999 
> across 102 US local markets and 2250 media outlets reaching 95 percent of 
> 12-17-year-olds, for an average of 8.3 messages per week.
>
> The process is overseen by Ogilvy & Mather, which includes PR agency Hill 
> & Knowlton in its ensemble:
>
> As Brand Stewards, we work to leverage the brands of our multinational 
> clients by combining local know-how with a worldwide network, creating 
> powerful campaigns that address local market needs while still reinforcing 
> the same universal brand identity.
> The hallmark of our brand-building capabilities is our balance of global 
> and local brands. Our local clients keep us in tune with local market 
> nuances, which is critical for the success of our multinational accounts.
> http://www.ogilvy.com/
>
> I read about this quite some time ago, and have heard whispers of it again 
> recently, but I would like to know the extent of the practice now.    For 
> instance, rather than merely vetting screenplays, is the US Government 
> initiating projects such as the film, Training Day, reviewed last month in 
> the Washinton Post:
>
> "Training Day" is a taut, high-velocity film that departs from the action 
> flick template by having actual ideas. It uses the lapel-grabbing 
> techniques of the slam-bang genre to look in a nuanced way at the moral 
> dilemmas of undercover narcotics cops, who have to sometimes choose 
> between using proper police procedure and getting the job done.
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A8799-2001Oct4
>
> I have become quite cynical when I watch American TV, actively looking for 
> these messages, especially if I see a "Just say No" poster or some such in 
> the background. I'm especially alert to the speeches protagonists give.
>
> I guess Hollywood learned the hard way after McCarthy: if you can't beat 
> them, get their advertising bucks.
>
> cheers
>
>
>
> David Farber wrote:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.msnbc.com/news/654090.asp
>
>
> "FILM AND TELEVISION
> The purpose of the meeting will be to identify strategies and agree on 
> practical ideas, which may involve films as well as TV messages."
>
> Who is the intended target of the films and tv -- Americans ??????
>
>
> For archives see:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *********************************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it may be legally privileged and 
> confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email,
> you must not disclose or use the information contained in it.  If you have 
> received this email in error, please notify us by return email and 
> permanently delete the document.
> *********************************************************************************


For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/