Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
effects of propaganda in ww1
Impact of Propaganda in World War One
critical analysis of art of war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: effects of propaganda in ww1
War has been present since the beginning of human history. Likewise, war movies have been present since the movie industry began. Just like most other genres of film, war films have been created as a form of entertainment to profit a person or organization. More people are willing to spend their money and time on a feeling of action, excitement, heroism, and patriotism than gruesome and horrid images of real and common human destruction. Propaganda has been used by governments for a very long time and when motion pictures came into existence, governments almost immediately saw the new medium as an opportunity to influence the public. Governments such as the United States of America, cooperate with the movie industry to use this influence to promote a positive perception about war in order to gain support for wars. The movie industry portrays war in an exciting, glorified, romanticized, and heroic light and often demonizes the enemies; this causes an unrealistic public perception of war which leads to greater positive public opinion and support of real wars.
Hollywood war movies are commonly based around heroic and courageous actions. These are major characteristics in the movies Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down. Although the film Black Hawk Down is based on an actual event, it is all about common soldiers conquering fear and hardship to save wounded allies, despite seeing the deaths of friends along the way. The story becomes personalized and revolves around a few individual soldiers who give examples of heroism. In the movie, one soldier returns to base injured and later chooses to return to the front line to help rescue his allies that are more gravely wounded than him. There are also multiple instan...
... middle of paper ...
...ew war as a positive and inevitable part of life they act accordingly. If the public was shown the real horrors of war they would be shocked by what they see and view war for what it really is, a tool that governments uses for its own benefit regardless of how horrible it is. The public would act differently. There would be more protests against war because people would realize that it is not the most efficient or effective way of achieving goals. Congressmen would be less inclined to vote to engage in war for fear of displeasing their constituents and there would be less war, less lives lost, and more exploration in to diplomatic negotiations. War should be reserved for the defense of a nation. With war movies, the movie industry has a very large influence on public perception and as of now this influence is not being used appropriately for the good of humankind.
contemplating how he is unable to readjust back into civilian life. His voiceover illustrates this state of limbo between soldier and civilian:
“Saving Private Ryan” is one of the first movies to accurately portray the horrors of war and as a result helps people realize how much the military
In conclusion, while books, photos, movies and other historical documentation can portray information or a message about wartime events, they will never be able to produce the feelings of those that were personally involved in wars have experienced. Yet, it is incorrect to criticize these writers. The information they reveal is still very important historical information. Even if a reader or viewer of this media cannot feel exactly the same emotions as those involved, they still often experience an emotional connection to the events being depicted. This is important, not only for the historical knowledge gained about wars, but also to understand the nature and futility of their occurrence.
Every war will have those who support the war and those who are against the war. In 1965, those who were against the Vietnam War made their views known by many forms of protesting such as forming organizations, rallying, and anti-war protest music. Anti-war protest music was an opportunity to put people’s perspectives into song to hopefully spread their message. Buffy Sainte-Marie wrote the song “Universal Soldier” in 1962 and her message was that “Universal Soldier is about individual responsibility for war and how the old feudal thinking kills us all” (Boulanger). The song “Universal Soldier” was used as a protest anthem during the Vietnam War and attempts to untangle one of the paradoxes of life that war never leads to peace through examining a soldier that is representative of every soldier in every nation.
When a person sees a new advertisement or commercial for their favorite shoe company, they immediately want to go and check out their latest designs. Similarly, propaganda uses different sources of media to encourage people to buy a certain item that will benefit their country or an organization. Propaganda was used in World War II to encourage citizens to buy certain tools or participate in certain events to help the soldiers fighting. Both video and radio advertisements were used by the Allied and Axis powers to encourage citizens to aid the war effort, resulting in a rise of nationalism and resentment towards opposing sides.
Nothing can impact society like war. War can be viewed as noble and just, or cruel and inhuman, as well as everything in between. War affects everyone in society whether they are fighting in a foreign country or waiting at home for a loved one to return. War is an indispensable part of civilization; found at every chapter of human history. It is the culmination of the basic survival instinct when provoked. As has the technique of battle; society's view on war has changed as well. Today the act of war has become almost shameful, whereas in earlier eras war was glorified and heroic. American society's view on war has changed also. Our history, even as a young country has seen a great deal of conflict.
Film makers use many historical events to spark up and idea for a movie. One historical event that is commonly used is war. One advantage a film maker has when using war as a movie plot is that there is already a lot of drama in war. This may seem like a good advantage for the film maker, however focusing on all of the drama of war leaves much of the actual info. When watching a war movie, you may feel like you have an understanding about the war, but when you really compare a war movie to an actual war you find that there is a lot of factual information left out. One may ask why would directors and film makers leave out the facts of war and focus on the drama? After reading The Faces of Battle by John Keegan and reviewing war movies such as Saving Private Ryan, and Pearl Harbor, one can clearly see what makes the Hollywood version of war different from real life war.
Propaganda is the art of persuasion, and it had a major influence on WWII. Every country involved in the war had their own way of using propaganda to impact the public in different ways. Some countries were more forceful in presenting their propaganda to their country. Many types of propaganda were used in WWII. Books, radio, films, comic strips, and posters were directed towards the public to put them in a certain mind set about war. Every countries propaganda had different effects on the public. Nazi Germany’s use of propaganda had a greater impact on the public compared to Canada, USA, and Britain’s propaganda.
“One man’s dream is another man’s nightmare”, and perhaps one nation’s war is a potential Hollywood movie. While many Hollywood filmmakers have deemed it their true calling to present the war topic to the public in creating pictures which, according to McCrisken and Pepper, allow them to “critically engage with complicated questions about what constitutes ‘America’ domestically and internationally in the post-Cold War world.” A subject which leaves room for little to no debate is the perception that Hollywood directors, along with their pedagogical and informative topics, usually resort to films in order to convey messages and inform their viewers of the “bigger picture” they might seem to have glanced so quickly at. Such is the case with the two high-profile war movies, which are the subject of debate in this thesis, Oliver Stone’s Platoon (1986) and David Russell’s Three Kings (1999). Upon their release, with the emphasis on the former, they have both created quite a buzz which attracted the attention of many historians and created controversy which would be put under the microscope and thus promoting historical inquiry which the Americans would soon want to unravel (McCrisken & Pepper, 2005). In order to better understand the topic at hand, it is of extreme importance to tackle the perceived motive behind the advancements of the American army in the Vietnam War, and their involvement in the Gulf War. (thesis statement here?)
When popular culture is associated with militarism it changes the way we regard war. Sports can do this in many different ways, for example advertisements in the Super Bowl is a massive way to get a large audience to hear a pro war commercial. After we attacked Iraq in the first Gulf War, “Super Bowl XXV featured a flurry of nationalism including American flag decals on the players’ helmets, images of soldiers in the desert throughout the pregame show, and a halftime address from President George H. W.
Unlike the WWII era, the Vietnam War brought realism into literature and film. There were no heroic movies of men fighting in Vietnam. Men could no longer shoot fifty enemy combatants on top of a tank without being hurt. Instead, popular culture brought a realistic view of war, death, pain, and destruction. Author Tim O’Brien, like many war veterans, struggled with his Vietnam experience and expressed them through writing. Tim O’Brien exposed the truth behind war stories because he shows the difference between WWII romanticism and Vietnam realism.
Hollywood played an important role in making the war seem like a positive thing to the public eye. The government teamed up with the film industry to produce motion pictures advertizing the war effort, and was able to hold a large influence over the American opinion. When the war started, many citizens were unenthusiastic and hesitant to enlist in the military; but as many famous actors—such as James Stewart and Ronald Reagan—began to enlist, it set a prime example for other American citizens to follow. Many actors received much praise for their accomplishments in the war effort, highly encouraging their fellow Americans to consider enlisting as well. This proved to be an excellent way to increase the number of United States soldiers in the war.
It glorifies soldiers as warriors not only because they are fighting the villains but are seen as heroes who defend the American values of freedom and democracy. As the United States has made these values the normative standards for itself and the rest of the world, the attitude of superiority has increased in the people, thus making it easier for the US to use the normative values as justification for military actions. The cooperation between media and government, which has unconditional support from American people by fostering a “peace through war” attitude, also help in strengthening a patriotic feeling in the society. This is probably the reason why people do not think about the numbers of others that the US military has killed as a negative issue. In the collective American mind, the US is militarily involved for the greater good, taking on the role of peacekeeper, thus making warrior culture a necessary component of peace culture in the
Media played a vital role in changing the views of pro-war Americans to anti-war views by giving death counts, setting the stage for the anti-war movement to perform on, and publicizing leaked government information. The Vietnam War was known as the first televised war (“Vietnam Television”). Americans could watch as United States Troops fought, and the nightly news updated Americans on the death count and progress of US Troops in Vietnam (“Vietnam Television”).
Hollywood seems to thrive on portrayals of violence. American audiences respond positively to violent, action-based films, which continue to perform particularly well at the box office. Some of these blockbusters glorify violence even further by highlighting patriotism in war films, making them both commercial and critical successes. These films let audiences admire American soldiers for killing their enemies and withstanding the savageries of warfare. In a nation that has arguably become desensitized to violence from witnessing recurring mass shootings and fatal racial tensions, it is no surprise that filmmakers Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarantino manage to captivate