Why is it important to critically analyze the media? - The Extended Informal Interactive Edition

I wrote the original version of my critical analysis paper without really reading the restrictions, so I had to trim down a lot on submission. The real version will be released tomorrow, but I thought I wouldn't trash the original, since there was a lot I didn't want to take out. Plus, this version had video links! Gold!

Appoximate Length: 25 min.



In 1939, Hitler started his conquest of the globe. His regime is known as one of the most propagandic ones in history, if not the most. He managed to convince his entire population that Jewish people were evil, inferior, and must be exterminated off the face of the Earth. These people weren't stupid, nor were they simply blind followers; they truly believed that Hitler was doing good in the world; his propaganda had convinced them.

Here is a video of Nazi propaganda:



Back in the United States and its allied countries, Germany was being demonized by the media, put out to be all pure evil: tens of millions of evil people that do not deserve to exist. Later in the war, the same treatment was done to the attacking Japanese, making them out to be subhuman, and the general population bought both; truly believing them.

Here is a classic Donald Duck cartoon demonizing the Germans:



There have been countless cases, even since then, but our population is not as naive as it used to be. We can no longer be psyched in to a war like we could be psyched in to a university football match at a pep rally. Today, there are countless opinions on all sides of the ongoing conflicts, and everyone critically analyzes the causes of wars, deciding whether or not they want to back their nation's apparent interests.

Here is a popular Green Day video that represents opposition to the American agenda:



The problem arises from a government that is fully aware of how to manipulate the public, and utilizes, via the media, our perceptual tendencies. For instance, we generally will “cling to first impressions, even if they’re wrong” (Adler, 2006, p.37). The media can use this by first incriminating the cause, and then later leaving it open to public interpretation. For example, the war in Iraq was first announced as a means of controlling weapons of mass destruction, thus implanting an evil perception on the subject. Later, even after no weapons were found, the public still believed that they had at least conquered a great evil (Goodman, 2003). This is circular logic since, the idea of them being a great evil was based on them having said weapons, which were never found.

Here is a video of the Daily Show, where Jon Stewart uncovers that Iraq had "nothin" to do with 9/11. It's 3 minutes in, but watch the whole thing; it's too funny not to.



(modified 10/11/06, as the original video was removed from YouTube)

It is important as a population to never follow, and always question the vague statements laid on us in the media. Do I truly back this war? What is the other side of the story? If we continue to ask questions like this, it will become harder for a government to act in a way that does not benefit its people, and conversely, it will become harder for a government to avoid the true demands of the people, who have become more vocal against a platform that has become somehow transparent.


Works Cited:

Adler, Ronald B. and George Rodman. Understanding Human Communication, 9th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Goodman, Ellen, “Let me see, uh, well, why did we invade Iraq?” Boston Globe 20 May, 2003. 1 Oct., 2006 .

All attached videos are automatically linked to their sources.