-Caveat Lector-

Online Journal - http://www.onlinejournal.com

04-25-01: Goebbels and mass mind control: Part Two
How PR opinion-shapers undermine environmental protection

By Carla Binion

April 25, 2001-In part one, we examined the fact that Hitler's
propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, admired Edward Bernays, a self-proclaimed
founder of the public relations industry. Goebbels used Bernays' book
"Crystallizing Public Opinion" in his campaign against Germany's Jewish
population. Now we'll look at specific propaganda techniques shared by
Goebbels and today's corporate PR teams, and at how those techniques
undermine today's environmental movement.

Public relations can be used for good or ill. When PR spin is used to
convince people that harmful things are good for them, or to turn people
against their own best interests, it is used for ill. Goebbels practiced
propaganda as a black art.

He helped organize Hitler's "brown shirts," and incited them to violence.
He instigated the events leading to "Kristallknacht," the infamous nights
of widespread brutal attacks against the Jews, November 8-9, 1938. He
helped create the "fuhrer cult," spinning Hitler as Germany's great
redeemer and convincing millions that the Nazi state was vital to their
well-being.

Goebbels believed in using stealth tactics, or "institutional lying," and
in using "fronts" to promote anti-Semitism and Nazi policies. For example,
Goebbels set up a film office in July 1933, made it part of a branch of
the Reich Cultural Chamber, and then used films to influence mass
audiences. Klaus P. Fischer writes in "Nazi Germany: A New History" that
most of the entertainment films "presented a sanitized image of carefree
life under the protective umbrella of the Nazi regime."

When pro-Nazi or anti-Semitic propaganda came from the mouth of a popular
German movie star on the screen, instead of directly from Goebbels, the
public perceived it differently. In the same way, today's PR firms use
front groups (fake grassroots, or "astroturf " groups) or so-called "third
parties" to speak for corporations.

In "Global Spin," (Chelsea Green Publishing, 1997) science lecturer Sharon
Beder writes that Merrill Rose, executive vice-president of the PR firm
Porter/Novelli, said: "Put your words in someone else's mouth . . . There
will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed
and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are
who you are. Any institution with a vested commercial interest in the
outcome of an issue has a natural credibility barrier to overcome with the
public, and often with the media."

John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton point out in "Toxic Sludge Is Good For
You," that on behalf of tobacco company Philip Morris, the PR company,
Burson-Marsteller, "created the [front group] 'National Smokers Alliance'
to mobilize smokers into a grassroots lobby for smoker's rights . . . To
defeat environmentalists, PR firms have created green-sounding front
groups such as "The Global Climate Coalition" and the "British Columbia
Forest Alliance."

Both Goebbels and today's PR firms have used euphemisms and Orwellian
newspeak and doublespeak to influence the public mind. For example,
corporate PR spinners have told the public that polluting-corporations are
friends of nature; that weapons-manufacturer General Electric does no harm
but merely "brings good things to life;" that spreading sludge on farm
fields is "beneficial use;" that human beings killed in war-for-profit are
"collateral damage."

American corporations have at times managed to circumvent the U.S.
Constitution and ignore laws designed to protect our own workers and the
environment by moving their companies offshore, in the name of "freedom."
In Hitler's Germany, the euphemistically named "Law for Terminating the
Suffering of People and Nation" (or, the "Enabling Law") gave governments
such "freedoms" as the right to deviate from the constitution, ultimately
helping Hitler undermine democracy and gain political power.

Goebbels presided over a communications monopoly in Germany by denouncing
"intellectualism" and urging book burning. Today, U. S. corporations have
a Goebbels-like communications monopoly, because virtually all television
networks and the vast majority of other media outlets in the country are
owned by a handful of corporations.

Klaus Fischer writes, "On May 10, 1933, an appalling event in the history
of German culture took place-the burning of the books . . . This
particular 'cleansing action' (Sauberung) was carried out by the German
Student Union."

Of the book burning, Goebbels said, "The age of extreme Jewish
intellectualism has now ended, and the success of the German revolution
has again given the German spirit the right of way." (J. M. Ritchie,
"German Literature Under National Socialism," 1983.) Today corporations
discourage Americans from educating themselves about corporate wrongdoing
by, as Stauber and Rampton say, "burning books before they're printed."

For example, science writer David Steinman obtained obscure government
research from the Freedom of Information Act and used the information in
his book, "Diet For A Poisoned Planet." Steinman wrote that many U.S.
foods contained contaminants and gave readers a chance to make safer food
choices by comparing the amounts of toxins contained in various foods.

Right away, corporate PR firms, including a "pesticide industry front
group with deep Republican connections" went to work attacking the book.
The Ketchum PR agency (representative of Dole Foods, the Beef Industry
Council, Miller Brewing and many other corporate food clients) markets
itself as a specialist in "crisis management," according to Stauber and
Rampton.

A Ketchum memo to the CALRAB food safety team read: "The [Ketchum] agency
is currently attempting to get a tour schedule so that we can 'shadow'
Steinman's [book promotional] appearances; best scenario, we will have our
spokesman in town prior to or in conjunction with Steinman's appearances."

Stauber and Rampton's source inside Ketchum said the PR firm called every
talk show where Steinman was booked, saying the shows shouldn't allow
Steinman to appear without also presenting "the other side of the issue."
The firm also tried to portray Steinman as an "extremist" without
credibility.

According to Sharon Beder ("Global Spin") corporate front groups are a
fairly recent phenomenon in America . . . a response to the rise of
genuine citizen public interest organizations. One front group, the
American Council on Science and Health, receives funds from Burger King,
Coca-Cola, NutraSweet, Monsanto, Dow, Exxon and other corporations.

Dr. Beder, author of numerous books, and a professional engineer and
senior lecturer in Science and Technology Studies at the University of
Wollongong, Australia, writes that "the American Council on Science and
Health is one of many corporate front groups which allow industry-funded
experts to pose as independent scientists to promote corporate causes.
Chemical and nuclear industry front groups with scientific sounding names
publish pamphlets that are 'peer reviewed' by industry scientists rather
than papers in established academic journals."

On the subject of corporate front groups, Beder quotes Mark Megalli and
Andy Friedman ("Masks of Deception: Corporate Front Groups in
America,"1991): "Contrary to their names, these groups often disregard
compelling scientific evidence to further their viewpoints, arguing that
pesticides are not harmful, saccharin is not carcinogenic, or that global
warming is a myth. By sounding scientific, they seek to manipulate the
public's trust."

The goal of pseudo-scientific corporate front groups, says Beder, is to
cast doubt on the legitimacy of authentic environmental problems. For
example, the Global Climate Coalition is a front group for various gas,
oil, coal, automobile and chemical corporations; and it has battled
restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions.

Global Climate Coalition has sent journalists videos claiming increased
carbon dioxide levels will help feed the world's hungry by increasing crop
production. The coalition has lobbied against mandatory emissions controls
and asked the Clinton administration to avoid agreements that would reduce
greenhouse emissions, claiming they "would damage the U. S. economy."

Corporations have worked to shape the next generation's environmental
perceptions "through the development and distribution of 'educational'
material to schools," writes Beder. Of course, the "educational" materials
promote a corporate slant on environmental problems.

Conservative think-tanks have also opposed environmental legislation,
working to cast doubt on greenhouse warming, industrial pollution and
ozone depletion. These think-tanks mingle with lobbyists, consultants,
interest groups and others and, as Beder says, "seek to provide advice
directly to the government officials in policy networks and to government
agencies and committees."

The think-tank employees ultimately "become policy makers themselves," and
act more as pressure groups or interest groups than as academic
institutions. Even so, says Beder, think-tank employees are treated by the
media as "independent experts" and sources of expert opinion. Most
conservative think-tanks promote free-market ideas, including corporate
deregulation and lower taxes for the wealthy.

Corporate and think-tank PR spin doctors typically show little respect for
the targets of their propaganda, and little regard for democracy. In
another book by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, ("Trust Us, We're
Experts!" - Tarcher/Putnam, 2001) the authors write, "If you ask the
managers of these ever-more-expensive propaganda campaigns why they have
vulgarized the democratic process [with, for example, fake grassroots
campaigns], they will frequently tell you that the problem is not with
them but with the voters who are too "irrational," "ignorant," or
"apathetic" to respond to any other kind of appeal."

Stauber and Rampton quote Bill Greider's "Who Will Tell The People:" "On
issue after issue, the public is belittled as self-indulgent or
misinformed, incapable of grasping the larger complexities known to the
policymakers and the circles of experts surrounding them. The public's
side of the argument is said to be 'emotional' whereas those who govern
are said to be making 'rational' or 'responsible' choices . . . The
reality, of course, is that the ability to define what is or isn't
'rational' is itself loaded with political self-interest."

Hitler's spin doctor, Joseph Goebbels, also expressed contempt for the
people and democracy. Klaus Fischer quotes the propagandist: "We go into
the Reichstag in order to acquire the weapons of democracy from its
arsenal. We become Reichstag deputies in order to paralyze the Weimar
mentality with its own assistance. If democracy is stupid enough to give
us free travel privileges and per diem allowances for this service, that
is its affair. We do not worry our heads about this."

Fischer also points out that the Nazis were beneficiaries of popular
anti-democratic theories of their time, and of a "totalitarian mood,"
which included "a wish to dismantle the egalitarian welfare state." Again,
Goebbels' techniques and attitudes and the fruits of his propaganda were
different in degree from those of today's corporate propagandists, but
they were clearly of the same basic nature.

Goebbels and today's corporate PR firms often practice public relations as
a black art, however some citizens inform people in helpful ways that
produce the fruits of increased public health, safety and well-being.

For example, registered nurse and environmental activist Terri Swearingen
worked to prevent the building of one of the world's largest toxic waste
incinerators, eventually inspiring the Clinton administration to declare a
national moratorium on new incinerator construction. When accepting the
prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize, Swearingen said, "There are
experts who are working in the corporate interest, who often serve to
obscure the obvious and challenge common sense; and there are experts and
non-experts who are working in the public interest."

Swearingen added, "Citizens who are working in this arena-people who are
battling to stop new dump sites or incinerator proposals, people who are
risking their lives to prevent the destruction of rain forests or working
to ban the industrial uses of chlorine and PVC plastics-are often labeled
obstructionists and anti-progress. But we actually represent progress-not
technological progress but social progress. We have become the real
experts, not because of our title or the university we attended, but
because we have been threatened and we have a different way of seeing the
world."


In part three, we'll take a closer look at propaganda and politics.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to