Sunday, June 8, 2014

Will it be Scintillation or will it be Titillation?

If you're a director of erotic movies, you can approach the making of films in one of two ways or a mixture that is made of a little of both – a choice that puts you on the spectrum between two ends. At one end, there is the suggestion of what you're not showing, and what it may stand for, letting the scintillation force the audience to imagine what it could be. At the other end, there is the explicit display of what you're showing, made so to titillate the desires of the audience, leaving nothing to the imagination.

But you don't have to be in the business of making erotic films to imagine how the seduction of audiences is done by those in charge of communicating ideas – be they of intimate encounter types or the clash of fanatic dogmas. And this takes us inside the world of propaganda where the communication of ideas, and the methods by which this is done, play a role in moving societies towards one political ideology or another ... whether the drama unfolds on the local stage or does so on the international stage.

In this regard, there is widespread agreement that America has lost the ability to communicate its message to the world. When you look at the matter closely, you'll find that it is happening because Americans are using the methods applied locally to try and communicate internationally. They are doing so at a time when the local methods have changed so much, they have become ineffective even locally. And you can see the heartbreak that this is creating among the people who wish to talk to the world but cannot. You can see it in the article written by Robert R. Reilly under the title: “Unmuffling the Voice of America” and the subtitle: “Congress has a chance to fix an error and give the U.S. a fighting chance in the international war of ideas.” It was published on June 6, 2014 in the Wall Street Journal.

When you get past the heartbreak, and you try to determine what has gone wrong with America's message, you discover that the doctor describing the cure is the disease he is trying to remedy. In addition, he mentions other doctors whose prescriptions are as worthless as his own. In short, America is the center for media excellence that has become the center for media uselessness.

Describing what has gone wrong with America's message to the world; Robert Reilly who was at some point director of Voice of America says this: “Most members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) were individuals who made their fortunes in the media. They sought to replicate their success according to commercial criteria, which meant aiming at large youth audiences and abandoning markets where audiences could not be attracted.” The trouble is that the description does not exactly match what he later says those individuals tried to do on the international scene which rendered VOA ineffective.

He gives two examples to that effect. First, he says that “one member of the BBG went to China to negotiate with Beijing officials on VOA's TV broadcasts to teach the English language. He ceded control to the Chinese government.” Second, he says that the BBG wanted to eliminate VOA radio broadcast to Uzbekistan. Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote the board not to do this. The board ultimately relented and soon thereafter the U.S. deployed troops in Uzbekistan to support operations in Afghanistan. Only then does Reilly assert what follows – as if struck by an afterthought: “Who listens became less important than how many listened.” And he backs this assertion with the revelation that “the BBG eliminated VOA broadcasting to Brazil, India, Russia and the Arab world, and repeatedly tried to eliminate VOA's China service.” And yet, with the exception of Russia, that is where the big audiences can be found. Try to figure that one out.

Here is the answer. What the author is missing is that one and the same reason underlies the rejection of America's message by the local audiences and the international ones. Both turn to something else to be informed and be entertained. It is that the audiences sense the presence of something phony in America's message. They feel it is stuffed with useless propaganda they may not be able to dissect and pick out what is real and what is not, but their instinct tells them it is toxic material designed to mess up their heads and their emotions. And we must ask: What can that be?

Well, self-serving propaganda is annoying and gets to be boring after a while. But the audiences do not develop a visceral hatred for the messenger when exposed to it. Those listening or watching turn off the radio or the TV when they had enough of it. By contrast, what angers an audience and makes it hate even the messenger is when it senses that the messenger does not represent the people or the institution he or she pretends to represent.

For example, that kind of responses used to happen when people listened to Cuban Broadcasts as they rendered lip service to the Soviet propaganda machine. The audiences used to express their hatred even for the host of the show. You can also see such responses come from some audiences when Canadian broadcasters extol British royalty. And it happens all the time when American media deify anything that is Jewish or Israeli.

This, therefore, is what is happening to America's media at home and throughout the world where the Voice of America still goes. It is how and why both the local and the international audiences have developed a visceral hatred for the message of America as well as the messenger. They reek of insidious Jewish propaganda … and there is nothing seductive about that.

To play on the theme of seducing the audience, someone once experimented with the delivery of news by completely nude women. You could say this was an experiment in maximum scintillation mixed with maximum titillation. The idea has been toned down a little by the Fox News Network which is now mixing trash news and worthless opinions with half-nude women.