2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Axelrod succesful in analysis of propaganda, October 5, 2009
This review is from: Selling the Great War: The Making of American Propaganda (Hardcover)
Alan Axelrod, in his book "Selling the Great War," delves deeply into the inception of the American Propaganda machine, the manufacture of consensus, and the future impact of these propaganda methods in the U.S. as well as abroad. His thesis, which he states in the introduction, is "reaching an understanding of the propaganda program that defined World War One will shed light on our current involvement in Iraq." Axelrod feels that just as America was "persuaded" to enter into World War One, mostly against its will, so was America pushed into a war in Iraq, based largely on government propagation of facts which turned out to be mostly insubstantial. Although not specifically stated by the author, his methodological approach to this particular subject in history seems based almost entirely on the use of primary sources, of which there are an abundance.
Axelrod's prose captures the genuine feel of the sense of urgency at the time, and the need for the U.S. to sway the average American's opinion toward approval of entering a war that most deemed a "European problem." Of particular note is his ability to narrate events in such a way that the reader is compelled to continue reading and feels immersed in the story as it progresses. One gains a sense that one is actually in the offices of the Committee on Public Information in 1917, within the hustle and bustle of dozens of journalists, writers, and artists, and that one actually feels the sense of urgency and anxiety of America's entry into the biggest war the world had ever seen to that point in time. Although a historical work, Axelrod's Selling the Great War reads more like a fictional drama with its intense characterization, effective use of tension, and a plot that seems more contrived than an actual historical account of the events surrounding the Woodrow Wilson administration's decision to enter an unpopular war.
The most common sources to which Axelrod refers are the books written by those people involved in the Committee on Public information, such as George Creel's How We Sold America. Creel, considered by many as the father of propaganda, wrote extensively on propaganda, a topic which he considered an important part of society at the time. The word propaganda itself did not evoke such thoughts of "government lies" then as it does today, and Creel was not ashamed to refer to his manipulation of public opinion as just that. To underscore the importance of this word and the methods used to disseminate information, Edward L. Bernays, another member of the Wilson administration's Committee on Public Information, also wrote a book, a primary source referenced by Axelrod, called simply Propaganda. In addition, Axelrod uses many archived government records of the time for his primary sources, as these records contain important information regarding the events surrounding the war and the propaganda campaign designed to "sell" the war to still reluctant Americans. The most important primary source used by Axelrod, however, is most likely Creel's own work at the time, and Axelrod cites these writings extensively in his book. Given the overwhelming use of these primary sources, it would seem that Axelrod's methodology is based almost entirely on eyewitness accounts.
Although few in number, Axelrod does make some use of secondary scholarly works, including the Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays and the Birth of Public Relations by Larry Tye written in 1998. Axelrod references these later works usually to quote a few lines in which the modern author has quoted someone else from the Wilson administration or from congress around the time of World War One. Essentially, Axelrod uses very few secondary sources in this book, and when he does, the source is usually used to reinforce some quote or another by someone from the time of Wilson, the Committee on Public Information, or some other reference to the War in Europe.
Without question, the single most significant source used by Axelrod in this book is Creel's How We Advertised America. Fully half of the citations used by Axelrod come from this single source, and this may have resulted in a less comprehensive overall writing. Although Creel's book certainly gives a great insight into the man's mind and his methods at the time, Axelrod may have benefitted more from using a wider variety of primary and secondary sources rather than focusing almost exclusively on the works of one author to make his point. In using Creel's book almost exclusively to write the story of the birth of American propaganda, Axelrod may have neglected the story from the point-of-view of more objective authors. Creel sought to justify his methods and ideologies at the time, and while his book provided a detailed look at the American propaganda machine from within, it is unlikely that he spent any amount of time writing about the downside or the backlash of shaping public opinion. As a result, Axelrod's assessment likely lacked a well-rounded perspective.
An analysis of the book reveals that the author's intention in this writing to bring to light the origination of government propaganda. He provides details on the methods of the men who created a system of mass information, disseminated to the public for the purpose of shaping opinion. Indeed, Creel's Committee was so efficient and successful at engineering the thoughts of the people, that his system was used as model for the German and Communist Russian propaganda machines of World War Two and beyond. Axelrod believes that a firm understanding of just how the Committee on Public Information went about the process of "manufacturing consent" will enlighten the public as to the reasons we may be inclined to follow the suggestions of our leaders today, whether we initially agree with them or not. The most important sentence in the book is likely this one, found in the conclusion: "Since the proliferation of the internet and all that is associated with its beginning in the early 1990s, the culture of information has been collapsing, the pyramid flattening out." The pyramid to which Axelrod refers is the government-fed propaganda which has permeated the way news has been told for almost a century. This news forms at the top and is brought down to us by the media. The sentence is of striking importance because, as Axelrod points out, the wide availability of information on the internet makes the ability of the people to form their own opinions, independent of government facts, more possible and more widely accepted. This is the most effective aspect of this book, and Axelrod does a spectacular job of convincing readers that most political decisions made by the public have traditionally not been born of their own opinions, but rather formed in the minds of government officials and meticulously handed down in such a way that dissention is considered unpatriotic or downright dangerous.
One area in which the author could have provided closer inspection is the significance of Creel's Committee and how this bureaucracy set the trend for future propaganda missions. Although he does make mention of some aspects of the legacy left behind by the Wilson administration and the desire to spoon-feed America and the world its opinions, he neglects to explain the impact on future policies, with the exception of the modern Iraq war. Many readers would likely be inclined to want to know more about government propaganda regarding policies for which the government sought support against a skeptical America. This book is recommended, however, for anyone pursuing a career in politics, as the book makes quite clear just how politicians can capture and manipulate public opinion in much the same way a marketing firm would. This would also be a good read for anyone interested in public opinion, and how that opinion can be affected by careful dissemination of "facts." Overall, this book was enjoyable as a historical analysis of the beginning of propaganda in America, and it is a testament to the effectiveness of politicians bent on shaping public thought to suit their own ends. Add to this the fact that the book almost reads like a fast-paced novel about government involvement in public opinion, and you have a book that is both fun to read and informative.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No