Is the government using advertisements and other sorts of manipulation schemes to their benefit ?

Asked by: paulpall
  • I Agree with it,

    Because: 1. Government is chosen by nation who live in that country. People want to see in government those who by their mind need to rule the country. If they are satisfied with that, then nation will follow and do everything that government says. And for that government uses advertisements and other sorts of manipulations to control the people. It have been done long time ago and it is been done also nowadays.
    2. One of the well know manipulation was propaganda. At that time the propaganda was very intense and it was simply noticeable. This was the governments first and also strongest weapon to use. People didn't have access from their country and they didn't really know what happens behind so called the walls. And the result of not know the life behind "the wall" people started to believe all the propaganda that sounded for them very true. Nowadays we have also propaganda, but we are so use to it that we cannot even notice it. All these commercials during the election days and different adds that control us. The government gets benefit of that.
    3. Most of the time the advertisement and the manipulation cause negative effect. For example, people get manipulated and do what they are said to do. Positive is, when people start to understand that they have been manipulated too much then they start saying out their opinions. They organise riots and start showing the government that they are not satisfied. But then government proposes the people something else and they start advertisement it. Somehow people calm down and the government gets the benefit again.
    4. For good advertisement they use the things that people like the most. From beautiful girls to fancy life. Showing people that if they do so how the government wants that all this mentioned things in the advertisement will be brought alive. Showing them that there is a bette life, like today we have these reality shows about Kardashians, rich kids and so on. It shows that there is a better life.
    5. People cannot make decisions on their own they need somebody who will rule them.

  • Government and people

    I agree with Mattiasl and paulpall, as to the statement that governent uses manipulation schemes and advertising to their benefit. The WW II example is one that explains enough. From the history, especially from the wars, we can observe and lay our eyes on the ultimate usage of advertising and manipulation strategies which changed the way of thinking of the peasants, so, that it would be beneficial for the government. We trust the government since it is the part of the state that makes our lives easier, but does it really make our lives easier? Gretaolive said that "People that look at advertisements have every freedom to deem them as ridiculous and disregard them". But why would you disregard something which is coming from a source that you trust as it is in the case of government. Government has a perfect oppurtunity to manipulate us, after all not trusting the government and protesting against it would be disadvantageous for an individual. And honestly, how much do we know about the real intentions of government and the ruling people, we only know what we are being told, and we are told information that we should know.

  • Is the government really using advertisement only for THEIR benefit?

    I agree to Paul that governments are using different manipulation schemes and tactics, but in my opinion not only for THEIR own benefit.
    First we need to define the government. The government is usually the people of the country, the govenment is chosen by the people and should represent the interest of the people.
    Now to Paul`s example of the war. I believe that when there`s war happening between some countries, the governments need to use somekind of advertisement or tactics to bring people to army. For example when a country is attacked by another country the government needs to bring people to army using any kind of schemes to protect the country, which is definitely in the interest of the people also to protect their country.

  • World War II

    For my argument, I will take the example of the Second World War. I think that we have all seen the mass propaganda that took place during the Second World War. Whether we are talking about the famous posters that are now printed on t-shirts or the early black-and-white army recruitment videos. It's clear that advertising was everywhere to increase the patriotism in the civilians and make them feel that whatever their government decided, was the right thing to do. Whether it was joining the army or salvaging the waste fats, it's clear that the governments had everything figured out to the smallest of things. Even private companies like Coca-Cola got dragged into the war, by being made available to soldiers for an increase of morale.

  • Media as the source of manipulation in favour of the state

    In addition to the arguments by paulpall, mattiasl and PetersonMadis, I would like to add some more. First of all, media manipulation currently shapes everything you read, watch online and hear. Depending on the government's position on the international scene and it's politics, the government will sort and select the information they need to use in order to make people be against other politics and ideas, since without the support of the nation, government would become weakened. The greatest advantage governments have is that people want to trust them, they want to be in favour of the state. And media is the greatest source of directing people and making them believe to the things that have been told. There is a quote by Ray Bradbury, an American writer, who said "The television is 'real'. It is immediate, it has dimension. It tells you what to think and blasts it in. It must be right. It seems so right. It rushes you on so quickly to its own conclusions your mind hasn't time to protest" and i agree with these words, because media has become into social control and propaganda, where human psyche is manipulated by television and other forms of mass media.

  • Government and news

    I agree with what PetersonMadis said, we indeed trust the government and often do not see behind their intentions.
    A good example for instance, is that government propaganda is often shared/published through news. When a president or a politician attends a celebration of some sort and gives an interview to a news reporter, s/he can choose to talk good or bad about it. Whatever s/he says, some viewers might think that because this authority thought that, it is like that and for that reason I think that as well. Therefore, the authorities (president/politicians) can manipulate some viewers to their benefit..

  • This is bull shit

    If the government expects me to spend money on things Ill never use just to benefit them then they are fucked in the head and pull their shit together. I will admit if I was apart of the government i would agree with the but on a viewer's point of view its a obvious technique and annoying for the viewer/consumer. Dick salt nough said

  • My arguments on this topic

    In my opinion whatever the government is doing cannot be considered manipulation, but rather the natural way of running a state in the modern day and age.

    Let's take propaganda as an example. In this context it can be defined as a form of communication with the aim of influencing the attitude of a population. As a more specific example, wartime propaganda can be considered. We all know those classic WWII era posters, calling the populace to join the war either themselves, to contribute towards the war effort or to be careful with their enemies. But are they really manipulative? Any rational adult can understand their intended purpose and motivating the people is something that every country needs to do to succeed in either a long scale conflict, or simply everyday life.

    However, this doesn't mean that propaganda cannot manipulate people. This works easier on children and people isolated from the rest of the world. Almost all non-democratic countries can be considered as examples of blatant government manipulation, as the people living in them might not be aware of the reality of the situation and the state often attempts to project the image that they are under attack by foreign countries or that no problems exist within the society. The success of such actions varies, and can not be considered effective in the long term. Does this benefit the state? It certainly does, but I can't really see what else such states could do as an alternative.

    I guess it depends on what exactly is meant by government by this statement. A totalitarian state definitely tries to manipulate its people into following the ideology, while a democratic one does propaganda and advertisement as an attempt at motivating the population, without having any delusions on its effect on the people.

  • My own arguments and response to Paul's

    No the Government is not purposely a scheming organization trying to manipulate the average person. To begin, benefit refers to acquiring an advantage or upper hand.
    Advertisement has a very broad definition but in this context it means no more than an announcement to the people to buy a product, go to an event, or perform some action. This notice is nothing more than a suggestion, and it cannot be called a manipulation scheme, for that particular combination of words has a negative connotation (where one person is cunningly controlling the actions of another). People that look at advertisements have every freedom to deem them as ridiculous and disregard them. Therefore the entirety of the middle section of the argument collapses inward on itself.
    Nevertheless, the other side may try to state that although advertisements are not manipulation schemes, the government is still using them to benefit itself. The purpose of government is to protect the individual rights of its citizens. At least in the United States of America the government is for the people, of the people, and by the people. The very nature of the government is that of giving the greatest quality of life possible for all people who qualify as citizens. The word "freedom" is overused but in reality, protecting freedom is the aim of the government. "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government;" This is written in article 21.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. What it emphasizes is that the government is not a monstrous, sly organization looking out for it's own good, but rather a group of people (humans like you and I) that exists only to serve it's citizens; not make them slaves or robots controlled by a remote.
    It also must be understood that the government uses media to help the citizens be more aware of what is going on in the world, but this is not the same as the government using advertisements to their benefit. My opponent might claim that all "Vote for me!" adds are proof of his side, but they are not. Political parties privately fund these sorts of advertisements and the government simply changes due to who wins.
    Paul believes that the propaganda used by the government in WWI is enough of a reason to say that the government uses ads to it's advantage, but if that were true why were there revolts by average people in the 60s against the Vietnam War? The amount of circulating propagandist was the same in both cases. With Paul's example I'd say that the desires of the people, the companies (large firms and small ones), and the government all had common interests, that of fighting the Nazis. No direct cause and effect is here and the government benefited for other reasons than ads. As mentioned before, the ads did not force anyone to go (the draft did) but merely suggested that they defend the country.

  • Make it clear

    1) Not all advertisements are governmental. In fact, most of the advertisements we see on streets and on Television represent some company or NGO, who are not directly related (or controlled by) government. Now, one can say that their purpose is still earning benefit, and with that I totally agree, but the thing is that the earned profits don't go straight to government but firstly to the company itself and stock holders.
    2) Government itself doesn't really advertise anything. Only major area that is controlled by it are the political campaigns that take place before elections. For those ads and posters, there are certain funds in the budget of our country, that cannot be exceeded. And they don't really earn anything directly to the government because the point of those ads is to help people decide who they want to choose as their representatives to the government to make important decisions.
    3) Advertisements can be called somewhat manipulative but I still believe that people have maintained some sort of sense of reality and ability to make final decisions. We can say that advertisement business(industry) has become a major and really important source of profit and it keeps growing day by day. Companies come up with new and innovative techniques and ways to make their product stand out and get attention. And obviously, the reason behind all this is to earn money. But no matter how eye-catching, shiny, sparkly, moving, slow, any ad or commercial is, the final decision comes from the people themselves and I think that we shouldn't consider advertisements so much as a way to manipulate people rather than informative and useful in terms of giving overview of some new products or innovative ideas and solutions.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Stefy says2015-05-16T13:49:11.717
What the hell does the International Baccalaureate have to do with this? It has nothing to do with this?
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-05-16T14:22:49.023
^What Stefy said