The research is about how corporate propaganda affects the youth culture. Propaganda is getting certain information and using it to fulfill ones personal interests. So when an individual uses various platforms such as the media to achieve whatever he or she is wants is called corporate propaganda. Politicians are a good example of those people use corporate propaganda to make sure the politics at hand are in their favor. In most cases, propagandists use manipulation of masses such as the youth to make them believe whatever they are claiming. [Thesis] Propagandists focus on the youth because they are easily manipulated into anything and this affects them greatly both in a positive and negative way.
Through corporate propaganda, youth can start developing a negative attitude towards the issue at hand. Negative attitude arises because the propagandists practice name calling using negative words which makes the youth to stop associating with a certain group or idea. This negativity changes the thinking of the youth thus affecting the society’s good values. The youth will abandon their good culture and follow what they have been manipulated into (Auerbach, Castronovo, 2014).
Corporate propaganda can limit the youth thinking because the propagandists want the youth to choose between them and the other party. The propagandists will have said lots of unpleasant things about the other party and then leave the youth with only two options to choose from. This kind of situation fixes the youth to choose between two, whereas they can think and analyze situations on their own and come up with the best decision. Probably, this decision could none of the two parties but something better and wiser (Jowett and O’Donnell, 2011).
Words like freedom and rights are used by the propagandist to make the youth more angry or emotional about the issue. They use this corporate propaganda to change the meaning of something so as to bring a negative idea to the youth. Due to the anger and emotions stirred up by the propagandist, the youth will want to fight or find a way of getting their rights or freedom back which makes the propagandists look like he or she is right. This affects the youth culture by making them believe in what is not right (Auerbach, Castronovo, 2014).
Corporate propaganda includes true and false statements that make the youth loose hope completely because they will not know who to trust and follow anymore. The youth need someone to guide them through the right path by telling them the truth for them to have hope about something. Propaganda with true statements will give the youth motivation to fight for the truth which improves the youth culture (Chomsky and Herman, 1988).
Not all corporate propagandas lead to negative effects, they can be positive as well. Corporate propaganda can be positive when the propagandist is fighting for the truth but not putting his or her interests at hand. If the youth are used in positive corporate propaganda, it will make them always want to fight for the truth only. This leads to a great society or country which has the truth only (Jowett and O’Donnell, 2011).
Corporate propaganda can be either positive or negative. Propagandists should strive to only deal with propaganda that leads to positive effects to the community especially the youth who are tomorrows’ leaders. If there is negative propaganda, the youth should make sure they are not manipulated into doing something wrong. They should act towards improving the youth culture more and more (St. John, 2010)
References
Auerbach, J. Castronovo, R. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chomsky and Herman. 1988. ‘The Propaganda Model’. In Herman, Edward S. (Ed.): Manufacturing consent. New York: Pantheon Books.
Mullen, Andrew. 2010. Twenty years on: the second-order prediction of the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model. Media, Culture & Society. Vol. 32 (4), pp. 673-690. [Online]
Jowett, S. G. O’Donnell, V. 2011. Propaganda & Persuasion. England: Sage.
St. John, B. 2010. Press Professionalization and Propaganda: The Rise of Journalistic Double-mindedness. New York: Cambria Press.
