Persuasion and propaganda are so close in meaning that many people use them interchangeably and most people could not begin to define the difference beyond that propaganda is bad, Of course, that statement stems from propaganda, very successful propaganda, and there is a difference between that and persuasion. Essentially, there are two major differences and one difference of perception. Persuasion is a transactional process and generally appeals to both logic and emotion. Propaganda is unidirectional and only appeals to emotion. The difference of perception is that propaganda is seen as inherently bad or even evil, while persuasion is seen as “friendly”. The two ads from Dove could be seen as propaganda if we only considered the emotional appeal and as persuasion if we only considered intent. However, we must consider both method and intent and even the intended audience in order to decide that these ads are, indeed, very powerful persuasion.
“Persuasion is interactive and attempts to satisfy the needs of both the persuader and the persuadee.” While propaganda is a form of persuasion, not all persuasion is propaganda. Persuasion is based on discourse and dialogue; propaganda is intended to be one-sided” (Cain, Bonnie Ann, 2006)
Some researchers, such as Cain (2006), look at any piece of media communication according to the ten points identified by Jowett and O’Donnell (1992)that can measure if the communication is persuasive or propaganda, it is really only necessary to look at those key points which differentiate the two: the appeal to reason or logic (persuasion) or the push for emotional response (propaganda); whether the process is a transaction or unidirectional; the expected cognitive response and the intent of the communication upon the target audience.
Cognitive responses refer to “all the thoughts that pass through a person’s mind while he or she anticipates a communication, listens to a communication, or reflects on a communication” ( Petty, Ostrom, & Brock, 1981, p. 7). (Perloff 1993:108)
While persuasion recognizes and often makes some use of, cognitive response to establish emotional connections and stimulate a response, propaganda avoids reason and logic, only seeking to stimulate a cognitive response. If people react only upon the cognitive response, they will not be likely to examine their motives or the logic of the communication.
The Dove commercials both attempt to stimulate a cognitive response in the target audience, which is different for each. Dove Pro-Age is aimed primarily at the 50 plus female audience, though it certainly gets attention from males of all ages too. By the most common standards, all of the models are very attractive, even beautiful. This even has a certain appeal to younger women. If we look at the likely cognitive response, we will likely find some surprise, some pleasure, some admiration, and some titillation. Older women will be likely to have the strongest response, pleasure at seeing some beautiful older women as nude models. They will also feel some admiration for the daring of the company in presenting this ad. They will read the repeated question: Think you are too old for an anti-aging commercial? and feel a touch of mirth. Then the final line: But this is Pro-age, will solicit a strong pleasure response and a reaction to subtle humor. Other cognitive responses in young women and all men will be positive, but not with the strong recognition factor.
So the cognitive processing factor is there, but there is also an appeal to logic and reason. If we can see these women as beautiful, then aging can be beautiful. The ad’s statement that the ad is “pro-age” is absolutely true. The real message of the ad borders on propaganda in that it attempts to associate the Dove brand with beauty, feminism, socially acceptable images, and with current politically correct ideals about women and aging. The real intent of the ad, as is true of most ads, is to create a favorable response to the brand: Dove is Pro-age. All other responses are incidental and they are different, according to the audience.
The evolution ad is targeted at young women and somewhat at their parents. It also pushes the viewer to certain expected cognitive responses. However, they have to be a bit mixed. The video first shows the model, who is pretty to begin with but not stunning, going through a make-over with hair and make-up. Then it shows her image enhancing with digital photo-editing. The most surprising part is when the photo-editor is used to make her face leaner with a more pronounced bone structure, her eyes bigger than is really possible and her neck impossibly long. In fact, while we cannot really see how the photo would look if her body were attached, we suspect it would no longer match very well.
The message here is that our perception of beauty may not be all our own and may not be realistic, due to the manipulation of the media. The ad seeks to identify itself with a campaign to teach young women to see themselves more positively and not to measure themselves against the false images in ads. It even uses the word “our” to make us believe that the company is part of our group, whichever that is. The Campaign for Real Beauty is an actual initiative of the company. Whether this is because the company truly wants to benefit the community or just wants to be seen doing so does not really matter. The results are the same. We will associate the brand with positive social programs. While some, like the New Socialist (Dzuba, Nicole 2008), will certainly question Dove’s motives, there really is no need. Company motives aside, they are doing a good thing.
While these ads are perilously close to being propaganda, they are transactional and the benefits fall on both sides. The discourse also is bidirectional. The ads ask questions and make statements and the visuals support what they say. They are seeking a cognitive and emotional response, but it is evident that they also seek to stimulate thought, questions, and investigation. The two most salient and identifiable attributes of propaganda are that it is one-way communication and that it depends only upon cognitive response. These ads are definitely transactional, seeking to establish a dialogue with the audience., They transact in the true sense described by Rosenblatt (1978), in that they expect each person to bring something different to the work. They also go way beyond the attempt to stimulate a cognitive response in seeking to stimulate thought and learning. They invite us to change our perception.
References
Cain, Bonnie Ann, 2006, AEJ 06 CainB ETH PROPAGANDA ANALYSIS: A CASE STUDY OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION’S MINORITY OUTREACH CAMPAIGN PROMOTING THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication in San Francisco August, Oklahoma State University, Web.
Dzuba, Nicole 2008, The New Socialist: Ideas for Radical Change, Web.
Jowett Garth S., and Victoria O’Donnell.1992, Propaganda and Persuasion. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1986. 2d rev. ed., 1992.
Perloff, Richard M. 1993. The Dynamics of Persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press; (1994). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.