Holos
Senior Member
Advertising and Propaganda are equivalent processes continuing beyond the receptive audience, the product stressed and the publishing industry.
If the receptive audience happens to misjudge the product stressed as yet another party beyond themselves and the publishers they misguide themselves to lose interest in a continuing and thriving economy, tending therefore to perceive conflict instead of progressive development.
I had never seen the propaganda incriminating the candidacy to which so many people have been referring to as irreconcilable and so extremely trespassing to repel any proposed serious discussion. Whenever watching and listening to the candidacy's speeches it was always informative in contributing to my increasing economical interest and political cooperative capacity.
Until just now, when I saw two ads on the USMB website, as very good examples of those previously evasive propaganda causing so much confusion between people I had been interacting with. Here is one of them:
It's evident that the propaganda has the intent to create political disruption, both against Hillary Clinton's name and image and against Donald Trump's name and image, appealing to the misplacement of complex emotions and finances, respectively. My intent with this thread is not to argue how we could contrive an intellectual or artistic value from or to the ad through a civil or linguistic reform, but to elucidate the method any citizen should approach ads and propaganda to ensure their comprehension of continuous economical collaboration within social exchanges and engagements.
There is, of course, a perfect reason for which an ad is placed in a public venue, whatever it is the message its audience contrives or whatever it is the message intended by the publisher. The law governs and even unlawful citizens are in its invariable direction.
The prospecting reality is that the ad is not really about "HILLARY!" nor about "Trump for President", but about what I, or anyone else decide to do with it - as any economical exchange functions through yet adjusting investments. The value embedded in any form of propaganda (an ad in this situation) isn't at its origin, but always with the receiving public who has the liberty to choose if they would like to be a customer or simply proceed with previous or alternative engagements of actual benefit to a political economy.
If the receptive audience happens to misjudge the product stressed as yet another party beyond themselves and the publishers they misguide themselves to lose interest in a continuing and thriving economy, tending therefore to perceive conflict instead of progressive development.
I had never seen the propaganda incriminating the candidacy to which so many people have been referring to as irreconcilable and so extremely trespassing to repel any proposed serious discussion. Whenever watching and listening to the candidacy's speeches it was always informative in contributing to my increasing economical interest and political cooperative capacity.
Until just now, when I saw two ads on the USMB website, as very good examples of those previously evasive propaganda causing so much confusion between people I had been interacting with. Here is one of them:
It's evident that the propaganda has the intent to create political disruption, both against Hillary Clinton's name and image and against Donald Trump's name and image, appealing to the misplacement of complex emotions and finances, respectively. My intent with this thread is not to argue how we could contrive an intellectual or artistic value from or to the ad through a civil or linguistic reform, but to elucidate the method any citizen should approach ads and propaganda to ensure their comprehension of continuous economical collaboration within social exchanges and engagements.
There is, of course, a perfect reason for which an ad is placed in a public venue, whatever it is the message its audience contrives or whatever it is the message intended by the publisher. The law governs and even unlawful citizens are in its invariable direction.
The prospecting reality is that the ad is not really about "HILLARY!" nor about "Trump for President", but about what I, or anyone else decide to do with it - as any economical exchange functions through yet adjusting investments. The value embedded in any form of propaganda (an ad in this situation) isn't at its origin, but always with the receiving public who has the liberty to choose if they would like to be a customer or simply proceed with previous or alternative engagements of actual benefit to a political economy.
