Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Perception Management vs. Psychological Warfare


“That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” - William Shakespeare

The definition of truth (according to dictionary.com) is: Conformity to fact, actuality or a statement proven to be or accepted as true. Truth by its very definition is exclusive, not inclusive. There is only one way that something actually occurred although it may be perceived, remembered, or told as happening in several different ways. The various views are often colored by prejudice, bias, or even misinterpretation of the facts. In the age of information, managing that information and choosing when and how to release vital pieces of that information becomes paramount to controlling how people perceive an idea, concept or a given situation.

Perception Management is a controlled strategy that aims to regulate and influence a group’s interpretations, conclusions, or decision process. Directing the perception and awareness of an event is key to manipulating the real or perceived outcome of that situation. Planned psychological operations against a target using specific information designed to shape and influence a targets emotional behavior or objective reasoning is a useful strategy in warfare. Learning about a targets strengths and vulnerabilities can be used to guide and motivate a group towards a specific course of action or paralyze them through fear and indecision.

Public diplomacy campaigns, although milder in process can still be used to persuade and influence popular opinion in an attempt to direct a specific agenda. Some efforts are called fair reporting of “the truth”, while others are deemed propaganda, disinformation, or outright psychological warfare. Perception management is often used in preparation to promote and engage a war effort, advertise a product of questionable safety, direct the outcome of political elections, or dissuade a governments efforts at nuclear armament.

The Iraqi Incubator Story

Saddam Hussein’s control over Iraq and it’s people was instilled through the use of barbaric and brutal death squads which were fueled by large oil reserve revenue. Although numerous reports from international human rights organizations exposed Hussein as a cruel and ruthless dictator in the middle east, the United States government still regarded the Iraqi regime as a valuable ally in it’s undeclared war against Iran. In August 1990, Iraqi troops led by Hussein invaded the oil rich nation of Kuwait.

The idea of risking American lives in the middle east to remove an Iraqi dictator in an area so far from American shores was unthinkable. Billions of dollars would be spent and an unprecedented effort would be needed to remove the Iraqi ruler from Kuwait. A public relations and management campaign was developed to promote a perception of the Iraqi regime as being an “evil empire” and that liberating the Kuwaiti people was in the best interest of the United States and the world. Over 20 public relations, & lobbyist firms were commissioned to mobilize US concern against Hussein.

Hill & Knowlton, one of the world’s largest public relations firms was contracted to mastermind this effort. It’s activities constituted the largest campaign ever initiated to direct American public opinion. H&K arranged briefings, direct mail campaigns, and orchestrated editorials in newspapers and other media formats to promote the Kuwaiti plight. It also backed and supported “Cititzens for a Free Kuwait” which arranged to distribute news releases, media kits, bumper stickers, and organize public rallies in support of this effort. In October 1990 congressional hearings started on the validity of going to war with Iraq.

Emotionally charged testimony before congress was received from a 15 year-old Kuwaiti girl. She told of how Iraqi soldiers were stealing baby incubators and tossing out the babies to die on the cold hard floor and then shipping the incubators back to Iraq. During the next three months the story of babies being ripped from their incubators was repeated over and over on television and radio talk shows, and at the UN Security Council. On January 12, 1991 the US senate voted to support a declaration of war against the Iraqi regime.

Once a military build-up began in the Persian Gulf, the Pentagon outlined a disciplined plan on controlling news agencies and journalist ability to report on the war effort. Visa denials and strict military escorts once they were approved, provided the sanitized censorship of news reporting the military sought after. 3 months after the war was initiated the United States won a decisive victory against Saddam Hussein and the Kuwaiti ruling class was restored to power.

The Tobacco Industry

U.S. tobacco companies have a long history of deception and deceit in a relentless pursuit of profit. Perception management has been used extensively by the Tobacco Industry or “Big Tobacco”, as they are affectionately called to advance a pro-tobacco agenda. Millions of dollars have been spent on media and print advertising which promotes tobacco products as anything but an addictive and deadly drug.

The idea that cigarettes are “cool” has been promoted by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company in their development of the controversial cartoon character “Joe Cool Camel” for Camel cigarettes. Millions of dollars were used to portray Joe Camel as a confident, hip, slick, and cool character who always had a beautiful blonde adoring him from afar. He was usually shown riding a Harley Davidson motorcycle or dressed in pilot gear in front of two airplanes while he puffed on a Camel cigarette.

Joe Camel was also portrayed as a beloved rock star that fans adored from their concert seats. These images helped in promoting the idea that smoking camel cigarettes could improve your image and possibly even make the smoker a little “cooler”. As these ads became more popular with teenage audience the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sought an outright ban against the advertising campaign. RJ Reynolds finally lost their court case against the promotion of the Joe Camel character, but the publicity surrounding the case only fueled more interest in the cartoon character. This “free” advertising served to continue the advancement of the Joe Camel figure among younger smokers.

Deliberate communication strategies have been developed to influence cigarette sales in a more subtle way. Subliminal messaging has often been used to activate and intrigue our core desires for sex, power, or rebellion from conformity. Ads with sexually suggestive images are covertly placed in exhaled cigarette smoke or often in streams flowing through the great outdoors.

The Marlboro Man campaign was used extensively to portray a rugged “John Wayne” type of image which appealed to stereotypical beliefs of manhood. Political and economic pressure has often been used to circumvent public health laws, and stimulate pro-industry legislation under the guise of “free trade”. Overseas expansion into countries with more lenient or easily influenced governments is a common method of influence. Foreign governments have been pressured by international financial institutions to privatize state-owned industries and relax restrictive import duties and tariffs.

In 1995 R.J. Reynolds significantly boosted it’s overseas ownership of facilities in Finland, Vietnam, and Poland. It is now a multinational giant with subsidiaries and licensing agreements in 57 countries. The tobacco industry continues to conduct sophisticated campaigns against conclusions that first and second-hand smoke causes lung cancer and others diseases.

Industry-directed research has been used to subvert government health agencies, and contradict negative investigational findings. Managing the perception of this research by manipulating the information or boldly refuting the conclusions continues to encourage tobacco sales and increase market share of a highly addictive drug despite the risks to health and well being.

The 2000 Presidential Election

In the 2000 presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore, it is difficult to find an unbiased “just the facts” information source. All sources claim to be telling “the real truth” and then go on to bash one side while bolstering their own views. Discovering what motivates an information source or deciding who you can really trust when it comes to the major media can be challenging at best.

Liberal news sources like the New York Times, ABC, CBS, CNN, National Public Radio (NPR), and Public Broadcasting System (PBS), all seem to work in concert to promote their agenda as being “the real truth” behind the others parties “lies”. Terms like “radical fundamentalist” or “the far right” are continually advertised to label and denigrate organizations like the Christian Coalition, or the Family Research Council. Points and counter points were discussed on radio and television talk shows.

The Fox News channel has self labeled itself as the “fair & balanced” news source and jumps on the Conservative Christian Agenda band wagon. Bill Oreilly hosts a show on the same network called The Factor where he uses catch phrases like “the spin stops here” in the “No Spin Zone”. Billionaire George Sorros provided financial backing to groups like MoveOn.org (a 501c political action committee) claims to focus on education and advocacy of important national issues.

It states on their website that they primarily help members elect candidates that reflect their “values” and are an advocate of important national issues. All of these groups played their part promote and shape the minds of the electorate in the presidential election of 2000. As in a real physical war, it doesn’t always matter who’s right, it only matters who wins.

North Korean Nuclear Power Ambitions

Perception management and information operations demonstrate a careful balancing act must occur when attempting to manage foreign perceptions. The Pentagon has attempted for decades to manage overseas propaganda efforts. Aggressive campaigns were developed to disseminate information though foreign media fronts and the internet. It also sought to engage covert information operations which distributed false news items to influence public opinion in friendly and neutral Near East and South Asian countries.

The goal was to influence enemy decision makers and convince or deceive them into taking a particular position on an issue without military intervention. The communist country of North Korea has continually sought after light water nuclear reactors under the auspices of a peaceful nuclear power program. North Korea began to remove monitoring equipment implemented by the IAEA thus removing the ability keep tabs on North Korean nuclear program.

As the United States continues to put international pressure on the Asian country to give up it nuclear ambitions, North Korea responds with rhetoric speaking of the imperialist hard-lined intent of the United States. North Korea indicates that they will answer a preemptive military strike with a tough counterstrike and shows no signs of backing down.

Diplomatic efforts continue with the countries of China, South Korea, North Korea, Japan, and the United States. The United States continues to conform to the policy that this should be resolved peacefully through discussion and diplomacy but the threat of military action continues to be discussed.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Perception management continues to be a study of the fine art of winning friends and influencing people on a global scale. It combines the attempts to manage public relation campaigns using radio, television and print advertising, Internet media for global dissemination of information, or through mass fear and intimidation.

Direct campaigns of psychological warfare against an enemy’s physical forces or an attempt at morally and mentally confusing an adversary all play a part in winning a series of battles which all play a larger part in winning a war. In the nuclear age where many government powers have the ability to completely annihilate each other, the prevention of serious conflicts becomes imperative to our global survival.

As in all wars, to the victor go the spoils, but in a nuclear holocaust scenario, the spoils won’t be worth winning.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)