VI

 

The Arts of Selling

 

The survival of democracy depends on the ability of large numbers of people to make realistic choices in the light of adequate information.  A dictatorship, on the other hand, maintains itself by censoring or distorting the facts, and by appealing, not to reason, not to enlightened self-interest, but to passion and prejudice, to the powerful 'hidden forces', as Hitler called them, present in the unconscious depths of every human mind.

      In the West, democratic principles are proclaimed and many able and conscientious publicists do their best to supply electors with adequate information and to persuade them, by rational argument, to make realistic choices in the light of that information.  All this is greatly to the good.  But unfortunately propaganda in the Western democracies, above all in America, has two faces and a divided personality.  In charge of the editorial department there is often a democratic Dr Jekyll - a propagandist who would be very happy to prove that John Dewey had been right about the ability of human nature to respond to truth and reason.  But this worthy man controls only a part of the machinery of mass communication.  In charge of advertising we find an anti-democratic, because anti-rational, Mr Hyde - or rather a Doctor Hyde, for Hyde is now a Ph.D. in psychology and has a master's degree as well in the Social Sciences.  This Dr Hyde would be very unhappy indeed if everybody always lived up to John Dewey's faith in human nature.  Truth and reason are Jekyll's affairs, not his.  Hyde is a Motivation Analyst, and his business is to study human weaknesses and failings, to investigate these unconscious desires and fears by which so much of men's conscious thinking and overt doing is determined.  And he does this, not in the spirit of the moralist who would like to make people better, or of the physician who would like to improve health, but simply in order to find out the best way to take advantage of their ignorance and to exploit their irrationality for the pecuniary benefit of his employers.  But after all, it may be argued, 'capitalism is dead, consumerism is king' - and consumerism requires the services of expert salesmen versed in all the arts (including the more insidious arts) of persuasion.  Under a free enterprise system commercial propaganda by any and every means is absolutely indispensable.  But the indispensable is not necessarily the desirable.  What is demonstrably good in the sphere of economics may be far from good for men and women as voters or even as human beings.  An earlier, more moralistic generation would have been profoundly shocked by the bland cynicism of the Motivation Analysts.  Today we read a book like Mr Vance Packard's The Hidden Persuaders, and are more amused than horrified, more resigned than indignant.  Given Freud, given Behaviourism, given the mass producer's chronically desperate need for mass consumption, this is the sort of thing that is only to be expected.  But what, we may ask, is the sort of thing that is to be expected in the future?  Are Hyde's activities compatible in the long run with Jekyll's?  Can a campaign in favour of rationality be successful in the teeth of another and even more vigorous campaign in favour of irrationality?  These are questions which, for the moment, I shall not attempt to answer, but shall leave hanging, so to speak, as a backdrop to our discussion of the methods of mass persuasion in a technologically advanced democratic society.

      The task of the commercial propagandist in a democracy is in some ways easier and in some ways more difficult than that of a political propagandist employed by an established dictator or a dictator in the making.  It is easier inasmuch as almost everyone starts out with a prejudice in favour of beer, cigarettes and refrigerators, whereas almost nobody starts out with a prejudice in favour of tyrants.  It is more difficult inasmuch as the commercial propagandist is not permitted, by the rules of his particular game, to appeal to the more savage instincts of his public.  The advertiser of dairy products would dearly love to tell his readers and listeners that all their troubles are caused by the machinations of a gang of godless international margarine manufacturers, and that it is their patriotic duty to march out and burn the oppressors' factories.  This sort of thing, however, is ruled out, and he must be content with a milder approach.  But the mild approach is less exciting than the approach through verbal or physical violence.  In the long run, anger and hatred are self-defeating emotions.  But in the short run they pay high dividends in the form of psychological and even (since they release large quantities of adrenalin and noradrenalin) physiological satisfaction.  People may start out with an initial prejudice against tyrants; but when tyrants or would-be tyrants treat them to adrenalin-releasing propaganda about the wickedness of their enemies - particularly of enemies weak enough to be persecuted - they are ready to follow him with enthusiasm.  In his speeches Hitler kept repeating such words as 'hatred', 'force', 'ruthless', 'crush', 'smash'; and he would accompany these violent words with even more violent gestures.  He would yell, he would scream, his veins would swell, his face would turn purple.  Strong emotion (as every actor and dramatist knows) is in the highest degree contagious.  Infected by the malignant frenzy of the orator, the audience would groan and sob and scream in an orgy of uninhibited passion.  And these orgies were so enjoyable that most of those who had experienced them eagerly came back for more.  Almost all of us long for peace and freedom; but very few of us have much enthusiasm for the thoughts, feelings and actions that make for peace and freedom.  Conversely, almost nobody wants war or tyranny; but a great many people find an intense pleasure in the thoughts, feelings and actions that make for war and tyranny.  These thoughts, feelings and actions are too dangerous to be exploited for commercial purposes.  Accepting this handicap, the advertising man must do the best he can with the less intoxicating emotions, the quieter forms of irrationality.

      Effective rational propaganda becomes possible only when there is a clear understanding, on the part of all concerned, of the nature of symbols and of their relations to the things and events symbolized.  Irrational propaganda depends for its effectiveness on a general failure to understand the nature of symbols.  Simple-minded people tend to equate the symbol with what it stands for, to attribute to things and events some of the qualities expressed by the words in terms of which the propagandist has chosen, for his own purposes, to talk about them.  Consider a simple example.  Most cosmetics are made of lanolin, which is a mixture of purified wool-fat and water beaten up into an emulsion.  This emulsion has many valuable properties: it penetrates the skin, it does not become rancid, it is mildly antiseptic, and so forth.  But the commercial propagandists do not speak about the genuine virtues of the emulsion.  They give it some picturesquely voluptuous name, talk ecstatically and misleadingly about feminine beauty, and show pictures of gorgeous blondes nourishing their tissues with skin food.  'The cosmetic manufacturers', one of their number has written, 'are not selling lanolin, they are selling hope.'  For this hope, this fraudulent implication of a promise that they will be transfigured, women will pay ten or twenty times the value of the emulsion which the propagandists have so skilfully related, by means of misleading symbols, to a deep-seated and almost universal feminine wish - the wish to be more attractive to members of the opposite sex.  The principles underlying this kind of propaganda are extremely simple.  Find some common desire, some widespread unconscious fear or anxiety; think about some way to relate this wish or fear to the product you have to sell; then build a bridge of verbal or pictorial symbols over which your customer can pass from fact to compensatory dream, and from the dream to the illusion that your product, when purchased, will make the dream come true.  'We no longer buy oranges, we buy vitality.  We do not buy just a car, we buy prestige.'  And so with all the rest.  In toothpaste, for example, we buy, not a mere cleanser and antiseptic, but release from the fear of being sexually repulsive.  In vodka and whisky we are not buying a protoplasmic poison which, in small doses, may depress the nervous system in a psychologically valuable way; we are buying friendliness and good fellowship, the warmth of Dingley Dell and the brilliance of the Mermaid Tavern.  With our laxatives we buy the health of a Greek God, the radiance of one of Diana's nymphs.  With the monthly best seller we acquire culture, the envy of our less literate neighbours and the respect of the sophisticated.  In every case the motivation analyst has found some deep-seated wish or fear, whose energy can be used to move the consumer to part with cash and so, indirectly, to turn the wheels of industry.  Stored in the minds and bodies of countless individuals, this potential energy is released by, and transmitted along, a line of symbols carefully laid out so as to by-pass rationality and obscure the real issue.

      Sometimes the symbols take effect by being disproportionately impressive, haunting and fascinating in their own right.  Of this kind are the rites and pomps of religion.  These 'beauties of holiness' strengthen faith where it already exists and, where there is no faith, contribute to conversion.  Appealing, as they do, only to the aesthetic sense, they guarantee neither the truth nor the ethical value of the doctrines with which they have been, quite arbitrarily, associated.  As a matter of plain historical fact, the beauties of holiness have often been matched and indeed surpassed by the beauties of unholiness.  Under Hitler, for example, the yearly Nuremberg rallies were masterpieces of ritual and theatrical art.  ‘I had spent six years in St Petersburg before the war in the best days of the old Russian ballet,' writes Sir Neville Henderson, the British ambassador to Hitler's Germany, 'but for grandiose beauty I have never seen any ballet to compare with the Nuremberg rally.'  One thinks of Keats - 'beauty is truth, truth beauty'.  Alas, the identity exists only on some ultimate, supra-mundane level.  On the levels of politics and theology, beauty is perfectly compatible with nonsense and tyranny.  Which is very fortunate; for if beauty were incompatible with nonsense and tyranny, there would be precious little art in the world.  The masterpieces of painting, sculpture and architecture were produced as religious or political propaganda, for the greater glory of a god, a government or a priesthood.  But most kings and priests have been despotic and all religions have been riddled with superstition.  Genius has been the servant of tyranny and art has advertised the merits of the local cult.  Time, as it passes, separates the good art from the bad metaphysics.  Can we learn to make this separation, not after the event, but while it is actually taking place?  That is the question.

      In commercial propaganda the principle of the disproportionately fascinating symbol is clearly understood.  Every propagandist has his Art Department, and attempts are constantly being made to beautify the billboards with striking posters, the advertising pages of magazines with lively drawings and photographs.  There are no masterpieces; for masterpieces appeal only to a limited audience, and the commercial propagandist is out to captivate the majority.  Those who like this not too good, but sufficiently striking, art may be expected to like the products with which it has been associated and for which it symbolically stands.

      Another disproportionately fascinating symbol is the Singing Commercial.  Singing Commercials are a recent invention; but the Singing Theological and the Singing Devotional - the hymn and the psalm - are as old as religion itself.  Singing Militaries, or marching songs, are coeval with war, and Singing Patriotics, the precursors of our national anthems, were doubtless used to promote group solidarity, to emphasize the distinction between 'us' and 'them', by the wandering bands of paleolithic hunters and food gatherers.  To most people must is intrinsically attractive.  Moreover, melodies tend to ingrain themselves in the listener's mind.  A tune will haunt the memory during the whole of a lifetime.  Here, for example, is a quite uninteresting statement or value judgement.  As it stands, nobody will pay attention to it.  But now set the words to a catchy and easily remembered tune.  Immediately they become words of power.  Moreover, the words will tend automatically to repeat themselves every time the melody is heard or spontaneously remembered.  Orpheus has entered into an alliance with Pavlov - the power of sound with the conditioned reflex.   For the commercial propagandist, as for his colleagues in the fields of politics and religion, music possesses yet another advantage.  Nonsense which it would be shameful for a reasonable being to write, speak or hear spoken, can be sung or listened to by that same rational being with pleasure and even with a kind of intellectual conviction.  Can we learn to separate the pleasure of singing or of listening to song from the all too human tendency to believe in the propaganda which the song is putting over?  That again is the question.

      Thanks to compulsory education and the rotary press, the propagandist has been able, for many years past, to convey his messages to virtually every adult in every civilized country.  Today, thanks to radio and television he is in the happy position of being able to communicate even with unschooled adults and not yet literate children.

      Children, as might be expected, are highly susceptible to propaganda.  They are ignorant of the world and its ways, and therefore completely unsuspecting.  Their critical faculties are underdeveloped.  The youngest of them have not yet reached the age of reason and the older ones lack the experience on which their new-found rationality can effectively work.  In Europe, conscripts used to be playfully referred to as 'cannot fodder'.  Their little brothers and sisters have now become radio fodder and television fodder.  In my childhood we were taught to sing nursery rhymes and, in pious households, hymns.  Today the little ones warble the Singing Commercials.  Which is better - 'Rheingold is my beer, the dry beer', or 'Hey diddle-diddle, the cat and the fiddle'? 'Abide with me' or 'You'll wonder where the yellow went, when you brush your teeth with Pepsodent'?  Who knows?

      'I don't say that children should be forced to harass their parents into buying products they've seen advertised on television, but at the same time I cannot close my eyes to the fact that it's being done every day.'  So writes the star of one of the many programmes beamed to a juvenile audience.  'Children', he adds, 'are living, talking records of what we tell them every day.'  And in due course these living, talking records of television commercials will grow up, earn money and buy the products of industry.  'Think,' writes Mr Clyde Miller ecstatically, 'think of what it can mean to your firm in profits if you can condition a million or ten million children, who will grow up into adults trained to buy your product, as soldiers are trained in advance when they hear the trigger words, Forward March!'  Yes, just think of it!  And at the same time remember that the dictators and the would-be dictators have been thinking about this sort of thing for years, and that millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions of children are in process of growing up to buy the local despot's ideological product and, like well-trained soldiers, to respond with appropriate behaviour to the trigger words implanted in those young minds by the despot's propagandists.

      Self-government is in inverse ratio to numbers.  The larger the constituency, the less value of any particular vote.  When he is merely one of millions, the individual elector feels himself to be impotent, a negligible quantity.  The candidates he has voted into office are far away, at the top of the pyramid of power.  Theoretically they are the servants of the people; but in fact it is the servants who give orders and the people, far off at the base of the great pyramid, who must obey.  Increasing population and advancing technology have resulted in an increase in the number and complexity of organizations, an increase in the amount of power concentrated in the hands of officials and a corresponding decrease in the amount of control exercised by electors, coupled with a decrease in the public's regard for democratic procedures.  Already weakened by the vast impersonal forces at work in the modern world, democratic institutions are now being undermined from within by the politicians and their propagandists.

      Human beings act in a great variety of irrational ways, but all of them seem to be capable, if given a fair chance, of making a reasonable choice in the light of available evidence.  Democratic institutions can be made to work only if all concerned do their best to impart knowledge and to encourage rationality.  But today, in the world's most powerful democracy, the politicians and their propagandists prefer to make nonsense of democratic procedures by appealing almost exclusively to the ignorance and irrationality of the electors.  'Both parties', we were told in 1956 by the editor of a leading business journal, 'will merchandize their candidates and issues by the same methods that business has developed to sell goods.  These include scientific selection of appeals and planned repetition ... Radio spot announcements and ads will repeat phrases with a planned intensity.  Billboards will push slogans of proven power ... Candidates need, in addition to rich voices and good diction, to be able to look "sincerely" at the TV camera.'

      The political merchandisers appeal only to the weaknesses of voters, never to their potential strength.  They make no attempt to educate the masses into becoming fit for self-government; they are content merely to manipulate and exploit them.  For this purpose all the resources of psychology and the social sciences are mobilized and set to work.  Carefully selected samples of the electorate are given 'interviews in depth'.  These interviews in depth reveal the unconscious fears and wishes most prevalent in a given society at the time of an election.  Phrases and images aimed at allaying or, if necessary, enhancing these fears, at satisfying these wishes, at least symbolically, are then chosen by the experts, tried out on readers and audiences, changed or improved in the light of the information thus obtained.  After which the political campaign is ready for the mass communicators.  All that is now needed is money and a candidate who can be coached to look 'sincere'.  Under the new dispensation, political principles and plans for specific action have come to lose most of their importance.  The personality of the candidate and the way he is projected by the advertising experts are the things that really matter.

      In one way or another, as vigorous he-man or kindly father, the candidate must be glamorous.  He must also be an entertainer who never bores his audience.  Inured to television and radio, that audience is accustomed to being distracted and does not like to be asked to concentrate or make a prolonged intellectual effort.  All speeches by the entertainer-candidate must therefore be short and snappy.  The great issues of the day must be dealt with in five minutes at the most - and preferably (since the audience will be eager to pass on to something a little livelier than inflation or the H-bomb) in sixty seconds flat.  The nature of oratory is such that there has always been a tendency among politicians and clergymen to over-simplify complex issues.  From a pulpit or a platform even the most conscientious of speakers finds it very difficult to tell the whole truth.  The methods now being used to merchandise the political candidate as though he were a deodorant, positively guarantee the electorate against ever hearing the truth about anything.