The latest ‘PCS People’ magazine has an article about a new exhibition that is being displayed in the ‘British Library’:

The propaganda of the state is placed under the microscope in a major new exhibition running at the British Library.

From the Little Red Book to the Green Cross Code visitors can expect an eclectic mix in Propaganda: Power and Persuasion running until 17 September.

More that 200 exhibits will be on display making this the first exhibition to gather such a significant range of international state propaganda in one room.

The aim is to explore the many, varied ways in which the state has used propaganda to influence the thoughts and feelings of a nation – whether the message it carries creates an enemy, generates feelings of national pride, or promotes a healthy lifestyle.

“We want visitors to  consider the role of propaganda in their own lives today, as well as looking at the state’s use of propaganda throughout history,” said a spokeswoman at the library.  ”That’s why, as well as displaying iconic pieces of propaganda from the library’s collections – such as the posters from both World Wars, the Cold War and Vietnam – we’ll also be focusing on more surprising examples, such as 2012 Olympics and even Twitter.  These are things you wouldn’t necessarily associate with a word like propaganda”.

The exhibition includes many examples of propaganda in films including the humorous ‘cough and sneezes’ public health adverts starring Richard Massingham and the chilling AIDS campaign narrated by John Hurt – hailed as one of the most controversial health campaigns in history.

The exhibition sounds interesting… I think I am going to have to try and schedule another visit to London before the exhibition closes ;-)

44 Comments CherryPie on Jul 15th 2013

44 Responses to “Presenting One Side of the Argument”

  1. ubermouth says:

    We had a huge trial over here over a guy who followed and gunned down an innocent black kid[and got off]because, so many lies were told, so much truth suppressed. It was all propaganda to make the dead,unarmed black victim the aggressor. It;s amazing how many people are too lazy to think beyond the obvious pap fed us, to question and more shocking is how much they have to turn a blind eye to to justify the indefensible. It may as well been a trial tried by the klan.

    • CherryPie says:

      Your comment reminds me of the Hillsborough disaster and the suppressed truth for all these years. It also reminds me of the building workers fighting for safer working conditions, but the were up against the big construction industries. That dispute has still not been resolved and the truth hasn’t yet been published…

    • amfortas says:

      See below, AND…

      “The young Mr. Breaux needs to brace himself. He has sinned deeply in the eyes of the race pimps and race baiters and there will be no redemption.

      And I doubt seriously the President will step in and suggest that if he had a son, he’d look like Tristan Breaux”

  2. Chrysalis says:

    Cherie – Perhaps they will bring the exhibit here to the U.S. (We can only hope).

    Ubermouth – Though I “try” not to form an opinion on cases like these without viewing all the evidence myself (too often the information we receive about these cases by the press is propaganda, in and of itself), I wanted to let you know that I left a comment in support of your decision to call a commenter elsewhere on using the “N” word, but I’m not sure it will be released. Regardless, thank you for speaking up :)

    If their point was that this case is becoming overly focused on race, using racial slurs doesn’t exactly help their point :/

    • Chrysalis says:

      I don’t want to speak for Cherie, but this issue is being debated on another forum, where both the comments of Amfortas and Ubermouth are published without sanction.

      I only posted my support of Uber’s standing up about the N word here because unlike Ubermouth and Amfortas, my comments aren’t always released.

      Regardless, that discussion should stay over there, and it was my fault for bringing it here – I’m sorry, Cherie :(

  3. amfortas says:

    There is deliberate State-created propaganda, and then there are the effects that it has on the mainstream. Take the propaganda, or ‘AgitProp’, of State-funded feminism that has become so common in our society that even long standing early feminists like Dorothy Lessing are horrified at what it has done to 50% of the population whose ‘crime’ and ‘failing’ is to have been born with a penis.

    She said:
    “I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed”.
    “The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests

    It would take an entire exhibition to see all the subtle variations on the theme.

  4. amfortas says:

    Ubermouth, just who has been lying? The Prosecution? The Media? The President?

    Maybe it is the recently appointed NAACP President in Norfolk who is about to be lynched for daring to question the ‘victimhood’ of a young hoodlum.

  5. Lisl says:

    I guess it might have brought back lots of memories, Cherie – some of which may not have been obvious as propaganda, especially to a child

  6. Suzie says:

    There is so much controversy over the Zimmerman case in the US. Each will decide according to their prejudices, or on the balance of probability, what actually happened. The difference with Hillsborough is that there were witnesses, many witnesses, and after years of struggle the truth emerged much to the dismay of some who would prefer to bury the truth.

    I await with interest the trial of Oscar Pistorius. Will he, like Zimmerman, walk free because the only other witness is a dead one? Never underestimate the power of fame, money and celebrity status in achieving a not guilty verdict.

  7. amfortas says:

    The incomparable Anna of ‘Anna Raccoon’, has a few sensible and sensitive questions.

    “”Who knew that Trayvon Martin had morphed from this angelic picture of a 12-year-old into a 6’2″ 17-year-old body builder? Were there no up to date photographs of him to plaster the country with? No matter, he has been immortalised in his cherubic period.

    Who knew that the Hispanic George Zimmerman was considerably ‘darker’ than this photograph taken under the harsh glare of forensic evidence gathering? Were there no smiling photographs of a relaxed George to plaster the country with? No matter, he has been immortalised in his evil almost-white racist period.

    Every week since Trayvon Martin was shot, every week, over 100 young black teenagers have been shot dead in the US, 94% of them shot by another young black man.

    We don’t hear of them. We don’t see smiling pictures of their innocent young faces. We don’t see grim mug shots of their murderers, man-slaughterers, aggravated assaulters, nor, final insult from a prosecution that seemed unable to make up its mind as to what they were prosecuting – ‘felony murderers in the course of child abuse’. Huh, ‘Terminal paedophilia with Prejudice’ .

    There is only one reason why. Racism. The racism that dare not speak its name.
    The racism that can live, if not cheerfully, at least uncomplainingly, with most of the 5,942 ‘children merely walking home with a packet of sweeties in their pocket’ who end up with a bullet through the head simply because someone ‘had a gun’ and ‘because they could’; because one of their black brethren thought they’d looked at his girl friend funny, or failed to drop to their knees in obeisance and ‘respect’ on passing them outside MacDonalds. Occasionally there is a flurry of local outcry as when a stray bullet from all those ‘friendly encounters’ on street corners fatally lodged itself in 7-year-old Heaven Sutton in Chicago. But then she was female.

    The racism that appeals to voters by saying ‘if I had a son he would look like Trayvon Martin’.

  8. That does sound an interesting exhibition.

  9. james higham says:

    NLP is one of the techniques used by CP for propaganda. There are so many of them – Delphi technique for example.

  10. JD says:

    Can you remember the scene in Blazing Saddles where all the cowboys were fighting in the dusty old wild west town? The camera then pans out to show that the town was actually on the film studio lot. The camera then zooms down to a different part of the lot to what looks like a big hangar and song and dance music fades in. Cut to the inside of the hangar where it is all white tie and tails and the music continues and the dancing etc continues just long enough for you to get drawn into the scene.
    Then suddenly!!! The walls are broken through by a horde of brawling cowboys and the song and dance crowd join in the fighting………..

    That’s what this blog post looks like! :)
    The mass brawl over at NourishingObscurity has spilled over into your very different world!!!!!

    Such fun! :)

    • CherryPie says:

      I love your analogy JD :-)

      I am reminded of the Monty Python Phrase (slightly modified) ;-) ‘Is this the right blog for an argument?’ No it isn’t!

      But I do like to debate and explore ideas and have my viewpoint challenged. Definitely no rudeness, arguing or aggression though!

      • CherryPie says:


        My turn for a PS tonight ;-)

        The interesting thing is that I didn’t comment on that thread at ‘NO’ but I see my name is mentioned in dispatches in the comments thread…

        Curious ;-)

  11. Suzie says:

    What mass brawl? JD, on this occasion I believe that Cherie stepped into the ring, of her own volition. Probably sick of being patronised by crazy people, and I don’t exclude myself from that judgement.

    But now I’m freed up to answer the question that Cherie asks regarding the exhibition. It’s a bit too far for me to come but may I suggest that James cracks on down there. He could even teach them a trick or two, maybe deliver a professorial seminar on why presenting one side of every argument, is exactly where it’s at. Call it a master class.

    • amfortas says:

      If James gave a Master-class, Suzie, he would have to fund it himself. His opposition would have a Government Grant.

    • CherryPie says:

      The timing is totally co-incidental and has nothing to do with anything that James posted. I read the article on Saturday 13th, it is a topic that interests me and I thought others would find it interesting too.

      I was out enjoying myself at Chatsworth on Saturday and spent the evening in the garden enjoying a nice meal with Mr C in the glorious weather that we are having over here. So I didn’t get around to the post until Sunday and as Sunday is my ‘Cherie’s Place Thought’ day I scheduled the post automatically for Monday 15th.

      You can click on the Wordle image and go to my Flickr account to see exactly what date and time I made the image along with the time that I posted it to Flickr. It was a screen print off my computer (if you are interested in the technical issues).

      If I have issues with people or posts I take it up with them directly, I do not air those things publicly on my blog.

  12. Chrysalis says:

    Lol, I’ve seen that scene, JD – guilty :/

    Suzie, regardless of whether Cherie threw her own hat in the ring with this post or it was coincidental (or if it made Ubermouth think of that situation), it was me that flat-out said so, so let’s blame me, I can take it ;)

    Hey, what’s that, up above? It’s a new post!

    Let’s all challenge ourselves and see if we can actually just comment about the post and photo;)

    Let’s dance, cowboys

    Let’s all dance under it cowboys, and here

    • Chrysalis says:

      Whups, went up to edit a typo and didn’t scroll back down far enough to see I’d already started writing the cowboy thing! (It was so nice I said it twice!;)

      • CherryPie says:

        It was a total co-incidence as I mentioned in my comment above to Suzie.

        It was always going to be a controversial post, but I never dreamed it wouldn’t get connected up with some random co-incidental posts at ‘NO’.

        • Chrysalis says:

          Cherie, I figured as much, but didn’t want to speak for your motivations, and I don’t want to speak for Ubermouth’s either. I can only speak with absolute certainty for my own and take responsibility for what’s mine :)

          Suzie, thank you, and I appreciate your offer, but my comments actually have been closed since October 2011. Maybe someday I’ll open them again, but most likely not. Thank you, though :)

  13. Suzie says:

    Cherie, I knew that the timing was possibly coincidental but you did insist, rather pointedly, that James give his opinion about the exhibition.

    JD, I also like your analogy nearly as much as your mention of Norah Batty and Hyacinth Bucket the other day which cracked me up. I smiled for hours over that response. Although our American friends wouldn’t be in on the joke, I can assure them, it was inspired.

    Chrysalis, I genuinely didn’t see your comment (at 1.09) or at least I didn’t read it properly. I know that you always stand up and say what you think, and encounter the same roadblock that I do. I’ve even tried to comment on your blog but I’m not happy to divulge friend’s email addresses and I think you require that before approval.

    Cherie, never think that I don’t exercise considerable restraint before barging into your peaceful space. It is at an intersection though, and sometimes the urge to make a point overwhelms me. I can’t do it in the appropriate place, so I take liberties. Clearly, you are slow to anger but you have become quite feisty of late. If I am too rude or aggressive, delete my comment. That’s your prerogative. Obviously, I am combative by nature as evidenced by a piece of advice once given to me many years ago by my father. Never try to get a job in the diplomatic service. We all know that he was right.

    • Chrysalis says:

      I wrote to you above already, but just a quick P.S.

      Direct? Yes, but I still have won awards for customer service.

      Confrontational? Yes, but I “try” to be only to ask for clarification or if the issue ends up affecting me adversely or the issue being confronted is bigger than me.

      Combative? Only when pushed.

      Regardless, tho we’ve all made mistakes in this area, I think it’s important that we respect the specific boundary requests the blogowner has made (Cherie, in this instance) – unless that blogowner has somehow misrepresented/interpreted (which she hasn’t).

      She has made a specific request that certain things be discussed privately and no arguing points on her blog or bringing in other issues from other blogs here.

      Are you in? :)

  14. Suzie says:

    Chrysalis, I never even attempt to comment on a particular blog anymore because it is a complete waste of my time. Until very recently that particular blog owner used to insist that he did not censor. Now he’s been busted he is trying to present his cherry-picking of commentary, or plain misrepresentation, as a virtue.

    Cherie is in the privileged position of being allowed to comment unimpeded, I suspect because she has been part of his network for a long time, and because she is always very reasonable and kind. Nevertheless Cherie has commented ever more robustly and it has not gone unnoticed by anybody.

    I don’t have any option but to comment here but I already try to keep my interjections to a minimum, and will continue to do that. There is no way to discuss things privately. I also always urge Cherie to delete when things become uncomfortable.

    • CherryPie says:

      Of course you have other options.

      You could email me with your grievances.

      Or if you prefer to air grievances publicly the best way to address them is on a blog of your own.

      So there are two options, rather air your grievances here.

      I have stated on many occasions that I do not allow derogatory comments about other people here.

    • Chrysalis says:

      It’s frustrating to feel you don’t have a voice or misinterpreted, I agree – but you’ve already made your point, hon.

      Regardless, Cherie should not have to pay the price for what other people do on their blogs, it’s not her fault.

      Both Cherie and myself have offered our emails to you before, but if it’s not possible to talk in email, what do you think of Cherie’s suggestion of a blog of your own to voice these concerns would help?

      The offer remains open, my email is available through Cherie. Otherwise, I’d really like to comply with Cherie’s wishes now. I do understand, but it’s time to move on, okay? Take care :)

  15. CherryPie says:


    or not, if there is nothing more to be said on that.

  16. Suzie says:

    Cherie, emailing you with my grievances is a completely different option, in a different medium. What would that achieve?

    Having already received a very dodgy email a few weeks ago I am extremely reluctant to go that route which seems a bit sneaky to me, anyway.

    Chrysalis, it was you who got incensed by the latest comments about Harriet Harmon, and you got slapped down. Quite disrespectfully as usual but that can be your problem. Congratulations on your customer service awards. I’ve never been awarded one of those but then, I have never had any customers.

    Cherie, criticising a blog does not constitute derogatory comment on the person but on their opinion but you have made your position crystal clear, so I will try not to say anything more.

    Your point about having my own blog is valid. I have thought about it before and I have more time these days so I might do that.

    • Chrysalis says:

      Yes, and I talked about what happened today – on my own post – on my own blog:)

      Perhaps you should read my post again – because it was Detroit who became “incensed”. I tried to stave him off from saying what he really wanted to say, by making the same point with humor first (but Detroit felt I wasn’t harsh enough and dug in). We can talk more about that from YOUR blog if you like?

      But Suzie, I’m becoming less and less inclined to do so, and I’ll tell you why – I am now going to be as forthright with you, just as you have been with us, okay?

      I do think your words were twisted on that other blog, and yes, I know what that feels like (believe me, more than you think) and it’s aggravating and unfair, and I am truly sorry that happened to you.

      However, it’s happened to all of us.

      So I also need to say I think you’re being manipulative, rude and a little selfish, always turning the focus back to how just YOU have been “done wrong”, and pointing out what’s wrong with everybody else’s behavior, risking and revealing nothing about yourself in the process – and letting poor Cherie take the fall for it all?

      Then that doesn’t make you that much different from the way you describe the main person you take issue with?

      I say you are “being” these things, because I hope it’s temporary – I can’t say if you’re always that way, I don’t know you.

      I understand a momentary slip, when these things happen, as I admitted I’ve done myself, but I admitted it and apologized – and this behavior is starting to appear chronic with you.

      I hope I’m wrong?

      If you’re the better person, prove it – take the pressure off Cherie, who is being pulled apart in the middle – my bet is on you being able to do that before he will ;)

      We heard you, Suzie, I promise you. C’mon, honey, let it go now.

      What’s it gonna be -

    • CherryPie says:

      So you are using my blog as a tool to achieve something?

      You don’t criticise a blog you criticise a single person on that blog and the comments of that person. You bring those issues and comments to my blog on random posts where they have no relevance.

      Most of my readers don’t follow that blog, so I am not sure what you are trying to achieve by airing those grievances and issues here.

      I offered to help you with that email problem and you chose not to accept my offer of help and continued to comment publicly on the issue when I asked you not to.

      As Claude said on another blog. A blog is a home. I treat my blog as a home, all views are welcome. That is why I am quite lenient on my comments policy. But some people forget that they are visiting…

      You said a blog is a forum. In a forum comments are deleted at whim when the forum moderator decides they don’t like them or they contravene commenting rules.

      In that thread you were actually quite rude about me but I chose to let it pass.

      So do you prefer a home or a forum?

  17. Suzie says:

    Cherie, Sorry if I was rude to you because it was absolutely unintentional and reading back I still can’t see what you mean. I absolutely will not comment here again.

  18. Moggsy says:

    Cherry, I am kind of assuming the “Public information message films” would be included in UK State Probaganda. I wonder if they include stats on health and campaigns for the milk marketing board and decimalisation, immunisation and anti smoking, drinking and obesity “public health” campaigns?

    There is also the issue of fake charity pressure groups, the lobbying they do to promote and push government agendas “under the radar” and bodies like the GMC and such in the orchestration of propaganda and scene setting for the state.

  19. Suzie says:

    Don’t worry Cherie, my vow to stop commenting stands, but just for this thread, allow me the liberty. I wrote what I did earlier as a response to JD. And it was a genuine response which cannot appear in the appropriate place.

    This particular thread is going old, and maybe far enough back not to impinge on your more natural readership. I think, having worried about what you said, and read your remark with due attention, that you were referring to other remarks on another blog. If you were offended by my silliness about ‘the bench’ (which is all I can think of) I am sorry, but it was a joke and an acknowledgement of your terminology, imagery, whatever you want to call it, and simply an extension of that. Not at all, intended as a put down.

    I genuinely like to see your photographs and see that you enjoy a glass of wine on your patio. Sometimes, I miss England a lot. You are not a tool, although I did own up to putting stuff out there, in the past, because I knew someone would read it.

    If you think a blog is a home then that is fine, but I do beg to differ. And obviously we are not going to change our views.

    Chrysalis, I don’t think that I am manipulative, and if everything is always about me, how come you know nothing? I know nothing about you either. Or Cherie, really.
    I did look at your blog and I saw you sing something in honour of your grandmother, and it was beautiful. And I have no ulterior motive for saying that.

    Good to see that Moggsy looks in, and I hope she/he knows that I never said anything bad about her/him. Or any other reasonable person.

    Good luck to you all. I do mean that!

    • CherryPie says:

      I think, having worried about what you said, and read your remark with due attention, that you were referring to other remarks on another blog. If you were offended by my silliness about ‘the bench’ (which is all I can think of) I am sorry, but it was a joke and an acknowledgement of your terminology, imagery, whatever you want to call it, and simply an extension of that. Not at all, intended as a put down.

      I was referring that lengthy debate when I accidentally posted a quote that wasn’t quite correct. And such big deal was made about it after I said I hadn’t done it on purpose. If I misinterpreted what you meant, I am sorry.

  20. CherryPie says:

    Now I think this comments thread has reached it’s sell by date.