final Flashcards
(236 cards)
the 3 Ps of after WW2
Peace (war is over), Prosperity (consumerism, products that make life in the home easier, like hand mixer, tupperware), and Paranoia (afraid of communists, of comfortable life that every has moved into after war changing)-sense of normalcy
What’s going on in the 1950s/after WW2 politically (party splits and changes, trust in gov)
- pretty evenly split in democrats and republicans-slightly more democrats
- only 50% find important differences between the parties (today that number is higher-almost 80%)
- high trust in gov (in 60s, distrust goes way up-Vietnam, watergate)-number of people who don’t trust gov overall increased over time
- change of party in 1960 w Kennedy-democrat
- changes back to republicans after
consumerism in the 1950s
- thousands of serviceman return-new fams, homes, jobs
- higher purchasing power of dollar back then
- growth in consumption-let’s buy things (economies of scale, technology), baby boom growing up, America is prosperous, cars and gas and TVs and stoves cheap (middle class can afford), american products are in demand worldwide
- can buy homes, millions migrated to cheap housing in the suburbs-conformity and convenience prevailed
- Suburban homes-avg. square footage of homes increased over times
- by the end of the 1950s, 2/3 Americans had TVs-by 1954, TV main source of ads-Am. consumer life never the same
overview of advertising
- special form of communication-you are seeing, hearing, and reading simultaneously
- audio includes music, sounds, words
- visual includes images and words
- it’s the union of these effects that makes the powerful, and sometimes misleading
- Emotional. Suggestive.
- 1952: first time presidential candidates campaigned on television-didn’t know what they were doing-but soon use of political ads grew
(political) advertising-how audio is used
- music
- meant to convey things are going great (happy music for candidate endorsing) or scary (when putting down/showing opponent)
- background sounds -birds, water (calming sounds), heartbeats, ticking clocks (for opponent)
- words-text in complete sentences
- often voice overs, rarely in candidate’s own voice-candidates rarely speak in own advertising-more recently added (past 10-15 years) “I’m ___ and I approve this message”-but before candidate didn’t even have to be in ad
(political) advertising-how visuals are used
- images-children, family, meeting and greeting-candidate at work, doing his job
- words
- single words flash on screen
- sources for facts (The New York times said ___)
- slogans
Advertising images in the 1950s-general description and and method and purpose of all the ads
- early ads were black and white
- cartoon images popular-still figuring out how to do TV/ads, live action complicated, not sure exactly how to do it well, animation easier-so lots of animated TV in 50s too
- the car a big part of commercial advertising in 1950s
- arts underscored conformity of decade
- want to evoke sense of comfort (we’re in a comfortable period, people can buy things that make life easier), conformity (everyone should want all these same things)
- concern also big part (concern for/fear of communism, nuclear war)-public opinion: most people think world war iii will happen in their lifetime, and they will not survive it
Eisenhower’s ads (1952 election)
tried to show everyone voting for him-ads represented all diff types of people (except minorities and working women)
- didn’t address issues-just “everyone likes Ike”, catchy, simple, cute cartoon full of symbols like, Stevenson in shadow, on donkey riding away, made fun of Truman- generate enthusiasm, Eisenhower was a war hero, parade
- shows images of Eisenhower as war hero-but advocates for peace, says he can bring it-sense of urgency-speaking loudly (his natural way of speaking-no nonsense military leader), no background music-focuses on change (but doesn’t actually say how he will change gov, how will solve problems)-Eisenhower looks down while person asking question looks up at him-makes him seem powerful-ad starts out with superman feel with words coming onto screen-references end of ww ii-evokes feelings of victory, crediting victory to Eisenhower, get people to be thankful to him-shows small house he grew up in makes him seem “just like you”-not stated, all through image
Stevenson’s ads (1952 election)
- animated, black and white, catchy song-evoke feelings of fear of another depression-saying that republican policies brought us the depression, keep democrats in office to keep things they way they are, not create another depression-not focused much on actual candidate (Stevenson)-remind you who brought you the depression-attack ad
- woman singing, makes it seem private, intimate, 1 woman, seems like she’s talking directly to you-winks-meant to look provocative, attractive-she’s supposed to be a bit hip-she’s not a 1950s housewife-sends message that cool people vote for Stevenson
1960 election, Kennedy vs. Nixon-Kennedy’s ads
- name repeated, used actual pictures of Kennedy and supporters-wider range of people-diff kinds of people-shows him as family man
- Jackie speaking in spanish, appealing to hispanic american population for Kennedy vote, acknowledging there are non white, non english speaking voters-big change from 1952 election-lots of policy content in ad, says JFK will bring peace-crucial period in international relations-potential first lady had more of a role
semiotics
- from the greek semeion, “sign”
- the study of signs and systems of communication-at a personal level, not social
semiotics-How is meaning made?
Sign=Signifier (sound-image) + Signified (concept)
- signifier and signified 2 sides of same coin
- signifier: sound (phonemes) or image (marks)
- /m/ of mat
- /b/ of bat
- signified: concept (thought or representation)
- ”mat” for mat-ness
- ”bat” or bat-ness
- there is no god-given/natural connection between “mat” and what it is/ how you think about what it is-connection between signified and signifier arbitrary and therefore changing-but didn’t talk what this means in society, in culture and stuff
- from denotative sign (language) to connotative sign (myth) -language is the signifier and signified creating the sign, and then when that sign becomes its own signifier, can combine with a signified to make another sign-that second layer is the myth
signs-denotative and connotative signs
- denotative sign/1st order meaning (language), to connotative sign/2nd order meaning (myth)
- language is the signifier and signified creating the sign, and then when that sign becomes its own signifier, can combine with a signified to make another sign-that second layer is the myth
- ex: Paris match cover-1st order meaning (language) is black kid saluting, 2nd order meaning is that France is a great empire and all french of all covers faithfully serve under French flag
signs-referent
the thing itself-real world object-mat or bat outside language
signs-myth
A secondary level of signification, where a
sign (that already has a literal – or
DENOTATIVE - first level meaning) is used to
stand for an aspect of bourgeois society (a
second level - or CONNOTATIVE -
signification).
• Any depoliticized representation or way of
presenting society as if it is a natural given,
and not a result of a certain history and
politics that could have been different.
What is the role of the critic (in judging signs)?
- situate signs (myths) within their contexts
- history, politics, culture, institutions
- attend to the complexity and contradiction of any sign (myth)
- demystify myths-Situate the myth (image) in context-expose the myth (image)
after WWII
- what kind of world will emerge?
- two competing systems of governemnt (
- fundamental differences
- different economies
- different lifestyles
- different beliefs
communist agenda
- revolution of working class
- Is this just theoretical?
- Is this a practical call to arms?
- how do we interpret Soviet action in light of this “goal”? (goal says “national revolution” in the Communist Manifesto book-so other countries felt very threatened by communis)
- conditions our interpretation of Soviet behavior
balance of power
what is balance of power
- a theory? an equilibrium? a goal? a system? a policy? - first, what is power?
relational power
A’s ability to get B to do something it would not otherwise do
material power
capabilities, resources (mainly military), the capacity to raise arms, deploy navies, occupy territories. Things with which states can influence one another
balance of power in cold war
- without outcomes/actual conflict, how can actors assess the balance of power?
- put yourself in Kissinger’s, Eisenhower’s, Kennedy’s position-how do you judge Soviet capabilities? How do you evaluate the Soviet intentions? Do they want to spread communism throughout the world? Are they acting as an aggressor? (Am. doesn’t want to be aggressor, start war, doesn’t know if can win-must figure out theoretically w these Qs) Or are they reacting to what they think is an American role as an aggressor?
- each side sees the other as the aggressor-each side thinks they are merely responding to the aggressor-neither side thinks they are escalating, just responding
- US has to infer USSR intentions from observed behavior, Soviets are doing the same thing
- Given what I know about your goals (or don’t know) how do I interpret your action?
- minimax
minimax
Minimizing your maximum regret
prisoner’s dilemma
-optimal result is neither side builds up weapons (“silent”)
-but neither wants to be caught “silent” while other “defects”-almost every time will reach mass equilibrium cuz increasing arms/defecting is always in best interest in this case-if one “defects” increases arms enough and other doesn’t they may fire, other side will die-so both “defect” by increasing arms
importance in cold war: if both sides have nuclear weapons, there’s a standstill-keep arming, assume other side continuing to arm-so mass equilibrium cuz neither side shoots-the optimal result not really possible, neither side trusts other so neither will disarm (only way both players are silent is if there’s enough trust or a threat involved from before, making the stakes higher-but doesn’t really work in this case, nothing to make 1 side trust other)-both sides want to avoid being blown up
-first goal is to hit missile bases, not cities so other can’t respond-but likely would not destroy them all (didn’t have satellites so didn’t know exactly where all weapons were, going on foreign intelligence), other side could strike back at cities-it’s mutually assured destruction-no one strikes cuz too worried about maximum regret (everyone dying)