CHINA THREAT Essay Example
- Category:Visual Arts & Film Studies
- Document type:Assignment
According to (Bucur, 2016), propaganda is information biases with intentions of serving the interests of propagandists. The propagandists do it without the knowledge of the targeted audience. The media text that is analyzed is in written context. The propaganda spread is that China is a threat to the US. An example to show the evidence is a speech given by Chuck Hagel “ The US would not look the other way when nations ignore international rules and China appears to be testing the power of the Americans to defend US interests, and those of its allies, in the region. Defense Secretary Hagel insists that the US would not look the other way. But what can America do? And how far does China have to go before Washington decides to resist?” The speech took place at a summit held for three days in Singapore. The tension briefly expressed by Chuck Hagel is not only faced by the US, but it also includes Vietnam and Philippines (Smith & Lasswell, 2015).
According to Radu (2015), the approach used is the critical propaganda as systemic in society. In this case, the targeted audiences tend to believe it but they also independently understand that it may not be true. More claims are that China had forcefully argued the rights of owning territories over the areas of the Southern part of the sea which neighbors Vietnam, Japan, and the Philippines. Major threats against the US are the concerns of insecurity since China has an excellent reputation of high atomic bombs technology. Reports by the Prime Minister of China Mr. Abe are that China is only using the threats to strengthen the security of policies for Japan. The use of the “myth” of China as a threat is meant to strengthen their systems according to some officials of China. The flared threats that America is facing have led to declarations of an air defense zone in the Eastern sides of China. The results of the myth of China being a threat to the US has produced in China’s adaptation of more confrontational moves over the disputed among the nations (Stere & Trajani, 2015).
China is a state which is authoritarian in their power leadership, and the US has currently evolved to a totalitarian state. The audience that was used by the propagandist is all the citizens of America because the speech characteristic is a private address. The information is later shared publicly to reach the States officials of the US government and the citizens. Production of the propaganda is clearly not stated but as usual, it is for the common reasons of political interests. Most significant words are ‘China a Threat’ (Orentlicher, 2015). The enemy in this propaganda is the China government versus the US government. The tactic used by the US government is avoiding or not allowing such threats to continue through dialogues. The results of the risks are the development of a high sense of insecurity in the US.
China government is not differing with the claims of recognizing themselves as a threat but, the Prime Minister put it clear that it is meant to create a solid stand on the formulated policies. It is with no intentions of destructing the US and other nations, but the plans have aims of achieving a high sense of its robust international defense. It would act as a source of security to their country. It is just a tactic used to make their interest which seems to be working for them. In the original text, what appears omitted most is the particular kind of threat the US is facing. According to the speech by Chuck, he focuses mainly on the interests of China in Vietnam, Japan, and the Philippines boundaries without being straight forward to the kind of interests that China have in the US (Chakraborti, 2016).
The biased information in the speech by Chuck about China as a threat is the focus on the State of America. It tells us the propaganda is with characteristics of a State bias. It does not refer to any gender, company or personal figures. It is political, and this concludes it as a Sate bias. Chuck Hagel faces rebukes after spreading the propaganda. The Chinese general challenged the US defense secretary Chuck to come up with better explanations of his propaganda. Chuck claimed that China continues to grow as a cyber-intrusions threat with links that are related to China. The response of rebuke came from the delegation of the Chinese including other officials who sat at the back during the summit in Singapore. The propaganda is part of the political traditions where it is okay to have leaders with such spread of propaganda.
The effectiveness of the propaganda is that the publicity does not seem to convince the audience. It is because of the vivid explanations from Chuck as to why he came up with such propaganda. The actions taken were holding a very robust dialogue to come up with solutions for the threats where President Barack Obama remarks the Pentagon chief were involved (Lehmann, 2016).
To show some evidence about the dialogue speech by Chuck, this is how he expressed himself. «That’s the whole point behind closer military-to-military relationships,» Hagel responded. «We don’t want miscalculations and misunderstandings and misinterpretations (Knight & Tribin, 2015). And the only way you do that is you talk to each other.» In the assessment of the propaganda, I think it wasted a lot of time although the relations strengthening were gained by holding a dialogue. The audience may have believed in Chuck’s propaganda at first. However, there must have been high doubts as the Chinese delegates were challenging Chuck. The primary reason as to why the audience might have challenged Chuck could be his first attempt at explaining his reasons for coming up with the propaganda where he vividly did (Tal & Gordon, 2016).
The role of propaganda in society is to win the hearts and minds of the audience. It is with the interests of the propagandist to assure that he uses the biased information to achieve his goals. It could be of political and non-political interests (Propaganda & Thomas, 2015). The roles include the achievement of controlling and manipulating people in large numbers. Some propagandists in the social media aim at gaining fame through reaching the audience with the biased information. By gaining popularity, it is always a strategy for future participation in the relevant elections or practices. As much as the information is biased, it seems to work for some individuals especially in matters of achieving fame for political reasons. Most of the information in propaganda makes a lot of sense, but when it comes to proving the issues, it is when the audience gets to know that it was nothing but propaganda.
Bucur, B. (2016). Sociological School of Bucharest’s Publications and the Romanian Political
Propaganda in the Interwar Period.North Carolina: Global Perspectives on Media Events in Contemporary Society, 106.
Chakraborti, A. (2016). Book review: Shukla Sanyal, Revolutionary Pamphlets, Propaganda and
Political Culture in Colonial Bengal. New Delh: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Sanglap: Journal of Literary and Cultural Inquiry, 2(2), 236.
Knight, B., & Tribin, A. (2015). The Limits of Propaganda: Boston: Evidence from Chavez’s
Lehmann, M. (2016). The depiction of America on Martin Waldseemüller’s world map from
1507—Humanistic geography in the service of political propaganda.Texas: Cogent Arts & Humanities, 3(1), 1152785.
Orentlicher, D. (2015). Abortion and compelled physician speech. The Journal of Law, Medicine
& Ethics, 43(1), 9-21.
Propaganda, E. W., & Thomas, W. (2015). Wakefield’s Nightmare, Pt. 2: Divided Opinion on
the Political Economic Importance of Enlightenment Intellectual Culture. New York:
Ether Wave Propaganda: History and Historiography of Science.
Radu, S. (2015). Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s: Between Cultural and Political
Propaganda.Chicago: The Historical Review/La Revue Historique, 12, 229-252.
Smith, B. L., & Lasswell, H. D. (2015). Propaganda, communication and public opinion. New
Jersey: Princeton university press.
Stere, S., & Trajani, B. (2015). Review of the theoretical and empirical literature of consumer
ethnocentrism. Chicago: Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 2(1), 41-54.
Tal, D., & Gordon, A. (2016). Jacques Ellul Revisited: 55 Years of Propaganda Study.
Texas: Society, 1-6.
More Important Things