Small Coffees For The Win

One of the greatest points I have read so far is on the topic of the "implied falsehood." This is also why George Walker, texas ranger, Bush could be more clever than you would ever want to believe. I don't know how many people can attest to the belief that the terrorist attacks on 9/11 somehow had something to do with the United States' invasion of Iraq, but I know there are a lot. 67% of Americans apparently do, myself included. For those who are passively-interested in politics, only the most important and major headlines seem to make any kind of impression. "Terrorists attacked the United States on September 11th." "The United States invades Iraq." You draw the conclusion yourself. Not everybody reads in between the headlines. Now, either it's the public's fault for not being more politically aware, or it's G.W.Bush's fault for intentionally implying a falsehood in order to gain support for a war. There's a billion people still arguing over this right now. 

I consider UnSpun to be the most dangerous form of propaganda. The whole intent of the book is to make its audience think in a way that they want them to. "Don't believe everything you hear." Even if their intent is to teach a generation to find facts in a world of disinformation, there is still room for bias. They present their "facts" as "truths" and in order to believe them, one has to somewhat subscribe to the conspiracy belief that the advertising industry is "out to get you," that the makers of Paxil CR intentionally display pleasant images while describing very unpleasant side effects because they only care about selling their product. Sure, businesses care about selling their product, but does the entire corporate America only care about making a buck? So much that they'll intentionally deceive the public into buying something they don't need or that is potentially dangerous? Maybe. But I try not to think like that. Paxil CR obviously doesn't show images of people vomiting and sweating on their advertisements, because there isn't a need to. Nobody HONESTLY thinks that because the people on the advertisements look happy, that if you take the product, your entire view of the world start looking like that commercial. Actually, I can't say that. Some people probably do. But I drink Pepsi because it tastes delicious, not because Ray Charles did. I don't think that, because Ray Charles drank Pepsi, I'll become as suave as Mr. Charles if I drink Pepsi too. If anything, I like Ray Charles more because he endorsed a delicious soft drink. 

The book IS right. These are "facts." Companies do use weasel words. What they are pointing out is "true," but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I feel cheated. I feel negative toward Paxil CR because they used "eye candy" in their advertisements. UnSpun just told me the facts, but when you tell somebody how they are being deceived, they're going to feel a little bitter. People don't like being deceived. Maybe some people do. I don't know. But give this book to the people at Paxil CR, and they'd probably call it Propaganda.