Persuasion refers to the action or fact of influencing someone or of being influenced to do or consider something. On the other hand, propaganda is the use of communication systems in a diverse manner in order to manipulate one’s emotions to accept a certain belief or opinion. In the most neutral sense, propaganda refers to disseminating or promoting particular ideas. The ultimate influence of propaganda is to change people’s behaviors and beliefs usually with an aim of exploiting them. Persuasion or propaganda can either be positive or negative since that they could eventually bring either good or bad outcomes. Therefore, the difference between the two practices is that propaganda aims at creating an egoistic influence that will primarily satisfy the propagandist desires while persuasion is a two way traffic influence, which aims at satisfying the desires of both the sender and receiver.
Modern day public relations and historical persuasion have numerous similarities and differences that create a good contrast and help in a good understanding of the two concepts. The basic similarity between the two aspects is that they both are a form of mutually beneficial communication, since they are an engagement between two or more parties who try to seek a common ground. Ignorance is the factor that clumps on both the modern-day public relations and historical persuasion, in the sense that people were not well informed on the benefits of persuasion and they acted without considering the implications of what they do. In the modern day public relations, most people who have not gone through a Public Relations training will tend to ignore it and even deny it.
In the United States today, gender or racial discrimination is a non-issue as people mix freely and both genders from the entire racial spectrum are given an opportunity to hold important leadership positions. This state of affairs is contrary to the historical times where gender discrimination and racial segregation was rampant, partly due to severe propaganda. We therefore find that this aspect of historical persuasion gives it a contrasting look to the modern-day public relation in the sense that the historical persuasion was racially discriminating. Historical persuasion has thus served as a platform from which lessons have been drawn to shape the modern Public Relations. The contrast between historical persuasion and current practice of Public Relations made it work towards eliminating all kinds of sex or race discrimination in the American society. Another difference noted is that contemporary Public Relations are in fact a profession, thus implying the existence of professional ideals and standards as well as a synchronized technical knowledge. On the other hand, historical persuasion is regarded as an aspect that needed no professional knowledge (since anyone of us can persuade at some level) to deliver a concrete outcome.
Stephen E. Fitzgerald (1946) indicates that historical persuasion has invested a new and broader social responsibility in the business and company interactions and as we see today, almost every company or business entity thrives to improve its Public Relations. Hence, we can see a clear shaping of the modern-day practice of Public Relations by the historical notion of persuasion. In critical thinking, problem solving always starts with problem identification as the first step. Therefore, modern day Public Relations were birthed from understanding that the historical persuasion had a problem that needed a solution. For example, racial discrimination was a problem that was not addressed by the historical persuasion, but rather fueled and catalyzed, as seen through the diverse propaganda content exhibited at the seminar. Thus, something had to be done in order to stop it. That is where Public Relations as we know it came in, it intervened to highlight that all people are equal and should be accorded equal chances and treatment regardless of their race or skin color.
The concepts of persuasion in advertising, public relations, and political communication have built upon one another. All these facets deal with a specific audience, whom social interests are integral for each and every one of these aspects. Advertising is the act of promoting with the view to persuade the audience into liking something (or someone). Hence, political communication, which always meant to bring people to a common agreement and promote a candidate, will heartily need to pick up from some facets of advertisement. Public Relations will also be ideal for political communication since before an idea is conceived, the bearer will think of a way to make it appealing to the audience. Without well-strategized public relations, the audience may deny the idea. Consequently, we can demonstrate that political communication needs to include some elements of both persuasive advertising and Public Relations in order to be viable.
Advertising also relies heavily on the concepts of Public Relations, since the likeability of the subject advertised will depend on its perception from the public. The notion of perception is also a common ground of political communication. This can be extracted from the characteristics of an influential advertiser who knows how to consider the social interests of the public to express and idea. It is therefore without any doubt notable that these concepts lean on one another to deliver an effective outcome.
Communication professionals used the concepts of “tailoring” and “target publics” in historical contexts in a highly favorable manner. The use of the concept of “tailoring” from Communication professionals refers to the aspect of making the public wants to accept or buy your idea, by offering a message perfectly suited for this particular audience. With the view to persuade at best, Communication professional would conduct a study to define their core target. Once this “target publics” as been established, Communication practitioners would ensure to get the appropriate information regarding whom these people really are in order to identify their likes and dislikes.
It is undoubtedly true that persuasion will use the aesthetic appeal of a message to trigger emotions, and eventually create a strong believability gauge. Propaganda and persuasion have been brought out in of both of the images (Cosmopolitan Magazine cover, November 1936 & OWI 55 poster, USA, 1943) centered around women. For example, the cover of the November 1936 Cosmopolitan Magazine, pictured a woman as elegant, precious, and refined, as if she was a living doll. This image has a multi-dimensional reach since Cosmopolitan Magazine has an entertainment but also informative function. This portrait paints an image of women looking sharp, and having time for leisure. When putting this cover in context with its timeframe (pre IInd World War), we could understand that it supports the cultural and societal values that women’s life back then were centered around the latest fashion and how to manage their household at best. According to me, the global idea depicted by the cover of Cosmopolitan Magazine is revolving around a perception of women as beautiful ingénues, contrasting totally with the new role that women have embraced with the start of the IInd World War.
The OWI 55 propaganda poster aims at women with the view to make them join the War effort. This propaganda poster contrasts with the Cosmopolitan Magazine cover since it portraits a new value of the role of women in society, as working individuals. The Office of War Information 55 propaganda poster represents a woman operating a machine; dress in a boyish worker outfit but looking, however, glamorous. The perception that I have received from this poster is that women are as powerful as men are, and they are able to be part of the war production effort, while still embracing their femininity and be happy doing it. Below the picture, one is requested to find their war jobs and therefore this ten
ds to give a perception that women can fight along by doing other things than to be on the battlefield. The Office of War Information 55 poster has also a multi-dimensional reach since it aimed to inform women that jobs suitable for them are available to be part of the war production effort, but also to educate them towards considering working as a central element of their daily life. This propaganda image challenges the societal and cultural perception of women as beautiful ingénue housewives since they are now, at some level, equal to men, because they can take over jobs left by men who were drafted to the frontline.
Through the two precise images of communication examples staging and directly targeting female, we can witness how the role and perception of women have evolved over the eras. Therefore, we can logically reconsider as well how our communication approach towards this precise target group has changed as well, between these different time frames and nowadays.
In conclusion, it is important to note that a message’s influence will highly depend on the conveyor and not the receiver. Through the implications of historical persuasion to the way Public Relations are conducted today, we need to keep in mind that the way a great part of the message is the way it is packaged by the communication practitioner. This packaging will greatly determine how the message sent will be received and perceived by the target audience, but will also be determining of its afterwards implications.