Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The freak out of some Democrats over [View all]foo_bar
(4,193 posts)49. c'mon, the whole thing is a rebranding exercise
Yesterday was the soft launch of Hillary 2.0 (or whatever point oh), but these things aren't set in stone, she could change logos twelve times before the convention if the invisible hand wills it. I'm almost ready to give in and embrace this democracy-by-marketing concept, I bet some genius came up with this logo just to piss off the sorts of people who worry about these sorts of things. Aldous Huxley penned some prescient thoughts on these matters:
In regard to propaganda the early advocates of universal literacy and a free press envisaged only two possibilities: the propaganda might be true, or it might be false. They did not foresee what in fact has happened, above all in our Western capitalist democracies -- the development of a vast mass communications industry, concerned in the main neither with the true nor the false, but with the unreal, the more or less totally irrelevant. In a word, they failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions. <...>
The task of the commercial propagandist in a democracy is in some ways easier and in some ways more difficult than that of a political propagandist employed by an established dictator or a dictator in the making. It is easier inasmuch as almost everyone starts out with a prejudice in favor of beer, cigarettes and iceboxes, whereas almost nobody starts out with a prejudice in favor of tyrants. It is more difficult inasmuch as the commercial propagandist is not permitted, by the rules of his particular game, to appeal to the more savage instincts of his public. The advertiser of dairy products would dearly love to tell his readers and listeners that all their troubles are caused by the machinations of a gang of godless international margarine manufacturers, and that it is their patriotic duty to march out and burn the oppressors' factories. This sort of thing, however, is ruled out, and he must be content with a milder approach. But the mild approach is less exciting than the approach through verbal or physical violence. In the long run, anger and hatred are self-defeating emotions. But in the short run they pay high dividends in the form of psychological and even (since they release large quantities of adrenalin and noradrenalin) physiological satisfaction. People may start out with an initial prejudice against tyrants; but when tyrants or would-be tyrants treat them to adrenalin-releasing propaganda about the wickedness of their enemies -- particularly of enemies weak enough to be persecuted -- they are ready to follow him with enthusiasm. <...>
Effective rational propaganda becomes possible only when there is a clear understanding, on the part of all concerned, of the nature of symbols and of their relations to the things and events symbolized. Irrational propaganda depends for its effectiveness on a general failure to understand the nature of symbols. Simple-minded people tend to equate the symbol with what it stands for, to attribute to things and events some of the qualities expressed by the words in terms of which the propagandist has chosen, for his own purposes, to talk about them. Consider a simple example. Most cosmetics are made of lanolin, which is a mixture of purified wool fat and water beaten up into an emulsion. This emulsion has many valuable properties: it penetrates the skin, it does not become rancid, it is mildly antiseptic and so forth. But the commercial propagandists do not speak about the genuine virtues of the emulsion. They give it some picturesquely voluptuous name, talk ecstatically and misleadingly about feminine beauty and show pictures of gorgeous blondes nourishing their tissues with skin food.
http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/#propdem
The task of the commercial propagandist in a democracy is in some ways easier and in some ways more difficult than that of a political propagandist employed by an established dictator or a dictator in the making. It is easier inasmuch as almost everyone starts out with a prejudice in favor of beer, cigarettes and iceboxes, whereas almost nobody starts out with a prejudice in favor of tyrants. It is more difficult inasmuch as the commercial propagandist is not permitted, by the rules of his particular game, to appeal to the more savage instincts of his public. The advertiser of dairy products would dearly love to tell his readers and listeners that all their troubles are caused by the machinations of a gang of godless international margarine manufacturers, and that it is their patriotic duty to march out and burn the oppressors' factories. This sort of thing, however, is ruled out, and he must be content with a milder approach. But the mild approach is less exciting than the approach through verbal or physical violence. In the long run, anger and hatred are self-defeating emotions. But in the short run they pay high dividends in the form of psychological and even (since they release large quantities of adrenalin and noradrenalin) physiological satisfaction. People may start out with an initial prejudice against tyrants; but when tyrants or would-be tyrants treat them to adrenalin-releasing propaganda about the wickedness of their enemies -- particularly of enemies weak enough to be persecuted -- they are ready to follow him with enthusiasm. <...>
Effective rational propaganda becomes possible only when there is a clear understanding, on the part of all concerned, of the nature of symbols and of their relations to the things and events symbolized. Irrational propaganda depends for its effectiveness on a general failure to understand the nature of symbols. Simple-minded people tend to equate the symbol with what it stands for, to attribute to things and events some of the qualities expressed by the words in terms of which the propagandist has chosen, for his own purposes, to talk about them. Consider a simple example. Most cosmetics are made of lanolin, which is a mixture of purified wool fat and water beaten up into an emulsion. This emulsion has many valuable properties: it penetrates the skin, it does not become rancid, it is mildly antiseptic and so forth. But the commercial propagandists do not speak about the genuine virtues of the emulsion. They give it some picturesquely voluptuous name, talk ecstatically and misleadingly about feminine beauty and show pictures of gorgeous blondes nourishing their tissues with skin food.
http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/#propdem
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
107 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Or this shit is so dumb people can't help but wonder why they're wasting their time arguing
Renew Deal
Apr 2015
#6
I dont like it because I think it could have been cooler looking, but the arrow direction
NoJusticeNoPeace
Apr 2015
#51
As often as I disagree with you, YES it has to point to the right as in going forward
NoJusticeNoPeace
Apr 2015
#54
It isn't a red arrow in the majority of instances. It's usually white with a blue arrow.It is
okaawhatever
Apr 2015
#23
Logos are not alive. There's only one perspective re: a logo, namely that of someone looking at it.
merrily
Apr 2015
#101
It's a reaction to the fools reading more into it than is rational. Once again,
KittyWampus
Apr 2015
#4
I have no idea about goatse...lack of social awareness probably protected the O logo
HereSince1628
Apr 2015
#21
Plus anyone who has used a cassette deck, video recorder, CD or DVD
muriel_volestrangler
Apr 2015
#106
If you don't love our new corporate logo, you are obviously an enemy and traitor
dissentient
Apr 2015
#5
Gee, did you or a buddy start a thread attacking the logo and get it locked or something?
KittyWampus
Apr 2015
#10
The freak out of some "Democrats" over the logo is even more interesting...nt
SidDithers
Apr 2015
#16
You mistake the hysterical laughing for a "freak out." Your exchanges on Library Girl's
msanthrope
Apr 2015
#30
The logo could have been far more interesting and techie and cool, HOWEVER
NoJusticeNoPeace
Apr 2015
#55
HRC's been successfully dealing w the right wing noise machine for 20+ Years
emulatorloo
Apr 2015
#69
Yes, I'm especially impressed with the way she made mincemeat of them over Benghazi
tularetom
Apr 2015
#75
Really. They're still yapping about Vince Foster, fer chrissake. I am so going the check out
Nay
Apr 2015
#85
In your signature line, Elizabeth Warren a president for the 100%, yep, she will take care of the
Thinkingabout
Apr 2015
#76
Clearly HRC drew it herself, knowing (with a smirk) is would piss off a lot of DUers!
Rex
Apr 2015
#92
I pondered that this morning...how many of us have played with our initials?
HereSince1628
Apr 2015
#100
There was a "Design the HRC Campaign Logo" contest held for DC elementary kids
Pooka Fey
Apr 2015
#107