Prompt: Reality depends upon who is telling the story
Those in positions of power, or who have privileged access to, or control media outlets, and who have wealth, are able to shape and define the public debate. They control the flow of information and can use a combination of technological tools to control people’s thoughts and feelings – their lived realities or their political, social and cultural contexts/livelihoods.
Wag the dog – how the government constructs our reality – and misrepresents our reality
The “Father” State (politicians and media etc) creates and influences our realities through the political/cultural and social narrative – the stories they tell and create ; the information they provide and the information they conceal has a big impact upon our realities
The government influences people’s mindsets through the stories it weaves
In Wag the Dog, the fake war, or the “appearance of war” becomes a real and welcome distraction for the American people thanks to the superior Hollywood special effects and the excellent skill of a public relations expert, Conrad Brean and Hollywood director Stanley Motss.
Conrad Brean organizes the war to distract the public from the president’s sexual misconduct with the “teenage” Firefly. There are 10 days before the election, and the task is to ensure that the story of misconduct does not feature in the daily news, and especially not on page 12 of the Washington Post.
In this case, the public can quite easily be convinced that it is necessary to wage a war to “preserve the American way of life”.
As Motss knows all too well, the tried and tested “age old horseshit” that we “don’t change horses in mid-stream” is not sufficient to convince the public that the President deserves to be reelected.
Breans’ public relations team judges the success of its public relations stunt according to whether or not there is any reference to the Firefly girl in the media coverage.
The official narrative:
“The war of the future is nuclear terrorism. It is and it will be against a small group of dissidents who, unbeknownst, perhaps, to their own governments, have blah blah blah.”
The story needs victims (the girl), an enemy (who wants what we want) and a hero. (We can’t have a war without a hero – someone who has been discarded like an old shoe”.) All of a sudden, the story of the President’s sexual misconduct, becomes a story about loss and about redemption.
What is real? What is the truth?
Motts boasts that the war footage “is a complete fucking fraud, and it looks a hundred percent real.”
Conrad Brean encourages us to be skeptical about official narratives because they are often constructed in such a way as to reveal a hidden or deceptive agenda.
In response to Motss’ questions about the truth, Bream states, “how the fuck do we know? You take my point?” Evidently, the truth simply does not make as interesting a story as the heroics of a bunch of American soldiers who were fighting for the “American way of life” and an end to terrorism.
Brean questions the “truth” about the Kennedy Assassination and believes that the Warren Report revealed that he was “killed by a drunken driver’.
He encourages us to question the official narrative relating to the Gulf War. Was the video footage of this war real? Brean neither confirms nor denies the fact that it could have been shot it in a studio in Falls Church Virginia. “The truth? I was in the building when we shot that shot… One-tenth scale model of a building.” Likewise, at the conclusion of the film, a news report about a violent incident in Albania is shown, but it is ambiguous whether this is a true event or simply a continuation of the fictional war.
And after all if war video footage is on national television, then there must be a war.
The government does not need to prove the “truth” or veracity of the information. As Brean says, “We don’t need it to prove out. We’ve got less than two weeks till the election, so we just need to distract them.”
The government controls the flow of information
Motss creates a narrative (story) around the Albanian conflict based on the girl fleeing from the “terrorist” attack. The “untrustable” Albanians become convenient enemies – more convenient than the Swedes. (The story is “dull” without an enemy.)
Brean believes that the public does not need to know why Albania is the enemy, apart from the fact that its people are envious of the American way of life. “They want what we want”.
They are swamped with terrorists, infiltrating America through the Canadian borders. Through the Canadian north wind, comes the “terror”.
When the story does break, there is maximum secrecy in the interests of the “safety of the men and women in combat”. The details are suppressed in the national interest. Likewise, questions are discouraged.
The government is not only secretive with regards to its agenda but it coerces naïve and innocent people such as Tracey (not Stacey) Lime into signing declarations. She is completely ignorant of the content, and is then informed that should she release any information, this would lead to maximum penalties. Brean tells her, “They could come to your house in the middle of the night and kill you.”
The public relations machine has little respect for the public. It is about “teasing” an unsuspecting public, and about stimulating and buying their curiosity with crass emotional bribes. As Motts says, who believes it is necessary to withhold the appearance of the war-hero-rapist, “you gotta tease them. You don’t put Jaws in the first reel of the movie … The contract of the election, whether they know it or not, is “Vote for me Tuesday, Wednesday I’ll produce Schumann.”
Brean uses subtle psychological powers of persuasion to influence, control and define the terms of the debate. For example, the question, “does the government have a B3-bomber?” focuses people’s attention on the country’s defence needs. But whether or not there is such a bomber is completely irrelevant.
Shared and competing interests: Self-interest takes priority
Brean advises the CIA Agent Charlie Young that protecting one’s country, is protecting one’s job, and ensuring that he is secure to enjoy the American way of life.
He reminds him that their spy satellites ought to reveal war-like activity, because “”if your spy satellites don’t see nothin’, if there ain’t no war, then you can go home and prematurely take up golf, my friend. ‘Cause there ain’t no war but ours.”
In other words, “if there is no threat, what good are you?”
For the CIA to be able to justify the trillions of dollars spent on national security, and ultimately one’s job, there must be dissidents and there must be war. One must remain alert, constantly “gearing up for that war” on the horizon.
After all we cannot always see the footprint of “nuclear terrorism”, which is the “war of the future”.
And fear rules the day.
Brean eventually becomes annoyed that the CIA “cuts a better deal” and announces the end to the war. It can’t end like this. “He’s not producing this!”.
As Motss believes, “It’s not over until I say it’s over. This is my picture – this is NOT the CIA’s picture.”
Hollywood Special Effects controls the war : War is “show business”; war is a “pageant”. It’s the “greatest show on earth”. “It’s like the Oscars.”
War is “show business”; war is a “pageant”. It’s the “greatest show on earth”.
“We’re not gonna have a war, we’re gonna have the appearance of a war.”
In a “room with talent” and amidst a buzzing electrified atmosphere, talented show-business personnel thrive on the story.
The director in the Hollywood studio sifts through the Village Library to choose a combination of special effects that combine to give a chilling and authentic picture of a lone survivor. There’s the burning bridge, the running stream, the white calico kitten and the burnt-out buildings in the background which provide dramatically and emotionally-charged video footage.
All the elements are meticulously chosen because of their emotive effect. The colour green stands for strong pride and dignity. The girl must be carrying a white calico kitten, it cannot be a dog.
There is maximum drama. She is “running from a village” over the burning bridge, because she cannot be static. Flames are introduced as are the “ooh ahh Anne Frank sirens” that give reinforce the frightening context. The news footage is suitably grainy.
The tragedy of war is reduced to a picture: “We remember the pictures”.
Ultimately, according to Brean, the public remembers the sensational or dramatic images. Despite the fact that there were 2,500 missions a day, the public remembers the “one smart bomb falling down a chimney”. “The American people bought that war” based on the fact that “war is show business”.
He believes that the public will only remember pictures, the “smart bomb, falling down a chimney. Twenty five hundred missions a day, 100 days, one video of one bomb. Mr. Motss. The American people bought that war.”
“You remember the picture 50 years from now, you’ll have forgotten the war. The Gulf War, smart bomb falling down a chimney. 2500 missions a day, 100 days. ONE video of ONE bomb Mr. Motts, the American people bought that war. War is show business – that’s why we’re here.”
The tragedy of war is reduced to a slogan: We remember the slogans (we can’t remember the fuckin’ wars)
The slogans and jingles influence the message and penetrate deep into the psyche of the nation.
“Language does not just describe reality. Language creates the reality it describes.” Desmond Tutu
The American government is not “declaring war” as was the case in World War II. The government is simply “going to war”.
The media becomes part of the story through the sensationalist and dramatic headlines. There is a “just-in report” with “poignant pictures” to inject drama. Other headlines such as the “late-breaking news – from Air Force One” reinforce the dramatic urgency of the occasion. And after all if war video footage is on national television, then there must be a war.
And in the end, as Winifred Ames declares, the media, the news coverage in cohorts with “show business, “destroyed the electoral process!”
Conrad Bream understands the power of slogans to create and shape the public’s reality and convince them to patriotically support the war.
It’s the songs, the images, the merchandising tie-ins.
Brean knows that people remember slogans and pictures. They can’t remember the wars. “Cause its show business. That’s why I’m here. Naked girl, covered in Napalm. Five marines Raising the Flag, Mount Suribachi. V for Victory.” “Remember the Maine”.
The choir sing a stirring song revolving around the patriotic need to “guard our American borders” and “guard the American dream”. The public can be convinced that this war is about keeping our “country free”.
In this case, the jingle about the “old shoe” ensures that the public eagerly awaits the return of the war hero, which is promised the day after the election result. This jingle penetrates their sub-conscious realities and members of the public contagiously chant and repeat the “old shoe” song. The director’s point is that through clever media and marketing tactics, through the power of persuasion, the government is able to turn a drug-addled criminal into a revered war hero.
Because of the songs, the director is able to encourage the public to patriotically support the returned war hero. This hero becomes a very poignant and courageous symbol of the war and of American success.
And as the show-business personnel hijack the narrative with their “pageant”, so Motts increasingly believes that he is running the show and the government.
As the war becomes increasingly real, so too does Motts’s power and self-belief. “The war ain’t over til I say it’s over . . . . Look at that! That is a complete fucking fraud, and it looks 100% real. This is the greatest work I’ve ever done in my life – because it’s so honest.”
His downfall is to ask for too much. He wants the credit which seals his downfall. Tracey Lime, who likewise wanted to include the … on her CV, is advised to keep silent. For some reason, Motts does not follow his own team’s advice. And indeed, as foreshadowed, they “come to your house in the middle of the night and kill you”.
The personnel are ultimately, not more important than the Presidential show.
Another parallel about a much-talked about president.
The Donald Trump campaign for President is all about the package and very little about content. In fact, some political commentators suggest that it is quite common for Mr Trump to contradict himself at least three times a day. According to the Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, Mr Trump can effortlessly leverage off his celebrity status and the 15 seasons of his reality TV show, The Apprentice, so that in the end it becomes difficult to distinguish between the real and the made-up President, between news and reality TV. “If you see Trump in The Apprentice, he’s in the high-backed chair. He’s perfectly lit. he’s perfectly made up. He’s perfectly coiffed. He’s perfectly dressed. And he’s decisive. He’s tough. He’s making decisions. He looks and acts like what you think a president should be.” (The Age, 30/4/16)
Return to The Hybrid Essay: Wag the Dog