Film Analysis: Wag the Dog

PRSA Perhaps the clearest violation of the principles of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) in Wag the Dog is its essential premise: the PR firm is working to create the impression that the U.S. is at war to save the reputation of the current president, even though the country is still at peace. The PR firm deliberately deludes the American public into believing falsehoods based upon the needs of the client.

As well as inhibiting the dissemination of truthful information, the PR firm actively stifles open communication by covering up the sex scandal of the president by creating false footage about the supposed war in Albania. The PR firm also collaborates with a movie producer to create fake film footage of the actual war specifically designed to tug at the heartstrings of Americans. What the public should actually be focused upon (the politician's credibility) is completely changed and reversed.

PR moguls are not supposed to lie but rather to present the news in a better way to suit the needs of the client. They are not supposed to manufacture war heroes that do not exist and manipulate the public with fabricated facts. It is one thing to present information in a positive light; it is another thing to actually become involved with the creation of the news from whole cloth.

In the film, the PR firm becomes an enabler of presidential dishonesty: PR firms are not supposed to 'be' the news but merely to report and present. In the film, PR crosses the line to 'create' stories and manage them rather than to merely 'spin.' Not only does it manipulate the media: it also manipulates ordinary people's emotions into believing untruths, as seen when it whips up support for the fake war hero. Through this direct PR manipulation, the election results are directly affected.

While PR has certainly resulted in wins and losses that would not have occurred otherwise in elections, the focus is supposed to be on the message's presentation: the message itself should not be lies nor should it be based upon a distortion of history. Q2. In the film the dog's 'tail' is the PR coverage while the 'dog' is supposed to be the actual meat and potatoes of policy-making. In this instance, the PR coverage is dictating the behavior of the electorate, rather than actual, concrete facts.

Theoretically, the news media should encapsulate real life and then PR staff members try to 'spin' this to the best advantage possible for the president. In this case, the PR spin begins the cycle -- it creates a story which then the news media picks up. The media is effectively reporting the 'spin' not the story and the manipulation and 'spin' thus become the story.

Ironically, however, the spin becomes so powerful that it is difficult to say what is really the less important story of the two issues (the war vs. The sex scandal): by virtue of making the fake war and its fake war heroes and songs so important, the wag or the issue of secondary importance becomes all-important. Spin and media influence is what matters, not the material impact of a story. Q3.

How real is it? Although the scenario depicted in the film is absurd, there are clear echoes of the truth in its portrayal of the media's manipulation of what we consider news. A good, early example of this is the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The constant barrage of reporting on this 'sexy' story eventually created a real, political story when the president's lying was investigated by the independent prosecutor.

But the importance of the story was not in its policy implications: the story itself and the question of who was lying and/or telling the truth drove the coverage. With virtually every celebrity story, the media begins by 'telling' us that it is a story with its overwhelming coverage, causing people to care about Michael Jackson or Whitney Houston's death far more than they might otherwise.

A story gains in sexiness and appeal simply by virtue of its simplicity and the overwhelming nature of the media's or a PR firm's coverage. Another good example of this in recent history was the coverage of the ACA (Affordable Care Act) debate. Regardless of one's position on this issue, healthcare reform is a serious matter deserving of reasoned debate.

But instead of covering the possible impact of the law or why it was passed, the news media focused on the political 'football' the law generated between the administration and the Republican-dominated Congress. The story became focused on who would 'win' this struggle vs. whether the law was valid or not or would really accomplish the goals it was supposed to accomplish. Instead, it was simply easier to focus on who won politically, versus a very complex law.

Even if the media has never been manipulated into covering a false war, the media is ultimately in the business of selling journalism, not disseminating facts. This means that breaking issues down into very simple terms and focusing on sexy rather than boring issues are in the media's interest and politicians are all too happy to go along with this.

Ultimately, there is a mutually beneficial 'dance:' politicians focus on partisan talking points (like freedom or class warfare, depending on their political parties) and the media portrays debates in similarly black-and-white terms. No one's points-of-view are changed by this: they are merely solidified. Q1. Name and describe 5 propaganda devices used in the movie (devices from "Propaganda -- all devices, 2014) "Appeal to emotion:" To rally support for the war, the PR operative creates a scene in which a young, Albanian refugee girl rescues a beloved kitten from the rubble.

Not only is the scene false, but even were it real, there is no inherent reason that the U.S. should intervene in Albania simply because a girl's little kitten was hurt. The image tugs on the heartstrings, little else. "Astroturf:" This common technique is used in politics to lure people to support a program: advertising the program's popular support which is actually manufactured by corporate interests.