Template talk:Wartime propagandists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Bush as propagandist[edit]

In 8 years, did Bush make a major public statement which was not a lie?
After 8 years plus, people still debate to what extent Bush was a puppet manipulated by Cheney. There is perhaps one precedent for that situation in US history but not more than that.
As far as the majority of the world is concerned, Bush was simply the mouthpiece for the smarter people in his clique (Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, etc.), and what they told him to say was a pack of lies. All of the "justifications" for the Iraq War had been debunked in the world media and/or alternative media in 2002, before the war ever began. It then took the mainstream US media a few years to catch up to what the rest of us knew back in 2002.
So, for these reasons, Bush is a war propagandist, pure and simple.
A war criminal who belongs in prison.
Does anyone actually not see him that way?
Varlaam (talk) 19:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

  • Varlaam, I'm sure there are plenty of people that would disagree with you, however this isn't the point. Whether you question his ethics and truthfulness or not, I don't believe "propagandist" is this correct category to put him under. In my view, this title is generally reserved for someone who's sole duty is to work specifically towards both creating and spreading propaganda to meet an end - as many of the others in that template show. Bush's title was "president of the USA" or "commander in chief"; whether or not he *used* propaganda to this end is what your disputing, but this was not his primary nor sole role. If you can find references that show him as a propagandist (not just using propaganda), then by all means cite it and change it. IMHO, however, this whole template is a waste. Tevonic (talk) 19:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
    • To further stress my point - if you believe Bush to be a bad political leader that's fine. You'd be ignorant not to agree with me there are FAR worse examples in history. Let's take Hitler for example, who certainly used propaganda to his ends. Shall we label him a wartime propagandist? No, he was a dictator who used propaganda. Tevonic (talk) 19:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
In Hitler's defence, he was actually elected. The Torturer General was not elected in 2000, nor in 2004.
Hitler served in combat where he was decorated. Hitler was not a draft dodger.
Hitler never strutted in a codpiece.
Hitler was a teetotalling vegetarian. Hitler was not a coke-snorting drunk driver.
Hitler wrote the lies that came out of his mouth. Hitler didn't mangle someone else's lies.
Fine, have it your way: Bush was a dictator who employed propaganda for his self-serving ends.
I disagree.
Varlaam (talk) 03:52, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I think the point would be to include Karl Rove and whoever is Obama's main propagandist under Iraq War, US invasion/occupation of Afghanistan, US drone attacks against Pakistan, US drone attacks against Yemen, Somalia, ... Boud (talk) 20:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Should be deleted[edit]

Inclusion on this template is very subjective. I think it should be deleted. p.s. I notice the template was created by a once-only editor. Despite good faith efforts to salvage it, I think it's just too riddled with problems, e.g. there is no definition of what a wartime propagandist is (there isn't even an article Wartime propagandist), and there is no way to reference peoples' inclusions. Adpete (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

What a strange template. The US, Britain and continental Europe have huge institutions that turn out war propaganda. The people in these institutions have names, faces. Wolf Blitzer made his name reporting on the Gulf War. Should he be in that section? Roger Ailes (and many, many others) boosted the Afghan and Iraq wars. George Creel promoted US intervention in WW1 as part of a government committee that defined its mission as "propaganda in the true sense of the word." Thomas Friedman turned out Iraq War propaganda that approached Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf in its slavishness.

It is easy enough to add names to the template, but I expect that if I tried to add the template at the bottom of the Ailes article it would be removed very quickly. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 04:44, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

"there is no definition of what a wartime propagandist is"
How about: someone who broadcasts propaganda during wars for a living?--eh bien mon prince (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
The Hearst and Pulitzer link goes to Propaganda_of_the_Spanish–American_War - with the claim that this was "the first conflict in which military action was precipitated by media involvement." So the claim is that this is mainly a 20-th/21-st century phenomenon.
Even if the claim is exaggerated, what would probably be reasonable would be:
  1. Split to something like Template:20th century wartime propagandists plus Template:21st century wartime propagandists (TODO: check the WP:MOS style conventions)
  2. Use something like a list of 20th/21st century wars article, expand the list into this template, commenting out those for which the best known propagandists don't yet have en.Wikipedia articles, and adding the links for those that do.
IMHO the 20th century list would be huge, and the 21st century one might be manageable.
Boud (talk) 20:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)