portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

Yet more FASCISM?

Could this be the biggest thing since catching on to the way the ideologically challenged consistently betray weak groups? Simply, how we USE or ARE USED BY the language all around us controls what we *believe* we can accomplish!
Yet more FASCISM? (bulletin from a student at the school for designing a society)

I want to point out the danger of letting language use us. In "Sexist Ads Have Got To Go!" (by Kathie), I found these words:

"The ad made me feel too shitty"

I want to know how an ad makes us do things? (Hey, I've let ads "make me" too! But that was before I started to catch on to the ideahh that i don't HAVE to let ads have any impact on me; WE ARE NOT BEING FORCED to LET ads have an impact on us!--but if you or anyone can show differently, i'd like to see that!) I want to tell you that you don't have to let ads, or anything else "make" you do anything. If we let ads like that one that "made" Kathy "pissed off,
invisible, discarded, used, ridiculous... I
felt so shitty I tried to avoid that whole street: how
fucked up is that!", we're just LETTING THE DESIGNERS OF THESE THINGS continue CONTROLLING us!

Anyone else want to stick their neck out into this dangerous thread? Maybe my fellow sdas'ers have an even more interesting way to look Kathy's language (and mine!). Imagine a sign above my metaphorical door saying: "Dissent Welcome!"


Then there was Paul K replying to Eric H on the topic being discussed:
"I do not ask that you change your opinion of the ad campaign, but that you consider the effects on people other than yourself. While marketing campaigns may have little effect on some people, they are designed to send very powerful messages to the masses."

I've learned to see the "but" in a new dimension. Look at the way language is using you! (Or, are you consciously using "normal", status-quo language--re: limiting freedom--yourself?--Look at the way you say "yourself" to Eric...!)

As for the way marketing campaigns are designed to effect the masses...yes! Do the masses have to continually ALLOW themselves to be victimized by them? And when do these ads actually victimize us? Apparently, if we avoid them, or censor them, that's supposed to seriously ward off the danger??

We use arguments like this and we don't seem to see how we get caught in an overwhelming trap. Basically, that we become the very same fascists that we claim to be trying to change!

Finally, Judy L asked a significant question:

"How do I deal (respond) to/with someone who is oppressing me without oppressing them and still feel okay about me?"

I'm reminded of the idea of the "power of the respondednt". Know what that entails?

homepage: homepage: http://www.designingsociety.org

You Should Go Door to Door 25.Feb.2001 20:22

Allison

I feel just as passionately as you do about the manipulation of mass marketing. More and more of us are coming out of our stupors and questioning things we never thought to question before. Not all of us are lucky enough to ask the questions though. For example, I daily see what the body image has done to many women by binding their consciousness to weight and, thus, taking focus away from serious personal empowerment (fat is a feminist issue because you can't fight oppression on an empty stomach). You have a rousing spirit...this is apparent by the language in your post. I think if you had any ideas about forming a guerrilla awareness organization that organized in each city to go door to door and speak with everyday people, I'd be right behind you. It's not the people who click on www.fair.org and mother jones and the imc who we should focus on. It's people who suffer under the illusion that the corporate, mainstream media will tell them everything they need to know in between the ads of their sponsors. If someone is making the comment that an ad "made them feel shitty," that's a step in the right direction towards the self-analysis of one's response to marketing. I agree that the phrase "makes me feel" is not the best to use because all of us who've been in therapy know that people feel based on their own feelings (experiences, issues, etc) and that to say that an ad, a spouse, an oddly worded comment, a joke..."made" them feel anything is incorrect. The words should be more self-analytical like: "I felt that the ad invoked..." or "my response to this is rather negative...let me tell you why.." etc etc. Yes. I think that if people are at least aware of the IMC and utilizing it in the manner that we are at the present moment, then they are a lot further along than the people we should be reaching door to door. Of course, peddlers and Jehovah Witnesses have already ruined the image of door to door "sales," but we could work on our spiel. What do you think? Your message needs to go to people who watch Fox News and drool in front of the Home Shopping Network. These people need all the help they can get.

In Solidarity and Clarity,
Allison