Another MSM psy-ops?

[PSPS]

I think I've noticed another subtle word game in the MSM to demonize democrats I'd like to run by everyone. It may be my imagination, so that's why I'd like to see if anyone else has noticed this.

As we all know, the use of the word "democrat" as an adjective has been commonplace since Gingrich and Luntz instructed that it be used that way as a subtle pejorative twenty years ago. Well, this is along those lines.

Anyway, when I listen to the text of a political story being read, I've noticed that the wording is crafted in a way to maximize the use of the word "they" when referring to what a democrat says, does or wants. For example, a story about, say, the health care bill will open with a sentence or two to introduce the story. Then, they will quote a republican in some context. As the story gets read, the republican side is usually mentioned as "republicans say…" but the democratic side always adds a sentence at the beginning so the word "they" can be used. Example: "But democrats don’t see it that way. They say it will help. They cite studies." Like that. I perceive it as a subtle way to impart the perception in the listener's/viewer's mind that democrats are "the other," not "like us."

So, what about it? Has anyone else noticed this?

[Truth2Tell]

1. This guy told me he's noticed it...

on edit: btw I kid. Show me some more data and I'll listen. :)

[leftrightwingnut]

3. Does this apply to online text stories?

Or is it just a video thing so that it is harder for viewers to perceive the manipulation?

[drm604]

2. I don't doubt it.

As Truth2Tell said, show me some more data, but I wouldn't be suprised in the least. They definitely play games with words and psychology and that could be one of the ways they do it.

[Mnemosyne]

4. It's called 'branding'; and the repukes are very good at it, unfortunately.

Think Faux news. :puke:

:hi:


snip>

Brand marketing is the art/science of making the right impression on prospects. It’s the active process of discovering, developing and bringing the right image or identity of your company to the marketplace. Too often, clients are focused on the later stages of the brand identity development process, such as the presentation on a Web site or advertisement in a magazine.

Effective Brand Marketing is a complete process of researching the market and developing an image for your corporate identity, and then engineering its presentation at optimal times and places. Since search engine users are looking for a specific product or service, having your well-constructed brand presented in search engine listings, is perhaps one of the best brand impressions you can make.

http://www.brandidentityguru.com/brand-marketing.htm

[chollybocker]

5. Words are important in this war.

Democrats have become 'the Others", while the word 'Republican' has disappeared from the propaganda lexicon. Re-branding is Karl's forté.

[Igel]

6. Haven't noticed it.

But I have from time to time noticed, when a party is basically setting the agenda, that they get more text. After all, what they're doing is the topic, and to introduce and discuss the topic is to introduce and discuss what the Party-in-power is doing and saying.

So you'd get things like "Party-out-of-power says X. But the Party-in-power says otherwise. It does W. It does X. It does Y. The members of the Party-in-power do Z." Or you may flip is so that the Party-out-of-power is the last in line for discussion; then you have to debate whether or not they get the final word, or if what they've said is so far down the page that few actually get to it. (I've heard people argue both--when it's their party at the end, nobody reads that far so it's as good as not including it; when the opposite party's at the end, they get in the final shot, and the paper's obvious in the other party's pocket.)

Now, you could use "Party-in-power" over and over, but it sounds incoherent after a very few repetitions. Try it; unless you simply love the sound of the party name, it's cloying and then annoying then moronic, in short order. It's why we have anaphoric expressions. The word "they" is an anaphor. If they go on and on about the Party-out-of-power they have to start using anaphora to refer back to the Party-out-of-power, as well.

The simpler the syntax, the more they'll have to say "they." If you're used to lots of hypotaxis and coordination, all those "theys" stick out like a sore thumb. They key is to keep the anaphora fairly stressless: As soon as you start putting the focus on it, *then* you start getting contrastive stress and making them "them" as opposed to "us".