Edward Bernays and the Manufacturing of Consent: Narratives, Propaganda, and the Shaping of Public Opinion

Edward Bernays, often regarded as the father of public relations, revolutionized the way public opinion is shaped and manipulated. Through techniques such as popular narratives, gaslighting, propaganda, scapegoating, and name-calling, Bernays created methods that are still used in contemporary marketing, politics, and media. His work fundamentally transformed the landscape of communication, leaving a legacy that permeates every facet of modern society, from consumerism to political campaigns and government policies.

The Foundations of Manufacturing Consent

Bernays, influenced by his uncle Sigmund Freud's theories on human psychology, understood that the manipulation of the subconscious mind was crucial for controlling mass behavior. He argued that the masses are irrational and subject to herd instincts, which can be directed by skilled propagandists. This understanding formed the bedrock of his approach to manufacturing consent—garnering widespread public acceptance for ideas and actions that may otherwise face resistance.

Popular Narratives and Public Acceptance

Bernays understood the immense power of narratives in shaping public opinion. He believed that for a narrative to be fully effective, it needed to achieve broad public acceptance, ideally around two-thirds of the population or higher. This widespread acceptance creates a form of social proof, where individuals conform to a belief or behavior because they perceive that the majority does as well.

One of Bernays' most famous campaigns was for the American Tobacco Company in the late 1920s. To increase the number of women smokers, he linked smoking to women's liberation, coining the term "Torches of Freedom" during a parade. By framing smoking as an act of feminist defiance, Bernays created a powerful narrative that resonated with many women, thereby increasing cigarette sales significantly.

Scapegoating and Name-Calling

Scapegoating and name-calling are tactics used to divert attention from the real issues and place blame on a particular group or individual. Bernays' techniques have been adapted in modern times to create divisive and polarizing narratives. For instance, political campaigns often employ these methods to discredit opponents and rally support from their base.

The terms "conspiracy theorist," "Karen," and "cancel culture" are contemporary examples of how name-calling and scapegoating can shape public discourse. These labels simplify complex issues into easily digestible sound bites, enabling the media and political entities to control the narrative and influence public perception.

Gaslighting and Propaganda

Gaslighting, a technique where a person is made to question their reality, was another method Bernays used to manipulate public opinion. By controlling the flow of information and the way it was presented, Bernays could make people doubt their perceptions and accept a constructed reality.

Propaganda

Propaganda, a tool Bernays extensively employed, involves the dissemination of biased or misleading information to promote a particular political cause or point of view. During World War I, Bernays worked for the U.S. Committee on Public Information, where he helped to create propaganda that framed the war as a fight for democracy and freedom. This campaign successfully garnered public support for the war effort, demonstrating the power of propaganda in manufacturing consent.

Iraq War: Gas-Lighting and WMDs

The lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003 provides a clear example of gas-lighting and propaganda influenced by Bernays' principles. The U.S. government, under President George W. Bush, and supported by key allies, claimed that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and posed an imminent threat to global security. This narrative was relentlessly pushed through speeches, media coverage, and official reports.

The term "gas-lighting" applies here because the public was led to believe in the existence of WMDs despite the lack of concrete evidence. The Bush administration's repeated assertions, along with selective presentation of intelligence, created a reality in which the existence of these weapons was taken as fact by much of the American public and the international community.

Even after extensive searches revealed no WMDs, the initial narrative had already achieved its purpose. The invasion was justified on the grounds of eliminating a supposed imminent threat. The term "conspiracy theorist" was used to discredit those who doubted the WMD narrative, effectively silencing dissenting voices and ensuring continued public support for the war.

Vietnam War: Dehumanization

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. government and media employed tactics of dehumanization to garner public support for the conflict. The Vietnamese people, particularly the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong, were often depicted as less than human, savage, and communist zealots who threatened global democracy. Terms like "gooks" and "Charlie" were used to dehumanize the enemy, making it easier for American soldiers and the public to justify the war.

The portrayal of the Vietnamese as the "Other" was a classic Bernaysian tactic. By creating a strong, negative image of the enemy, it became easier to rally public support for military actions. This dehumanization helped to diminish the moral dilemma of waging war against another nation and justified the extensive military operations conducted by the U.S.

Afghanistan War: Dehumanization and Propaganda

In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. launched the war in Afghanistan, targeting the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The narrative crafted around this conflict heavily relied on dehumanization and propaganda. The Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters were depicted as barbaric extremists who posed a direct threat to global security and American freedom. This narrative was used to justify the invasion and prolonged military presence in Afghanistan.

The propaganda campaign painted the conflict as a fight between civilization and barbarism, freedom and oppression. This simplified, black-and-white portrayal ignored the complex realities of Afghan society and the motivations behind various groups involved in the conflict. It allowed the U.S. government to maintain public support for the war effort, even as it dragged on for nearly two decades.

The Legacy of Bernays

The impact of Edward Bernays on modern society is profound. His ideas underpin the strategies of every political campaign, public relations team, marketing school, and even government foreign policy. By mastering the art of manufacturing consent, Bernays demonstrated that public opinion could be engineered to serve specific interests, often at the expense of truth and transparency.

Edward Bernays' influence on the techniques of modern propaganda is unmistakable, even in conflicts that occurred after his active career. The dehumanization of enemies in the Vietnam and Afghanistan wars, as well as the gas-lighting narrative regarding Saddam Hussein's WMDs, demonstrate how Bernays' principles have been adapted and utilized to manufacture consent and maintain public support for contentious military actions. His legacy underscores the enduring power of controlled narratives in shaping public perception and policy, reminding us of the importance of critical thinking and skepticism in the face of persuasive propaganda.

Bernays' techniques have been used to justify wars, promote consumerism, and shape societal values. For example, the build-up to the Iraq War in 2003 saw extensive use of propaganda and misleading information to gain public support for the invasion. Similarly, advertising campaigns constantly create narratives that equate personal happiness and success with the consumption of particular products.

Conclusion

Edward Bernays' work on public relations and propaganda has left an indelible mark on the world. Through the strategic use of narratives, gaslighting, propaganda, scapegoating, and name-calling, Bernays demonstrated how public opinion could be manipulated to serve specific agendas. His legacy is evident in the pervasive influence of these techniques in modern media, politics, and consumer culture. While his methods have been used to achieve significant societal changes, they also raise ethical questions about the manipulation of truth and the erosion of individual autonomy.