Univ., Diss.--Bonn, 2003.

No description available.

From Europe to the Nation examines how six influential American journalists - John Gunther, Freda Kirchwey, Arthur Krock, Walter Lippmann, Anne O’Hare McCormick, and Dorothy Thompson - viewed and interpreted for their American audience the series of European events from Hitler’s ascension to power in Germany to the attack on Pearl Harbor. My study describes the interpretative frameworks through which these journalists viewed and explained what happened, namely a shared faith in the superiority of American politics and policies, a belief in the moral supremacy of the “new world” over the “old world,” a view of a racially-stratified world dominated by Anglo-Saxons, and a gendered worldview based on the binary opposites of masculine and feminine. These journalists used different interpretative frameworks in response to different events, shifting, overlapping and eventually coalescing in time. As events in Europe became increasingly dire following the Fall of France and threatened directly the national security of the United States, the interplay of these guiding assumptions prompted the rise to dominance of a shared viewpoint: what was at stake was the future of a West tom between civilization and barbarism. The civilization versus barbarism discourse had a clear propaganda value, in that it was used by journalists to support American participation, if not outright intervention, in the European war. This approach pinpoints the historical process of ideology creation. This ideology was elastic and highly effective, utilized for propaganda purpose not just for American intervention, but also to rally the home-front throughout the war and to legitimize Cold War American foreign policy. This study stresses the importance of recognizing the agency of journalists in the development of the concept because of their critical role as intermediaries between the crises occurring on the other side of the Atlantic and the American public’s understanding of what these events meant for the United States. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

No description available.

Conservative talk radio has had a long and controversial history in the United States of America. Two early controversial radio hosts who rose to fame in the United States were the "radio priest" Charles Coughlin (1889-1979), a Roman Catholic priest who had a massive national radio audience of approximately 30 million people during the 1930s, and the Reverend Robert P. Shuler (1879-1965), the fundamentalist Evangelical pastor of the 5,000 member Trinity Methodist Church in Los Angeles California. This thesis examines Charles Coughlin and Robert P. Shuler's use of recognized propaganda techniques as defined by Harold Laswell, Walter Lippmann, Ronald H. Carpenter, Alfred McClung Lee, Elizabeth Briant Lee, and others, especially in casting themselves as favored social elites, using their insider information to warn followers that other elites meant them harm. In an era when digital communication easily magnifies demagoguery, understanding the various methods and effects of propaganda as practices by these two figures might help contemporary audiences discern whether a communicator intends to promote the general welfare of society or merely their own interests. Additionally, this thesis examines Coughlin and Shuler's relationship with populist political movements.

This paper aims to contribute to knowledge of stereotypization mechanisms, bringing in the case of PR consultants. Using lenses of the key cultural form - film and television series - the project analyses a way of representing PR profession, as depicted on TV screen both in Czech Republic and the United Kingdom, during 2000-2017 time period. Theoretical frame is drawing on key ideas on stereotype, narrowed by film usage, as seen in the work of Walter Lippmann and others. Main hypothesis is based on assumption that negative media portrayal might interfere with professional reputation. Analytical part employs qualitative, thematical analysis that focuses on interpretation of personal features, behavioral characteristics and depiction of reocurring key themes. The final outcome then presents a professional portrayal of Public Relations on Czech and British television scene, builded up on prominent steretypes, accompanied by relevant quotes to illustrate the point. Key findings show undestanding communication as means of persuasion, leading to egoism, a lack of ethical values and dominant attitude in relation to clients and journalists. To prove the contribution argument that these negative attributes will further affect the future professional status of PR, the final insight illustrates such impact by...

Le néolibéralisme, un terme qui désigne couramment la raison d’état contemporaine, est largement associé à un désinvestissement de l’État pour la cause sociale ainsi qu’à un discours de légitimation des disparités socio-économiques. Il s’agit, pour plusieurs, d’une idéologie qui ne considère pas la justice comme un idéal collectif à poursuivre. Un retour sur certains penseurs à qui l’on attribue la formulation des idées néolibérales permet toutefois de constater que la justice fut, au sein de leurs travaux, l’un des thèmes majeurs. L’objectif général de ce mémoire est donc de présenter la conception de la justice chez deux penseurs du néolibéralisme : le journaliste américain Walter Lippmann et l’économiste autrichien Friedrich A. von Hayek. Cette perspective comparée me permettra d’identifier ce que je nomme la «conception néolibérale» de la justice, conception qui s’articule à partir d’une compréhension singulière du marché. Dans le premier chapitre, je présente le problème central de la conception néolibérale de la justice, en abordant la posture épistémologique privilégiée par Hayek et Lippmann. Dans le deuxième chapitre, je présente certaines modalités de cette conception et soulève ses principales apories. Je soutiens aussi qu’une rupture survient entre Hayek et Lippmann autour de la notion de «responsabilité». Finalement, je compare la conception néolibérale de la justice avec la conception libertarienne présentée par Nozick. C’est à partir des critères de justice respectifs de chaque théorie que j’avance la distinction, au troisième chapitre, entre les deux conceptions pourtant similaires. Contrairement à une analyse courante qui fait du néolibéralisme un projet amoral, je soutiens que la reconnaissance de la dimension morale du discours néolibéral ouvre une fenêtre à partir de laquelle il devient possible de critiquer le projet sur des bases éthiques. C’est en identifiant la notion de justice à l’oeuvre dans le discours néolibéral contemporain et en l’inscrivant dans la tradition morale présentée dans le cadre de ce mémoire que nous sommes mieux à même de comprendre l’idéologie du néolibéralisme. / Neoliberalism, a term commonly used to describe the current paradigm of the state, is largely related to a disengagement of the state from issues of social welfare and is associated with the legitimization of socio-economic inequalities. For many critics, it also represents an ideology that does not consider justice as a collective ideal that should be pursued. This stands in contradiction with the fact that justice was a central theme in the works of many thinkers to whom we attribute the formulation of neoliberal thought. Considering this paradox, the main purpose of this Master’s thesis is to expose the conception of justice as expressed by two key neoliberal thinkers: the American journalist Walter Lippmann and the Austrian economist Friedrich A. von Hayek. This comparative perspective will allow me to single out what I call the "neoliberal conception" of justice, a conception that builds on a particular understanding of the market. In the first chapter, I present the central challenge of the neoliberal conception of justice by broaching the epistemological stance common to Hayek and Lippmann. In the second chapter, I present specific properties of this conception and discuss its principal blind spots. I also show that Hayek and Lippmann disagree when it comes to the notion of "responsibility". Finally, I compare the neoliberal conception of justice with that of libertarians, as presented by Robert Nozick in his work Anarchy, State and Utopia. In this third section, I argue that Hayek and Nozick’s respective criteria of justice drive a wedge between two otherwise rather similar conceptions. In contrast to a standard analysis that treats neoliberalism as an amoral project, I contend that recognition of the moral dimension of neoliberal discourse opens up a perspective from which it becomes possible to challenge the project on ethical grounds. Understanding the idea of justice underpinning contemporary neoliberalism, as rooted in the moral tradition presented in this essay, is necessary if we are to criticize this ideology on moral grounds.

No description available.