OCR Text |
Show 7 Page by T. Octopus The Utah Advertising Federation, true to its colors, is currently sponsoring a false and misleading television advertising campaign. The message of the campaign, Without advertising you wouldnt know, implies that the advertising industry is continuing to perform its traditional function of informing consumers of product availability and the relative advantages of competing products. Such an assertion is patently untrue - an increasing amount of advertising is motivated by other considerations not directly related to the promotion of the advertiser's goods and services, considerations which can most accurately be described as political. Such political advertising falls into two general classes: manipulation of the political climate for the individual advertiser (or the advertisers industry), and aggrandizement of the free enterprise system. Attempts to influence the political climate by commercial advertisers are, of course, not new - they have merely become more numerous and the techniques less subliminal. Kennecott Copper Corporation employed a low key approach in its Kennecott Neighborhood Theatre television program of the fifties and sixties. Its propaganda messages sought to cast a favorable light on the companys operations and to promote general good will for Kennecott among the programs audience. However, unlike traditional good will advertising where the intended audience is consumers of the advertisers goods and services, here the audience was the community in which Kennecott sought tax concessions, advanpollution control waivers, or other economic-politictages for the maximization of profits. By todays standards, the campaign seems almost innocuous, but the slowness in the implementation of even the weakest pollution controls on Kennecott s operations and the pride with which residents still point to Kennecotts stripmine in the Oquirrhs demonstrate al issoe 74 w jerry, w ue Tie ; U 1$ RX)T6T RUSSIAN 6T TH5 IPFA THAT THIS 15 MiXnxmwp GXfcJTW arr AFTER HOUR VCTftM AU&LA LEAPEf- off-sho-re " place). Why the recent upsurge in corporate propaganda? Perhaps big business finds it more difficult to buy politicians these days and is trying the corporate version of grass root politics. After all, if the American public can be conned into buying feminine hygiene deodorants, STP, and home trash compactors, why not the free enterprise system? YIUCEP JERCY xmf U ORP0R TO POT A HALT TO 016 runaway pmiTE- IIFH9JPEK W c- W JERRY W l&WEAgr TO KXESO (JILUVG FER2X1AL mi Inn 1 THA- T- m mu A 53 M3am)HO)T aup - ve&cuss SUFFERS TOM WEAK' ( AMP the effectiveness of its propaganda efforts. Mountain Fuels Gaslight Theatre is representative of the new wave of corporate attempts to influence public opinion. Abandoning any pretext of selling a product or developing traditional good will, Mountain Fuel lobbies unabashedly for new pipeline. specific policies such as higher rates or oil Similarly, the conglomerates no longer claim superior gas wider smiles, or cleaner restrooms, but promote mileage, drilling, the Alaskan pipeline, or the opening of more land to oil exploration. General Motors explains to the American public that coal is the answer now. We await Utah Power and Lights campaign supporting capital punishment (preferrably by electrocution). Puffing on behalf of the free enterprise system, the second class of political advertising, is usually left to the local chamber of commerce. The times, however, apparently demand bigger bankrollers. Coca Cola Corporation urges Americans to look up and see what wevo'got (smog limits the effectiveness of the campaign in Los Angeles and Salt Lake). The Bell System congratulates America for the worlds best telephone system. Mobil Oil pays tribute to Economic Freedom which it claims is responsible for two hundred years of prosperity (while consumers pay tribute unto Mobil). U.S. Steel (have you bought an latelv?) attributes the of its steel and the nations quality progress to cooperation between labor and management :(so long ns labor keeps its 1 nTO CAU OOHSOP WITH AUaCtfR 5WE5MAW Wmi AM- - am aup &m$Me LnnJ AOP R330SO AfTAIRS R3R awim I- Tie SKOUP F- SPOT 00 Tlct&r. W Pragmatic Dogmatics Political Ping Pong By Kent Shearer An obscure, but significant fact is that Jake Garn once was Utah Universitys ping pong champion. Whats more, Jakes 1974 field director, Richard Eyre, could play Gam almost evenly in the sport. Although not in the Garn-Eyr- e league (I never developed a meaningful back spin), as a youth I was the table tennis el supremo of Russell, Kansas. I unveil this data not as mere pedantic exercise. My purpose is instructional. Young men and women who plan for public service usually focus upon debate, chess, political science, history and law. They err. Although they may dabble without critical career handicap in should-i- f their any or all of the aforementioned pursuits, they serious-dedic- ate themselves to ping political ambitions are pong. Why? Because table tennis teaches one that success resides not so much in ones own abilities, as in the oppositions errors. Ones slams are set up by bad returns. One wins by opponents shots into the net or off the table. So one tries to play ping pong with something on the ball, concentration, and the anticipation necessary to capitalize upon the opponents flubs. Likewise, in politics, more campaigns are won through of opponents mistakes than through the Aristotlian qualities the victors. d a number of Ted Moss, for example, must have three years before the baby Jake could even lift a paddle. The Moss elections all have been created by his opponents ping-ponge- blunders. No. 1. Arthur Watkins, attempted to squeeze Brack Lee out of Republicanism. Brack reciprocated with a third party Senate candidacy. Watkins failed. Score one for Moss in 1958. No. 2, Ernest Wilkinson, along with me and many, sensed a conservative mood. He plaved his perception to its final hilt, won the nomination, but lost: the election. Score two for Moss in 1964. No. 3, Laurence Burton, Utahs best and brightest, became persuaded that all wisdom resided east of the Missouri River, and hired Eastern campaign managers. Those unworthies attempted to convince Utahns that Moss deserved eternal damnation, not temporal retirement. Score three for Moss in 1970. So here we are in 1976. One of the three Republicans - Des Barker, Jack Carlson or Sherman P. Lloyd - will be nominated for the Senatorial big Game against an aging Moss. Each outmatches Moss objectively. But whomever the GOP elects may be overeager, not keep the little white ball in play; make a brand new fault, and therefore follow in the pathways of Watkins, Wilkinson and Burton. If they do, we will, this year, score four for Moss. My partisan plea is: let Moss commit the big mistake of which he is fully capable this time!! In the meanwhile, I advise the kids to treat Aristotle casually, 'and to brush up their ping pong. 11 |