• dan tdaxp

    I’m not sure what the purpose is… to criticize video-based instruction? Pedagogy in controversial topics? Just making fun of the quality of actors who are now dead or retired?

  • MountainRunner

    Dan, no, no, and no. This is about who gets to see what content. If you don’t care to read the post linked at the beginning, let me review the issue. Today, there is a misconception that the U.S. government isn’t supposed to propagandize its own people. Despite the role of the Press Secretary, the Department Heads, and the NSC (in 43s first term), we still fantasize there ain’t no propagandizing. Smith-Mundt is liberally cited as the cause of this mythical prophalactic. These propaganda videos are therefore bad, very bad, for your sensitive eyes and ears, especially if there was any U.S. government support behind them (which there was). Don’t make me call you Jane and recite a line from the old Saturday Night Live (when it was still good).

  • KSH

    It’s quite interesting to view these films in today’s perspective. I have several of them on different topics the the U.S. government release some 40 years ago. Today they seem blindingley propagandastic. What will today’s Fox TV look like in 10 years?

  • dan tdaxp

    MR,Gotcha. I read the linked-to post when it first came out.
    Indeed, it’s surprising that people think the government does not engage in propaganda. The public schools are full of that nonsense, though which part of the political spectrum is being pushed changes with time.