Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media

1992

Biography / Documentary / War

8
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 78% · 9 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 94% · 2.5K ratings
IMDb Rating 8.1/10 10 5104 5.1K

propaganda media professor psychoanalysis manipulation of the media political activist

Director

Mark Achbar Photo
Mark Achbar

Top cast

Noam Chomsky Photo
Noam Chomsky as Self
Edward S. Herman Photo
Edward S. Herman as Self
Peter Jennings Photo
Peter Jennings as Self
Tom Wolfe Photo
Tom Wolfe as Self
480p.DVD
1.44 GB
706*480
English 2.0
NR
Subtitles
23.976 fps
2 hr 47 min
Seeds 22

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by rash594 8 / 10

Chomsky's explanation of the Media Propaganda Model, with relevant examples

Anyone acquainted with Herman and Chomsky's Propaganda Model will identify with this film, but the beauty of Manufacturing Consent is that even those who aren't, will, by the end of it, have a clear picture of what it is about. At 167 minutes, Manufacturing Consent is rather long for a documentary, but the detailing of events and juxtapositioning and interplay between frames are effective tools in delivering the message. The movie is divided into two parts. It follows Chomsky's interviews with various media outlets across platforms – TV and radio news stations, newspaper journalists, student groups and across talks, debates and Q&A sessions. Through all of them, he explains the Propaganda Model and gives various examples to explain it. The atrocities carried out by the US in Cambodia versus those carried out by Pol Pol, also in Cambodia, is given a great deal of importance in the movie, and Chomsky's view is that the former received very little coverage, since the US was involved, but the latter was played up – all in keeping with the Propaganda Model. Another example is that of the genocidal atmosphere created by Indonesian forces in East Timor, and how there was precious little coverage in US media, because it was a matter of economic interest (arms selling) for the US and they wanted the killings to go on. The movie was made in 1992, following the release of the book of the same name by Chomsky and Herman (1988). At the time, as was also discussed in the movie, the media comprised of the 'traditional' vehicles – TV, radio, film and newspapers. In such a situation, the Propaganda Model seemed to hit the nail of news filtering methods on the head. However, today, over two decades later, the situation is a bit different. The biggest change is in the method of news consumption. While a lot of people still turn to traditional news media, there are a large number of people (and the numbers keep growing) who have turned to the internet. With the dynamics of the internet, where content is easier to access and where the five filters don't necessarily apply, it is much easier for subjects other than those discussed in traditional media to be broached. More often than not, these would include 'uncomfortable' topics which would have been left out by traditional media. That being said, however, the online news space, too, is getting very competitive and is increasingly beginning to adopt means of revenue similar to traditional media, therefore succumbing to similar pressures. But with the online space, the common man can also be the disseminator of news, and this is where the challenge to Chomsky's Propaganda Model arises. Those with no economic, political or any other vested interests in media other than the dissemination of news will be committed to talking about the uncomfortable facts, making sure that the propaganda and agenda set by mainstream media are challenged. However, Chomsky states in the film that, "It's (alternative media) going to have a hard time, because there is such a concentration of power." Another important factor to consider while gauging the validity of the Model is an individual's own background. Those coming from media or 'media literate' backgrounds, would, arguably, be better able to decipher the news filtering process. The average common man is less likely to question what was eliminated before the news that he sees in the morning newspaper appeared, as compared to a more media literate person. However, Chomsky says that the common man is very smart and that given the know-how, he can tell the difference for himself. Besides this, schools and universities, as institutions of learning, are, by default, meant to be models of scholarly dissent and should train one to ask such 'difficult' questions. Besides, family, religious organisations and other social influences also make a difference in one's understanding of the media process. For instance, a person whose religious views are moderate is not likely to engage in flak against other religious groups (or the media carrying the news itself) based on a news item. Likewise, a person from a well- educated, 'aware' family is likely to ask poignant questions about the inclusion or, more importantly, the non-inclusion of certain news items in mainstream media. Thus, it is necessary to keep in mind the structure of news dissemination systems in today's date, and realise that there's been a shift in power. News is no longer a one-way process; it is now a two-way street, whereby the consumer is not helpless and at the mercy of the traditional media. The consumer, too, can ask questions or, not finding the answers, begin to disseminate the news himself via alternative means such as the internet. The only thing that's required is awareness, and Manufacturing Consent does just that. This is not to say the Propaganda Model isn't relevant, but efforts must be made. After all, as Chomsky mentions in the film, "The struggle for freedom and independence is never truly over."
Reviewed by jackinbox1982 8 / 10

Mind blowing but rather subjective

Reviewed by rachael-songqi 8 / 10

The heart behind the intellect

Read more IMDb reviews

11 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment