Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To think that in the future lockdown will be studied as an example of effective propaganda?

99 replies

Jericoo · 29/10/2020 20:03

I remember studying different examples of propaganda when I was at school, mostly in the context of wartime efforts. In the context of lockdown, all it took was a 3-word slogan and people abandoned all of their civil liberties! Astonishing.

OP posts:

whatisgoingtohappen · 29/10/2020 20:07

I think it will be studied in terms of incompetence rather than propaganda. Very good quarantining and test and trace from back in February would have avoided the number of deaths and the economic destruction that we have.

Anotherpointofview1 · 29/10/2020 20:14

There's some really interesting stuff about China and their pushing for lockdown, and the way they propagandised near the beginning - mobile.twitter.com/MichaelPSenger/status/1271497987362041856. There's also this really interesting article in the Colombia Journalism Review about the reach and impact on the media of Gates and his Foundation - www.cjr.org/criticism/gates-foundation-journalism-funding.php. As you say, fascinating how quickly we have given up freedoms that have taken millennia to develop, in an instant.

Offtothedogs · 29/10/2020 20:22

It suddenly struck me tonight, that by making it illegal to meet with others and socialise in person, and therefore pushing all our interactions online, we are now basically unable to have discussions that aren't being monitored. Also by spending so much more of our time online we're susceptible to being manipulated via targeted content on a terrifying scale. I'm not a conspiracy theorist in any way, and I'm not suggesting that Covid was manufactured or made up for this aim, but I find it utterly chilling how the tech giants have capitalised on the situation, and how we've essentially given up freedom of association, probably for ever (in the sense that this has become so normalised we're bound to continue with this online existence long after we aren't being compelled to.

And then I realised even if I was down the pub putting the world to rights, my smart phone would be listening to it all anyway, and then I felt really depressed. And yes I do recognise the irony in ranting about this on Mumsnet.

Offtothedogs · 29/10/2020 20:26

That was supposed to be more obviously relevant to the OP's point. Yes I think you're totally right, and I think this is going to be looked back on as a pivotal moment in the history of our freedom.

Original poster

Jericoo · 29/10/2020 20:27

The idea that you could ever make it illegal to see family, especially family that may be ill with a life-limiting illness and not have long left, is just crazy. How can the government tell me I cannot see those that I love. It's dystopian. But if you disagree with it then you're cruel and heartless - as if believing people shouldn't be allowed to see their families isn't cruel and heartless?

OP posts:

underneaththeash · 29/10/2020 20:32

It’s an example of ineffective propaganda - as a significant minority of people aren’t following the rules - hence the current mess we’re in.

VaggieMight · 29/10/2020 20:37

How can the government tell me I cannot see those that I love.

This has always been the case if there are safeguarding issues or a risk to society.

I do think it's interesting how quickly society can change. Some of the actions of the police in the early days was alarming. I'm sure this period will be studied for a long time, and there will be long term changes to society. I think a lot mentioned on this thread is tin foil hat stuff though.

Original poster

Jericoo · 29/10/2020 20:38

Is it not effective propaganda if the majority of people are following the rules? It's been a while since I studied this , by what criteria would you judge it to be effective, @underneaththeash?

OP posts:

PicsInRed · 29/10/2020 20:50

It's an example of the importance of buy-in and taking people WITH you (rather than just ordering people about incoherently). I think it was Vallance who said you need to treat people as rational actors, basically you need to treat them as grown ups, and make the process collaborative.

The problem is that those in charge at present are no longer rational actors themselves - terror has gripped them and removed them of their senses. They've totally lost touch with perspective and the original end goal of "save the NHS".

Think back to March - why did we lockdown? To buy time to get additional capacity and treatments. Well, we have that now, so open the fucking Nightingales and keep the economy going or we'll be broke and likely mass-rioting by May.

Tldr: the lesson is buy-in vs political mass madness.

Goosefoot · 29/10/2020 20:55

I've thought a few times that from a communications POV, it will be really interesting to look back and see what worked and what really pissed people off or was ineffective. And also how people's feelings changed over time.

Also from a disease prevention/public health POV, there have been some interesting things, a lot of what has been attempted with this has been pretty unique, and some of it has gone against what is usually considered to be effective behaviourally. So it will be interesting to examine that in a few years time.

Original poster

Jericoo · 29/10/2020 20:56

@PicsInRed Very interesting point!

Many people stopped believing in the Stay At Home message when the prominent scientist (apologies I've forgotten his name) broke the rules he had been advocating. The people in charge have to buy in to their own propaganda otherwise people won't take it seriously.

OP posts:

Mintychoc1 · 29/10/2020 20:56

In future lockdown will be seen for the outrage that it is.

I get how we can be told what to do in busy public spaces, or to strangers, or to people against their will - but to tell me that my partner can’t walk, (alone, away from everyone) to my house, is immoral.

Mintychoc1 · 29/10/2020 20:58

Historians will look back and marvel that weren’t street riots, when cases like Dominic Cummings were all over the news. Instead we sat at home and painted rainbows and clapped the NHS, like a bunch of Stepford Wives.

Bathrum · 29/10/2020 21:03

I completely agree, OP. When I think back to the beginning of all this and the way my DP and I felt and behaved, it definitely seems like we were very effectively manipulated.

Neither of us are pushovers, in fact we're both fairly cynical and questioning, yet we both felt very scared, and we therefore absolutely did what we were told to do. I'm not really scared of the virus anymore and I find it bizarre when I reflect on the things we did (eg stripping off clothes and having an immediate shower after going shopping, only shopping once every three weeks, not seeing family apart from at an enormous distance etc etc). I really think we did those things because we were subject to manipulation through propaganda.

I'm not saying that it wasn't necessarily right to manipulate people so that the majority did stay in... I'm just saying that I'm certain that manipulation did happen and I 100% agree with the OP.

Eng123 · 29/10/2020 21:04

I disagree. I think that Brexit and the last election were the worst examples of propaganda and manipulation. Possibly with a big dollop of stupidity!

D4rwin · 29/10/2020 21:07

A study into how anti social personality disorders have a high correlation with non mask wearing already been carried out.

RuggerHug · 29/10/2020 21:15

Information doesn't become propaganda just because you don't like it. As pp said, Brexit is what happens with propaganda.

Original poster

Jericoo · 29/10/2020 21:20

"A study into how anti social personality disorders have a high correlation with non mask wearing already been carried out." Really? That sounds interesting.

OP posts:

DianaT1969 · 29/10/2020 21:27

You say that the government shouldn't keep you from visiting a patent. The only reason I kept my distance from elderly relatives, was because I didn't want to risk infecting them. Nothing to do with a government rule. People who have elderly relatives in care homes have had a terrible time, but ultimately, I guess they don't want to risk bringing the infection in either.
Also, the students in the future would be studying global lockdowns. Our experience wasn't entirely unique.

RuggerHug · 29/10/2020 21:30

Information doesn't become propaganda just because you don't like it. As pp said, Brexit is what happens with propaganda.

Mintychoc1 · 29/10/2020 21:34

@RuggerHug

Information doesn't become propaganda just because you don't like it. As pp said, Brexit is what happens with propaganda.

Information is propaganda if it is inaccurate and sometimes fictitious .

RuggerHug · 29/10/2020 21:36

Inaccurate? What was inaccurate? I'm not in UK but we want to stop people becoming infected and dying was pretty worldwide.

VinylDetective · 29/10/2020 21:40

I sometimes wish I was young enough to see how history reads the years since 2016. It seems to me that the world went completely bonkers then and has stayed that way.

Whosayswhatnow · 29/10/2020 21:40

I agree with the restrictions but did wonder today what would happen if everyone just said no. I’m in Scotland and Nicola Sturgeon said today they can’t police people so it’s on us to do the right thing... what if people just have enough and ignore all the rules. Is there even the man power to control it?!

Al1langdownthecleghole · 29/10/2020 21:55

I think it is an even better example of failing to communicate and educate the public.

Flip

1 2 3 4