Arundhati Roy and Michael Moore are two very skilful propagandists who use powerful and persuasive techniques to convey a particular message. These techniques are deliberately used to appeal to us, the audience, and our appetites, our sense of fear and above all our vanity. These techniques used in “The end of imagination” (Arundhati Roy) and “Fahrenheit 9/11” (Michael Moore) will be examined to consider how effective these propagandists are at appealing to these internal persuaders. Roys essay “The end of imagination” focused on nuclear warfare, her main argument was that the Indian government and all world governments must not be involved in the production or testing of nuclear bombs as they are simply to destructive and harmful to all of creation. Moore’s film focused on the presidency of George W. Bush, the Iraq war and its coverage by the American media, his main argument was that American corporate media did not provide an objective and accurate analysis concerning the invasion of Iraq, and that George Bush was, at the time an inept president.
The most important weapon in a propagandist’s arsenal is the ability to draw emotion from a reader or viewer, along with the ability to control and direct that emotion so that the audience believe what is being presented, without doubting whether or not, it is accurate. There are many emotions that can be provoked by a propagandist however the strongest is by far fear. Fear tactics are used by both Roy and Moore very effectively, the title of Roy’s essay itself is an example (The end of imagination). Roy writes in the opening sentence “May 1998. It’ll go down in history books, provided of course we have history books to go down in. “Provided, of course, we have a future.” This is a prime example of fear tactics being used to consume the audience in a sense of uncertainty for the future, however this is not the only technique at use here, exaggeration is also present. Exaggeration is used either to emphasize facts...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document