6 ms·

Kind of related: what was it in Hollywood that did away the old time-y presentations like this in animations? The grand orchestral music, the personable-but-sti

Kind of related: what was it in Hollywood that did away the old time-y presentations like this in animations? The grand orchestral music, the personable-but-still-authoritative male narrator, amazingly well-paced script. Was it Hanna-Barbera and how they commoditized animation?

dragontamer 5y ago
The opposite. These presentations were 100% within the propaganda period of the USA. These sorts of cartoons were top-down funded by the US Government for WW2 and eventually, the cold war (well, this cartoon is 1952, well within the Cold War period). But all of these cartoonists were good at their job _because_ of WW2 propaganda cartoons. US Government practically bankrolled Disney (and other cartooning groups) to ensure we had unity throughout the War. What changed is politics. We're no longer in a World War nor a Cold War... and propaganda techniques such as this cartoon are now frowned upon. --------- This is "good propaganda" though. I think our country needs more of it these days. But it'd be a difficult political battle to get people used to propaganda again, especially because there's no communist threat anymore for us to point to. If we were to ask the US Government to spend $50 million bucks making a similar production cartoon today on a variety of US-subjects (imagine an up-to-date version of this cartoon on the modern Stock Market), can you imagine how many people would be pissed off? -------- In any case, as US Government propaganda money dried up from the post-war period (1960s), the quality of cartoons dropped down. People still agreed upon the commissioning of educational cartoons for children (ex: School House Rock), but not upon educational cartoons for adults. > Was it Hanna-Barbera and how they commoditized animation? Hanna Barbera needed to commoditize animation to save money. With less money flowing into the industry from the post-war period (much less propaganda being made), the quality of cartoons suffered.
- TheGigaChad 5y ago
  Yes, because 50M is a huge sum. You have youtube content creators making similar cartoons for peanuts.
- jaypeg25 5y ago
  The US govt is certainly still involved in propaganda. For example, NASA helped with The Martian.[1] DoD released a game, America's Army, about 20 years ago with a total budget of $32 million over 8 years or so.[2] Also, Pentagon pays about $10-15 million annually just for the various pro-military messaging we see at sports events (salute to veterans, etc).[3] These are just some examples, but there are plenty more. [1]. https://www.popsci.com/why-nasa-helped-ridley-scott-create-martian-film-and-what-means-future-sci-fi-space-movies/ https://www.popsci.com/why-nasa-helped-ridley-scott-create-m... [2]. https://www.wired.com/2009/12/americas-army-budget https://www.wired.com/2009/12/americas-army-budget [3]. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/11/04/report-at-least-50-teams-were-paid-by-department-of-defense-for-patriotic-displays/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/11/04...
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    Its not quite the same though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_propaganda_production#Overview_of_propaganda_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_p... >> During World War II, Disney made films for every branch of the United States Armed Forces and government.[13][14] This was accomplished through the use of animated graphics by means of expediting the intelligent mobilization of servicemen and civilians for the cause of the war. Over 90% of Disney employees were devoted to the production of training and propaganda films for the government.[13] Throughout the duration of the war, Disney produced over 400,000 feet of educational war films, most at cost, which is equal to 68 hours of continuous films. In 1943 alone, 204,000 feet of film was produced.[11] ------- This is _JUST_ the cartoon propaganda. There's also posters, commercials, movies, documentaries, etc. etc. We don't do this today because we're no longer at a major war between world powers, and too much propaganda is probably bad for our brains and ability to think for ourselves. It was a different time that called for different measures.
- CoastalCoder 5y ago
  Thanks, I learned a lot from that post! One minor quibble (which I don't think diminishes your main point at all): > We're no longer in a World War nor a Cold War... I don't think that's 100% correct. My impression is that PRC is waging a cold war against the U.S., but the U.S. government hasn't accepted that yet. I'm certainly no expert on the matter, though. I'd be very grateful for any correction.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    A big component of the Cold War era was NATO vs Warsaw, which has no modern equivalent. China is trying to rival us economically, and at best is aiming to maybe increase its sphere of influence out into the Pacific Ocean a bit. But back in the Cold War, Capitalists and Communists were splitting the entire world into two spheres... a communist sphere and a capitalist sphere. China isn't trying to spread its breed of nationalism across the world. Sure, its picking up African influence and Asian influence, but not quite in the same manner as NATO or Warsaw was picking up influence back then. If the influence is "just" economic influence, I wouldn't really worry too much. Unfortunately, there's a degree of "hot" war and saber-rattling going on that I find dangerous. Its very different from the Cold War: its entirely focused on Chinese interests and not so much a battle of ideologies around the world.
    - CoastalCoder 5y ago
      Thanks, interesting counter-points. I agree that it's unlike the actual Cold War in several important ways: - The two sides aren't engaging each other via proxy wars, e.g. Vietnam. - The two sides haven't formed clear multi-national alliances, i.e. NATO vs. Warsaw. Things that do strike me as similarities: - Like the USSR, China's mood appears expansionistic. E.g., South China Sea, Taiwan, and (arguably?) Tibet. - Like the USSR, Russia also seems expansionstic. E.g., Georgia and (maybe) Ukraine. - Maybe less relevant, but China and Russia are to some extent authoritarian (removal of presidential term limits) and seemingly use state-sanctioned violence to suppress political opposition. So as with the Cold War, there's some degree of ideological divide between the two sides.
- lelandfe 5y ago
  Reading about the OWI is a good starting place to learn more about this stuff, by the by: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_War_Information https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_War_In...
peter303 5y ago
I remember in junior and high school in the 1960s we'd be shown 16mm film instructional videos usually on social topics. They were kind of heavy handed and propagandistic. I think a lot of these have been digitized into youtube for nostalgic entertainment. I dont know what happened between the mid 70s and 2000, when internet video took over.

dragontamer 5y ago

The opposite. These presentations were 100% within the propaganda period of the USA. These sorts of cartoons were top-down funded by the US Government for WW2 and eventually, the cold war (well, this cartoon is 1952, well within the Cold War period). But all of these cartoonists were good at their job _because_ of WW2 propaganda cartoons. US Government practically bankrolled Disney (and other cartooning groups) to ensure we had unity throughout the War. What changed is politics. We're no longer in a World War nor a Cold War... and propaganda techniques such as this cartoon are now frowned upon. --------- This is "good propaganda" though. I think our country needs more of it these days. But it'd be a difficult political battle to get people used to propaganda again, especially because there's no communist threat anymore for us to point to. If we were to ask the US Government to spend $50 million bucks making a similar production cartoon today on a variety of US-subjects (imagine an up-to-date version of this cartoon on the modern Stock Market), can you imagine how many people would be pissed off? -------- In any case, as US Government propaganda money dried up from the post-war period (1960s), the quality of cartoons dropped down. People still agreed upon the commissioning of educational cartoons for children (ex: School House Rock), but not upon educational cartoons for adults. > Was it Hanna-Barbera and how they commoditized animation? Hanna Barbera needed to commoditize animation to save money. With less money flowing into the industry from the post-war period (much less propaganda being made), the quality of cartoons suffered.

TheGigaChad 5y ago
Yes, because 50M is a huge sum. You have youtube content creators making similar cartoons for peanuts.
jaypeg25 5y ago
The US govt is certainly still involved in propaganda. For example, NASA helped with The Martian.[1] DoD released a game, America's Army, about 20 years ago with a total budget of $32 million over 8 years or so.[2] Also, Pentagon pays about $10-15 million annually just for the various pro-military messaging we see at sports events (salute to veterans, etc).[3] These are just some examples, but there are plenty more. [1]. https://www.popsci.com/why-nasa-helped-ridley-scott-create-martian-film-and-what-means-future-sci-fi-space-movies/ https://www.popsci.com/why-nasa-helped-ridley-scott-create-m... [2]. https://www.wired.com/2009/12/americas-army-budget https://www.wired.com/2009/12/americas-army-budget [3]. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/11/04/report-at-least-50-teams-were-paid-by-department-of-defense-for-patriotic-displays/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2015/11/04...
- dragontamer 5y ago
  Its not quite the same though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_propaganda_production#Overview_of_propaganda_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_p... >> During World War II, Disney made films for every branch of the United States Armed Forces and government.[13][14] This was accomplished through the use of animated graphics by means of expediting the intelligent mobilization of servicemen and civilians for the cause of the war. Over 90% of Disney employees were devoted to the production of training and propaganda films for the government.[13] Throughout the duration of the war, Disney produced over 400,000 feet of educational war films, most at cost, which is equal to 68 hours of continuous films. In 1943 alone, 204,000 feet of film was produced.[11] ------- This is _JUST_ the cartoon propaganda. There's also posters, commercials, movies, documentaries, etc. etc. We don't do this today because we're no longer at a major war between world powers, and too much propaganda is probably bad for our brains and ability to think for ourselves. It was a different time that called for different measures.
CoastalCoder 5y ago
Thanks, I learned a lot from that post! One minor quibble (which I don't think diminishes your main point at all): > We're no longer in a World War nor a Cold War... I don't think that's 100% correct. My impression is that PRC is waging a cold war against the U.S., but the U.S. government hasn't accepted that yet. I'm certainly no expert on the matter, though. I'd be very grateful for any correction.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  A big component of the Cold War era was NATO vs Warsaw, which has no modern equivalent. China is trying to rival us economically, and at best is aiming to maybe increase its sphere of influence out into the Pacific Ocean a bit. But back in the Cold War, Capitalists and Communists were splitting the entire world into two spheres... a communist sphere and a capitalist sphere. China isn't trying to spread its breed of nationalism across the world. Sure, its picking up African influence and Asian influence, but not quite in the same manner as NATO or Warsaw was picking up influence back then. If the influence is "just" economic influence, I wouldn't really worry too much. Unfortunately, there's a degree of "hot" war and saber-rattling going on that I find dangerous. Its very different from the Cold War: its entirely focused on Chinese interests and not so much a battle of ideologies around the world.
  - CoastalCoder 5y ago
    Thanks, interesting counter-points. I agree that it's unlike the actual Cold War in several important ways: - The two sides aren't engaging each other via proxy wars, e.g. Vietnam. - The two sides haven't formed clear multi-national alliances, i.e. NATO vs. Warsaw. Things that do strike me as similarities: - Like the USSR, China's mood appears expansionistic. E.g., South China Sea, Taiwan, and (arguably?) Tibet. - Like the USSR, Russia also seems expansionstic. E.g., Georgia and (maybe) Ukraine. - Maybe less relevant, but China and Russia are to some extent authoritarian (removal of presidential term limits) and seemingly use state-sanctioned violence to suppress political opposition. So as with the Cold War, there's some degree of ideological divide between the two sides.
lelandfe 5y ago
Reading about the OWI is a good starting place to learn more about this stuff, by the by: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_War_Information https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_War_In...

peter303 5y ago

I remember in junior and high school in the 1960s we'd be shown 16mm film instructional videos usually on social topics. They were kind of heavy handed and propagandistic. I think a lot of these have been digitized into youtube for nostalgic entertainment. I dont know what happened between the mid 70s and 2000, when internet video took over.