Second, memes do not seem intended to directly influence diplomacy, but may further diplomatic efforts indirectly by bolstering popular support for the war. Rather, they are concurrent and complementary to these military efforts, suggesting that they are meant to play a supporting role. First, memes are not used in isolation from a particular military operation on the battlefield, such as an offensive or counter-offensive. Overall, our analysis of Ukrainians’ use of memes points to several findings that shed new light on how other countries may use memes during conflict. The memes were all taken from Reddit, a popular social media website that allows users to comment in discussion forums based on shared interests. To explore these and related questions, we compiled an original dataset of memes posted by Ukrainians throughout the war. Who is the audience, what is the message, and what events drive the production of these memes? Memes have also been a staple of the war in Ukraine, providing a valuable window into key questions about how actors use memes for political purposes in war. In contemporary conflict, those symbols have increasingly taken the form of memes, defined as a “piece of media that is repurposed to deliver a cultural, social, or political expression, mainly through humor.” Online users have attempted to counter the Islamic State by creating memes satirizing the group’s barbarism, especially on specific “Troll ISIS Days.” Lebanese Internet-users have ruthlessly mocked Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, with memes. These films capitalized on the public’s predisposition to understand social life in terms of in- and out-groups, which shapes how people often interpret foreign policies, including the use of force. In World War II, Hollywood produced films that “created a communal viewing experience unlike any during World War I” intended to maintain resolve for the war. Nowhere has the use of propaganda been more ubiquitous than in war, especially because acquiescence or resistance is based on public sentiment and behavior. This included the use of symbols and slogans that were memorable, such that they could frame “ pictures”-or, cognitive shortcuts-that the public recalled when engaging elected officials to shape certain policies. Scaling to the mass-level, however, required simplicity. Second, that those public attitudes could also be manipulated. One is that the mass public played a key role in political outcomes, such as success and failure in war. In 1927, the political scientist Harold Lasswell wrote about political propaganda as “the management of collective attitudes by the manipulation of significant symbols.” Underlying Lasswell’s work were two sets of insights.
0 kommentar(er)
