PowerNetizen.com – Political narratives do not always have to go straight to the point regarding issues of power. They can take winding or curved paths. But in the end, they always lead to the realm of power, whether it is economic power, political power, or other forms.
In 1929, Edward Bernays, a leading figure in modern public relations, constructed a narrative of freedom with the theme “Torch of Freedom.” He supported the women’s rights movement, which was gaining strength in the United States.
Of course, it was not just support. He steered the narrative towards freedom, not just equality in work and politics. This was the idea behind the “Torch of Freedom” campaign that he launched.
During the Easter Sunday Parade on March 31, 1929, in New York, he directed a procession of women whom he paid to participate. He instructed them to walk while smoking. Naturally, this act caused a sensation, as it was taboo for women to smoke in public at the time.
Bernays capitalized on the power of the media. He exploited written content, images, and photos. Pictures of women smoking were spread through various media outlets, challenging the social taboo.
The “Torch of Freedom” campaign was a huge success and became legendary.
Cigarettes were transformed into a symbol of women’s freedom. Since then, women have started to smoke in public spaces.
Was “women smoking” the ultimate target of Barnum’s campaign? No. It was merely a winding narrative, a strategy—not a tactic.
The real target of the “Torch of Freedom” campaign was to sell Lucky Strike cigarettes produced by the American Tobacco Company (ATC), which was then led by George Washington Hill. It was ATC that hired Bernays to boost the sales of its product.
Bernays’ working method can certainly be adapted to political campaigns. The process begins with a careful reading of the situation, tapping into long-standing issues, and spinning the narrative to suit the ultimate goal.
In this way, the political narrative being built does not grow wildly without a link to public thought.
If we pay attention to a relatively popular issue lately, which is “free lunch,” there seems to be something wrong with that campaign.
Free lunch has never been a public issue. It has never been a debate, unlike the issue of women’s rights in the 19th and 20th centuries in the U.S.
Because there is no basis for the issue, “free lunch” becomes like a structure built on swampy ground. It can sway back and forth. Moreover, that swaying is deliberately manipulated by certain political forces.
Free lunch should have been framed as a tactical move, not a strategic one. The strategy itself should have been built on long-standing public discourse such as issues like stunting, nutritional adequacy, and so on.
To avoid being seen as a special or partial political project, the narrative for its strategy needs to be connected to social concerns, justice, and so on. After all, isn’t concern and justice our collective interest?
Written by: Emeraldy Chatra
