Political Science

In his essay titled  Leaders and the Rank and File  published in his book, Public Opinion, Walter Lippmann provides the readers with what appears to be an apparent pattern on how public opinion is formed and employed. He further adds that this is made possible through the use of symbols which can be visual such as illustrations and gestures, or words through the use of metaphors.  These symbols, though innocuous as they may appear, have a significant role to play in society especially in the development of public opinion. Lippmann notes that symbols appeal a lot to the  rank and file  of society which are the  working class,  or the  underprivileged  (234). Because of the powerful appeal these symbols have to the masses, political leaders, whether in government or in interest groups, and to a lesser extent, business leaders, make use of these symbols because they see that these symbols conserve unity.

What makes symbols  powerful  is they help arouse emotions, and when there are issues, they are often directed at a certain target whether to support or to scorn. Furthermore, what makes symbols more appealing is their simplicity. The masses are by nature simple-minded which does not necessarily mean they lack intelligence or the smarts. These are people who are impatient in paying attention to details, intricacies, and complexities of the facts at hand. These symbols help simplify issues and the tendency for the majority is to take it at face value and not read between the lines neither would they bother to even attempt it.  Instead of providing the facts, it offers suggestions which provoke the public on what to say or what action to be taken.  It could be said that the media is responsible for this conditioning as they continually bombard the public with facts that they wanted to hear and believe. Since the media has always been regarded as the reliable source of truth, the public has come to accept everything they see and hear from it at face value and regard it as the truth without bothering to look into the details.  More often than not, the people try to align these symbols to their own beliefs or outlook which Michael Maslansky would define as  their truth.   Looking at it from the perspective of the business world which is also affected by these symbols, it is unrealistic for leaders to impose their version of the truth on the masses. Maslansky warns that if this truth runs counter to their version of the truth, they will lose in the court of public opinion.  No amount of facts and detail will make the majority change their minds. It is here that Maslansky suggests that leaders, both in the business and government sectors, must not challenge or change the majoritys version of the truth, but rather accept it and work with it by finding the messages and symbols they can use.

It is because of its role as the emotional  glue  which keeps society together that powerful and influential leaders in politics and even in business try to capitalize on it by  riding  with these emotions to gain leverage.  Public opinion is the  pulse  of society, and anyone who wants the majority on his or her side must be able to feel this  pulse  and tuning in to the appropriate emotion to do so would establish that connection. Quoting Bagehot, Lippmann states that any attempt to  poke about  these symbols would disrupt the transference of emotion from the individual to that symbol which would lead to utter chaos (234). For instance, in the case of Tsarist Russia, the monarchy was overthrown by the Bolsheviks because everything the monarchy stood for, the symbol of stability and continuation of Russias heritage, lost its meaningfulness as a symbol and was replaced by a new one by the Bolsheviks (Lippmann 234-235). Another example given by Lippmann would be the issue of housing shortages (242).  In this scenario, the issue is often indirectly dealt with, which is to find ways to address the shortage through plans and appropriate measures to carry them out. Instead of doing this, what the government does is go after the perceived causes of the shortage in the form of greedy landlords and developers who profit from the misery of the masses.  The point that Lippmann is trying to make is that the latter is more visible and can immediately be identified as opposed to constructive policy which is very abstract and  boring.   The former becomes the (unwilling) symbol that will evoke the desired emotion which in this case is outrage and thereby turn peoples resentment away from the government and to the given  scapegoats  (Lippmann 242).

In conclusion, symbols are here to stay as a tool for forming public opinion. They have been a part of communication since the beginning and are considered the most effective form of communication because of its simplicity. Because of this simplicity, symbols enable the public to identify with an issue or align their own viewpoints with it, and it is not largely due to the facts but by the emotion it evokes whether it will inspire or inflame. It is because of this that it develops or reinforces the publics version of the truth. One other pattern that Lippmann noticed is that the public takes everything at face value and does not bother reading between the lines. Once the public is exposed to these symbols, emotions take over from here and no amount of argument or reasoning can counter it. It is for this reason that leaders try to  feel the pulse  of the masses in order to be one with them by subscribing to these symbols in order to find the meaning and message they can use to advance their agenda or goals.