The Selling of America: The Advertising Council and American Politics, 1942–1960

1983 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Griffith
Keyword(s):  
Executive Branch ◽  
Eisenhower Administration ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Truman Administration ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
American Business ◽  
Free Enterprise ◽  
Advertising Council ◽  
The New Deal

From its inception in the 1940s the Advertising Council was part of a broad, loosely coordinated campaign by American business leaders to contain the anticorporate liberalism of the 1930s and to refashion the character of the New Deal State. In this campaign the Council generally aligned itself with the more liberal wing of the business community, usually identified with the newly organized Committee for Economic Development (CED), rather than with the older and more conservative National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). Like the CED, the Advertising Council often espoused a “corporatist” ideology which emphasized cooperation between business and government; and like the Business Advisory Council, the National Petroleum Council, and other quasi-public corporatist bodies, it sought to establish close, reciprocal relationships with the executive branch. The Council enthusiastically supported the new foreign and national security policies of the Truman Administration, but strongly opposed its domestic programs. By contrast, the Council supported both the foreign and domestic policies of the Eisenhower Administration, and helped promote the administration's economic programs in a series of major advertising campaigns. Through its millions of “public service” advertisements, the Council sought to promote an image of advertising as a responsible and civic-spirited industry, of the U.S. economy as a uniquely productive system of free enterprise, and of America as a dynamic, classless, and benignly consensual society.

Business Organized as Power: The New Imperium in Imperio

1950 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alpheus T. Mason
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Evolution ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Free Enterprise ◽  
Crucial Difference ◽  
Welfare Society ◽  
Industrial Civilization ◽  
University Officials ◽  
The Welfare State

President Truman's stubborn determination to build on the New Deal's embattled foundations an imposing edifice called the Welfare State is stirring the business community and its spokesmen to renewed and outwardly bold hostilities. This present outcry for “welfare,” it seems, is not what it used to be: “The irresponsible clamor of the mob for bread and circuses.” “Welfare” is now recognized as “a justifiable demand, consonant with the necessities of social evolution,” and in keeping with our political tradition. The old jungle economy, at long last, must be discarded. All this is now cheerfully conceded. But whose responsibility is it to bring order out of chaos, whose business is it to formulate and administer the welfare program? There is the rub. Certainly not government's, business leaders assert, for ultimately that would spell not a glorious welfare society but an inglorious welfare state. This ignominious prelude to statism, to totalitarianism, to despotism, must be avoided at all cost. That is why certain publicists, ex-New Dealers, industrial leaders and university officials are alerting the business community to a fresh responsibility, the unique venture of capitalism today—“the greatest opportunity in the world,” Russell Davenport calls it, and peculiarly the concern of Free Enterprise.Harvard's Business School Dean, Donald K. David, also points ominously at “The Danger of Drifting,” and sharply differentiates between “freedom to” and “freedom from,” between “equality of opportunity and equality of results,” etc., etc. These refinements are important, Dean David decides, because in them lies the crucial difference between welfare society (which he approves) and welfare state (which he deplores). How easy it is, he warns, to drift into the lethal arms of the welfare state. To foil the octopus of welfare, businessmen must be vigilant and aggressive. “Responsibility for this program,” Dean David concludes, “is going to be placed in the hands of the businessman, because we have, whether some people like it or not, an industrial civilization; and the businessman, whether he likes it or not, has to assume new responsibilities.”

Peace and the Reconversion of the Advertising Council

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger L. Stole
Keyword(s):  
Public Relations ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Free Enterprise ◽  
Advertising Industry ◽  
Postwar America ◽  
The Public ◽  
American System ◽  
Advertising Council ◽  
The Government

This chapter follows the Council through the last months of the war and into the reconversion period, when it worked diligently with leaders of the advertising industry, business, and government to determine its role in postwar America. It discusses the nature of these deliberations and analyzes the newly elevated role of advertising as a public relations tool for the business community at large. No longer satisfied with taking directives from the government, the postwar council—once again called the Advertising Council—assumed a more independent role in regard to campaign selections. Its campaigns over the next few years included programs that were more explicitly designed to educate the public about the superiority of the American system of free enterprise and the virtues of corporate capitalism.

When Business Is Not “Businesslike”

2020 ◽  
pp. 197-221
Author(s):  
Emily J. Charnock
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Business Groups ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Free Enterprise ◽  
World War ◽  
Initial Resistance ◽  
Conservative Coalition

This chapter explores the initial resistance to the PAC concept within the business community and among conservatives more generally in the 1940s and 1950s. Though major business groups like the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and United States Chamber of Commerce had not entirely ignored elections to this point, they concentrated their energies following World War II on lobbying and publicity campaigns promoting “free enterprise,” while criticizing labor and liberal PACs as coercive, collectivist, and antidemocratic. They also placed faith in the “conservative coalition” of Republicans and Southern Democrats to protect their interests, reflecting their strong belief that both parties should and could promote business aims. As fears grew that labor had successfully “infiltrated” the Democratic Party, however, conservative activists urged business groups to be “businesslike” and respond to labor electioneering in kind. Business leaders thus began to contemplate a partisan electoral counterstrategy centered on the Republican Party.

“Selling” Europe on free enterprise

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger L. Stole
Keyword(s):  
Soft Power ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Marshall Plan ◽  
American Business ◽  
Information Campaign ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Advertising Council

Purpose – A number of scholars have explored the US Government’s postwar efforts, often in collaboration with the business community, to “sell America” to Americans themselves; others have documented the means through which such information was aimed at audiences behind the Iron Curtain. Few scholars have explored the use of the US “propaganda” to secure political loyalty and financial markets among Western allies, and fewer still have studied the government’s use of commercial marketing methods for this purpose. Attempting to fill a void, this paper aims to explore the US State Department’s postwar collaboration with the Advertising Council, a non-profit organization funded and organized by American business, to “sell” the 16 countries that were receiving aid under the Marshall Plan on “the American way of life”. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing primarily from archival sources, the underlying research here is heavily based on various State Department collections housed at the National Archives in Washington, DC, and College Park, Maryland, as well as documents from the Harry S. Truman Library in Independence, Missouri, and the Advertising Council Archives at the University of Illinois. Findings – In contrast to its many successes during the Second World War, the Advertising Council’s first international project was plagued by erroneous assumptions and unforeseen problems, making the “Overseas Information” campaign far less successful than its previous projects. Thus, the case study holds lessons for the US Government in any future attempts to use the assistance of commercial advertisers in attaining its “soft power” objectives. Research limitations/implications – The study explores the “Overseas Information” campaign from an institutional perspective only. Future research should focus on public perceptions of the campaign and possibly a rhetorical analysis of the actual advertisements. Practical implications – The case study holds lessons for the US Government in any future attempts to use the assistance of commercial advertisers in attaining its “soft power” objectives. Social implications – The study reveals interesting, and heretofore, unrevealed information about collaborations between the government and US business in the postwar era. Originality/value – Up till this point, the Advertising Council’s “Overseas Information” has received very scant scholarly attention and few, if any, have recognized its importance in the ongoing quest for government “soft power” in the postwar era.

Thomas J. Watson and the Business-Government Relationship, 1933–1956

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
David L. Stebenne
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New Deal ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
Social Conditions ◽  
Business Community ◽  
American Business ◽  
Precise Nature ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The New Deal ◽  
The U.S

The precise nature of the relationship between the American business community and the New Deal has been a lively topic of debate in recent years. This article looks at an important figure and firm in that relationship (Thomas J. Watson of IBM) to increase our understanding of it. This article focuses chronologically on the period from the early 1930s through the mid-1950s, when New-Deal-era public policy innovations were most influential. The overall picture that emerges from this study of the U.S. business-government relationship during those years is one of business accommodation of major changes in social conditions and public policies rather than a view of business as the primary leader of change.

The Origins of Republican War Debt Policy, 1921–1923

2019 ◽  
pp. 28-46
Author(s):  
Melvyn P. Leffler
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
American Business ◽  
World War ◽  
European Currency ◽  
Debt Policy

This chapter argues that elite factions of the American business, banking, and farm sectors grasped that war debt payments were intimately related to the controversies over German reparations, the restoration of European currency stability, the promotion of American exports, the alleviation of unemployment, and the revival of agricultural prosperity. In short, they were far from ignorant about the needs of European reconstruction after World War I. The chapter studies the origins of war debt legislation in a microscopic way. In doing so, it reveals the complexity of the policymaking process and the diversity of motives bearing on decision-makers. Here, the chapter demonstrates the role of business and economics in the making of U.S. foreign policy, as well as the pluralism within the business community, the messiness of the legislative process, and the salience of organizational pressures within executive branch departments.

Corporate Liberalism in the American Business Community, 1920–1940

1978 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 342-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim McQuaid
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
World War I ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Organized Labor ◽  
American Business ◽  
Power Structures ◽  
World War ◽  
Big Business ◽  
Corporate Business

Contrasting with the resentment of other power structures, especially corporate business, that democratic governments display is the obvious need of the powerful and the productive for each other in times of stress. Professor McQuaid follows the activities of a group of “corporate liberals” (i.e., big business leaders who believed that intelligent collaboration between business, government, and organized labor was an attainable goal) from World War I through the prosperous 1920s, the despondent 1930s, and the busy and prosperous years of World War II. He concludes that corporate liberal opinion grew more influential in both corporate and governmental circles during and after the period.

Continuity and Change Reinterpreting the Policies of the Truman and Eisenhower Administrations toward Iran, 1950–1954

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Marsh
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Eisenhower Administration ◽  
Truman Administration ◽  
Continuity And Change ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Gradual Shift

It has long been argued that the Eisenhower administration pursued a more assertive policy toward Iran than the Truman administration did.This interpretative consensus, though, has recently come under challenge.In the Journal of Cold War Studies in 1999, Francis Gavin argued that U.S.policy toward Iran in 1950–1953 became progressively more assertive in response to a gradual shift in the global U.S. -USSR balance of power.This article shares, and develops further, Gavin's revisionist theme of policy continuity, but it explains the continuity by showing that Truman and Eisenhower had the same principal objectives and made the same basic assumptions when devising policy. The more assertive policy was primarily the result of the failure of U.S. policy by early 1952. The Truman administration subsequently adopted a more forceful policy, which Eisenhower simply continued until all perceived options for saving Iran from Communism were foreclosed other than that of instigating a coup to bring about a more pliable government.

scholarly journals Closing the Gender Gap in Corporate Advancement: Insights and Solutions from Behavioural Economics

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 187-225
Author(s):  
Lori Anne Heckbert
Keyword(s):  
Gender Gap ◽  
North American ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Behavioural Economics ◽  
Endowment Effect ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
American Business ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
Women In The Workplace ◽  
The Us

Despite evidence that both gender and ethnically diverse leadership is good for businesses’ bottom line, just one in five senior North American business leaders is female, one in thirty a woman of colour. Little literature exists applying behavioural economics [BE] concepts to explain gender gaps. Yet, as demonstrated by the 2010 UK Conservative-Liberal Democrats coalition government, the Obama government in the US and Trudeau government in Canada, lawmakers, policymakers and business leaders are interested in BE’s persuasive power to influence behaviour. My contribution exploits this interest, builds on the excellent existing scholarship analyzing gender gap concepts from a BE perspective, and fills this gap. Applying concepts of bounded rationality, bounded willpower, bounded self-interest, and the endowment effect to 2017’s North American-focused Women in the Workplace report (Report) published by LeanIn and McKinsey, a vast study examining HR practices and pipeline data of 222 companies employing 12 million+ people and surveying 70,000+ employees’ experiences, I find that hiring and promotion decisions are affected by the three bounds and endowment effect, undercutting businesses’ compelling economic interest in diverse leadership. BE offers solutions to tackle biased behaviour and shows how gender gap scholars’ and the Report’s recommendations can be taken further to close the gender gap in advancement. I argue that normative best practice adoption by business and nudges and tax incentives from governments, ideally in combination, can spur businesses to adopt debiasing behaviours and practices that will contribute to closing the gender gap in advancement. Enabling women to achieve their full leadership and economic potential will enhance women’s wellbeing, improve businesses’ performance, and lead to greater social equity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document