Does Video Quality Really Matter?

One of my favorite military sources, “Task & Purpose” featured an article “North Korea Blasts US Arsenal in Fresh Propaganda Video with TerribleGraphics” (see: http://taskandpurpose.com/north-korea-blasts-us-arsenal-fresh-propaganda-video-terrible-graphics/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-today&utm_content=button; which is the photo source.) You can also read about the video in the Japan Times at: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/20/asia-pacific/north-korean-state-run-propaganda-website-depicts-u-s-aircraft-carrier-bomber-engulfed-flames/#.WNMNio61ufX

You can find the almost three minute video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70MTvxFzZ-Y. Unfortunately it’s in Korean with no subtitles, a likely intelligence indicator of who the target audience for the video is. After watching the sepia toned mélange of photos and clips, it seems to me that the audience is like to be North Koreans.

While not being able to understand the dialogue, it seems to me that the intent of the video is to convince the view that the North Koreans will prevail against the meagre weapons of the decadent West. While the quality is supposed to be the same as ‘professional’ news organizations, it would not likely pass for a product from an advanced news agency such as the BBC or US outlets.

Does that matter?

In my opinion, it really doesn’t matter. The North Korean viewing public is a captive audience and likely has lower standards in terms of video production that those outside the country who have access to other news sources.

Another principle at work here is that it is harder to change someone’s mind than it is to reinforce an existing opinion.  North Koreans have been conditioned to accept government information as truth for generations so that the government can control the content and flow of information that their citizens receive.

The same work product would likely have little effect on Western Viewers who are able to explore a variety of alternative sources including www.defense.gov and military defense contractors such as http://www.lockheedmartin.com/ or their competitors such as: BAE Systems, Boeing, Cassidian (Airbus Military), Dassault Group, Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH, Finmeccanica, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Panavia Aircraft GmbH, Raytheon, and SAAB AB.

Reader feedback welcome as always.