Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2007 Public relations and political controversy: a case study of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations' public relations campaign regarding the Ottoman Empire's deportation of the Armenians Tamar Grace Meguerditchian Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Mass Communication Commons Recommended Citation Meguerditchian, Tamar Grace, "Public relations and political controversy: a case study of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations' public relations campaign regarding the Ottoman Empire's deportation of the Armenians" (2007). LSU Master's Theses. 1411. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/1411 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PUBLIC RELATIONS AND POLITICAL CONTROVERSY: A CASE STUDY OF THE ASSEMBLY OF TURKISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONS’ PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN REGARDING THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE’S DEPORTATION OF THE ARMENIANS A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Mass Communication in The Manship School of Mass Communication by Tamar Grace Meguerditchian B.A., Loyola University New Orleans, 2004 May 2007 DEDICATION This effort is dedicated to my parents Hagop and Grace Meguerditchian, both of whom instilled in me a love and respect for the opportunities an education offers. Their resilient efforts to prosper and provide for our family have made me want more out of my own life – both academically and professionally. Thank you, Mom and Dad. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my Thesis Committee – Dr. Eileen Meehan, Dr. Megan Sanders, and Dr. Margaret DeFleur. Dr. Meehan’s support for the past year- and-a-half has been both the guiding force in this project. Since I first approached her with the idea, she has shown an interest and commitment and has undoubtedly made me a stronger individual, researcher and thinker. I would also like to thank Dr. Sanders who has provided me with excellent feedback and support both stylistically and methodologically, no doubt increasing my sensitivity to avoiding researcher bias. Finally, to Dr. Margaret DeFleur I would like to express my gratitude not only for agreeing to serve on my committee on top of her duties as associate dean, but for being a continuous mentor and professor in my three years here at LSU. This thesis is the culmination of my academic career and is undoubtedly the biggest challenge I has faced to date. It would not have been possible without the support of many individuals including my fellow colleagues, family and friends. I would like to thank my parents Hagop and Grace Meguerditchian for their support, my friends Tiffany Anzalone and Sarah Dhane for their much-needed pep-talks, and Andrew Gregorian and Dr. Eddie Avedikian for their ability to make the impossible seem simple. Finally, I would like to thank Ara and Natalie Meguerditchian and my nephew Michael for making me smile. Most importantly, I thank and praise God for His daily guidance and strength. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEGEMENTS…………………………………………………………………iii LIST OF TABLES.………………………………………………………………………..vi ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………..vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND JUSTIFICATION…………………………………………1 The Assembly of Turkish American Associations…………………………………..2 The Assembly of Turkish American Associations’ Web Site……………………….3 Justification: Public Relations and Ethics……………………………………………6 Persuasive Communication…………………………………………………………7 Public Relations……………………………………………………………………..8 Propaganda………………………………………………………………………….10 Statement of Purpose………………………………………………………………..11 2. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE MODELS……………………………………13 Grunig and Hunt’s Public Relations Models………………………………………..13 Propaganda Models …………………………………………………………………19 Lasswell’s Propaganda Model……………………………………………………….19 Herman and Chomsky’s Propaganda Model…………………………………………23 3. MODELS FOR APPLICATION………………………………………………………30 Public Relations: Grunig and Hunt’s Asymmetrical Model………………………….30 Propaganda: Synthesized Propaganda Model………………………………………...32 Persuasive Communication Campaigns and Ethics…………………………………..34 4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ……………………………………………………………37 Operational Definitions……………………………………………………………….37 Rationale and Research Questions……………………………………………………38 5. METHODOLOGY …………………………………………………………………….40 ATAA and Sample Publications………………………………………………………40 Operational Definitions………………………………………………………………..43 Close Reading, the Synthesized Propaganda Model and Public Relations……………44 6. ANALYSIS……………………………………………………………………………..51 The Armenian Allegation of Genocide: Facts…………………………………………52 The First Shot…………………………………………………………………………..73 Hitler and the “Armenian Question”…………………………………………………...92 Perpetuating the Genocide Myth………………………………………………………106 Facts and Discussion Points in the Armenian Allegations…………………………….120 Let Historians Decide on the So-called Genocide……………………………………..127 The U.S. Congress and Hitler on the Armenians………………………………………142 iv 7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION…………………………………………………..153 Discussion…………………………………...…………………………………………153 Implications…………………………………………………………………………….162 Limitations of Discussion………………………………………………………………164 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………...166 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………..167 APPENDIX A GENOCIDE AND THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE……………………………………172 B THE HISTORY OF PUBLIC RELATIONS……………………………………………174 C SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET…………………………………………..176 D PRE-TEST CODING SHEET…………………………………………………………..177 E SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET ………………………………………….179 F SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET…………………………………………..181 G SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET …………………………………………183 H SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET………………………………………….185 I SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET………………………………………….186 J SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET……………………………………….…188 K SINGLE PUBLICATION CODING SHEET………………………………………….190 L THE ARMENIAN ALLEGATION OF GENOCIDE: FACTS….…………………….191 M THE FIRST SHOT…………………………………………………………………….197 N FACTS AND DISCUSSION POINTS IN THE ARMENIAN ALLEGATIONS …….208 O HITLER AND THE “ARMENIAN QUESTION”…………………………………….210 P PERPETUATING THE GENOCIDE MYTH………………………………………….218 Q LET HISTORIANS DECIDE ON SO-CALLED GENOCIDE……………………….227 R THE U.S. CONGRESS AND ADOLF HITLER ON THE ARMENIANS……………239 VITA………………………………………………………………………………………..257 v LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Close Reading Publications, ATAA Web site Reference Library…………………41 vi ABSTRACT An organization will almost always use persuasive communication tactics to influence public opinion. Persuasive communication tactics can be either pubic relations or propaganda. The definitions of both public relations and propaganda, as well as a study of the relevant models, reveals that neither practice heavily stresses the importance of social responsibility. Using the importance of social responsibility in honest persuasive communication tactics, this qualitative case study of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations’ (ATAA) determined that the efforts of the ATAA’s persuasive communication efforts are in line with the methods of propaganda, as stated in the operational definition of propaganda and in the objectives of the synthesized propaganda model. vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND JUSTIFICATION From 1915 to 1923, the Ottoman Empire deported more than 2 million Ottoman Armenians living in the present-day Republic of Turkey. Beginning April 1915, Armenian religious, educational, intellectual and political leaders were arrested and deported. In following years, the other members of the Armenian population were also deported. Armenian resistance was sporadic and outside observers, such as former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Henry Morgenthau, reported atrocities and deaths. The deportation is at the center of a controversy that involves not only the Armenian and Turkish communities, but also historians, genocide scholars and foreign governments. In recent years, Armenians and Armenian-Americans have charged the Ottoman Empire with genocide – any act committed with the intent to destroy, in part or in whole, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group – as defined in 1948 at the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Turkey describes the deportation as civil war and rejects the charge of genocide. Also involved in this debate are non-governmental organizations including the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA) and the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA). They participate in the debate through the creation of campaigns to seek congressional support or opposition for resolutions recognizing genocide and to influence public opinion using their respective Web sites. Thus, both organizations’ actions raise the question of the whether their campaign Web sites’ represent public relations efforts or propaganda. These are two very different organizations in terms of finances and resources. The ATAA’s staff includes four full- time employees, a 15-member board of directors and regional staffers, as well as a 12-member board of trustees. The ANCA staff includes 4 full-time members and two regional