The phrase “manufacturing consent” literally means “producing agreement.” It is about how people come to agree or seem to agree with political and media narratives. It describes how governments, corporations, and media systems help shape public opinion so citizens ‘agree’ with official agendas (Herman & Chomsky, 1988). This phrase was first introduced by Walter Lippmann in the 1920s and later reinterpreted by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman in the 1980s.
Image from: https://www.thephilroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/walter-lippmann-01.png
In 1922, Walter Lippmann published a book called “Public Opinion.” According to Lippmann, because of this complexity, societies need “experts” and “elites” to organize and guide public opinion. He called this process the “manufacture of consent.”
Image from: https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.ACDEjJsWaJosy92HlqX_WQHaE8?cb=ucfimgc2&rs=1&pid=ImgDetMain&o=7&rm=3
In 1988, Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman published a book called “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media.” They borrowed Lippmann’s phrase, but they completely reversed its moral stance. They claimed that modern mass media serve elite interests rather than inform the public. To explain how this works, they introduced what they called the “Propaganda Model,” a framework of “five filters” that shape what kind of information reaches the public. The Five Filter Model includes Ownership, Advertising, Sourcing, Flak, and Anticommunism (Herman & Chomsky, 1988). Durham suggested that a propaganda model focuses on this inequality of wealth and power and its multi-level effects on mass-media interests and choices (2006, p. 257).
There is one example to show the manufacturing consent. In the coverage of the war in Gaza, the New York Times employs several reporters with personal or family ties to Israel’s military. And NYT CEO continued to speak at events and serve on the advisory council of an Israel lobbying and fundraising group, BBYO. NYT coverage of Palestinian deaths decreased as Gaza killings increased. Over 100 BBC staff accused the BBC of pro-“Israel” bias in Gaza coverage. That proves that the coverage through ownership, flak and anticommunism filters. The media is constrained by the ideological framework of “anti-terrorism” and rationalizes Israel’s actions. As a result, when the death toll in Palestine surged, the media reported less on Palestine, showing a clear bias.
In conclusion, Walter Lippmann described how consent is organized, while Noam Chomsky revealed how it is manipulated. It encourages us to question who benefits from the stories we are told and whether our agreement is freely given or carefully manufactured. As citizens, our task is to stay alert, question what we see, and look beyond the headlines. When we receive the information in our daily life, we should notice more media from different perspectives and compare their differences, recognizing the information which be ignored. More subscribe independent media instead of other media. Only then can democracy be something more than just manufactured agreement.
Reference
Herman, E.S. & Chomsky, N. (1988) Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Random House.
Durham, M.G. (2006) Media and cultural studies: keyWorks.
Stavrou, A. (2004) More than 100 BBC staff accuse broadcaster of Israel bias in Gaza coverage. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-israel-gaza-letter-tim-davie-bias-palestine-b2636737.html (Accessed: 13 November 2025)
