Andy Warhol and a million graphic designers might disagree :)

I maintain that art affects society. Scorsese makes Taxi Driver, some crazy guy watches it, decides to shoot Ronald Reagan to impress Jody Foster. Would crazy guy have done the same thing regardless of the movie? Maybe. Would he have done it on the same day, at the same time, in the exact same way? Probably not.

The world where Scorsese chose to make Taxi Driver is different than the one where the movie never existed; maybe the difference is trivial, but -some- effect is there. The remaining question is the extent of that effect.

The fact that when I imagine a cop, I imagine "Bad Boys" and "Law and Order", even when I haven't watched these shows for over a decade, is a testament to art's effects. Maybe this image was born out of the crime waves of the 70s-80s, but the image persists, affecting how people feel on topics of policing.

The motivations may be different, but how they convey their message is very similar. Advertisements, documentaries, and even propaganda, manipulate our emotions and subconscious thoughts using the exact same techniques as film and television. All of these can be used to subtly influence public perception and opinions.

I think the motivation influences what you do. TV show, I want to show people what they're going to watch. Showing them some congestive dissonance generally won't work.

If I want to sell someone a burger I already made what they want "the burger" presumably to what they want to eat. Now I want them to know about it.