[absurdo]

This theory about Edward Bernays and the lucky strike being some PR mastermind striked me as bullshit and still strikes me as bullshit. People have convinced themselves of how this one guy is behind it all because it’s an easy answer - that’s the bigger con.

[djhn]

I’ve also always wondered what a more critical and impartial review of source material would reveal about Bernays’ impact.

[plausibilitious]

This happens a lot in historiography. Easy tales become handles for epochs and then denounced as contrived, then revived. Reminds me of the xkcd about levels of rebuttal.

The guy indeed was behind the "Torches of Freedom" campaign. And was indeed an influential person. Would it have happened without him? Most likely. But he did do the things. Is History driven by personalities? By structures? Big debate there. Nonetheless, Bernays' story is not bunk.