What separates propagandism from “normal” communication is in ways by which the message attempts to shape opinion or behavior, which are often subtle and insidious among other characteristics. For example, propagandism is often presented in a way that attempts to deliberately evoke a strong emotion, especially by suggesting illogical (or non-intuitive) relationships between concepts or objects (for instance between a “good” car and an attractive woman or a sex symbol). The “super-villain” Captain Nazi on the cover of Master Comics #21 (1941), flanked by his American patriotic enemies Captain Marvel (left) and Bulletman. Art by Mac Rayboy. The “super-villain” Captain Nazi on the cover of Master Comics #21 (1941), flanked by his American patriotic enemies Captain Marvel (left) and Bulletman. Art by Mac Rayboy.

An appeal to one’s emotions is, perhaps, a more obvious, and more common propagandism method than those utilized by some other more subtle and insidious forms. For instance, propagandism may be transmitted indirectly or implicitly, through an ostensibly fair and balanced debate or argument. This can be done to great effect in conjunction with a broadly targeted, broadcast news format. In such a setting, techniques like, “red herring”, and other ploys (such as Ignoratio elenchi), are often used to divert the audience from a critical issue, while the intended message is suggested through indirect means.

This sophisticated type of diversion utilizes the appearance of lively debate within what is actually a carefully focused spectrum, to generate and justify deliberately conceived assumptions. This technique avoids the distinctively biased appearance of one sided rhetoric, and works by presenting a contrived premise for an argument as if it were a universally accepted and obvious truth, so that the audience naturally assumes it to be correct.

By maintaining the range of debate in such a way that it appears inclusive of differing points of view, so as to suggest fairness and balance, the suppositions suggested become accepted as fact. Here is such an example of a hypothetical situation in which the opposing viewpoints are supposedly represented: the hawk (see: hawkish) says, “we must stay the course”, and the dove says, “The war is a disaster and a failure”, to which the hawk responds, “In war things seldom go smoothly and we must not let setbacks affect our determination”, the dove retorts, “setbacks are setbacks, but failures are failures.”

In this example, the actual validity of the war is not discussed and is never in contention. One may naturally assume that the war was not fundamentally wrong, but just the result of miscalculation, and therefore, an error, instead of a crime. Thus, by maintaining the appearance of equitable discourse in such debates, and through continuous inculcation, such focused arguments succeed in compelling the audience to logically deduce that the presupposions of debate are unequivocal truisms of the given subject.

The method of propaganda is essential to the word’s meaning as well. A message does not have to be untrue to qualify as propaganda. The message in modern propaganda is often not blatantly untrue. But even if the message conveys only “true” information, it will generally contain partisan bias and fail to present a complete and balanced consideration of the issue. Another common characteristic of propaganda is volume (in the sense of a large amount). For example, a propagandist may seek to influence opinion by attempting to get a message heard in as many places as possible, and as often as possible. The intention of this approach is to a) reinforce an idea through repetition, and b) exclude or “drown out” any alternative ideas.

In English, the word “propaganda” now carries strong negative (as well as political, mainly) connotations, although it has not always done so. It was formerly common for political organizations, as it had started to be for the advertising and public relations industry, to refer to their own material as propaganda. Because of the negative connotations the word has gained, today it is uncommon to admit producing propaganda, although opposing parties sometimes accuse each other of producing propaganda. Other languages, however, do not necessarily regard the term as derogatory and hence usage may lead to misunderstanding in communications with non-native English speakers. U.S. propaganda poster, which warns against civilians sharing information on troop movements (National Archives) U.S. propaganda poster, which warns against civilians sharing information on troop movements (National Archives)

Public relations pioneer Edward L. Bernays in his classic studies eloquently describes propaganda as the purpose of communications. In Crystallizing Public Opinion, for example, he dismisses the semantic differentiations (“Education is valuable, commendable, enlightening, instructive. Propaganda is insidious, dishonest, underhanded, misleading.”) and instead concentrates on purposes. He writes (p. 212), “Each of these nouns carries with it social and moral implications… The only difference between ‘propaganda’ and ‘education,’ really, is in the point of view. The advocacy of what we believe in is education. The advocacy of what we don’t believe in is propaganda.”

The reason propaganda exists and is so widespread is because it serves various social purposes, necessary ones, often popular yet potentially corrupting. Many institutions such as media, private corporations and government itself are literally propaganda-addicts, co-dependent on each other and the fueling influence of the propaganda system that they help create and maintain. Propagandists have an advantage through knowing what they want to promote and to whom, and although they often resort to various two-way forms of communication this is done to make sure their one-sided purposes are achieved.

[edit] Types of propaganda A 1947 comic book published by the Catechetical Guild Educational Society warning of “the dangers of a Communist takeover”. A 1947 comic book published by the Catechetical Guild Educational Society warning of “the dangers of a Communist takeover”.

Propaganda shares techniques with advertising and public relations. Advertising and public relations can be thought of as propaganda that promotes a commercial product or shapes the perception of an organization, person or brand, though in post-World War II usage the word “propaganda” more typically refers to political or nationalist uses of these techniques or to the promotion of a set of ideas, since the term had gained a pejorative meaning, which commercial and government entities couldn’t accept. The refusal phenomenon was eventually to be seen in politics itself by the substitution of ‘political marketing’ and other designations for ‘political propaganda’.

Propaganda was often used to influence opinions and beliefs on religious issues, particularly during the split between the Catholic Church and the Protestants. Propaganda has become more common in political contexts, in particular to refer to certain efforts sponsored by governments, political groups, but also often covert interests. In the early 20th century the term propaganda was also used by the founders of the nascent public relations industry to describe their activities. This usage died out around the time of World War II, as the industry started to avoid the word, given the pejorative connotation it had acquired.

Literally translated from the Latin gerundive as “things which must be disseminated”, in some cultures the term is neutral or even positive, while in others the term has acquired a strong negative connotation. The connotations of the term “propaganda” can also vary over time. For example, in Portuguese and some Spanish language speaking countries, particularly in the Southern Cone, the word “propaganda” usually refers to the most common manipulative media — “advertising”.

In English, “propaganda” was originally a neutral term used to describe the dissemination of information in favor of any given cause. During the 20th century, however, the term acquired a thoroughly negative meaning in western countries, representing the intentional dissemination of often false, but certainly “compelling” claims to support or justify political actions or ideologies. This redefinition arose because both the Soviet Union and Germany’s government under Hitler admitted explicitly to using propaganda favoring, respectively, communism and fascism, in all forms of public expression. As these ideologies were antipathetic to liberal western societies, the negative feelings toward them came to be projected into the word “propaganda” itself.

I also noticed the lovely form styling of the comments is from WuFoo ;)