From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Intentional vagueness)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the form of communication. For other uses, see Propaganda (disambiguation).
French propaganda painting Napoleon Crossing the Alps (1805), a romantic depiction by Jacques-Louis David during the Napoleonic Wars.
American recruiting poster from World War I depicting Uncle Sam, the personification of the United States.
Painting from 1918 during the Russian Civil War period, depicting Red Army leader Leon Trotsky as a modern-day Saint George of communism slaying the dragon of capitalism with a top hat and the word "counterrevolution" in Russian written on its side.
Nazi poster (from around 1938) reads: "60,000 Reichsmark is what this person suffering from a hereditary defect costs the People's community during his lifetime. Fellow citizen, that is your money too. Read '[A] New People', the monthly magazine of the Bureau for Race Politics of the NSDAP."
1935 poster of Manchukuo promoting harmony between Japanese, Chinese, and Manchu. The caption, written from right to left, says: "With the help of Japan, China, and Manchukuo, the world can be in peace." The flags shown are, left to right: the flag of Manchukuo; the flag of Japan; the "Five Races Under One Union" flag.

Propaganda is a form of communication aimed towards influencing the attitude of a population toward some cause or position.

Propaganda is information that is not impartial and used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively (perhaps lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or using loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information presented.

While the term propaganda has acquired a strongly negative connotation by association with its most manipulative and jingoistic examples, propaganda in its original sense was neutral and could refer to uses that were generally positive, such as public health recommendations, signs encouraging citizens to participate in a census or election, or messages encouraging persons to report crimes to law enforcement.


Propaganda is a modern Latin word, the gerund form of propagare, meaning to spread or to propagate, thus propaganda means that which is to be propagated.[1] Originally this word derived from a new administrative body of the Catholic Church (congregation) created in 1622, called the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (Congregation for Propagating the Faith), or informally simply Propaganda.[2][3] Its activity was aimed at "propagating" the Catholic faith in non-Catholic countries.[2]

From the 1790s, the term began being used also for propaganda in secular activities.[2] The term began taking a pejorative connotation in the mid-19th century, when it was used in the political sphere.[2]


Poster of the 19th-century Scandinavist movement

Defining propaganda has always been a problem. The main difficulties have involved differentiating propaganda from other types of persuasion, and avoiding a biased approach ("what they do is propaganda, what we do is education"). Garth Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell have provided a concise, workable definition of the term: "Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist."[4] More comprehensive is the description by Richard Alan Nelson: "Propaganda is neutrally defined as a systematic form of purposeful persuasion that attempts to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions, and actions of specified target audiences for ideological, political or commercial purposes through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which may or may not be factual) via mass and direct media channels. A propaganda organization employs propagandists who engage in propagandism—the applied creation and distribution of such forms of persuasion."[5]

Both definitions focus on the communicative process involved — or more precisely, on the purpose of the process, and allow "propaganda" to be considered objectively and then interpreted as positive or negative behavior depending on the perspective of the viewer or listener.

According to historian Zbyněk Zeman, propaganda is defined as either white, grey or black. White propaganda openly discloses its source. Grey propaganda is ambiguous or non-disclosed. Black propaganda purports to be published by the enemy or someone besides its actual origins.[6]

Propaganda shares techniques with advertising and public relations, each of which can be thought of as propaganda that promotes a commercial product or shapes the perception of an organization, person, or brand. 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.

Propaganda was often used to influence opinions and beliefs on religious issues, particularly during the split between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches. 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, propaganda was exemplified in the form of party slogans. Also in the early 20th century the term propaganda was used by the founders of the nascent public relations industry to refer to 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 that 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 for 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[citation needed] both the Soviet Union and Germany's government under Hitler admitted explicitly to using propaganda favoring, respectively, communism and Nazism, in all forms of public expression. As these ideologies were repugnant to liberal western societies, the negative feelings toward them came to be projected into the word "propaganda" itself. However, Harold Lasswell observed, as early as 1928, that, "Propaganda has become an epithet of contempt and hate, and the propagandists have sought protective coloration in such names as 'public relations council,' 'specialist in public education,' 'public relations adviser.' "[7]

Anti-communist propaganda in a 1947 comic book published by the Catechetical Guild Educational Society warning of "the dangers of a Communist takeover".

Roderick Hindery argues[8] that propaganda exists on the political left, and right, and in mainstream centrist parties. Hindery further argues that debates about most social issues can be productively revisited in the context of asking "what is or is not propaganda?" Not to be overlooked is the link between propaganda, indoctrination, and terrorism/counterterrorism. He argues that threats to destroy are often as socially disruptive as physical devastation itself.

Propaganda also has much in common with public information campaigns by governments, which are intended to encourage or discourage certain forms of behavior (such as wearing seat belts, not smoking, not littering and so forth). Again, the emphasis is more political in propaganda. Propaganda can take the form of leaflets, posters, TV and radio broadcasts and can also extend to any other medium. In the case of the United States, there is also an important legal (imposed by law) distinction between advertising (a type of overt propaganda) and what the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an arm of the United States Congress, refers to as "covert propaganda".

Journalistic theory generally holds that news items should be objective, giving the reader an accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. On the other hand, advertisements evolved from the traditional commercial advertisements to include also a new type in the form of paid articles or broadcasts disguised as news. These generally present an issue in a very subjective and often misleading light, primarily meant to persuade rather than inform. Normally they use only subtle propaganda techniques and not the more obvious ones used in traditional commercial advertisements. If the reader believes that a paid advertisement is in fact a news item, the message the advertiser is trying to communicate will be more easily "believed" or "internalized".

Such advertisements are considered obvious examples of "covert" propaganda because they take on the appearance of objective information rather than the appearance of propaganda, which is misleading. Federal law specifically mandates that any advertisement appearing in the format of a news item must state that the item is in fact a paid advertisement.

The propagandist seeks to change the way people understand an issue or situation for the purpose of changing their actions and expectations in ways that are desirable to the interest group. Propaganda, in this sense, serves as a corollary to censorship in which the same purpose is achieved, not by filling people's minds with approved information, but by preventing people from being confronted with opposing points of view. What sets propaganda apart from other forms of advocacy is the willingness of the propagandist to change people's understanding through deception and confusion rather than persuasion and understanding. The leaders of an organization know the information to be one sided or untrue, but this may not be true for the rank and file members who help to disseminate the propaganda.


More in line with the religious roots of the term, it is also used widely in the debates about new religious movements (NRMs), both by people who defend them and by people who oppose them. The latter pejoratively call these NRMs cults. Anti-cult activists and Christian countercult activists accuse the leaders of what they consider cults of using propaganda extensively to recruit followers and keep them. Some social scientists, such as the late Jeffrey Hadden, and CESNUR affiliated scholars accuse ex-members of "cults" who became vocal critics and the anti-cult movement of making these unusual religious movements look bad without sufficient reasons.[9][10]


US Office for War Information poster implying that working less helped the Axis powers.

Propaganda is a powerful weapon in war; it is used to dehumanize and create hatred toward a supposed enemy, either internal or external, by creating a false image in the mind. This can be done by using derogatory or racist terms, avoiding some words or by making allegations of enemy atrocities. Most propaganda wars require the home population to feel the enemy has inflicted an injustice, which may be fictitious or may be based on facts. The home population must also decide that the cause of their nation is just.

Propaganda is also one of the methods used in psychological warfare, which may also involve false flag operations. The term propaganda may also refer to false information meant to reinforce the mindsets of people who already believe as the propagandist wishes. The assumption is that, if people believe something false, they will constantly be assailed by doubts. Since these doubts are unpleasant (see cognitive dissonance), people will be eager to have them extinguished, and are therefore receptive to the reassurances of those in power. For this reason propaganda is often addressed to people who are already sympathetic to the agenda. This process of reinforcement uses an individual's predisposition to self-select "agreeable" information sources as a mechanism for maintaining control.

Propaganda can be classified according to the source and nature of the message. White propaganda generally comes from an openly identified source, and is characterized by gentler methods of persuasion, such as standard public relations techniques and one-sided presentation of an argument. Black propaganda is identified as being from one source, but is in fact from another. This is most commonly to disguise the true origins of the propaganda, be it from an enemy country or from an organization with a negative public image. Grey propaganda is propaganda without any identifiable source or author. A major application of grey propaganda is making enemies believe falsehoods using straw arguments: As phase one, to make someone believe "A", one releases as grey propaganda "B", the opposite of "A". In phase two, "B" is discredited using some strawman. The enemy will then assume "A" to be true.

Britannia arm-in-arm with Uncle Sam symbolizes the British-American alliance in World War I.

In scale, these different types of propaganda can also be defined by the potential of true and correct information to compete with the propaganda. For example, opposition to white propaganda is often readily found and may slightly discredit the propaganda source. Opposition to grey propaganda, when revealed (often by an inside source), may create some level of public outcry. Opposition to black propaganda is often unavailable and may be dangerous to reveal, because public cognizance of black propaganda tactics and sources would undermine or backfire the very campaign the black propagandist supported.

Propaganda may be administered in insidious ways. For instance, disparaging disinformation about the history of certain groups or foreign countries may be encouraged or tolerated in the educational system. Since few people actually double-check what they learn at school, such disinformation will be repeated by journalists as well as parents, thus reinforcing the idea that the disinformation item is really a "well-known fact", even though no one repeating the myth is able to point to an authoritative source. The disinformation is then recycled in the media and in the educational system, without the need for direct governmental intervention on the media. Such permeating propaganda may be used for political goals: by giving citizens a false impression of the quality or policies of their country, they may be incited to reject certain proposals or certain remarks or ignore the experience of others.

In the Soviet Union during the Second World War, the propaganda designed to encourage civilians was controlled by Stalin, who insisted on a heavy-handed style that educated audiences easily saw was inauthentic. On the other hand the unofficial rumours about German atrocities were well founded and convincing.[11]


Main article: Corporate propaganda

Corporate propaganda refers to propagandist claims made by a corporation (or corporations), for the purpose of manipulating market opinion with regard to that corporation, and its activities. Just as the use of these products and services can provide pluses which outweigh the minuses to society and individuals, their advocacy may function more positively than negatively.

Common euphemisms for corporate propaganda are advertising and public relations.


For more details on this topic, see Propaganda techniques.
Anti-capitalist propaganda

Common media for transmitting propaganda messages include news reports, government reports, historical revision, junk science, books, leaflets, movies, radio, television, and posters. Less common nowadays are letter post envelopes examples of which of survive from the time of the American Civil War. (Connecticut Historical Society; Civil War Collections; Covers.) In principle any thing that appears on a poster can be produced on a reduced scale on a pocket-style envelope with corresponding proportions to the poster. The case of radio and television, propaganda can exist on news, current-affairs or talk-show segments, as advertising or public-service announce "spots" or as long-running advertorials. Propaganda campaigns often follow a strategic transmission pattern to indoctrinate the target group. This may begin with a simple transmission such as a leaflet dropped from a plane or an advertisement. Generally these messages will contain directions on how to obtain more information, via a web site, hot line, radio program, etc. (as it is seen also for selling purposes among other goals). The strategy intends to initiate the individual from information recipient to information seeker through reinforcement, and then from information seeker to opinion leader through indoctrination.[12]

A number of techniques based in social psychological research are used to generate propaganda. Many of these same techniques can be found under logical fallacies, since propagandists use arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid.

Some time has been spent analyzing the means by which the propaganda messages are transmitted. That work is important but it is clear that information dissemination strategies become propaganda strategies only when coupled with propagandistic messages. Identifying these messages is a necessary prerequisite to study the methods by which those messages are spread. Below are a number of techniques for generating propaganda:


Social psychology[edit]

The field of social psychology includes the study of persuasion. Social psychologists can be sociologists or psychologists. The field includes many theories and approaches to understanding persuasion. For example, communication theory points out that people can be persuaded by the communicator's credibility, expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. The elaboration likelihood model as well as heuristic models of persuasion suggest that a number of factors (e.g., the degree of interest of the recipient of the communication), influence the degree to which people allow superficial factors to persuade them. Nobel Prize–winning psychologist Herbert A. Simon won the Nobel prize for his theory that people are cognitive misers. That is, in a society of mass information people are forced to make decisions quickly and often superficially, as opposed to logically.

Social cognitive theories suggest that people have inherent biases in the way they perceive the world and these biases can be used to manipulate them. For example, people tend to believe that people's misfortune (e.g., poverty) is a result of the person and downplay external factors (e.g., being born into poverty). This bias is referred to as the Fundamental Attribution Error. Self Fulfilling prophecies occur when people believe what they have been told they are. Propaganda frequently plays upon people's existing biases to achieve its end. For example, the illusion of control, refers to people's seemingly innate desire to believe they can and should control their lives. Propagandists frequently argue their point by claiming that the other side is attempting to take away your control. For example, Republicans frequently claim that Democrats are attempting to control you by imposing big government on your private life and take away your spending power by imposing higher taxes while Democrats frequently argue that they are reigning in big corporations that are attempting to influence elections with money, power and take away your job, health etc. ... According to bipartisan analysis, these claims are frequently untrue.[13][not specific enough to verify]

Role theory is frequently used to identify an idea as appropriate because it is associated with a role. For example, the public relations firm Leo Burnett Worldwide used the Marlboro Man to persuade males that Marlboro cigarettes were a part of being a cool, risk-taking, cowboy rebel who was fearless in the face of threats of cancer. The campaign quadrupled sales of their cigarettes. Of course, smoking has nothing to do with being a cowboy or a rebel. This is a fantasy but the campaign's success is consistent with the tenets of role theory. In fact, the three actors who played the Marlboro man died of lung cancer.

Herman and Chomsky[edit]

Early 20th-century depiction of a "European Anarchist" attempting to destroy the Statue of Liberty.

The propaganda model is a theory advanced by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky that argues systemic biases in the mass media and seeks to explain them in terms of structural economic causes.

The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

First presented in their 1988 book Manufacturing Consent: the Political Economy of the Mass Media, the propaganda model views the private media as businesses selling a product — readers and audiences (rather than news) — to other businesses (advertisers) and relying primarily on government and corporate information and propaganda. The theory postulates five general classes of "filters" that determine the type of news that is presented in news media: Ownership of the medium, the medium's Funding, Sourcing of the news, Flak, and Anti-communist ideology.

The first three (ownership, funding, and sourcing) are generally regarded by the authors as being the most important. Although the model was based mainly on the characterization of United States media, Chomsky and Herman believe the theory is equally applicable to any country that shares the basic economic structure and organizing principles the model postulates as the cause of media biases. After the Soviet Union disintegrated, Chomsky said terrorism and Islam would be the new filter replacing communism.[citation needed]

Ross' epistemic merit model[edit]

American World War I poster: "Remember Your First Thrill of American Liberty"

The epistemic merit model is a method for understanding propaganda conceived by Sheryl Tuttle Ross and detailed in her 2002 article for the Journal of Aesthetic Education entitled "Understanding Propaganda: The Epistemic Merit Model and Its Application to Art".[16] Ross developed the Epistemic merit model due to concern about narrow, misleading definitions of propaganda. She contrasted her model with the ideas of Pope Gregory XV, the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, Alfred Lee, F.C. Bartlett, and Hans Speier. Insisting that each of their respective discussions of propaganda are too narrow, Ross proposed her own definition.

To appropriately discuss propaganda, Ross argues that one must consider a threefold communication model: that of Sender-Message-Receiver. "That is... propaganda involve[s]... the one who is persuading (Sender) [who is] doing so intentionally, [the] target for such persuasion (Receiver) and [the] means of reaching that target (Message)." There are four conditions for a message to be considered propaganda. Propaganda involves the intention to persuade. As well, propaganda is sent on behalf of a sociopolitical institution, organization, or cause. Next, the recipient of propaganda is a socially significant group of people. Finally, propaganda is an epistemic struggle to challenge others' thoughts.

Ross claims that it is misleading to say that propaganda is simply false, or that it is conditional to a lie, since often the propagandist believes in what he/she is propagandizing. In other words, it is not necessarily a lie if the person who creates the propaganda is trying to persuade you of a view that they actually hold. "The aim of the propagandist is to create the semblance of credibility." This means that they appeal to an epistemology that is weak or defective.

False statements, bad arguments, immoral commands as well as inapt metaphors (and other literary tropes) are the sorts of things that are epistemically defective... Not only does epistemic defectiveness more accurately describe how propaganda endeavors to function... since many messages are in forms such as commands that do not admit to truth-values, [but it] also accounts for the role context plays in the workings of propaganda.

Throughout history those who have wished to persuade have used art to get their message out. This can be accomplished by hiring artists for the express aim of propagandizing or by investing new meanings to a previously non-political work. Therefore, Ross states, it is important to consider "the conditions of its making [and] the conditions of its use."


Pre-modern precedents[edit]

English Civil War cartoon entitled "The Cruel Practices of Prince Rupert" (1643)

Primitive forms of propaganda have been a human activity as far back as reliable recorded evidence exists. The Behistun Inscription (c. 515 BC) detailing the rise of Darius I to the Persian throne is viewed by most historians as an early example of propaganda.[17] The Arthashastra written by Chanakya (c. 350 – 283 BC), a professor of political science at Takshashila University and a prime minister of the Maurya Empire in ancient India, discusses propaganda in detail, such as how to spread propaganda and how to apply it in warfare. His student Chandragupta Maurya (c. 340 – 293 BC), founder of the Maurya Empire, employed these methods during his rise to power.[18] The writings of Romans such as Livy (c. 59 BC – 17 AD) are considered masterpieces of pro-Roman propaganda.[citation needed] The most well-known originator of Roman historiography was Quintus Fabius Pictor (3rd century BCE). His style of writing history defending the Roman state actions and using propaganda heavily eventually became a defining characteristic of Roman historiography. Another example of early propaganda is the 12th-century work, The War of the Irish with the Foreigners, written by the Dál gCais to portray themselves as legitimate rulers of Ireland.

"HIC OSCULA PEDIBUS PAPAE FIGUNTUR." "Kissing the Pope's feet." (1545). German peasants respond to a papal bull of Pope Paul III. From a series of woodcuts by Lucas Cranach commissioned by Martin Luther,[19] usually referred to as the Papstspotbilder or Papstspottbilder.[20] The accompanying caption reads: "Nicht Bapst: nicht schreck uns mit deim ban, Und sey nicht so zorniger man. Wir thun sonst ein gegen wehre, Und zeigen dirs Bel vedere." "Don't frighten us Pope, with your ban, and don't be such a furious man. Otherwise we shall turn away and show you our rears."[21]

Propaganda during the Reformation, helped by the spread of the printing press throughout Europe, and in particular within Germany, caused new ideas, thoughts, and doctrine to be made available to the public in ways that had never been seen before the 16th century. The printing press was invented in approximately 1450 and quickly spread to other major cities around Europe; by the time the Reformation was underway in 1517 there were printing centers in over 200 of the major European cities.[22] These centers became the primary producers of both Reformation works by the Protestant Reformers and anti-Reformation works put forth by the Roman Catholics.

Modern propaganda[edit]

19th century[edit]

Propaganda as generally understood, is a modern phenomenon that emerged from the creation of literate and politically active societies informed by a mass media, where governments increasingly saw the necessity for swaying public opinion in favour of its policies. A notable example was perhaps during the Indian Rebellion of 1857, where Indian sepoys rebelled against the British East India Company's rule in India. Incidents of rape committed by Indian rebels against English women or girls were exaggerated to great effect by the British media to justify continued British colonialism in the Indian subcontinent.[23] At the time, British newspapers had printed various accounts about English women and girls being raped by the Indian rebels. It was later found that some of these accounts were false stories created to perpetuate the common stereotypes of the native people of India as savages who need to be civilized by British colonialists, a mission sometimes known as "The White Man's Burden". One such account published by The Times, regarding an incident where 48 English girls as young as 10–14 were supposedly raped by the Indian rebels in Delhi, was criticized as a false propaganda story by Karl Marx, who pointed out that the story was reported by a clergyman in Bangalore, far from the events of the rebellion.[24]

Gabriel Tarde's Laws of Imitation (1890) and Gustave Le Bon's The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1897) were two of the first codifications of propaganda techniques, which influenced many writers afterward, including Sigmund Freud. Hitler's Mein Kampf is heavily influenced by Le Bon's theories.


Northern propaganda in the American Civil War. Former slave Gordon showing keloid scars from whipping. This famous photo was distributed by abolitionists.[25]

Abolitionists in Britain and the United States in the 19th century developed large, complex propaganda campaigns against slavery. Stampp says that, "Though abolitionists never argued that the physical treatment of slaves had any decisive bearing on the issue of the morality of slavery, their propaganda emphasized (and doubtless exaggerated) cruelties and atrocities for the purpose of winning converts."[26] Blight says,

"The authenticity of these reports about southern atrocity is questionable. I know of no verification for them. The propaganda uses of such stories, though, were not lost on abolitionist editors such as Douglass."[27]

Halttunen argues that the pornography of pain was an essential part of developing a humanitarian sensibility in Britain and the US. She notes, "The index of Theodore Dwight Weld's compilation American Slavery as It Is (1839) clearly demonstrates that project's focus on torture: A is for Arbitrary power, cruelty of, B is for Branding with hot iron, C is for Chopping of slaves piecemeal, D is for Dislocation of bones, E is for Ear-cropping."[28][29]

Berry and Alford argue, "Detailed accounts of white slaveholders maliciously whipping bondwomen, stripped of their clothing, gave abolitionist propaganda an eroticism that conflicted with white society's sexual and literary standards. Drawings and stories revealed that enslaved women, stripped partially or completely naked, were whipped....The images of enslaved women historically characterized as immoral, promiscuous, and animalistic were inconsistent with white American values of womanhood."[30] Kennicott argues that the largest and most effective abolitionist speakers were the blacks who spoke before the countless local meetings of the National Negro Conventions. They used the traditional arguments against slavery, protesting it on moral, economic, and political grounds. Their role in the antislavery movement not only aided abolitionist propaganda but also was a source of pride to the black community.[31]

First World War[edit]

How Britain Prepared, 1915 film.

The first large-scale and organized propagation of government propaganda was occasioned by the outbreak of war in 1914. In the war's initial stages, propaganda output was greatly increased by the British and German governments, to persuade their populace in the justness of their cause, to encourage voluntary recruitment, and above all to demonize the enemy.

At the start of the war, Emperor Wilhelm II expanded its unofficial propaganda machinery, establishing the Central Office for Foreign Services, which among other duties was tasked with propaganda distribution to neutral nations, persuading them to either side with Germany or to maintain their stance of neutrality. After the declaration of war, Britain immediately cut the undersea cables that connected Germany to the outside world, thereby cutting off a major propaganda outlet. The Germans relied instead on the powerful wireless Nauen Transmitter Station to broadcast pro-German news reports to the world. Among other techniques used to keep up the morale of the troops, mobile cinemas were regularly dispatched to the front line for the entertainment of the troops. Newsreels would portray current events with a pro-German slant. German propaganda techniques heavily relied on emphasizing the mythological and martial nature of the Germanic 'Volk' and the inevitability of its triumph.

British propaganda during World War I — called "an impressive exercise in improvisation" — was hastily expanded at the beginning of the war and was rapidly brought under government control as the War Propaganda Bureau (Wellington House), under the overall leadership of journalist Charles Masterman. The Bureau began its propaganda campaign on 2 September 1914 when Masterman invited 25 leading British authors to Wellington House to discuss ways of best promoting Britain's interests during the war. Those who attended included William Archer, Arthur Conan Doyle, Arnold Bennett, John Masefield, Ford Madox Ford, G. K. Chesterton, Henry Newbolt, John Galsworthy, Thomas Hardy, Rudyard Kipling, Gilbert Parker, G. M. Trevelyan and H. G. Wells. Several of the writers agreed to write pamphlets and books that would promote the government's point of view; these were printed and published by such well-known publishers as Hodder & Stoughton, Methuen, Oxford University Press, John Murray, Macmillan and Thomas Nelson.

1914 "Lord Kitchener Wants You!" poster

After January 1916 the Bureau's activities were subsumed under the office of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. In May 1916 Masterman began recruiting artists, including Muirhead Bone, Francis Dodd, Eric Kennington and others, to paint pictures of the war in France and the home front. In early 1918 it was decided that a senior government figure should take over responsibility for propaganda and on 4 March Lord Beaverbrook, owner of the Daily Express newspaper, was made Minister of Information. The British effort soon far surpassed the German in its quality and ability to sway the public mood both at home and abroad.[32]

A variety of propaganda methods were used by the British during the war, with emphasis on the need for credibility.[33] Written forms of distributed propaganda included books, pamphlets, official publications, ministerial speeches or royal messages. They were targeted at influential individuals, such as journalists and politicians, rather than a mass audience.[34] Pamphlets were distributed to various foreign countries, primarily the United States: - these pamphlets were academic in tone and factual in nature, distributed through unofficial channels. By 1916, 7 million copies had been circulated by Wellington House in various languages.[35]

British propagandists also sought to influence the foreign press, by providing it with information through the Neutral Press Committee and the Foreign Office. Special telegraph agencies were established in various European cities, including Bucharest, Bilbao and Amsterdam, in order to facilitate the spread of information.[36]

Recruitment was a central theme of domestic propaganda until the introduction of conscription in January 1916. The most common theme for recruitment posters was patriotism, which evolved into appeals for people to do their 'fair share'. Among the most famous of the posters used in the British Army recruitment campaign of World War I were the "Lord Kitchener Wants You" posters, which depicted Secretary of State for War Lord Kitchener above the words "WANTS YOU".

One major propaganda avenue was the use of atrocity stories. These aimed to mobilise hatred of the German enemy by spreading details of their atrocities, real or alleged, and was used extensively by Britain, reaching a peak in 1915, with much of the atrocities related to Germany's invasion of Belgium.[37][38][39] One of the first significant publications to be produced by the Bureau was the Report on Alleged German Outrages, in early 1915. This pamphlet documented atrocities both actual and alleged committed by the German army against Belgian civilians. Other atrocity stories included the fate of the nurse Edith Cavell and the Sinking of the RMS Lusitania. These had a significant impact both in Britain and in America, making front-page headlines in major newspapers.[40][41]

Before the United States declared war in 1917, it established a propaganda department along similar lines. President Woodrow Wilson hired Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays to participate in the Creel Commission, which was to sway popular opinion in favor of entering the war on the side of the United Kingdom. The Creel Committee provided themes for speeches by "four-minute men" at public functions, and also encouraged censorship of the American press. Starting after World War I, propaganda had a growing negative connotation. This was due in part to the 1920 book "How We Advertised America: the First Telling of the Amazing Story of the Committee on Public Information that Carried the Gospel of Americanism to Every Corner of the Globe"[42] in which the impact of the Creel Committee, and the power of propaganda, was overemphasized. The Committee was so unpopular that after the war, Congress closed it down without providing funding to organize and archive its papers.

The war propaganda campaign of the Creel Committee "produced within six months such an intense anti-German hysteria as to permanently impress American business (and Adolf Hitler, among others) with the potential of large-scale propaganda to control public opinion."[43]

Russian revolution[edit]

Russian revolutionaries of the 19th and 20th centuries distinguished two different aspects covered by the English term propaganda. Their terminology included two terms: Russian: агитация (agitatsiya), or agitation, and Russian: пропаганда, or propaganda, see agitprop (agitprop is not, however, limited to the Soviet Union, as it was considered, before the October Revolution, to be one of the fundamental activities of any Marxist activist; this importance of agit-prop in Marxist theory may also be observed today in Trotskyist circles, who insist on the importance of leaflet distribution).

Soviet propaganda meant dissemination of revolutionary ideas, teachings of Marxism, and theoretical and practical knowledge of Marxist economics, while agitation meant forming favorable public opinion and stirring up political unrest. These activities did not carry negative connotations (as they usually do in English) and were encouraged. Expanding dimensions of state propaganda, the Bolsheviks actively used transportation such as trains, aircraft and other means.

Joseph Stalin's regime built the largest fixed-wing aircraft of the 1930s, Tupolev ANT-20, exclusively for this purpose. Named after the famous Soviet writer Maxim Gorky who had recently returned from fascist Italy, it was equipped with a powerful radio set called "Voice from the sky", printing and leaflet-dropping machinery, radio stations, photographic laboratory, film projector with sound for showing movies in flight, library, etc. The aircraft could be disassembled and transported by railroad if needed. The giant aircraft set a number of world records.


Bernays, a nephew of Freud, who wrote the book Propaganda early in the 20th century,[44] later coined the terms "group mind" and "engineering consent", important concepts in practical propaganda work. He wrote:[45]

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

The file Century of the Self by Adam Curtis documents the immense influence of these ideas on public relations and politics throughout the last century.

Lippmann, in Public Opinion (1922) also worked on the subject, as well as the American advertising pioneer and founder of the field of public relations Edward Bernays, a nephew of Freud, who wrote the book Propaganda early in the 20th century.[44]

According to Alex Carey, one distinctive feature of the 20th century was "the professionalizing and institutionalizing of propaganda", as it became an increasingly prominent, sophisticated, and self-conscious tactic of both government and business.[46]

Nazi Germany[edit]

Lappland-Kurier soldiers newspaper
Main article: Nazi propaganda

After the defeat of Germany in the First World War, military officials such as Erich Ludendorff suggested that British propaganda had been instrumental in their defeat. Adolf Hitler came to echo this view, believing that it had been a primary cause of the collapse of morale and the revolts in the German home front and Navy in 1918 (see also: Dolchstoßlegende). Later, the Nazis adapted many British propaganda techniques during their time in power. Most propaganda in Germany was produced by the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. Joseph Goebbels was placed in charge of this ministry shortly after Hitler took power in 1933. All journalists, writers and artists were required to register with one of the Ministry's subordinate chambers for the press, fine arts, music, theatre, film, literature or radio.

Hitler met nearly every day with Goebbels to discuss the news, and Goebbels would obtain Hitler's thoughts on the subject. Goebbels then met with senior Ministry officials to pass down the official Party line on world events. Broadcasters and journalists required prior approval before their works were disseminated. Along with posters, the Nazis produced a number of films and books to spread their beliefs.

Second World War[edit]

World War II saw continued use of propaganda as a weapon of war, building on the experience of WW1, both by Hitler's propagandist Joseph Goebbels and the British Political Warfare Executive, as well as the United States Office of War Information.

Within the USA, the British Security Coordination activities worked to counter pro-German sentiment, and isolationist opinion. The British broadcast black propaganda through fake German-language radio stations to Europe.

The Reichs Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda used English language broadcasts - such as Germany Calling - broadcast to the UK. Presenter William Joyce - a British fascist - gained the nickname "Lord Haw-Haw" from the popular press.

Cold War propaganda[edit]

A 1988 German Democratic Republic poster showing the increase of timber production from 7 million cubic metres in 1970 to 11 million in 1990
Soldier loads a "leaflet bomb" during the Korean War.

The West and the Soviet Union both used propaganda extensively during the Cold War. Both sides used film, television, and radio programming to influence their own citizens, each other, and Third World nations. The United States Information Agency operated the Voice of America as an official government station. Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, which were, in part, supported by the Central Intelligence Agency, provided grey propaganda in news and entertainment programs to Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union respectively. The Soviet Union's official government station, Radio Moscow, broadcast white propaganda, while Radio Peace and Freedom broadcast grey propaganda. Both sides also broadcast black propaganda programs in periods of special crises.

In 1948, the United Kingdom's Foreign Office created the IRD (Information Research Department), which took over from wartime and slightly post-war departments such as the Ministry of Information and dispensed propaganda via various media such as the BBC and publishing.[47][48]

Its main targets were in the Third World.[49] However, it was also set out to "be of use to" British media and opinion formers. As well as supplying material to the BBC World Service, secret lists were compiled of approved journalists and trade unionists to whom material was offered, if not always accepted.

Possibly its most notorious "project" was the joint operation with the CIA to set up Encounter magazine, edited by Stephen Spender from 1953 to 1966. Spender resigned after it emerged that the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which published the magazine, was being covertly funded by the CIA.[50]

The ideological and border dispute between the Soviet Union and People's Republic of China resulted in a number of cross-border operations. One technique developed during this period was the "backwards transmission," in which the radio program was recorded and played backwards over the air. (This was done so that messages meant to be received by the other government could be heard, while the average listener could not understand the content of the program).

When describing life in capitalist countries, in the US in particular, propaganda focused on social issues such as poverty and anti-union action by the government. Workers in capitalist countries were portrayed as "ideologically close". Propaganda claimed rich people from the US derived their income from weapons manufacturing, and claimed that there was substantial racism or neo-fascism in the US.

When describing life in Communist countries, western propaganda sought to depict an image of a citizenry held captive by governments that brainwash them. The West also created a fear of the East, by depicting an aggressive Soviet Union. In the Americas, Cuba served as a major source and a target of propaganda from both black and white stations operated by the CIA and Cuban exile groups. Radio Habana Cuba, in turn, broadcast original programming, relayed Radio Moscow, and broadcast The Voice of Vietnam as well as alleged confessions from the crew of the USS Pueblo.

George Orwell's novels Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four are virtual textbooks on the use of propaganda. Though not set in the Soviet Union, these books are about totalitarian regimes that constantly corrupt language for political purposes. These novels were, ironically, used for explicit propaganda. The CIA, for example, secretly commissioned an animated film adaptation of Animal Farm in the 1950s with small changes to the original story to suit its own needs.[51]

During the Cuban Revolution, in 1955 Fidel Castro stressed the importance of propaganda in his struggle both against Fulgencio Batista and the United States, saying, “Propaganda is the heart of our struggle. We must never abandon propaganda.”[52]

Vietnam war[edit]

Propaganda was used extensively by Communist forces in the Vietnam War as means of controlling people's opinions.[53] Radio stations like Radio Hanoi were in an integral part of North Vietnamese propaganda operations. Communist Vietnamese politician Mai Chi Tho, commenting on the use of propaganda, stated:

"Ho Chi Minh may have been an evil man; Nixon may have been a great man. The Americans may have had the just cause; we may not have had the just cause. But we won and the Americans were defeated because we convinced the people that Ho Chi Minh is the great man, that Nixon is a murderer and the Americans are the invaders... The key factor is how to control people and their opinions. Only Marxism-Leninism can do that."[54]

Yugoslav wars[edit]

During the Yugoslav wars, propaganda was used as a military strategy by governments of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Croatia.

Propaganda was used to create fear and hatred, and particularly incite the Serb population against the other ethnicities (Bosniaks, Croats, Albanians and other non-Serbs). Serb media made a great effort in justifying, revising or denying mass war crimes committed by Serb forces during these wars.[55]

According to the ICTY verdicts against Serb political and military leaders, during the Bosnian war, the propaganda was a part of the Strategic Plan by Serb leadership, aimed at linking Serb-populated areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina together, gaining control over these areas and creating a sovereign Serb nation state, from which most non-Serbs would be permanently removed. The Serb leadership was aware that the Strategic Plan could only be implemented by the use of force and fear, thus by the commission of war crimes.[56][57]

Croats also used propaganda against Serbs throughout[citation needed] and against Bosniaks during the 1992-1994 Croat-Bosniak war, which was part of the larger Bosnian War. During Lašva Valley ethnic cleansing, Croat forces seized the television broadcasting stations (for example at Skradno) and created its own local radio and television to carry propaganda. They also seized the public institutions, raised the Croatian flag over public institution buildings and imposed the Croatian Dinar as the unit of currency. During this time, Busovača's Bosniaks were forced to sign an act of allegiance to the Croat authorities, fell victim to numerous attacks on shops and businesses and, gradually, left the area out of fear that they would be the victims of mass crimes.[58] According to ICTY Trial Chambers, in Blaškić case, Croat authorities created a radio station in Kiseljak to broadcast nationalist propaganda.[59] A similar pattern was applied in Mostar and Gornji Vakuf (where Croats created a radio station called Radio Uskoplje).[60] Local propaganda efforts in parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina controlled by the Croats were supported by Croatian daily newspapers such as Večernji list and Croatian Radiotelevision, especially by controversial reporters Dijana Čuljak and Smiljko Šagolj, who are still blamed by the families of Bosniak victims in Vranica case for inciting massacre of Bosnian POWs in Mostar when broadcasting a report about alleged terrorists arrested by Croats who victimized Croat civilians. The bodies of Bosnian POWs were later found in Goranci mass grave. Croatian Radiotelevision presented Croat attack on Mostar as a Bosnian Muslim attack on Croats in alliance with the Serbs. According to ICTY, in the early hours of May 9, 1993, the Croatian Defence Council (HVO) attacked Mostar using artillery, mortars, heavy weapons and small arms. The HVO controlled all roads leading into Mostar and international organisations were denied access. Radio Mostar announced that all Bosniaks should hang out a white flag from their windows. The HVO attack had been well prepared and planned.[61]

During the ICTY trials against Croat war leaders, many Croatian journalists participated as the defence witnesses trying to relativise war crimes committed by Croatian troops against non-Croat civilians (Bosniaks in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbs in Croatia). During the trial against general Tihomir Blaškić (later convicted of war crimes), Ivica Mlivončić, Croatian columnist in Slobodna Dalmacija, tried to defend general Blaškić presenting claims in his book Zločin s pečatom about alleged "genocide against Croats" (most of it unproven or false), which were considered by the Trial Chambers as irrelevant for the case. After the conviction, he continued to write in Slobodna Dalmacija against the ICTY presenting it "as the court against Croats", with chauvinistic claims that the ICTY cannot be unbiased because "it is financed by Saudi Arabia (Muslims)".[62][63]

Modern techniques[edit]

Afghan War[edit]

In the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, psychological operations tactics were employed to demoralize the Taliban and to win the sympathies of the Afghan population. At least six EC-130E Commando Solo aircraft were used to jam local radio transmissions and transmit replacement propaganda messages. Leaflets were also dropped throughout Afghanistan, offering rewards for Osama bin Laden and other individuals, portraying Americans as friends of Afghanistan and emphasizing various negative aspects of the Taliban. Another shows a picture of Mohammed Omar in a set of crosshairs with the words: "We are watching."

Iraq War[edit]

Both the United States and Iraq employed propaganda during the Iraq War. The United States established campaigns towards the American people on the justifications of the war while using similar tactics to bring down Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq.[64]

Iraqi propaganda[edit]

The Iraqi insurgency's plan was to gain as much support as possible by using violence as their propaganda tool.[65] Inspired by the Vietcong's tactics,[66] insurgents were using rapid movement to keep the coalition off-balance.[65] By using low-technology strategies to convey their messages, they were able to gain support.[67] Graffiti slogans were used on walls and houses praising the virtues of many group leaders while condemning the Iraqi government. Others used flyers, leaflets, articles and self-published newspapers and magazines to get the point across.[67]

Insurgents also produced CDs and DVDs and distributed them in communities that the Iraq and the US Government were trying to influence.[68] The insurgents designed advertisements that cost a fraction of what the US was spending on their ads aimed at the same people in Iraq with much more success.[68] In addition, a domestic Arabic language television station was established with the aim of informing the Iraqi public of alleged coalition propaganda efforts in the country.[66]

US propaganda in Iraq[edit]
US PSYOP pamphlet disseminated in Iraq. The pamphlet says: "This is your future, Al-Zarqawi", and shows Al-Qaeda fighter Al-Zarqawi caught in a rat trap.

To achieve their aim of a moderate, pro-western Iraq, US authorities were careful to avoid conflicts with Islamic culture that would produce passionate reactions from Iraqis, but differentiating between "good" and "bad" Islam has proved challenging for the US.[66]

The US implemented black propaganda by creating false radio personalities that would disseminate pro-American information, but supposedly run by the supporters of Saddam Hussein. One radio station used was Radio Tikrit.[66] Another example of use of black propaganda is that the United States paid Iraqis to publish articles written by US troops in their newspapers under the idea that they are unbiased and real accounts; this was brought forth by the New York Times in 2005.[69] The article stated that it was the Lincoln Group who had been hired by the US government to create the propaganda. However, their names were later cleared from any wrongdoing.[69]

The US was more successful with the Voice of America campaign, which is an old Cold War tactic that exploited people's desire for information.[66] While the information they gave out to the Iraqis was truthful, they were in a high degree of competition with the opposing forces after the censorship of the Iraqi media was lifted with the removal of Saddam from power.[70]

In November 2005, the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times alleged that the United States military had manipulated news reported in Iraqi media in an effort to cast a favorable light on its actions while demoralizing the insurgency. Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a military spokesman in Iraq, said the program is "an important part of countering misinformation in the news by insurgents", while a spokesman for former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the allegations of manipulation were troubling if true. The Department of Defense confirmed the existence of the program.[71][72]

Propaganda aimed at US citizens[edit]

The extent to which the US government used propaganda aimed at its own people is a matter of discussion. The book Selling Intervention & War, by Jon Western, argued that president Bush was "selling the war" to the public.[73]

President George W. Bush gave a talk at the Athena Performing Arts Center, at Greece Athena Middle and High School, Tuesday, May 24, 2005, in Rochester, New York. About halfway through the event, Bush said: "See, in my line of work, you got to keep repeating things over and over, and over again, for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."

People had their initial reactions to the War on Terror. While the United States' official stance was to remove Saddam Hussein's power in Iraq with allegations that his government held weapons of mass destruction or was related to Osama Bin Laden,[74] over time the Iraq war as a whole has been seen in a negative light.[75] Video and picture coverage in the news has shown shocking and disturbing images of torture and other evils being done under the Iraqi Government.[74]

North Korea[edit]

North Koreans touring the Museum of American War Atrocities.

Every year, a state-owned publishing house releases several cartoons (called geurim-chaek in North Korea), many of which are smuggled across the Chinese border and, sometimes, end up in university libraries in the United States. The books are designed to instill the Juche philosophy of Kim Il-sung (the father of North Korea)—radical self-reliance of the state. The plots mostly feature scheming capitalists from the United States and Japan who create dilemmas for naïve North Korean characters.

DPRK textbooks claim that US missionaries came to the Korean Peninsula and committed barbarous acts against Korean children, including injecting dangerous liquids into the children and writing the word "THIEF" on the forehead of any child who stole an apple for missionary-owned orchards in Korea.[76]

Mexican drug cartels[edit]

Drug cartels have been engaged in propaganda and psychological campaigns to influence their rivals and those within their area of influence. They use banners and narcomantas to threaten their rivals. Some cartels hand out pamphlets and leaflets to conduct public relation campaigns. They have been able to control the information environment by threatening journalists, bloggers and others who speak out against them. They have elaborate recruitment strategies targeting young adults to join their cartel groups. They have successfully branded the word narco, and the word has become part of Mexican culture. There is music, television shows, literature, beverages, food and architecture that all have been branded narco.[77][78]

United States of America[edit]


Propaganda is used by the Communist Party of China to sway public and international opinion in favor of its policies.[79][80] Domestically, this includes censorship of proscribed views and an active cultivation of views that favor the government. Propaganda is considered central to the operation of the Chinese government.[81] The term in general use in China, xuanchuan (宣傳 "propaganda; publicity") can have either a neutral connotation in official government contexts or a pejorative connotation in informal contexts.[82] Some xuanchuan collocations usually refer to "propaganda" (e.g., xuānchuánzhàn 宣传战 "propaganda war"), others to "publicity" (xuānchuán méijiè 宣傳媒介 "mass media; means of publicity"), and still others are ambiguous (xuānchuányuán 宣传员 "propagandist; publicist").[83]

Aspects of propaganda can be traced back to the earliest periods of Chinese history, but propaganda has been most effective in the twentieth century owing to mass media and an authoritarian government.[81] China in the era of Mao Zedong is known for its constant use of mass campaigns to legitimize the state and the policies of leaders. It was the first Chinese government to successfully make use of modern mass propaganda techniques, adapting them to the needs of a country which had a largely rural and illiterate population.[81] In poor developing countries, China spreads propaganda through methods such as opening Confucius Institutes, and providing training programs in China for foreign officials and students.[84]


Vladimir Putin's Russia has been reviving the Soviet-style Propaganda traditions, as well as developing new methods of propaganda, for domestic purposes, aimed at sustaining the popularity of the regime and its leader among Russian voters, and foreign purposes—that is, building a positive image of the Kremlin abroad.[85][86] Additionally, Russian authorities orchestrated a propaganda campaign with the aim of promoting a version of the country's history for political purposes. The campaign include school textbooks and the film industry. It stresses the exceptionality of Russian historical development and is geared to endowing the figure of Vladimir Putin.[87] Russia also developed a cult of personality around president Putin, known by some as Putinism.[88]

On June 28, 2000, Putin approved The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation to create "a positive perception of Russia abroad", something that has been identified as one of Russia's foreign policy priorities.[86][89] Additionally, it emphasized the importance of "developing Russia's own means of influencing public opinion abroad".[86] In 2010, it was estimated that the Russian government allocated US$1.4 billion for international propaganda that year.[90]

Some experts and analysts believe that Russia's vision of soft power has remained practically unchanged since the Soviet period and consists of, above all else, the idea of strengthening Russia's international influence while weakening the influence of the United States through the principles of anti-Westernism and anti-Americanism.[86] For example, Lilia Shevtsova, an expert Kremlinologist, sates that old ideas still dominate Russia's politics: "Americans cannot be trusted, Americans are guilty, Americans are hypocritical and the Americans are a threat!"[86][91] Lev Gudkov, a Russian sociologist, pointed out that creating a feeling of external threat is an effective means to consolidate a society: "The specter of an enemy is an extremely powerful means for creating internal cohesiveness and solidarity with the authorities. As soon as this image of the enemy gets formed […] there emerges a powerful mechanism for consolidation on the basis of the principle us vs. them and America becomes the main villain."[86]

In 2005, Russia launched state monitored and funded[86] informational TV channel Russia Today (RT). The head of the Russian Federal Agency for Print and Mass Media pointed out that the main objective of the new channel is to create a positive image of Russia abroad.[86] As of 2012, RT broadcasts in English, Spanish and Arabic and serves as the Kremlin's main weapon of soft power.[86] Its reportage is consistent with the tactics chosen by official Russia: "What right do you have to criticize us? Look at what is happening in your country!"[86][92] In the best tradition of propaganda, the focus puts a particular spin on the events within contrasted significantly greater coverage on events without.[86] In many respects, RT's "support" consists of creating a rather idealistic picture of Putin's Russia, in contrast to an America drowning in poverty and crime, facing continuous class struggle and ruled by ruthless corporations.[86] On March 6, 2014, one of RT's Washington-based news anchor, Liz Wahl, announced her resignation from the channel at the end of a live newscast citing "ethical and moral challenges" in working for a news media that "whitewashes the actions of Putin". Wahl's resignation followed an on-air expression of dissent with Russia's plans for military invasion in Ukraine by another US based anchor for RT, Abby Martin, a few days earlier.

In early 2014, during the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict following the February 23rd ouster of President Victor Yanukovych, Russia began a massive propaganda campaign aiming to discredit the newly appointed interim government, inter alia, among the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine. Knowing that large parts of Eastern and Southern Ukraine relies on Russian television as a source of Russian-language entertainment and news, State-owned and government-linked Russian television channels targeted their news and commentary directly at their Ukrainian audience, and analysis have suggested[93] that the Kremlin, in an unprecedented manner, has used the domestic Russian media to shape the political debate in a foreign country.

Russia employs paid, pro-government commenters known as Web brigades. According to Freedom House, Russia, China and Bahrain are at the forefront of this practice.[94]


Propaganda posters in Vietnam with images of solidarity and Ho Chi Minh

Posters hanging everywhere often describe unity of the working class, farmers and soldiers under the leadership of the Communist Party of Vietnam and Ho Chi Minh. Residents and students have been studying ethics and ideology of Ho Chi Minh.


Propaganda of the New State, showing the Brazilian President Getúlio Vargas alongside children, 1938.

Of all the potential targets for propaganda, children are the most vulnerable because they are the most unprepared for the critical reasoning and contextual comprehension required to determine whether a message is propaganda or not. Children's vulnerability to propaganda is rooted in developmental psychology. The attention children give their environment during development, due to the process of developing their understanding of the world, will cause them to absorb propaganda indiscriminately. Also, children are highly imitative: studies by Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila A. Ross in the 1960s indicated that,

Poster promoting the Nicaraguan Sandinistas. The text reads: "Sandinista children: Toño, Delia and Rodolfo are in the Association of Sandinista Children. Sandinista children use a neckerchief. They participate in the revolution and are very studious."

to a degree, socialization, formal education and standardized television programming can be seen as using propaganda for the purpose of indoctrination. The use of propaganda in schools was highly prevalent during the 1930s and 1940s in Germany, as well as in Stalinist Russia.[citation needed]

Anti-Semitic propaganda for children[edit]

In Nazi Germany, the education system was thoroughly co-opted to indoctrinate the German youth with anti-Semitic ideology. This was accomplished through the National Socialist Teachers League, of which 97% of all German teachers were members in 1937. It encouraged the teaching of racial theory. Picture books for children such as Don't Trust A Fox in A Green Meadow or The Word of A Jew, Der Giftpilz (translated into English as The Poisonous Mushroom) and The Poodle-Pug-Dachshund-Pincher were widely circulated (over 100,000 copies of Don't Trust A Fox... were circulated during the late 1930s) and contained depictions of Jews as devils, child molesters and other morally charged figures. Slogans such as "Judas the Jew betrayed Jesus the German to the Jews" were recited in class.[95] The following is an example of a propagandistic math problem recommended by the National Socialist Essence of Education:

See also[edit]

Further history


  1. ^ Oxford dictionary.
  2. ^ a b c d Diggs-Brown, Barbara (2011) Strategic Public Relations: Audience Focused Practice p. 48
  3. ^
  4. ^ Garth Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell, Propaganda and Persuasion, 4th ed. Sage Publications, p. 7
  5. ^ Richard Alan Nelson, A Chronology and Glossary of Propaganda in the United States (1996) pp. 232–233
  6. ^ Zeman, Zbynek (1978). Selling the War. Orbis Publishing. ISBN 0-85613-312-4. 
  7. ^ pp. 260–261, "The Function of the Propagandist", International Journal of Ethics, 38 (no. 3): pp. 258–268.
  8. ^ Hindery, Roderick R., Indoctrination and Self-deception or Free and Critical Thought? (2001)
  9. ^ "The Religious Movements Page: Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect"". Retrieved December 4, 2005. 
  10. ^ "Polish Anti-Cult Movement (Koscianska) - CESNUR". Retrieved December 4, 2005. 
  11. ^ Karel C. Berkhoff, Motherland in Danger: Soviet Propaganda during World War II (2012) excerpt and text search
  12. ^ Garth S. Jowett and Victoria J. O'Donnell, Propaganda & Persuasion (5th ed. 2011)
  13. ^
  14. ^ "Letter from Noam Chomsky" to Covert Action Quarterly, quoting Alex Carey, Australian social scientist,
  15. ^ review of Carey, Alex (1995) Taking the Risk out of Democracy: Propaganda in the US and Australia, University of NSW Press.
  16. ^ Ross, Sheryl Tuttle. "Understanding Propaganda: The Epistemic Merit Model and Its Application to Art." Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 36, No.1. pp. 16–30
  17. ^ Nagle, D. Brendan; Stanley M Burstein (2009). The Ancient World: Readings in Social and Cultural History. Pearson Education. p. 133. ISBN 978-0-205-69187-6. 
  18. ^ Boesche, Roger. "Kautilya's Arthasastra on War and Diplomacy in Ancient India", The Journal of Military History 67 (pp. 9–38), January 2003.
  19. ^
  20. ^,+usually+referred+to+as+the+%22&source=bl&ots=v01iFZ5bbi&sig=z9acEc9elPY2wpgXGb0-Ylq2co8&hl=en&ei=2DxeTMOaA8OqlAeEh7CZCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum#v=onepage&q=%22This%20woodcut%20sequence%20of%201545%2C%20usually%20referred%20to%20as%20the%20%22&f=false
  21. ^,+with+your+ban%22&hl=en&ei=bHFjTO2dCsGB8gbctpGJCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Don%E2%80%99t%20frighten%20us%20Pope%2C%20with%20your%20ban%22&f=false
  22. ^ Mark U. Edwards, Printing Propaganda and Martin Luther 15; Louise W. Holborn, "Printing and the Growth of a Protestant Movement in Germany from 1517 to 1524", Church History, 11, no. 2 (1942), 123.
  23. ^ Beckman, Karen Redrobe (2003). Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism. Duke University Press. pp. 31–33. ISBN 0822330741. 
  24. ^ Beckman, Karen Redrobe (2003). Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism. Duke University Press. pp. 33–34. ISBN 0822330741. 
  25. ^ Kathleen Collins, "The Scourged Back," History of Photography 9 (January 1985): 43–45.
  26. ^ Kenneth M. Stampp (1980). The Imperiled Union:Essays on the Background of the Civil War. Oxford University Press. p. 85. 
  27. ^ David W. Blight (1991). Frederick Douglass' Civil War: Keeping Faith in Jubilee. LSU Press. pp. 86–87. 
  28. ^ Karen Halttunen, "Humanitarianism and the Pornography of Pain in Anglo-American Culture," American Historical Review (1995) 100#2 pp. 303–334 quote at p. 321 in JSTOR
  29. ^ Andrea Major (2012). Slavery, Abolitionism and Empire in India: 1772–1843. Liverpool University Press. p. 270. 
  30. ^ Daina Ramey Berry; Deleso A. Alford (2012). Enslaved Women in America: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 4. 
  31. ^ Patrick C. Kennicott, "Black Persuaders in the Antislavery Movement," Journal of Black Studies (1970) 1#1 pp 5–20.
  32. ^ "The Battle for the Mind: German and British Propaganda in the First World War". Retrieved 2012-12-17. 
  33. ^ Sanders 1982, p. 143
  34. ^ Ibidem, Messinger 1992
  35. ^ Sanders 1975, pp. 129–130
  36. ^ Sanders 1975, pp. 134–135
  37. ^ Wilson 1979, p. 369
  38. ^ Laurence V. Moyer, Victory Must Be Ours: Germany in the Great War 1914-1918, p 96 ISBN 0-7818-0370-5
  39. ^ Laurence V. Moyer, Victory Must Be Ours: Germany in the Great War 1914-1918, p 97 ISBN 0-7818-0370-5
  40. ^ Haste 1977, pp. 93–95;Knightley 1995, p. 86; Sanders 1982, p. 143
  41. ^ Welch 2003, pp. 123–124
  42. ^ Rogers, E.M. (1994). A history of communication study: A biographical approach. New York, NY: The Free Press.
  43. ^ p. 22, Alex Carey, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy: Corporate Propaganda versus Freedom and Liberty, University of Illinois Press, 1997.
  44. ^ a b About Edward Berneys book chapter
  45. ^ Bernays, Edward. Propaganda (1928)
  46. ^ "Conspiracy Or Groundswell?", in Ken Coghill and McPhee Gribble (eds.), The New Right's Australian Fantasy, Penguin Books 1987, pp. 3–19.
  47. ^ "Records". Retrieved December 4, 2005. 
  48. ^ "Reports". Retrieved December 4, 2005. 
  49. ^ Death of the department that never was from The Guardian, January 27, 1978
  50. ^ Frances Stonor Saunders (12 July 1999). "How the CIA plotted against us". New Statesman. Retrieved 2008-12-21. 
  51. ^ Guardian — The cartoon that came in from the cold -
  52. ^
  53. ^ [1] Vietnamese propaganda reflections from 1945–2000
  54. ^ Toại, Đoàn Văn. (1981, March 29). New York Times Magazine. Retrieved 11 January 2014.
  55. ^ "Serbian Propaganda: A Closer Look". April 12, 1999. NOAH ADAMS: The European Center for War, Peace and the News Media, based in London, has received word from Belgrade that no pictures of mass Albanian refugees have been shown at all, and that the Kosovo humanitarian catastrophe is only referred to as the one made up or overemphasized by Western propaganda.
    Also, and we quote from the report, "information programs are designed to present the illegitimacy of a NATO aggression on Yugoslavia, the unanimity of the Serbian people in resisting the enemy and Serbian invincibility. All three aims are wrapped in a nationalistic code, `most powerful Western nations, killers, death disseminators, fascists, dictators, criminals, villains, bandits, vandals, barbarians, gangsters, vampires, cowards, perverts, lunatics, scum and trash who want to destroy the small but honorable, dignified, freedom-loving Serbian nation.
  56. ^ "ICTY: Radoslav Brđanin verdict - 1. Joint Criminal Enterprise". 
  57. ^ "ICTY: Radoslav Brđanin verdict — C. The implementation of the Strategic Plan in the Bosnian Krajina". 
  58. ^ "ICTY: Blaškić verdict — A. The Lasva Valley: May 1992 – January 1993 - b) The municipality of Busovača". 
  59. ^ "ICTY: Blaškić verdict — A. The Lasva Valley: May 1992 – January 1993 - c) The municipality of Kiseljak". 
  60. ^ "ICTY: Kordić and Čerkez verdict — IV. Attacks on towns and villages: killings - 2. The Conflict in Gornji Vakuf". 
  61. ^ "ICTY: Naletilić and Martinović verdict — Mostar attack". 
  63. ^ Igor Lasić — Izlog izdavačkog smeća
  64. ^ Altheide, David L. "War and Mass Mediated Evidence." Cultural Studies — Critical Methodologies 9 (2009): 14–22.
  65. ^ a b Garfield, Andrew. "The U.S. Counter-propaganda Failure in Iraq." Middle East Quarterly 14 (2007): 23–32.
  66. ^ a b c d e Schleifer, Ron. "Reconstructing Iraq: Winning the Propaganda War in Iraq." Middle East Quarterly (2005): 15–24.
  67. ^ a b Garfield, Andrew. "The U.S. Counter-propaganda Failure in Iraq." Middle East Quarterly 14 (2007): 24
  68. ^ a b Garfield, Andrew. "The U.S. Counter-propaganda Failure in Iraq." Middle East Quarterly 14 (2007): 26
  69. ^ a b Shah, Anup. Iraq War Media Reporting, Journalism and Propaganda. Aug 1, 2007. May 12, 2009. <>
  70. ^ Goldstein, Sol. "A Strategic Failure: American Information Control Policy in Occupied Iraq." Military Review 88.2 (Mar. 2008): 58–65.
  71. ^ Baldor, Lolita C. (November 30, 2005). "U.S. Military Unclear on 'Planted' Stories". Associated Press. Archived from the original on June 30, 2006. 
  72. ^ Baldor, Lolita C. (December 2, 2005). "Pentagon describes Iraq propaganda plan". Associated Press. Archived from the original on December 5, 2005. 
  73. ^ Thrall, A. Trevor. "A Review of: "Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush's War on Iraq, by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber Weapons of Mass Persuasion: Marketing the War Against Iraq, by Paul Rutherford Selling Intervention & War: The Presidency, the..." Political Communication 24.2 (Apr. 2007): 202–207.
  74. ^ a b O'Shaughnessy, Nicholas. "Weapons of Mass Seduction: Propaganda, Media and the Iraq War." Journal of Political Marketing 3.4 (2004): 79–104. America: History & Life.
  75. ^ John, Sue Lockett, et al. "Going Public, Crisis after Crisis: The Bush Administration and the Press from September 11 to Saddam." Rhetoric & Public Affairs 10.2 (Summer2007 2007): 195–219.
  76. ^ [3]
  77. ^ O'Connor, Mike (November 5, 2010). "Analysis: A PR department for Mexico's narcos". GlobalPost. Retrieved 2012-03-28. 
  78. ^ Beckhart, Sarah (February 21, 2011). "The Narco Generation". AL DÍA (Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars's Mexico Institute). Retrieved 2012-03-28. 
  79. ^ Brady, Anne-Marie (2006). "Guiding Hand: The Role of the CCP Central Propaganda Department in the Current Era". Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture 1 (3): 58–77. 
  80. ^ Shambaugh, David (Jan 2007). "China's Propaganda System: Institutions, Processes and Efficacy". China Journal (57): 25–58. 
  81. ^ a b c Mitter, Rana (2003). Nicholas J. Cull, David Colbert, and David Welch, ed. Entry on "China" in Propaganda and Mass Persuasion: A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 to the Present. ABC-ClIO. pp. 73–77. 
  82. ^ Kingsley Edney (2014), The Globalization of Chinese Propaganda: International Power and Domestic Political Cohesion, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 22, 195.
  83. ^ Translations from John DeFrancis, ed. (2003), ABC Chinese-English Comprehensive Dictionary, University of Hawaii Press, p. 1087.
  84. ^ Kurlantzick, Joshua; Perry Link (2009). "China's Modern Authoritarianism". Wall Street Journal. 
  85. ^ Putin and the Press: The Revival of Soviet-style Propaganda, Oleg Panfilov, June 2005
  86. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l The Propaganda of the Putin Era:Part One In Russia, Part Two The Kremlin's Tentacles; Institute of Modern Russia; November 2012
  87. ^ History as a propaganda tool in Putin's Russia, by Miguel Vázquez Liñán, Communist and Post-Communist Studies
  90. ^ Challenging America: How Russia, China, and Other Countries Use Public Diplomacy to Compete with the U.S., The Heritage Foundation, 2012
  91. ^ 'Lonely Power: Why Russia Has Failed to Become the West and the West is Weary of Russia', by Lilia Shevtsova, 2010
  92. ^ Kremlin Diplomacy, Soviet-Style: Putin's Russia Revives "Look Who's Talking" Routine, Vladimir Kara-Murza, 05 November 2012
  93. ^ "The Electronic Warfare Against Ukraine". Christo Grozev, Risk Management Lab. 11 March 2014. 
  94. ^ "Russia's Online-Comment Propaganda Army". theatlantic. 9 October 2013. 
  95. ^ Mills, Mary. "Propaganda and Children During the Hitler Years". Jewish Virtual Library.
  96. ^ Hirsch, Herbert.|Genocide and the Politics of Memory. Chapel Hill & London: University of North Carolina Press, 1995. p. 119.


Further reading[edit]


  • Altheide, David L. & Johnson, John M. Bureaucratic Propaganda. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. (1980)
  • Brown, J.A.C. Techniques of Persuasion: From Propaganda to Brainwashing Harmondsworth: Pelican (1963)
  • Chomsky, Noam and Herman, Edward. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon Books. (1988)
  • Cole, Robert. Propaganda in Twentieth Century War and Politics (1996)
  • Cole, Robert, ed. Encyclopedia of Propaganda (3 vol 1998)
  • Combs, James E. & Nimmo, Dan. The New Propaganda: The Dictatorship of Palaver in Contemporary Politics. White Plains, N.Y. Longman. (1993)
  • Cull, Nicholas John, Culbert, and Welch, eds. Propaganda and Mass Persuasion: A Historical Encyclopedia, 1500 to the Present (2003)
  • Cunningham, Stanley, B. The Idea of Propaganda: A Reconstruction. Westport, Conn.: Praeger. (2002)
  • Cunninghamm Stanley B. "Reflections on the Interface Between Propaganda and Religion." In P.Rennick, S. Cunningham, R.H. Johnson (eds), The Future of Religion. Cambridge Scholars Pub.: Newcastle upon Tyne 2010, pp. 83–96.
  • Dimitri Kitsikis, Propagande et pressions en politique internationale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1963, 537 pages.
  • Ellul, Jacques. Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes. Trans. Konrad Kellen & Jean Lerner. New York: Knopf, 1965. New York: Random House/ Vintage 1973
  • Jowett, Garth S. and Victoria O"Donnell, 'Propaganda and Persuasion, 5th edition. ' California: Sage Publications, 2010. A detailed overview of the history, function, and analyses of propaganda.
  • Kingsbury, Celia Malone. For Home and Country: World War I Propaganda on the Home Front (University of Nebraska Press; 2010; 308 pages). Describes propaganda directed toward the homes of the American homefront in everything from cookbooks and popular magazines to children's toys.
  • Lasswell, Harold D.. Propaganda Technique in World War I. Cambridge, Mass: The M.I.T. Press. (1971)
  • Le Bon, Gustave, The Crowd: a study of the Popular Mind (1895)
  • MacArthur, John R.. Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War. New York: Hill and Wang. (1992)
  • Marlin, Randal. Propaganda & The Ethics of Persuasion. Orchard Park, New York: Broadview Press. (2002)
  • McCombs M. E. & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176–187.
  • Linebarger, Paul M. Psychological Warfare. International Propaganda and Communications. ISBN 0-405-04755-X (1948)
  • Moran, T. "Propaganda as Pseudocommunication." Et Cetera 2(1979), pp. 181–197.
  • Pratkanis, Anthony & Aronson, Elliot. Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. (1992)
  • Rutherford, Paul. Endless Propaganda: The Advertising of Public Goods. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. (2000)
  • Rutherford, Paul. Weapons of Mass Persuasion: Marketing the War Against Iraq. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. (2004)
  • Shaw, Jeffrey M. Illusions of Freedom: Thomas Merton and Jacques Ellul on Technology and the Human Condition. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock. ISBN 978-1625640581 (2014)
  • Sproule, J. Michael. Channels of Propaganda. Bloomington, IN: EDINFO Press. (1994)
  • Stauber, John, and Rampton, Sheldon Toxic Sludge Is Good for You! Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995.


External links[edit]

Current propaganda[edit]

Historical propaganda[edit]