Talk:Propaganda techniques

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Media  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Politics  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that the techniques section of Propaganda be merged into Propaganda techniques. These sections have substantial overlap and much of the language is 100% identical suggesting it was copied from one to the other at some point. Merging will take a little bit of work as there are differences in language and there are techniques listed in each one that arenot listed in the other (for example, The Lie in Propaganda and Loaded Language in Propaganda techniques. I think it's reasonable to maintain techniques as a separate article with a crosslink. ---Vroo (talk) 03:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Support - There is substantial overlap between these sections. Propaganda is probably too long, or at least not tight enough. --Andrewaskew (talk) 00:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support for referred reasons. (BTW, how many supporters must there be for the merge to occur?) JMCF125 (discussioncontribs) 12:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - and since it's been over a year, I was bold and made the changes --Spiffy sperry (talk) 21:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

Hi, I'm definitely no expert on the subject, but I think another propaganda technique might be what I would coin (if it hasn't been already) reverse propaganda, or the use of intentionally silly, over the top, or and/or obvious propaganda against party A, while then boasting support for party B, in an effort to decrease support for party B by its "propaganda-conscious" viewers. -Coltinator5000, a regular wiki-viewer

so what is name calling

sticks and stones.Skookum1 (talk) 02:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I wish someone had included 'strawman' arguments, or a reference to such. They are a common tool used by propagandists in 'discussions'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.120.93 (talk) 17:48, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I concur. Strawman arguments are an important part of the propagandists toolkit, especially those who profess to be involved in 'logical discussions'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.183.51 (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2014 (UTC)