Talk:Propaganda techniques

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

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)
The logical technique closest to the straw-man argument is modus tollens, but then the argument would have to accurately represent the refuted argument. And please sign your posts with four tildes; the computer does the rest. 110.55.0.148 (talk) 13:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

ID-ed by scholars?[edit]

Does "Scholars have identified many standard techniques used in propaganda and persuasion" describe the list of techniques? 130.105.213.86 (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)