Episode 39: Understanding and Countering Propaganda

In this episode, April attempts to unpack the complicated topic of propaganda, a form of persuasion used by corporations, advertisers, pundits, influencers, and political personalities. These days, it's important for critical thinkers to understand that there should be a delineation between propaganda and the kind of rhetoric used in democratic governance, to recognize propaganda and to avoid being influenced by it. If this sounds important--well, it is.

Episode 39 Show Notes

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/propaganda--this references the origins of the word propaganda and its original link to religious proselytizing

https://www.thoughtco.com/propaganda-definition-1691544--Dr. Richard Nordquist's excellent ThoughtCo article about the difference between rhetoric and propaganda

https://researchguides.uoregon.edu/medialiteracy/propaganda --University of Oregon's Media Literary Research guide's deep dive into propaganda has some great information about how to determine if something is propaganda

https://researchguides.uoregon.edu/medialiteracy/propaganda --the Naab Research Center gives examples of positive uses of propaganda

Emotional Campaigning in Politics: Being Moved and Anger …--a pdf of Gruning and Schubert's article about the use of emotion in political campaigns

https://www.yourdictionary.com/articles/glittering-generalities--YourDictionary.com has a great article with examples of glittering generalities

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Loaded_language--the list of "snarl" words is at the bottom of this wiki page devoted to loaded language

https://www.allsides.com/sites/default/files/AllSidesMediaBiasChart-Version2.jpg--an updated version of the AllSides Media Bias chart

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/--a great source for checking the bias of any news source, as well as whether it has failed any fact checks

https://disinformation-nation.org/combat-propaganda/--great article about ways to combat propaganda

https://www.shortform.com/summary/thinking-fast-and-slow-summary-daniel-kahneman?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=531475976&msclkid=704335b2e9371134f6f7526e8cdafb8c--a long web address leading to a short summary of Daniel Kahneman's book Thinking Fast and Slow

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-act-be/202003/can-you-be-abundantly-cautious-and-fearless--while this article was written about the Covid pandemic, the ideas in it still resonate

https://www.neuroandcounselingcenter.com/single-post/informed-protect-peace--good ideas from certified mental health counselor Amanda Levison, about how to keep your cool and not get overwhelmed w

Transcript

Episode 39-- Cutting Through the Noise – Understanding and Countering Propaganda

[INTRO MUSIC]

 Welcome back to Think It Through. This episode is, I guess, a continuation of episode 37, in which we looked at demagoguery. If you haven’t listened to it, you might want to do that before moving on to this episode. We’re looking at one of the most effective tools in the demagogue’s toolbox—propaganda.  It’s always been around, shaping our beliefs, pushing our emotions, and, in many cases, steering us away from the truth. And these days, especially in our current political climate, it’s being used on us constantly—it’s so ubiquitous that we might think, well, it’s just the way politics works now. But it’s not the way politics is supposed to work, at least not in a democracy, so we need to know what it is, and what it does. More importantly—we need to be able to see through it and do our best to counter it. Stick around, and let’s think this through.

[SEGMENT 1:]

So, what is propaganda? Well, it’s…complicated. When we think of the word, we almost always associate it with political speech. But the first known modern use of the word propaganda, which is Latin for “propagate” “spread” or “proseletyze,” was in the name of an organization founded in 1622 by a group of Catholic cardinals in order to carry out missionary work. This organization was called The Congregation for Propagation of the Faith. So, propaganda first had a religious connotation—to spread the word of God to the masses. Merriam-webster says that for the next two centuries, the word propaganda was mainly used in reference to that Catholic organization. It wasn’t until the early 19th century that the term came to mean “using ideas or information of questionable accuracy as a means of persuasion.” It’s interesting, and possibly telling, to note the link between “questionable accuracy” and proselytizing, but I’m just gonna leave that there. Another interesting fact is that in the Portuguese language, one of the words for “advertisement” is propaganda. It’s entirely true that many of the tactics that define propaganda are also commonly used in advertising.

The words propaganda and rhetoric are often used interchangeably. Rhetoric is, to quote Aristotle, the art of persuasion, and persuasion, as you probably know, is the attempt to change the beliefs and/or behavior of an audience. Propaganda and rhetoric are similar in the sense that they are both used to persuade. However, even though some people might believe propaganda and rhetoric are the same thing, many other scholars disagree.  Dr. Richard Nordquist, professor emeritus of rhetoric and English at Georgia Southern University, calls propaganda “a form of psychological warfare,” while maintaining that rhetoric has to do with formal argument and debate, which is the basis for democratic governance. Scholars Beth Bennett and Sean Patrick O’Rourke, in the 2006 book “Readings in Propaganda and Persuasion” wrote, "In a society where the system of government is based, at least in part, on the full, robust, give-and-take of persuasion in the context of debate, this conflation (between rhetoric and propaganda) is deeply troubling. To the extent that all persuasive activity was lumped together with 'propaganda' and given the 'evil connotation' the label carried, persuasive speech (i.e. rhetoric) would never hold the central place in education or democratic civic life it was designed to.”  So for them, as well as many other scholars, there needs to be a clear delineation between rhetoric and propaganda. The University of Oregon’s Media Literacy Research Guide says that, unlike rhetoric, the aim of propaganda is not to encourage deliberation or reflection; it doesn’t show the audience a variety of viewpoints and let them determine which perspective is correct. In the U.S., our system of government depends on the legislative branch to formally debate the issues, come to some kind of consensus, and write laws that reflect that consensus. Rhetoric and formal argument encourage that kind of discussion, but propaganda tells people what to think and discourages independent thought. So what is the difference between propaganda and rhetoric? People in power use rhetoric to convince, but they use propaganda to control.

Segment 2—Identifying propaganda 

Corporations use it. Advertisers use it. And yes, governments use it. It’s not always false, but it’s almost always manipulative. And although we generally think of propaganda as a negative thing, it’s not always bad.  The Edward V. Nabb Research Center at Salisbury University acknowledges that some propaganda has positive objectives—they point to the Smokey the Bear Wildfire Prevention Campaign (that began in the 1940’s and is still used today) as an example of positive propaganda. It makes an emotional plea to prevent forest fires, so cute little woodland creatures won’t be harmed, and it’s been extremely successful at reducing the number of forest fires caused by carelessness. So, propaganda can certainly be used positively, although it IS more likely to be used for shadier purposes, especially by corporations and politicians.

You might be surprised at the amount of corporate and political speech that qualifies as propaganda. To be clear, the techniques I’m about to discuss here are not solely used in propaganda, but they are commonly found in it. If you listened to the episode about demagogues, you might find some of the following tactics familiar:

·       First, The use of raw emotional appeal: this is by far the most common tactic; almost all propaganda uses emotion in some manipulative way. It’s very common in advertisement; the Smokey the Bear example has successfully played on our emotions for decades. For political propaganda, while the emotions can revolve around feelings like progress, pride, enthusiasm or patriotism, more often there is a special emphasis on negative emotions like fear, anger, contempt or even disgust. According to the 2022 article in the journal Psychology titled “Emotional Campaigning in Politics,” research done in the early 2000’s showed that around 72% of political ads focused on emotion rather than logic and of those that did use emotion, the most common one was anger. Another emotion commonly used in political propaganda is fear. The Nabb Research Center says that “By playing on the audience’s deepest, and at times irrational, fears, propagandists can sway opinion and promote action.” Scare tactics are often designed by political entities to cause stress, make people unsure, confused, and frightened, and push them to either act out angrily and impulsively or simply be so overwhelmed by confusion that they shut down and refuse to engage in the political process.

·       Then there’s Name-calling /aka ad hominem attacks– this tactic is also extremely common in political propaganda. While rational debaters will attack their opponent’s arguments, propagandists often prefer to attack some aspect of their opponent’s character or appearance. It’s as simple as calling the opposition names like “stupid” or “ugly,” attaching negative or insulting labels to people or ideas to discredit them. When those on opposite side of the political spectrum call their opponents “rethuglicans” or “libtards,” or reference their “beady little eyes” or their wrinkly skin or even their fashion choices, they’re guilty of using this tactic. By using names that evoke a negative emotional response, the audience creates an association between the negative image and the opposition in their minds. And once that association is created it’s likely to remain there for a very long time, and continue to influence the way we think about the issues, even if those things have nothing to do with the issues.

·       Next is the Bandwagon fallacy/appeal to identity – these are related fallacies that are common to both political speech and advertising. The Bandwagon fallacy says that “Everyone is doing it, so you should too” and is often used by advertisers and influencers to persuade us to think that a product or action is very popular and if we don’t buy it or do it, we won’t be one of “the cool kids.” The appeal to identity fallacy goes beyond that and says, “You are one of us, you’re a member of our group, and all good members of this group feel the same way about this topic, and so should you.” Of course, we all want to belong, and thinking and doing what others do is part of that “belonging.” But in propaganda, there’s no way to debate or disagree, and those who do are excluded from the group. You’re literally told what you should feel and do, and if you’re not in lockstep with the group, you’re the problem and maybe even the enemy. 

·       Then there are Glittering generalities – Yourdictionary.com defines a glittering generality as a propaganda statement that speaks to the values and beliefs of the audience by using vague, feel-good words like “freedom” or “justice” without concrete details as to what those things exactly mean. They’re not demonstrably either true or false because they don’t really convey any information but are usually interpreted by the receiver of the message in the way that the propagandist wants them to see it. In advertising, brand or product slogans are examples of this tactic—like L’Oreal makeup’s slogan “Because I’m Worth It" or Coca-Cola’s “It’s the Real Thing.” During WWII there were many popular posters pushing the idea that Americans were expected to contribute to the war effort, like Uncle Sam pointing and saying “I Want You!” and Rosie the Riveter showing her buff arms while exclaiming “We Can Do It!” (most of us would say that those were positive propaganda campaigns). In recent years, Biden’s slogan “Build Back Better” and Trump’s now ubiquitous “Make America Great Again” are perfect illustrations of vague but appealing statements. What you think they mean, and how you feel about them, is totally dependent on your political stance.

·       Finally, there’s Card stacking –This term refers to a form of cheating in gambling called “stacking the deck” where the cheater arranges the cards to increase their chances of winning while simultaneously damaging their opponent’s chances. In propaganda, card stacking is presenting only one side of an issue while simultaneously downplaying or even ignoring the other side. This technique makes the best possible case for the propagandist’s argument by failing to provide any information that might be used by the audience to make a more informed decision. This has been a common technique in advertising ever since there’s been advertising. For much of the last century, cigarette ads completely ignored any potential negative effects of smoking and focused on the advantages of their particular brand, like filters on Viceroys or menthol in cigarettes like Kools and Newports. Some of these ads even had doctors and dentists recommending particular brands! This is also a very popular tactic in politics; of course you never see any negative information about a politician on their campaign literature or websites, just how awesome they are and what they’ve accomplished. And you’ll also see this tactic on some cable news shows that cater to particular political parties; on many of these shows you’re unlikely to see news pundits and politicians giving thoughtful discussion to their opposition’s arguments; they’ll either ignore them or “straw-man” them and simply dismiss them. If you happen to know someone who has one of these cable channels on all day, it’s very likely that person is strongly influenced by this extremely one-sided firehose of propaganda.

These are only a few of the techniques used in propaganda. They’re powerful tactics because they bypass critical thinking and play directly to our emotions. But once you understand how they work, you can start to see propaganda for what it is.

Segment 3:

We’ve defined propaganda and learned about some of the techniques that make it so effective. Now let’s figure out how to determine if what we’re seeing or hearing is indeed propaganda. Here are some key questions to ask:

1.     What emotions is it triggering in you? – It’s very likely that your first response to propaganda is an emotional one--it will make you immediately feel something. Depending on the message, it could be something positive like pride or compassion, because as I said, some propaganda is used for positive ends. But emotions like extreme anger, fear, or disgust should make you stop and take a step back. 

2.     Where is this message coming from? – This might take a little sleuthing, because the first time you hear a message that sounds suspicious could be from someone you know, a friend or acquaintance who is simply repeating what they’ve heard. You might want to say, “Well, that sounds…troubling…where did you hear that?”  Follow that trail until you can find the source of the message. Then try to determine that source’s agenda—what would it benefit them for you to believe this message? 

3.     Is it presenting a balanced view? – Are opposing arguments fairly represented, or is only one side being pushed? Are facts and statistics “cherry-picked?” Is there missing context, information about the message that, if it were included, might make you see it differently than it’s being portrayed? 

4.     Does it rely on loaded language? – The RationalWiki website defines loaded language, also called “prejudicial language” as “language intended to produce an emotional response in the mind of the audience, in order to directly affect their views on a topic.” I’ll link to their page about loaded language in the show notes; they have a list of what they call “snarl words.” These are derogatory words that, when attached to a person, group, or issue, make it very easy to dismiss their worth or importance. So words like “feminazi,” “astroturfer,” “wingnut,” or “woke” fall into this category when used to denigrate the opposition. 

The more we pause and analyze, the better we get at spotting propaganda before it influences our thinking. Of course, recognizing propaganda is one thing. But what do we do about it? Here are three strategies:

https://www.neuroandcounselingcenter.com/single-post/informed-protect-peace

1.     Seek out multiple perspectives. Read and listen to different sources, including those you disagree with. Relying on only one source will give you only one perspective; the broader your information diet, the less likely you are to be misled. Now I say that with a caveat; the goal of some sources is literally to spread propaganda, so be careful which ones you choose. I’ll put a link to the AllSides Media Bias chart in the show notes; it’s a good resource for picking online news sites with different viewpoints. I’ll also provide the link to my favorite fact-checking website, MediaBiasFactCheck.com; you can type the name of any news source into the search bar, and it will tell you where that source lands on the bias and accuracy scale, and if it’s failed any major fact checks. The Disisnformation Nation website, a project of the Freedom Forum Institute in Washington DC, recommends that you Find Your Five—that means you should create a list of five news sources—two that you already generally agree with, two that you don’t generally agree with, and one that looks at the news from a specific perspective, such as a religion, a demographic group, or a profession. Then check those sources regularly, at least once a week, to see the world in all its complexity.

2.     Engage in slow thinking. I’ve talked about the late Daniel Kahneman’s seminal book, Thinking Fast and Slow several times before on this podcast. He says we have two brains—one automatic, fast, and impulsive, the other one slow, conscious, and thoughtful. While there are certainly times when fast thinking is called for, rational thinking is definitely what you want to use when you realize your emotions are being played. When you’re faced with propaganda, instead of reacting emotionally and impulsively, take a breath. Give yourself time to evaluate claims logically. When confronted with worst-case scenarios, don’t allow yourself to become so fearful that you shut down or act impulsively. 

3.     Ask questions. Now, before you do this you might want to go back and listen to Episode 26, “Just Asking Questions,” to make sure you’re asking the right kinds of questions, and by that, I mean ones that are legitimate attempts to gain knowledge and ascertain what is truly the case. Challenge what you hear and encourage others to do the same. Ask, “What evidence is there for this?” “What’s the counterargument?”  and “Who benefits if I believe this claim?”

[CONCLUSION: Call to Action]

Propaganda thrives when we stop thinking critically. But when we arm ourselves with awareness, we take back control of our own minds. So, next time you encounter a message that stirs strong emotions, pause—think it through. You may see that the message is designed to frighten you and cause panic and uncertainty. It’s true that there are some important issues in the world today that we should genuinely be concerned about. And the political propaganda being pushed on us about those issues is affecting how people think and react--it's very easy for even the most rational thinker among us to react in the very way that the propagandist wants because so many others around us are doing just that. Is there a way to maintain peace of mind and still recognize the need to be vigilant? In the Psychology Today Blog, “Think, Act, Be,” licensed psychologist Seth Gillihan acknowledges that while there are issues to be concerned about, it’s possible to be both cautious and fearless. Certified mental health counselor Amanda Levison has several strategies for staying informed without being overwhelmed: limit your news consumption, set boundaries on the amount of time you spend on social media, choose reliable sources of information, practice media literacy, seek out positive news, reach out and connect with others, and practice gratitude. You know, I’ve talked about some of these strategies in previous episodes, so it might be time to go back and revisit them.

It's important to take reasonable precautions for yourself and your family, to take care of your own mental health, and do your best to respond to today’s challenges and make a difference in the best way you can. When I start feeling overwhelmed by everything that’s happening, I remind myself that I can use this podcast to help anyone who comes across it think more clearly and rationally, to seek out good, valid, accurate sources of information, and to use that knowledge to make better decisions in their lives. And I have no doubt that you can use your knowledge and ability to do something good for the people around you.

And that’s it for this episode. Don’t forget to check out the show notes, and if you found this episode helpful, share it with someone who might need to hear it. And as always, keep questioning, keep seeking the truth, and keep thinking it through.

[OUTRO MUSIC]