A Concept Paper on Propaganda Written by Jennifer Dumoulin, Department of Communication, University of Ottawa 15 December 2009 Contemporary propagandists often referred to as doctors of spin, are highly criticized for misleading their audiences in order to achieve a specific and desired outcome on behalf of their client. Propagandists and the very notion of propaganda were not always viewed in such a contemptuous manner. In fact, propaganda – which dates back to 1622 when the Roman Catholic Church was attempting to broaden the reach of its religious doctrine – became associated with deception and immorality following the First World War.1 It is therefore not surprising that much of the contemporary literature on propaganda examines the concept in the context of military operations and training exercises or describes propaganda techniques using traditional war terminology2. The objective of this paper is to dissect the concept of propaganda – examining the mediums used for communication, its functions, and its constitutive features – in order to situate the concept of propaganda as a form of mass communication and therefore differentiate it from other forms of mass communication. What is Propaganda? Propaganda is a form of mass communication, in that the target audience of propaganda is usually a large segment of a specified population – which can be defined in any singular or combination of global, national, or local terms.3 Propaganda may be communicated to both its target and non-target audience via various mediums including traditional print, radio, film and 1 Leo C. Rosten. “Movies and Propaganda,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 254 (1947), 118; as well as John Corner “Mediated politics, promotional culture, and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 29, No. 4 (2007), 670. 2 For a discussion of propaganda in the context of military operations or training exercises see, for example, Mark Wolfgram. “Democracy and Propaganda: NATO’s War in Kosovo,” European Journal of Communication, Vol. 23, No. 2 (2008), 153-171; Rune Ottosen. “The Military-Industrial Complex Revisited: Computer Games as War Propaganda,” Television & New Media, Vol 10, No.1 (January 2009), 122-125; as well as Stig A. Nohrstedt et al. “From the Persian Gulf to Kosovo – War Journalism and Propaganda,” European Journal of Communication, Vol. 15, No.3 (2000), 383-404. For examples of discussions which use traditional war terminology for describing propaganda techniques see, for example, John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton. Toxic Sludge is Good For You! (United Kingdom: Constable & Robinson Ltd., 2004). 3 For an example of globally-targeted propaganda campaigns, see Dwayne Winseck, “Information Operations ‘Blowback,’” The International Communication Gazette, Vol. 70, No. 6 (2008), 419-441; for an example of nationally-targeted propaganda campaigns, see Nancy Snow and Philip M. Taylor, “The Revival of the Propaganda State,” The International Communication Gazette, Vol. 68, No. 5-6 (2006), 389-407; for an example of a locallytargeted propaganda campaign, see Mark Lowes, “Selling the Spectacle,” Indy Dreams and Urban Nightmares (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002), 58-91. broadcast media, new media such as computer and video games, the Internet, email, and wireless communication devices, as well as through interpersonal forms of communication including word of mouth (WOM) communication and telephone outreach programs.4 The definition and purpose of propaganda are not as easily identifiable as the mediums through which it is communicated. Much of the literature on propaganda examines the concept as either a tool of persuasion or as a tool for the dissemination of information – both of which are examined below in further detail. Propaganda as a Tool of Persuasion In the literature examining propaganda as a tool of persuasion, the concept is often referred to in negative, contemptuous terms. Propaganda in this sense is a form of promotional discourse – for all promotional discourses attempt to persuade. It is described as both deliberate and manipulative with the objective of influencing attitudes and behaviour by nonviolent methods.5 These definitions, however, do not necessarily distinguish between propaganda and advertising, which at its core is also deliberate and endeavours to manipulate the attitudes and behaviour of its audiences, usually in terms of consumption. Attempts to distinguish propaganda from other forms of promotional discourse such as advertising and public relations focus on the notion of controversy, that is that propaganda attempts to influence attitudes on controversial subjects.6 This distinction is flawed in that advertising, social marketing, and even public relations attempt to influence attitudes and perception on controversial subjects such as smoking, waste management, drunk driving and foreign policy.7 This perspective also fails to acknowledge that the notion of controversy is a subjective one. War propaganda is also considered to be a form of persuasion. Propaganda is employed during times of war in order to create support for a particular mission, contempt for an opposing nation and, among other objectives, to encourage military enrolment in the ‘home’ warring nation.8 Propaganda as a Tool for Disseminating Information 4 For an account arguing that propaganda occurs only when group dynamics are involved, and therefore does not apply to newspaper, books, magazines, or radio which are consumed on an individual basis, see Rosten, “Movies and Propaganda,”116-124. 5 See, for example, Garth Jowett and Victoria O’Donnell (1992) in Corner, “Mediated politics, promotional culture and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” 671; Gregory Zilboorg, “Propaganda from Within,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 198 (January 1938), 117; as well as Ralph K. White, “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 398 (January 1971), 27. 6 Rosten, “Movies and Propaganda,” 118. 7 For examples of advertising, social marketing, and public relation campaigns which attempt to influence attitudes and perception on controversial subjects, Stauber and Rampton. Toxic Sludge is Good For You! (2004); as well as Ronan Paddison, “City Marketing, Image Reconstruction, and Urban Regeneration,” Urban Studies Vol. 30, No.2 (1993), 341. 8 See, for example, William Eckhardt, “War propaganda, welfare values, and political ideologies,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 9, No.3 (September 1965), 357; Nohrstedt et al., “From the Persian Gulf to Kosovo – War Journalism and Propaganda,”; as well as Deepa Kumar, “Media, War and Propaganda,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (March 2006), 53-64. One dissenting voice, that of George E.G. Catlin, examined the role of propaganda in a democracy and argued that propaganda is a legitimate function of government, particularly as it relates to openness and accountability.9 Propaganda then could be used to provide information to stimulate the economy – advertising the benefits of trading with a particular country, or to provide information about the cultural norms of a society – as exemplified by the November 2009 release of the Canadian Citizen Guidebook, entitled Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship.10 Propaganda in this sense serves an educational function. Catlin further notes that, in a democracy, each person is entitled to present their position and policies, thus legitimatizing the use of propaganda by political parties and lobby groups.11 From this perspective then, political parties and lobby groups are merely presenting information about their points of view. This explanation blurs the line between information and persuasion as lobby group and political parties – not unlike elected governments – are vested interests. In other words, it is possible that the information being put forward by these groups may serve not only to inform about their position and policies, but also to persuade others that these are the “correct” positions to take and the “correct” policies to put in place. The constitutive elements of propaganda, including the techniques employed by various vested interests, are outlined below. Constitutive Elements of Propaganda The distinction between propaganda and other forms of promotional discourse, including advertising, public relations, and marketing, is one that merits further study. Much of the literature on propaganda fails to distinguish between propaganda and promotional discourse in terms of objective and function. The literature that does distinguish between the two labels the former as nefarious, and the latter as neutral. The constitutive elements – techniques – o f propaganda, as laid out in the literature are assessed and classified below in order to determine if there is a distinction between the two concepts. Constitutive Element (Technique) Propaganda Promotional Discourse Attracting and retaining audience attention X X Developing and maintaining an emotional and rational connection with the audience X X Presentation of and emphasis on source credibility X X Construction and circulation of false X 9 George E.G. Catlin, “The Role of Propaganda in a Democracy,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 179, No.1 (1935), 220. 10 For a contemporary example of Government efforts to promote trade, see the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade campaign entitled “2010 Reasons to do Business in Canada”; For a contemporary example of Government efforts to provide information about the cultural norms, see the Department of Citizenship and Immigration’s Canadian Citizen Guidebook, entitled Discover Canada: The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship. 11 Catlin, “The Role of Propaganda in a Democracy,” 221. information Exaggeration of information presented X Strategic selectivity X Deliberate omission of contradictory information X Repetition X X Table 1: The Constitutive Elements and Techniques of Propaganda and Other Forms of Promotional Discourse Attracting an audience and retaining their attention has been identified as the first step of any communications campaign, be it informational or promotional.12 This is followed by developing and maintaining an emotional and rational connection between the campaign and its audience.13 This connection may be forged in part by employing mechanisms of emotional appeal such as fear and desire.14 An important element in maintaining this rapport is source credibility. Credibility can be generated through various mechanisms, including the presentation of information by authority figures and the availability of evidence confirming the accuracy and objectivity of the information presented.15 Much of the literature on propaganda centers upon the notion that it is deceitful and that the information being disseminated is not only false, but fabricated.16 Certain techniques have been argued to be present in this conception of propaganda: the construction and circulation of false information, deliberate omission of contradictory information, strategic selectivity and exaggeration. The fabrication and dissemination of false information, more simply referred to as lying, can be expanded to include techniques such as implying an accusation rather than stating it explicitly and exaggeration – the distortion of information in a manner that is favourable to the campaign.17 Strategic selectivity involves both the withholding of information contradicting the 12 White, “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” 28. ibid 14 For a discussion on the use of emotional appears, including those of fear and desire, see Dan Gardner, Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear ( Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2008). I draw special attention to Chapter 11 “Terrified of Terrorism.” 15 Gary Schulman and Chrysoula Worrall, “Salience Patterns, Source Credibility, and the Sleeper Effect,” Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 3 (1970), 381; White, “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” 29; as well as Wolfgram, “Democracy and Propaganda: NATO’s War in Kosovo,” 153-171. 16 See, for example, Corner, “Mediated politics, promotional culture and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” 673; as well as Leonard W. Doob and Edward S. Robinson, “Psychology and Propaganda,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 179, No. 1 (1935), 88. 17 Corner, “Mediated politics, promotional culture and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” 674; as well as White, “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” 30-31. 13 communications campaign and the presentation of material of questionable relevance, accuracy, and objectivity.18 A final technique that is present in both propaganda and promotional discourse that merits discussion is that of repetition. The message presented in any promotional campaign, be it social marketing, advertising, or public relations, is repeated through various mediums and in various forms. Repetition serves not only to increase the likelihood of exposure, but also to reinforce the message in its audience.19 Ultimately, the distinction between propaganda and other forms of promotional discourse is the employment of questionable techniques, specifically the fabrication and dissemination of false information and strategic selectivity. By censoring and limiting access to alternative perspectives, the propagandist is in effect control the information that its audiences receive. 18 Corner, “Mediated politics, promotional culture and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” 674 -675; as well as White, “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” 32. 19 Doob and Robinson, “Psychology and Propaganda,” 90-92. References Catlin, George E.G. “The Role of Propaganda in a Democracy,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 179, No.1. 1935, 219-226. Corner, John. “Mediated politics, promotional culture, and the idea of ‘propaganda,’” Media, Culture & Society. Vol. 29, No. 4. 2007, 669-770. Doob Leonard W., and Robinson, Edward S. “Psychology and Propaganda,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 179, No. 1. 1935, 88-95. Eckhardt, William. “War propaganda, welfare values, and political ideologies,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution. Vol. 9, No.3. September 1965, 345-358. Gardner, Dan. Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2008. Kumar, Deepa. “Media, War and Propaganda,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies. Vol. 3, No. 1. March 2006, 48-69. Lowes, Mark. Indy Dreams and Urban Nightmares. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. Nohrstedt, Stig A., et al. “From the Persian Gulf to Kosovo – War Journalism and Propaganda,” European Journal of Communication. Vol. 15, No.3. 2000, 383-404. Ottosen, Rune. “The Military-Industrial Complex Revisited: Computer Games as War Propaganda,” Television & New Media. Vol 10, No.1. January 2009, 122-125. Paddison, Ronan. “City Marketing, Image Reconstruction, and Urban Regeneration,” Urban Studies. Vol. 30, No.2. 1993, 339-349. Rosten, Leo C. “Movies and Propaganda,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 254. 1947, 116-124. Schulman, Gary, and Worrall, Chrysoula. “Salience Patterns, Source Credibility, and the Sleeper Effect,” Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 34, No. 3. 1970, 371-382. Snow, Nancy, and Taylor, Philip M. “The Revival of the Propaganda State: US Propaganda at Home and Abroad since 9/11,” The International Communication Gazette. Vol. 68, No. 5-6. 2006, 389-407. Stauber, John and Rampton, Sheldon. Toxic Sludge is Good For You! United Kingdom: Constable & Robinson Ltd., 2004. White, Ralph K. “Propaganda: Morally Questionable and Morally Unquestionable Techniques,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 398. January 1971, 26-35. Winseck, Dwayne. “Information Operations ‘Blowback’: Communication, Propaganda and Surveillance in the Global War on Terrorism,” The International Communication Gazette. Vol. 70, No. 6. 2008, 419-441. Wolfgram, Mark. “Democracy and Propaganda: NATO’s War in Kosovo,” European Journal of Communication. Vol. 23, No. 2. 2008, 153-171. Zilboorg, Gregory. “Propaganda from Within,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 198. January 1938, 116-123.