Everything Radio Programs Book: How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home
How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home

Everything Radio Programs Book: This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today
This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today

Everything Radio Programs Book: You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host
You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host

Everything Radio Programs Book: How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America
How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America

Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows
Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows

Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition)
Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition)

Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000)
Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000)

Everything Radio Programs Book: Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)
Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)

◄◄ Jump  More→ 1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|Radio Talk Show Links|More Guides Everything Radio Programs Radio Talk Show Directory
Learn More About This Directory
This directory sponsored by SIQL, a Spider Makers company...
Guides: Radio Talk Show - Articles - Talk:Propaganda - Wikipedia

Talk:Propaganda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is a featured article. We believe it to be one of the best examples of the Wikipedia community's work. Even so, if you see a way this page can be improved still further, we invite you to contribute.


Those stupid uninformed "administrators" have no idea what they are talking about. They don't even _think_ that they could be wrong. Dogmatics. - 212.137.33.208 15:02, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)


Could someone add a brief note with the etymology of the word? It comes from a Catholic Church congregation, the "Congregatio Propaganda something", the congragation for the propagation of faith. I don't do it myself because i don't remember the exact name.

Congregatio de propaganda fide; propaganda is a future participle, meaning that which ought to be propagated.


According to the Logic they are four ways to define an entity, in this case, the propaganda phenomenon could be defined as next.

The etymological nominal definition for propaganda reside in the latin word "propaganda", meaning "that which ought to be propagated" (cf. supra 2nd paragraph), that term is the future participle of the transitive and reflexive latin verb "propâgare" (to propagate) the which it means "to multiplify by generation or another way of reproduction" or, in a figurative sense, "to extend, to prolong or to increase something or its effects".

Some synonymical nominal definitions for propaganda could be "to disseminate", "to diffuse", "to spread", etc.

A sort of descriptive real definition for propaganda is evolving yet in this free encyclopedia.

The essential real description belongs to the realm of the Metaphysics.

About the origins of the contemporary use of the word "propaganda", those can be traced back to the Reformation. The Catholic Church found itself struggling to maintain and extend its hold in non-Catholic countries. A Commission of Cardinals was set up by Pope Gregory XIII (r. 1572-85), charged with spreading Catholicism and regulating ecclesiastical affairs in non-Catholic lands. A generation later, in 1622, Gregory XV made the Commission permanent, as a sacra congregatio de propaganda fide, tasked to manage foreign missions and financed by a `ring tax' assessed on each newly-appointed cardinal. The first official propagandist institute was therefore a body charged with improving the dissemination of a group of religious dogmas. The word `propaganda' came to be applied to any organisation set up to spread a doctrine; then it was applied to the doctrine itself which was being spread; and lastly to the methods employed in the dissemination.

Please visit these web sites:

This site created by Aaron Delwiche, doctor in communications from the University of Washington, is inspired in the legacy of the Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA). http://www.propagandacritic.com

Article "Powers of Persuasion (Propaganda)" by David Welch. http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1373/8_49/55481498/p1/article.jhtml?term=%22Powers+of+Persuasion+%28Propaganda%29%22

And please, read this book:

Thompson, John B. "Ideology and Modern Culture: Critical Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication". Polity Press, 1990

Sent by Luis from México.


A great example for scapegoating is a joke I know: When Kruschev was forced out of office in the Soviet Union, he wrote two letters for his successor. One was addressed, "Open me if you have a crisis." The second one was addressed, "Open me if you have a second crisis." Sure enough, something went wrong and Kruschev's successor had a crisis. He opened the first envelope, and it said, "Blame it on me." So the successor blamed it all on Kruschev, and everything got better. Not long after, a second crisis came up. The successor opened the leter, and it began, "Write two letters..."

D

I don't agree that propaganda is generally most extreme within totalitarian systems, if only because it seems unnecessary whenever a person can be executed or "disappeared" for dissension. I'd have to argue that propaganda seems more necessary in "open" societies. But again, I'm neither a sociologist nor a, um, political scientist, and I'm sure data in this area--especially data to be trusted--are hard to come by.

-- Propaganda is very common in totalitarian systems. I can confirm this by observation and monitoring for the last 30 years. There was propaganda in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba, and the Communist countries of Eastern Europe. The right-wing Salazar dictatorship and Franco's Spain were also propagandists. The difference tends to be that dictatorships use propaganda in extensive domestic as well as foreign coverage. When there is no free discussion of ideas, there still has to be something to fill the airwaves and billboards. -- GABaker, 23 Oct 02


Propaganda, like censorship, is generally most extreme within totalitarian systems, and probably can be expected to increase, or decrease, as a government becomes more, or less, despotic.

I've removed this from the main page, because it's a controversial claim, which is not attributed or supported. I think propaganda techniques are used very commonly outside totalitarian governmental systems.

In fact most of the propaganda I see comes from large corporations. All you need to do is take some time looking at advertising, and you'll be able to find examples of nearly all of the propaganda techniques explained on the main page. Moreover, the use of film, radio, television, and print media in a concerted way -- which is typical of a large scale propaganda campaign -- is also characteristic of a major advertising blitz. MRC


I agree. Personally, I think the definition above has it backwards, and that within totalitarian systems there's less need of propaganda, since the consequences of dissent are both extreme and swift, whereas in a democracy or republic the best way to keep the natives down is to indoctrinate them. Yes, IMHO, this includes the U.S. :-) --KQ
Best propaganda is truth with carefully choosed words and accents. I am not sure if it is reflected in article. Example is an old joke most of you probably knows: Chruszczow and Kennedy were racing once. New York Times reports: Kennedy won, Chruszczow lost. Radio Erewan reports: Kennedy finished just before last participant, Chruszczow finished just after winner.
While the authors may have used the US Psyops manual as a source on "propaganda techniques", most of those were named if not originated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, a group of American political scientists from the 1930s. That's almost certainly where the Psyops boys got their material from, and in any case the IPA ought to get some mention. Unfortunately I know very little about them and don't really know where to put the stuff.
About the IPA legacy I'd just pasted this link:

http://www.propagandacritic.com

(formerly was: http://carmen.artsci.washington.edu/propaganda/home.htm)

This e-place was created eight years ago, when the world-wide web was in its infancy, the propaganda site is inspired by the pioneering work of the Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA). From 1937 to 1942, the IPA was dedicated to promoting the techniques of propaganda analysis among critically-minded citizens.

The author, Aaron Delwiche, holds a doctorate in communications from the University of Washington and a B.A. in political science from the University of California at Berkeley. He is currently employed as a lecturer in the Department of Communication at the University of Washington.

Sent by Luis from México.


We need to come to a consensus on the first few paragraphs. They keep getting deleted and added. I think starting with the assertion that all propaganda is lies and is used only in war is self-evidently false. I think we should start the article with the lines which currently read "In the broad sense of the term..." Jfeckstein 15:35, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)


We now have two interestingly contrasting images of Saddam Hussein: one Iraqi, one American. -- The Anome 14:56, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)


Table of contents
1 Propaganda flyers
1 Cult propaganda is missing
2 Were rank and file Nazis liars?
3 Too Much Emphasis on deliberate deception
4 Walt Disney
5 Injustice and Faint
6 Statistics
7 Problem with current definiton
8 Cuban propaganda
9 Played Backwards

Propaganda flyers

Image:EconNaziPropaganda.png Please do not use altered historic documents. If you do not want the Nazi-Text to be readable, do not use this example in the first place. Manipulating the image so that the original text becomes unreadable (without even mentioning it) is not an option: It is dishonest and leaves the reader uncertain what the image actually is all about (it only shows two buildings, after all). It would be cool if someone could contribute a better/clearer/more authentic sample of Nazi propaganda? 62.227.161.132 11:53, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)


This is interesting "However, propaganda usually has political or nationalist themes." I would speculate that propaganda is commonly used for racial and religious themes as well, at least. The justification of slavery was racial and religious, but pretty much transnational, would have been my guess; also the continuing christian propaganda about how women should submit to men is transnational, and relgious (although not racial). The protestant propaganda that the rich are simply blessed by God, or the Islamic propaganda that the Jews are evil, are more examples of propaganda that I would term more religious than even political, although of course they (religion, politics, nationalism, racism) are all hopelessly intertwined. Of course in the Yugoslavian arena, propaganda is simultaneously racist, religious, nationalist, and political. :) Kyk 12:07, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Wow, the list of propaganda techniques in the article shows a good fit for what I see commonly in Christian indoctrination in the United States. But I suppose it would take great care to put such an observation in the article. Kyk 12:11, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I miss the satement of some basic facts, such as the reference to what is propagated by propaganda.

Now as we all hold beliefs and have ideas that may not be chrystalised as opinitons or value statements, yet by being exposed to various verbally formalised propaganda, we gradually develop and dislose our own reaction. Depending on the strength of our convictions any propaganda aimed at us to change our attitudes will focus on conversion/reassurance, thr former of which is only likely to take place, if we are uncertain and not determined enough about our ways of seeing the world and its chunks, whether confessing them verbally or not.

Living in a world, which is as hugely complex as it is, most of the propaganda that we experience is about making us like or dislike something: a brand, a place, an object, a person, etc. By inducing the people to like/dislike something there is a constant pressure around to take sides in the social world, get organised and to join forces, as opposed to relating to it just like non colonising animals do (focus on your own world, ignore distant worlds).

Now this information on likes/dislikes is then used to motivate/manipulate the whole society in line with the objectives of invesment with a good ROI, by making use of public opinion polls and other paraphernalia of PO research plus intelligence/surveillance. This is possible by exploiting the natural inclination in humans to imitate and copy all sorts of things, patterns of acts and behaviour included. Under such circumstances all the communications, unbiased or otherwise, function as propaganda and as agents to modify and synchronise individual behaviour with results measured and felt on a mass scale. The differences in style and other aspects, that may range from subtle to enorurmous do not change the overall outcome of the intended (and probably indiscardable)presence of control. Apogr 10:11, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Cult propaganda is missing

Were rank and file Nazis liars?

Let's not forget Walt Disney on the other side of the war, using Hitler's own images to American purpouses. I think you shouldn't forget that all parts of international conflicts tell "many, many lies".. - Sigg3.net 08:20, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Too Much Emphasis on deliberate deception

Andries


"Those novels were used for explicit propaganda such as the CIA secretly commissioned an animated film adaptation of Animal Farm in the 1950s. "

Can't parse that sentence... 217.211.131.17 09:55, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)


One could analyze the similarities among propaganda used by national leaders who want to start wars, such as the recent war in Iraq; the Spanish-American War; etc.


Walt Disney

My younger brother thought he was downloading a Donald Duck cartoon while the file infact turned out to be a Walt Disney WW2 propaganda cartoon clearly aimed at children. I've seen it myself and I find it appaling the way this cartoon portrais the Nazis, as zombies raised to die. First of all this propaganda isn't any more right than the Nazi propaganda (which is alot better as such) and second of all it is aimed solely at children. Of course it is a few fun sections of it, like the animated Hitler going berserk, but considering the situation around and the goal of this cartoon I find it very distasteful. If I'm able to watch it again, I'll write some more about it and probably add it to the Propaganda article. - Sigg3.net 13:23, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)


Injustice and Faint

IMO the usage of an archaic word (Faint) is not good in encyclopedia. Please replace by a suitable synonym. Mikkalai 19:29, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
...or may be the author simply misspelt "feign"? Mikkalai 19:34, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
...or "feint"? Robert Southworth 22:50, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)


Statistics

Is misusing statistics a specific form of propaganda (techniques section), or is it part of "testimonial" or another form? For example, pro-choice propaganda might say something like "4 out of 5 doctors believe abortion should be the woman's choice in all cases," but the doctors surveyed might all practice in liberal New England. --zandperl 21:24, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Good point. I think this is a very common form of misleading people in the Netherlands. Andries 21:28, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

George W. Bush has also be accused of it. For example in the post September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks NYC, he was accused of encouraging (forcing?) the EPA to change their interpretations of air quality data to ease public fears rather than show concerns. --zandperl 23:18, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)


I was just wondering.. Maybe we should put up some thoughts by Adolf Hitler, being pretty known for "his" propaganda? I know he wrote quite alot about this weapon, and how much he respected it, a reaction to having read Marxist documents. - Sigg3.net 13:23, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

yes, Hitler had some good quotes about propaganda. I was amazed to read it in Mein Kampf. Andries 22:15, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

When I studied for examen facultatum (a small, Norwegian introduction course to the philosophy of science) we worked alot with Hitler. The 20-35 first pages were about propaganda and psychological experiments, and spread evenly among these pages you could read excerpts from Men Kampf. - Sigg3.net 08:18, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Problem with current definiton

I have a problem with the current definition of propaganda and that is that in practice one can only know what is propaganda in hindsight. First of all propaganda has to be one sided or untrue and this is often difficult to know. Secondly one has to know that the leader of an organization knows it to be untrue or one sided. If a leader sincerely believes in the truth of what he says then it is not propaganda because propaganda involves deliberate deception. But it is very difficult to know whether somebody sincerely believes in his delusions or that he is lying. Any suggestions. Andries 22:15, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I might define it as "one-sided advertising to promote a cause, rather than a commercial product." Perhaps the "one-sided" aspect can be determined at the time of the propaganda by seeing how much opposition there is. I think typically it is socially frowned upon to object to propaganda. We might say rather than deliberately misleading, that propaganda "deliberately depicts the facts from one point of view." The current definition on this page may be POV, in that it implies that all propaganda is intentionally malicious, which is not always the case. --zandperl 23:11, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The current def does NOT imply maliciousness. It says exactly what you two mean: one-sidedness (with fat chance of deception and lies). Further, "propaganda" has three participants: "propagandist", "propagandee", and "observer". Even if the first two sincerely believe, it still may remain propaganda. (If the observer believes as well, then... do you remember that phylosophical puzzle about the tree that fell in the forest where no one could hear it falling?) Mikkalai 23:24, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
As for the "difficulty to know", that's the very goal of propaganda, otherwise it would make no sense to bother. Mikkalai 23:27, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Propaganda does not need to be "one-side or untrue. What makes it propaganda is that it a) be systematically propagated, and that it is b) done for the purpose of advancing their cause. See the American Heritage Dictionary. Note that falsehood is not a part of the definition; not even bias, not even half-truth.

1. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause. 2. Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause: wartime propaganda.

The etymology of the word literally means "that which ought to be propagated," and, of course, if you look up the origins of the word "broadcast" it refers to a way of sowing seed. Dpbsmith 23:37, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Once again, First, the phrase "serving an agenda" says the same as yours "reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause", only a bit slangish, I admit, but hits the nail directly. Second, "specific type of message presentation" phrase covers your (1) and (2). Third, that wikipedia explicitely says "fail to paint a complete picture", is just a clarification of the "First". Fourth, etymology can play tricks with attempts to understand the meaning. As a non-native English speaker I went through great pains to learn this :-) Unfortunately, the meaning of the term is indeed tilting into negative, we have to deal with this. Mikkalai 00:25, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
And Fifth, what you just did, is an excellent example of propaganda (of your POV): You write: Note that falsehood is not a part of the definition, and to confirm this, you conveniently omit a piece from the quotation from the American Heritage Dictionary, namely, "wartime propaganda" is actually written there as "the selected truths, exaggerations, and lies of wartime propaganda". Gotcha!!! Mikkalai 00:35, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
For what it's worth, on checking, I find that my print copy of AHD 3rd edition matches your quotation. What I quoted was from an online copy of [AHD 4th edition]. I quoted it correctly, without omission or distortion and no intent to deceive. I don't know whether the definition changed from AHD 3rd to AHD 4th, or whether the online edition of AHD 4th is different from the print edition. Dpbsmith 03:27, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Of course is is known that the word didn't intend to be negative. Hitler had Ministry of Propaganda. Stalin had Agitprop (Agitation and Propaganda). Surely they didn't intend to have something read as "Ministry of Lies". But again, the word communism was not "bad" one, too. Since many people began thinking that "propaganda" is bad word, so it became. That's the life of language, you know. Mikkalai 05:31, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Mikkalai, when I read the current version then I read from it that propaganda is always malicious. Andries 23:47, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I see it now; the overall article is definitely biased into malice. I was speaking about the very first definition, not about examples. Mikkalai 00:25, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think where the current article first indicates a change from the neutral "message to serve an agenda" to the POV "malicous lies" is in the section titled "Kinds of Propaganda," second paragraph. Such a statment that the term is often more used in a negative way is ok in itself. But then in "Techniques of Propaganda Generation" every example given seems negative to me. I think this could be solved by one of three ways: (1) rewording the examples so they're all neutral; (2) indicating which are examples of the negative connotation of propaganda; or (3) giving additional examples which are more neutral.
Meanwhile, should we add a {{msg:NPOV}} note to the top of the page?
--zandperl 04:24, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)


Cuban propaganda

I lived in Cuba for three months last year, and I have quite a few photographs of the propaganda spread evenly across the country. Should I put them up here, or what? - Sigg3.net 08:21, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please do! GABaker 18:56, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Consider it done. - Sigg3.net 08:20, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Played Backwards

The statement that contains
... in which the radio program was recorded and played backwards over the air.
sounds meaningless. What's the propaganda goal of playing backwards? Mikkalai 20:25, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Everything Radio Programs Book: How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home
How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home
  Everything Radio Programs Book: This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today
This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today
  Everything Radio Programs Book: You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host
You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host
  Everything Radio Programs Book: How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America
How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America
 
Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows
Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows
  Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition)
Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition)
  Everything Radio Programs Book: Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000)
Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000)
  Everything Radio Programs Book: Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)
Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)
 
 
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Propaganda
◄◄ Jump  More→ 1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|Radio Talk Show Links|More Guides Everything Radio Programs Radio Talk Show Directory

Valid CSS! Valid HTML 4.01!
This custom Guide To The Internet produced by Siql. Visit us today, and find out how to get your own custom guide to the Internet, and how to get your site listed in our guides.
Copyright 1995-2004 by Siql. All Rights Reserved.