We Need to Be Able to Detect Lies
It is on each of us as individuals to be able to identify fact from fiction. We don't have all the resources but there are tools that can help keep us in the right direction.
“There can be no liberty for a community which lacks the means by which to detect lies.”
Walter Lippmann
Another Perspective on Mass Media Propaganda by John Jay Black of the Department of Communication, Utah State University. 1977
This article talks about some of the different definitions of propaganda. There is the model from the Institute of Propaganda Analysis, which I wrote about at:
In future articles, I will go into more detail on some of the other perspectives.
John Jay Black writes in the article on mass media propaganda:
“Taken in their extremes (and recognizing that people fall somewhere along the continuum at any given time, rather than resting at a pole), the pictures of propagandists/propagandees and non-propagandists/non-propagandees as uncovered by the preceding discussion, show very definite patterns of behavior.
On the one hand, the dogmatist (typical of both propagandist and propagandee) may be characterized as having a heavy reliance upon authority figures, a narrow time perspective, a tendency to make irrational evaluations, and displaying little sense of discrimination between different sets of information. On the other, the non-dogmatist (typical of both non-propagandist and non-propagandee) faces a constant struggle to remain open-minded' as he evaluates and acts on information independently of its own merits, and is governed by self-actualizing attitudes rather than irrational ones, doesn't get hung up on what is being said or by whom, recognizes contradictions, incomplete pictures of reality, and the interrelationship of past, present, and future.
The above typologies help lead us to an original definition of propaganda, one that can be applied not only to mass media studies but to a broad range of communications behavior in everyday life. The definition is broad enough to apply to creators of messages, the messages themselves, the media in which they are carried, and the receivers of those messages. It goes as follows:
While it may or may not emanate from individuals or institutions with demonstrably closed belief systems, the manifest content of propaganda contains characteristics one associate with dogmatism; while it may or may not be intended as propaganda, this type of communication seems non-creative and seems to have as its purpose the evaluative narrowing of its receivers. While creative communication expects its receivers to conduct further investigations of its observations, allegations, and conclusions, propaganda does not appear to do so.
Rather, propaganda is characterized by at least the following:
heavy or undue reliance on authority figures and spokesmen, rather than empirical validation, to establish its truths or conclusions;
the utilization of unverified and perhaps unverifiable abstract nouns, adjectives, and adverbs, rather than empirical validation, to establish its truths, conclusions, or impressions;
a finalistic and fixed view of people, institutions, and situations divided into broad, all-inclusive categories of in-groups and out-groups (friends and enemies), situations to be accepted or rejected as a whole;
a reduction of situations into readily identifiable cause-effect relationships, ignoring multiple causality;
a time perspective characterized by an under or over-emphasis on the past, present, or future as disconnected periods, rather than a demonstrated consciousness of time flow, and
a greater emphasis on conflict than cooperation among people, institutions, and situations.”
Another important point in the article is that when you identify these things, it doesn't mean it is being done intentionally. Everyone has an internal bias on most issues. Also, it could be that their education was in a culture or environment that was propagandistic, and that is how they learned to communicate.
I think these reference points are like logical fallacies, good things to have in mind when analyzing information but not something to use as a tactic in online debate. Pointing out to the other person isn't going to help any conversation.
This is also useful as a test of your communication. If you are looking to stamp out propaganda in general, then you want to check your communication to see that it wouldn't read as propagandistic.
And we need to fight for the truth.
“I am convinced that we shall accomplish more by fighting for truth than by fighting for our theories. It is a better loyalty. It is a humbler one, but it is also more irresistible. Above all it is educative. For the real enemy is ignorance, which all of us, conservative, liberal, and revolutionary, suffer.”
Walter Lippman
Thank you for reading. This is the newer format of posts I am testing out. I will be back on Wednesday with another newsletter.