Drawing the Curtain: Propaganda vs. Public Relations
The Role of Logic, Critical Thinking, and the Citizen’s Responsibility
In this so-called “post-fact world,” it is more important than ever to understand the way information is packaged and disseminated to a generally passive populace. People routinely accept what they see on TV and online as truth, without giving much thought to its credibility — especially if the outlet is their chosen source or appeals to their emotions.
That is, of course, dangerous. It led me to think about the shaping of mass perception, the role my profession, public relations, plays in the information environment, and how it can be a force for good.
In the realm of shaping public opinion and influencing mass perception, two powerful tools come to the fore: propaganda and public relations (PR). Both propaganda and PR share the common goal of conveying information and persuading audiences, yet they differ significantly in their intentions, methodologies, and ethical considerations.
Let’s draw the curtain and delve into the distinctions between propaganda and PR, shedding light on their respective purposes, strategies, and impacts on society. We’ll also examine the way humans think, why books are banned, a key failure of the educational system, and how the only way to avoid being manipulated is for citizens to employ logic and critical thinking.
Defining Propaganda
Propaganda can be defined as the deliberate dissemination of information, ideas, or rumors, typically with a biased or misleading nature, to manipulate public opinion and advance a particular agenda. Propaganda aims to control and shape people’s thoughts, emotions, and behaviors by employing techniques such as emotional appeals, selective presentation of facts, and the use of loaded language. Historically, propaganda has been associated with totalitarian regimes and oppressive political systems, aiming to control the narrative and suppress dissent.
Understanding Public Relations
On the other hand, public relations, often referred to as PR, is the strategic communication practice of establishing and maintaining positive relationships between organizations, individuals, or institutions and their target audiences. PR focuses on managing the reputation and image of a person, brand, or entity by building trust, and credibility, and fostering mutually beneficial relationships. Unlike propaganda, PR operates within the boundaries of ethical practices, transparency, and two-way communication.
The Role of Media Bias in Propaganda
It is frequently observed that various forms of media such as newspapers, television news outlets, magazine articles, and videos exhibit inherent bias or possess specific agendas in their messaging. Developing the ability to assess content to discern its underlying perspective is crucial for maintaining an informed perspective. While some materials strive to provide comprehensive and impartial coverage of all aspects of an issue, there are other types, such as propaganda, deliberately characterized by bias or deceptive tactics, intended to advance specific viewpoints.
Notable instances of propaganda include the recruitment posters utilized during World War I, featuring “Uncle Sam,” and the iconic “Rosie the Riveter” poster from World War II. These examples skillfully employ symbols to convey a message of strength and a call to action, urging citizens of the United States to actively participate in the war effort.
Of course, since these images were in service to the side of right, it may cause a bit of cognitive dissonance placing them on the propagandistic side of the ledger (the Soviet era produced many interesting examples, also).
That gets to intention but does not excuse checking your critical thinking processes at the door, or the wall, as it were.
Key Differences
1. Intention: Propaganda intends to manipulate and control public opinion, often by using misinformation, distortion, and emotional manipulation. In contrast, PR aims to create favorable perceptions, establish trust, and promote positive narratives about a brand or organization.
2. Transparency: Propaganda often conceals its true intentions, disguising itself as objective information. In PR, transparency and honesty are essential. PR professionals strive to build credibility by providing accurate information and engaging in open dialogue with stakeholders.
3. Power Dynamics: Propaganda is typically employed by governments, political parties, or extremist groups to consolidate power, suppress dissent, or manipulate public sentiment. PR, while serving the interests of organizations, operates in a more balanced relationship between the entity and its target audience, seeking to establish mutual understanding and trust.
4. Ethical Considerations: Propaganda frequently employs unethical tactics, such as spreading falsehoods, promoting hate speech, or dehumanizing opponents. PR, in contrast, adheres to ethical guidelines and industry standards, promoting transparency, respect for diverse perspectives, and responsible communication practices.
Impact on Society
Propaganda, due to its manipulative nature, can have severe consequences for society. It can breed division, incite violence, and undermine democratic principles. It papers over hard truths and makes inconvenient learning from our mistakes as a society. History has shown the destructive power of propaganda in fueling conflicts and perpetuating misinformation.
History itself is the first casualty of propaganda, the truth second — because we cannot identify truth without a proper understanding of history. As author George Orwell prophetically decreed, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.”
Conversely, PR, when practiced ethically, can foster informed public discourse, bridge gaps between stakeholders, and contribute to the growth of healthy democratic societies.
Combating Propaganda with Logic Critical Thinking
Developing strong critical thinking skills can be an effective way to deter propaganda.
As propaganda often relies on manipulating people’s emotions, prejudices, and cognitive biases to shape their beliefs and actions, one remedy is instilling strong critical thinking skills. By developing critical thinking skills, individuals can become more discerning and less susceptible to manipulation.
Here are a few ways in which critical thinking can help deter propaganda:
Evaluating sources: Critical thinking involves critically evaluating the sources of information. It helps individuals determine the credibility and reliability of the sources before accepting the information presented. By questioning the source, checking for biases, and verifying facts, individuals can identify and avoid propagandistic messages. Google’s fact-checking tools are a great place to start.
Analyzing arguments: Critical thinking involves analyzing arguments and claims presented in propaganda. It helps individuals identify logical fallacies (”I got the vaccine, then I got sick. Therefore the vaccine doesn’t work,”), inconsistencies, and unsupported assertions. By scrutinizing the reasoning behind the propaganda, individuals can detect manipulative tactics and reject flawed arguments.
Recognizing emotional manipulation: Propaganda often appeals to emotions to sway opinions and behaviors. Critical thinking helps individuals become aware of emotional manipulation techniques, such as using fear, nostalgia, or tribalism. By recognizing these tactics, individuals can make more rational and informed decisions.
Seeking multiple perspectives: Critical thinking encourages individuals to seek diverse perspectives and consider alternative viewpoints. This helps in developing a more comprehensive understanding of an issue and prevents falling into echo chambers or accepting propaganda without critical analysis.
Fact-checking and research: Critical thinking involves fact-checking and conducting thorough research to verify claims. In the age of digital misinformation, it is crucial to verify information from reliable sources before accepting it as true. By being diligent in fact-checking, individuals can avoid spreading or being influenced by propaganda.
Incidentally, it can also help you identify con artists and charlatans.
Overall, critical thinking empowers individuals to think independently, question information, and make well-informed judgments. It provides a foundation for resisting propaganda by promoting skepticism, discernment, and a commitment to truth and rationality.
Book Banning and Prohibiting Critical Thinking in Education
Currently, there is a fever of book banning in the United States. I’d like to think most folks advocating this are good-hearted people who have been manipulated by propaganda into believing perverts are trying to “groom” kids on every corner and mind-warping lurking on every shelf in the library.
Then again, there seem to be plenty of people who hew towards authoritarianism and believe sincerely that if a written work does not adhere to their personal belief system, then no one should be allowed to access it.
Book banning is self-defeating for an open, progressive society that aims to retain economic and moral leadership in the world. It contributes to poor critical thinking by limiting access to diverse perspectives, ideas, and information. When certain books are banned or censored, individuals are deprived of the opportunity to engage with differing viewpoints and develop their critical thinking skills through examining, analyzing, and evaluating different arguments and perspectives. This can hinder their ability to think critically, make informed judgments, and understand complex issues in a nuanced manner.
There are also subjects teachers are not allowed — even on a very basic level — to mention in the classroom. School boards nationwide are cynically demanding approval of every word of the curriculum. They don’t want professional educators; they want babysitters who indoctrinate by exclusion. This is the antithesis of education. Instead of fostering genuine education, it prioritizes monoculture thinking, which stifles intellectual growth.
Ask yourself this question the next time someone wants to ban books or questions the need to teach logic and critical thinking: “Why do some groups wish to limit people’s ability to think for themselves?”
Caution: Critical Thinking is Not the Same as “Do Your Own Research”
There is a difference, however, between questioning sources and information and the “do your own research” movement, where people fail to understand the difference between checking information sources for credibility, instead seeking sources — no matter how pathetically worthless or malignant — to confirm a feeling or to reinforce prejudice, aka confirmation bias.
Confirmation bias is a cognitive bias that refers to the tendency of individuals to seek, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms their preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. It can often lead people to disregard or downplay information that contradicts their views while selectively accepting information that supports their beliefs.
However, confirmation bias can intersect with the concept of “do your own research” in a way that undermines its intended purpose. When individuals engage in research while already holding strong beliefs or biases, they may unconsciously gravitate towards sources and information that align with their preexisting views (some may look at the hyperlinks in this article and accuse me of that very thing). They may selectively choose evidence that confirms their beliefs while disregarding or dismissing information that contradicts them.
For example, imagine a person who strongly believes in a particular conspiracy theory. When they are encouraged to “do their own research,” they may be more inclined to seek out sources, websites, or communities that promote or support that conspiracy theory. They may overlook reputable sources that debunk or refute the theory and instead focus on information that confirms their initial belief. This can lead to a reinforcement of their existing biases and perpetuation of misinformation.
Mea culpa: I did this in my twenties when I was convinced Oliver Stone was on to something about the JFK assassination. I found myself reading tons of books about it that just added fuel to the fire that there was some vast conspiracy. Good movie, but no. I still have some doubts about how the investigation was handled, but ultimately the hard truth is that JFK conspiracy theories lack substantial evidence and rely on speculative claims that are bizarre, inconsistent, and contradictory.
This kind of amateur scholarship is not harmless fun, either. Just ask the grieving relatives of manipulated people who “did their own research” and decided the Covid vaccine was designed to monitor and harm, rather than save lives.
I’ve found that Occam’s Razor, the principle that suggests the simplest explanation or solution is often the correct one, is usually all you need to determine if something passes the smell test. This leads us back to Propaganda Vs. PR.
Exploitation and Distortion Vs. Transparency and Honesty
Propaganda and public relations represent two distinct approaches to shaping public opinion. While propaganda exploits emotions, distorts facts, and serves hidden agendas, public relations operates within a framework of transparency, honesty, and responsible communication.
Understanding the differences between the two is crucial for individuals to critically analyze information, identify manipulation, and foster a society built on truth, transparency, and ethical practices.
By championing the principles of public relations and maintaining high standards of critical thinking, we can strive for a world where open dialogue, respect for diverse perspectives, and the pursuit of truth prevail over propaganda’s detrimental influence.
“…wherever the people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.” — President Thomas Jefferson
But it’s not just PR pros who need to be vigilant — all citizens must also do the work to set it right. There lies the challenge.