mass-communication-theory

THINKING
about
THEORY
“antisocial” propaganda. They demand a Board of Public Opinion Censors, with wide
and confiscatory powers. At this level of opposition to free speech many of them remain,
even if it is pointed out to them that censorship of anyone who claims to support
democracy is in no way compatible with the traditions and program of the American
people. (Smith, 1941, p. 251)
The Institute of Propaganda Analysis had at its core
the goal of identifying common propaganda techniques
and teaching average people about them so
they could defend themselves against the propagandist’s
work. The institute regularly sent out information
fliers and published books to teach people how
to think, rather than what to think.
It identified seven propaganda “tricks of the trade”:
1. Name-calling: By using negative labels and bad
names, propagandists create distrust toward their
subjects. Name-calling is a substitute for arguing
an idea’s merits.
2. Glittering generalities: Typically in the guise of
slogans or simple catchphrases, propagandists
use vague, sweeping statements without offering
supporting evidence.
3. Transfer: Propagandists claim the approval of
some one or thing as theirs, hoping that the public’s
support for that “authority” will transfer to
them.
4. Testimonial: Propagandists use respected people
to endorse their ideas, hoping that stamp-of-approval
will move the public closer to their goals.
5. Plain folks: The propagandist is always “just a
regular guy or gal, just like you or me,” or “just one
of you,” or “just a simple working stiff.” The public
can trust this humble soul because his or her
ideas are “of the people.”
6. Bandwagon: Propagandists claim widespread
support, appealing to people’s desire to be on the
winning side. They offer no evidence or even lie
about the level of support they claim their idea
enjoys.
7. Card-stacking: Propagandists make the best
case possible for their side and the worst case possible
for any alternatives; they “stack the cards”
against the public reaching an informed decision.
Your turn. Take these seven techniques and apply
them to a controversial contemporary issue that
Chapter 4 The Rise of Media Theory in the Age of Propaganda 89
APPLYING THE SEVEN PROPAGANDA TECHNIQUES
interests you (e.g., gun control, reproductive choice,
health care reform, media deregulation, immigration reform).
Take a position in the debate and analyze the
appeals of the side with which you disagree (that’s propaganda,
of course). Then subject your side’s appeals
to the same analysis. What do you find? Or you can
choose an identifiable public personality who speaks
strongly or regularly on public issues (a politician or media
personality, for example). Apply the same steps.
A trio of mass communication researchers at
Indiana University did just this. Mike Conway, Maria
Elizabeth Grabe, and Kevin Grieves (2007) used the
Institute of Propaganda Analysis’s seven techniques
to analyze 115 episodes (six months’ worth) of “Talking
Points Memo,” the editorial portion of the television
program The O’Reilly Factor. You can see the research
itself at http://journalism.indiana.edu/papers/oreilly.
html. These researchers chose the Fox Cable News
show for their study for three reasons. First, host Bill
O’Reilly labels his program the “No Spin Zone,” and
they wanted to test that assertion. Second, a 2005
Annenberg Public Policy Center survey found that
40 percent of American adults consider O’Reilly a journalist
(compared, for example, to 30 percent who see
Bob Woodward of the Washington Post and Watergate
fame as a journalist). They thought it interesting
that a “journalist” might utilize propaganda techniques.
Third, O’Reilly is one of the most powerful voices in the
media today, so he was worthy of study.
In brief, the researchers discovered that O’Reilly
employed six of the seven tricks of the trade nearly
thirteen times in each minute of his editorials. For example,
he calls some person or group a bad name every
6.8 seconds. Watch an episode or two of this program
to see if this analysis makes sense to you. Can you
argue that one person’s propaganda is another’s
truth? Compare the Indiana University results to the
results of your own study. What conclusions can you
draw about the seven techniques? About using them
to search for the presence of propaganda?
Copyright 2010 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.