Nonviolent Change Journal

PROPAGANDA OR PERSUASION?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
But so can truth be.

In these times of crisis
our eyes become narrow
as we scan our environment
for things and people that might harm us.

This is the time then
when truth can be distorted or lost in the cries of beliefs.
And with it,
hopes for successful long-term resolution between warring parties
seem out of reach.

     Our experiences help to define our perceptions, which in turn define our reality of life. What we are exposed to through our years can liberate us, expanding our horizons and our possibilities for futures we desire; or it can enchain us, dragging us down to a quagmire of mere survival, hatred, animosity, ever-present vigilance. What we choose to believe helps to put our world in particular contexts. Our lens and vision become set. Crisis and the unexpected grab our attention in skewed ways. We know that if there are fifty witnesses to a crime, there will be fifty perceptions of what actually occurred.

     How truth is told can hinge on whether the speaker or the writer has a stake in convincing his or her audience of what is being stated. In the telling of truth, what differentiates art of persuasion from propaganda?

     In Aristotle’s time, the art of persuasion was always telling the truth in a convincing manner that would inspire the person to accept the argument. It appeals to reason, not to the emotionality of the subject.

     If emotions were provoked, the truth would be covered with fears and desires. Reason and breath would be shortened. Time would become the enemy. Immediate gratification would predominate, with futures mimicking the present’s desire for control.

     Propaganda, on the other hand, often appeals to the emotions of the audience using any means possible to get the person to ‘buy the product.’ In Spanish, we use the word “propaganda” as the word describing commercials. In our language, we know that commercials are attempts to persuade the audience to buy that product, often through exaggeration, emotions, and half-truths. It is propaganda. The aim of such a communication is not to necessarily to convey truth but to convince the reader, the listener, the onlooker that one’s belief and worldview are the right ones; the only ones.

     Truth can be a victim in a power struggle to ‘win over’ constituents, clients, patients, buyers, or citizens. The fear that truth may not be enough can lead to blatant misinformation or more cleverly forms of disinformation. Disinformation hides the falsities behind a veneer of truth; half-truths to be exact. False analogies convincingly communicated can truncate a person’s curiousity to further research. Provide semblances of truths that the receiver knows to be correct and mix in exaggerations, opinions, and beliefs and you have propaganda.

     In a time of trauma, economic struggle, or in a climate of fear, survivors turn to authority figures to keep them informed of any life-threatening (and economic threatening) situations. Trust and faith in authority figures may prevail, especially if those in power have proven in some acceptable manner deserving of such trust and faith.

     If the object of the propaganda is ‘the other’—a person, group, or a situation that is currently viewed as the ‘outsider’ in one’s society, then propaganda can work very well. Scapegoating can easily occur when the media controls information, specifically quality and quantity. Such were the cases in Nazi Germany. The media helped the Nazi government to plead their case, barring or minimizing any dissenting voices as unpatriotic or foolishness. Consequently, those with psychological infirmities and physical deformities were the first ‘test cases’ to see if the general public would rise up to protest against their imprisonment and subsequent gassing. Next came gays and lesbians, gypsies, members of Assembly of God, and communists. The biggest group and by far the more popular group to be vilified through propaganda were those of the Jewish faith. By the time the war ended over eleven million human beings of these groups died; six million being of Jewish descent.

     All sides can spout out propaganda to gain favor for their side. Fear and distrust seem to be the authors of skewing the truth. The fear is that that the audience would not be supportive if the simple truth be told. And truth, be told, the audience, especially a democratic audience, may not be supportive. They may not agree. If the audience is concerned with their own survival, they will have a greater tendency to turn over their critical thinking and power to those they trust should be doing their work: the media and government.

     In this age of melodrama, adrenalin junkies, workaholics, and other addicted-oriented individuals and organizations, the volume is turned on high to get their attention. A simple truth may be too tiny and soft spoken to be heard. Perhaps. There is no trust in non-adrenalin communication.

     Propaganda can have a powerful effect to move people’s passions. It can be and has been used for wars, causes, movements, political campaigns, and other large scale ventures. Yet, it has also been used in areas of health-related issues. Marijuana was so vilified in my junior high school health class that few students took the total information seriously. Films that were so exaggerated in their persuasion were experienced as comical and unrealistic. Any facts and hard evidence embedded in the melodrama of the health education films were lost or see as falsities by the audience. Had the administrators trusted the simple truth, and nothing but the simple truth of the effects of marijuana, they may have fared better in effectively persuading students not to be users.

     A few terms need to be clarified here: information, misinformation, and disinformation. Information is providing facts and figures that are verifiable and are accepted as true by the majority of the population, either through the scientific method or through observations. An apple drops to the ground. Water is wet. The grass is green. The car hits the lamppost. The man screams at the dog. The wind blows gusts of sand and dirt.

     Misinformation can be deliberate, but more often is given accidentally. Erroneous information. The water is dry. The apple falls up to the sky. Most people can see the obvious errors in these statements. But what if the statements are about situations and people whom we are not that versed about? It is easy to misinform an audience about situations and people that the audience knows nothing about, except through what they are told by sources they trust and believe are honest.

     Disinformation is as it was stated earlier, a combination of truths and fiction, designed to deceive and manipulate the audience toward the goals of the sender. In Nazi Germany’s time, it was easier to disinform and misinform. In today’s internet age, where information and communication are everywhere, it is not so easy to deceive a larger number of people as before. But it is possible, especially if people have no time nor desire to research if what they are being given is accurate, nor any desire or belief to question their sources.

     Propaganda can only work most of the time with people if the people have not been trained and taught to do critical thinking, to question, to be curious, and to do research outside their normal ‘comfort zones.’ If people are in a survivor mode, they have a higher tendency to stick to their beliefs and coping skills that have worked in the past. They will have a higher tendency to categorize and stereotype if they perceive time as an enemy. If people are struggling to make ends meet -- financially, psychologically, spiritually, physically, or any other manner that captures their minds and breaths—propaganda is easier to embed in information they receive. That is why those who hold the keys to disseminating information are in a powerful position. Who polices them?

     If propaganda is to survive, there has to be control over distribution of information. There has to be collaboration to not share other viewpoints. There has to be a cry of being “unpatriotic” or “treasonous” toward any public utterances or communication that does not adhere to the official voices being promoted in the ‘regular’ media. During the McCarthy trials and blacklisting, the fear of communism, along with the backing of powerful authorities allowed propaganda to flourish. People were scared. If they stated anything to the contrary of the propaganda, they were frightened that they would be labeled and targeted. They were correct. Propaganda robs us of our liberties through the tactics of fear of being seen as disloyal; of being labeled as a traitor to one’s group (family, community, religion, country, you name it).

     The fear of the ‘wolf’ heightens the senses, the suspicions, and the survivor mentality. The country is thrown into distrust. The enemy could not have done a better job to turn citizen against each other. Never again! This was the cry of the victims in Nazi Germany and again the cry of those blacklisted in post-McCarthy America. We shall remember. We must remember.

     During these current times, when much is at stake, there is a need to convince one’s audience of one’s truth, one’s beliefs and perceptions. Often the truth is split in at least two segments, if not more. One side gives half the truth, along with their beliefs and opinions being presented as truth too. The other warring side gives the second half of the truth, along with their beliefs and opinions as being the truth too. To experience the whole truth, often involves a search for neutral parties and media sources, which are not of the warring parties. How is the truth viewed from that neutral vantage site? How often do people in general search beyond their normal media sources?

     Have we remembered? Critical questioning comes from critical thinking and experiencing time as a friend to reflect. In a world where adrenalin and crisis feelings are pushed as the norm, it is difficult to take back our power to think and question our surroundings and ourselves. It is difficult to remember our history.

     Someday our enemy of today will be our friends of tomorrow. In between that time, there will death and destruction, vilification, manipulation, untold grief, and hardening of the hearts of the individuals who were caught in the crossfires. Trauma will set in. Governments will become friends again. Current friends will become our future enemies. And then our friends again. In the meantime, vilification, dehumanization, and fear of “the Other” have been spouted as truth. The cycle continues. Propaganda helps to perpetuate that cycle, for good or for bad.

     So how does this tie in with conflict resolution? If people believe in the propaganda, which is designed to inflame their passions and cement beliefs, then finding common ground to resolve conflict becomes that much harder. If the ‘other’ is caricaturized as inhuman; vilified as the personification of evil and Satan, then understandably how can we see them as ourselves? For we no longer see a human face with a human heart. What mirroring is there? Propaganda needs to be addressed for what it is. And quite often it will not be addressed by those who have vested interest in promoting it. It must be addressed by neutral parties and by those within each side who hold respect within their groups.

     Those who wish to resolve conflict have to consider the metamessages given by the conflicting parties to their followers. What good is it to help resolve conflict between leaders and those in managerial positions, if we do not address the effects of their propaganda on their followers? Resolving conflict at the community level, at the grass roots level, at the individual levels is necessary; otherwise, some day someone from those ranks will rise up again and again to continue on with those metamessages, when the environment is such that people are willing to believe, despite the truth.

Darling G. Villena-Mata, Ph.D. holds a degree in social psychology. She is often asked to speak about societal traumas, conflict resolution, and inter/intracultural communication. Those interested in her book regarding societal traumas’ effects on the overall well-being of recipients may contact her directly at circlepoint@earthlink.net The book is designed for laypeople and professionals in the field.

These articles and opinions of the authors do not constitute the endorsement of Nonviolent Change nor its publisher, Organization Development Institute, or any of its staff, nor of CirclePoint which is housing the Nonviolent Change Journal.

©2002.2003. All rights reserve. The Nonviolent Change Journal is published by the Research/Action Team on Nonviolent Large Systems Change - an interorganizational and international project of The Organization Development Institute.

Permissions: Reposting and reprints are encouraged, as long as proper source acknowledgement is given. As a courtesy, please let us know that you are reprinting or electronically reposting. It helps us know of the interest level. Thank you.