- If you need to spend more than 5-10 seconds to gather the propaganda message, then the message is a failure. This poster is a big failure.
- This poster originates from a right-wing leaning group.
- It’s propaganda method is basically to present lots of facts.
- In terms of effectiveness, this poster is awful. Far too detailed, far too complex, way too much tiny print. Nearly impossible to figure out the message.
With the help of uncritical journalists, a story about “fake news” ended up disseminating far more than it exposed.
The Intercept (and others) allege the Washington Post published a fake news story based on anonymous sources and lobbyists, making assertions and allegations without supporting evidence.
The WaPo story reads like fake news stories prevalent on social media, typically based on allegations sourced from flimsy evidence and quotes of “she said, he said”. RT notes WaPo has agreed to publish a correction to provably fake allegations made in the article.
The article appears designed for the so-called “outrage culture” – literally the shouting and sharing on social media. Social media amplifies the media’s propaganda message, as people Like and Share online, attempting to persuade their “friends” to adopt someone else’s agenda. As we note on this blog, few will attempt to question or correct such stories, as few want to take the time or risk their friendships. The consequence is that social media becomes a friction-less platform for the spread of nonsense.
The WaPo article appears to use many propaganda techniques including appeals to anonymous authorities, logical fallacies, patriotism, lies, and emotion.
Celebrity endorsement and Testimonial.
This quote is true.
How well this poster was shared is unknown.
The quote was contained in Lincoln’s first State of the Union speech, both in terms of concern over the potential concentration of wealth (Lincoln had been a lawyer that defended the rapidly growing railroad industry), but also in terms of capital being used to own labor (as in slaves), as well as to hire. His point was that labor comes first to create wealth, which then begets capital. From a government/regulatory perspective, some wanted to give capital a priority over labor, a choice which Lincoln said was not right.
- This is an example of a poorly designed social media propaganda poster
In terms of design, it is complex and no one is making eye contact with the viewer. It takes too much time to understand what it is about and what it is trying to say. .There are enough details that it likely engages (Kahneman’s) System 2 thinking rather than the quick, intuitive, gut-level response of System 1. Propaganda works best when quickly invoking a System 1 response, rather than System 2.
I do not have TV so cannot comment on TV coverage. Our regional newspapers did do a lot of coverage on Bernie Sanders and there was no evidence that the media was “ignoring Sanders outright” or was “routinely ignored”. That claim is the emotional hook needed to grab the target into Liking and Sharing. This poster might have been more effective if that was the main claim, presented prominently, rather than diluting the message with lots of words.
Thinking Fast and Slow author Kahneman, and creator of the “System 1 and System 2” thinking concept acknowledges that 11 of 12 studies cited in his chapter on “priming” were from weak studies. That chapter implied that “subtle cues in their environment can have strong effects on their behavior outside their awareness“. This does not mean his conclusions are wrong but that the evidence supporting his conclusions may be weak. This acknowledgement is independent of the System 1/System 2 thinking style issues.
- Testimonial from unknown (or “ordinary”) person in Belgium
- Half true, half logical fallacy.
- Works in part, on the basis of “What you see is all there is”.
Belgium really does have “automatic wage indexation” that requires wages to be adjusted to the “retail price index” cost of living calculation. Belgium and Luxembourg are the only countries in Europe that have this policy. Thus, “This is the opposite of America” is true, but it is also true for Europe and most of the world! This claim works on the basis of “What you see is all there is” – the target does not know that few countries have “automatic wage indexation”.
What media consumers reward outlets for are rarely deeply reported stories on matters related to consequential items of public policy. What takes off are emotionally stimulating stories that don’t require of their readers any background knowledge to fully understand them and to opine on them.
Social media’s penchant for quick, emotionally outraged responses merely amplifies what the professional media does every day.
During the past 10 months, our local newspaper features an article, prominently on their web page (labeled “Featured”) , that has a topic and headline designed as click bait. The purpose is to emotionally arouse their readers into reading, commenting and sharing the story. “Featured” stories often receive thousands of comments.
This is the same business model used by fake news web sites that spread propaganda stories on social media.
The story linked below is an excellent report – real journalism – about the linkage between fake news as click-bait and the targeting of our emotions:
Sentiment analysis can’t be used to show whether news is true or false, but it does show the way headline writers, like marketers, manipulate our emotions to inspire us to click, like or share a story.
Read the whole article – it is spot on.
I prefer propaganda to describe the use of propaganda methods to influence others to adopt ones agenda. “Fake news”, however, describes a form of propaganda that grew rapidly in 2016. “Fake news” are stories produced to emotionally target selected groups in to an “outrage” response. They quickly Like and Share these fake stories, which ultimately generates clicks for selling advertising. Fake news has been around for years; Facebook itself noted that “fake news” was becoming a problem back in 2014. Our blog wrote publicly about fake news back in January of 2016.
Unlike propaganda, the purpose of “fake news” is not to persuade anyone to adopt an agenda – the primary goal is to sell eyeballs to advertisers. Propaganda is for persuasion while fake news is for making profits.
In the fall out from the election, the mainstream media found itself embarassingly out of sync with the voters and caught off guard by the election outcome. Rather than question why the media was out of touch, they have jumped on to the “fake news” meme. Their spin is that “fake news” caused people to be dumb and vote wrong.
Because the election outcome was different than the model, the media has adopted the view that the model was correct and something must be wrong with the real world.
It’s because Facebook has become a platform for the sort of fake news stories that helped elect Donald Trump
Fake news targeted both Clinton and Trump and some targeted political parties (rather than candidates). Fake news is targeted at people who already agree with the emotional sediments of the fake news item – thus, it is unclear that fake news had any influence on people voting differently than they already were planning to vote. Those who share fake news items on FB and Twitter appear to already have strongly held partisan views.
The “fake news” meme is itself a propaganda message, trying to persuade everyone that “fake news” caused a different election outcome than the media “elite” expected.
This time, it’s centered on “fake news”—the idea that Trump’s victory can be chalked up to phony right-wing news websites, which allegedly had an outsize presence on social media networks in the run-up to the election. As with “Bregret,” the obvious implication is that the election of Donald Trump is not a real rejection of the cosmopolitan establishment, because if voters actually understood their options, they would not have elected him.
In other words, we blame the voters for being dumb, but at least it was not their fault – it was the fault of “fake news”.
A major flaw in this assertion is that at least some of the partisan web sites are run by people who hold opposing political views to their target audience. To them, it is just a business. Paul Horner, for example, specifically targeted conservatives – strictly for business reasons, not ideology. On the other hand, conservative commentator Laura Ingraham owns one of the right wing fake news publishers and is under consideration for a White House job. On the flip side, the largest fake news publisher is the left wing Occupy Democrats for profit social media publisher.
Rather than attempt to understand why voters made the decisions they made, rather than understand why the media was out of touch, rather than examine why the pollsters were wrong – the new propaganda meme is to blame “fake news” as the culprit.
The media’s explanation du jour is that “fake news” spun the election (which assumes fake news was a right wing phenomena, in spite of tremendous left wing fake news too) and that Russia (identify a bogeyman) was behind this fake news (in spite of substantial evidence that fake news is the work of entrepreneurs in the U.S. and outside the U.S. seeking profits, not agendas):
What could be a time for useful introspection is regressing back to where we started – with fake stories about fake news, in an attempt to explain why the media were out of touch. The real world data is wrong and our original model was obviously correct, so the spin goes! By targeting Russia, the media pundits create a “bogeyman” (a classic propaganda technique) on which to focus the target’s attention.
“…viewers think that staying informed and ‘reacting’ to the news is a form of participation (helping their favorite causes, teams or stocks) and elites have taken it for granted that media narratives are a window into the people’s will. But is it? When news sites deliberately create and cultivate outrage to get clicks, is what people are pissed off about online really an indicator of anything? Do you really care about half the things you share on social media…?”
Media and social media messaging have devolved in to emotionally laden, outrage culture designed to sell eye balls to advertisers. Most of it is pure bull shit carefully crafted to manipulate your emotions for profit.
Our analysis of three hyperpartisan right-wing Facebook pages found that 38% of all posts were either a mixture of true and false or mostly false, compared to 19% of posts from three hyperpartisan left-wing pages that were either a mixture of true and false or mostly false. The right-wing pages are among the forces — perhaps as potent as the cable news shows that have gotten far more attention — that helped fuel the rise of Donald Trump. These pages, with names such as Eagle Rising on the right and Occupy Democrats on the left, represent a new and powerful force in American politics and society. Many have quickly grown to be as large as — and often much larger than — mainstream political news pages.
Occupy Democrats has nearly 4 1/2 million “subscribers” on Facebook alone. Eagle Rising has a mere 655,000 page likes.
Look at those numbers – literally millions of people voluntarily subscribe to fake propaganda messaging, and then voluntarily share those fake items on their own FB pages, such that individual posts are exposed to tens of millions of potential “targets”.