Propaganda theory. Chapter 5

Two methods that can be used in propaganda or PR to form or to change the public view on particular events, services or products.

Sloth or overprotected? A collage from the Seven deadly sins series by Sabine Pigalle

In the previous four chapters I’ve already talked about the psychology behind propaganda techniques, approach to content writing , to strategy, and some of the tactical choices for public opinion control during crisis. Now I want to look into a couple of methods that can help you either recognise the manipulation with public opinion or to use them for your own purposes in PR or advertising or propaganda, for a good reason, I hope. 

“The witnesses”

Last time I wrote about the “presence effect” as a tactical move that can be used to make up the public opinion. It’s very effective because it addresses our emotional experience and allows us to project it to the processes happening. That can be about a joyful journey to an exotic resort or about despair and horrors of war. In the media there’s a genre that serves the purpose - reportage. In advertising its imitation is used to point out the advantages of the service or a product by showing the witnesses’ reaction, by sharing their opinions. 

But in propaganda that is one of the most manipulated techniques that can make the difference in the going on campaign and really shape the target audience’s reaction on particular subjects or issues for many many years. That’s what creates the image of the countries, the particular movements or political initiatives. Everything that has a “human face” is easier to frame and use to change the current frame towards previously unacceptable values and attitudes.

Witnesses’ statements that contribute to the wanted policy are priceless. We can all remember how public attitude was developed in the COVID year - from complete unacceptance of the idea of self-isolation, the danger of spreading the virus just by staying next to each other in the shop and overall vaccination to the anticipation of the vaccines and the movements against public gathering and for the prolongation of the mask regimes.

In propaganda witnesses can be real or can be staged. The difference is only in the amount of truth behind their reports. No matter how good the actor plays their role, they can’t deliver the same level of trust as a real person that believes and spreads the facts they’ve seen. 

You may ask, what is the problem with showing the real facts to the public? Isn’t it exactly the purpose of the media?

It surely is. But in a good editorial materials the reader or the observer will have an opportunity to look at the subject from different angles, while when media is used only as a propaganda platform, there’s only one side of experience prevails.