Typology of Propaganda Techniques

Typology of propaganda techniques used in this challenge

Group 1: Appeal to Commonality 

Corresponding mostly to the logos principle in a constructive manner, this group encompasses techniques that often exhibit patriotism or self-praise based on fallacious reasoning and/or emotions. Therefore, pathos is also present. The author often appeals to shared experiences, such as national feelings or common values. The tweets containing these techniques usually inform about the justness and relevance of a government’s actions, construct a positive image of the country, and frequently express the courage, heroism and morality of its members. Within this group we include: 

• Ad populum / Ad antiquitatem: appealing to the will of the majority, to the tradition, to the history of a community to support an argument (Weston, 2018: 88; Van Vleet, 2011)  

  • • • • We know what we are doing. The most important factor for Chinese achievement is that we are adaptive to the changing world. That's the legacy of our ancestors. That's Chinese wisdom.  Western people need to seriously learn Chinese history and culture to understand China. 

• Flag Waving. Hobbs & McGee (2008) first referred to this technique as the exhibition of symbol to gain credit and persuade. Da San Martino et al (2019) further elaborate that it consisted in playing on strong national feeling to justify or promote an action or idea. This task adopts a wider concept that includes playing on strong national feelings, worshiping a symbol or hero, hyperbolic praise, and portraying oneself as a savior of your community.    

• #OTD in 1799 Russian forces under Field-Marshal Alexander #Suvorov won one of the most dramatic & iconic battles in history “the Battle of the Bridge”. Victory was achieved against all odds under impossible conditions & impassable terrain, yet... #RussiansDidIt 

Group 2: Discrediting the Opponent

Corresponding mostly to the logos principle in a destructive manner, this group contains techniques that predominantly show hostility towards a third party (such as a political adversary) through fallacious reasoning and/or negative emotions (therefore the pathos is also present). Tweets with these techniques often build the image of a hostile adversary, delegitimize its actions or ideas and undermine alternative perspectives. This group contains:  

• Name Calling / Labelling. Pejoratively labelling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, or finds undesirable (Da San Martino et al, 2019; Miller, 1939).  

  • • • I called the politicization of the China Virus by the Radical Left Democrats a Hoax, not the China Virus itself. Everybody knows this except for the Fake and very Corrupt Media!

• Undiplomatic Assertiveness / Whataboutism. This is a combination of techniques that attempt to discredit an opponent's behavior by depicting it as hostile, cynical or unethical, occasionally deviating the attention from one’s own behavior. It is based on the aggressivity shown by certain diplomats on Twitter (see, for example,  d’Hooghe, 2021), on Johnson-Cartee & Copeland (2004), that anticipate that vilifying the enemy is a likely manifestation of diplomatic propaganda, and on a wider conceptualization of the traditional concept of whataboutism, as employed in Da San Martino et al (2019). Through Undiplomatic Assertiveness / Whataboutism, it is expected to notice systematic hostility against rivals, which may indicate propagandistic endeavors to flood the zone: trying to manipulate audiences’ perceptions through similar, cumulative messages that intend to direct or distract the attention (d’Hooghe, 2021; Starr, 2020). DIPROMATS 2024 includes within this technique other similar techniques from the 2023's edition, namely: Absurdity Appeal, Demonization, Propaganda Sliging and Scapegoating.  

  • • • Western elites and Mainstream Media are readily shouting the name of #Navalny-the-crook who faces charges of embezzlement, but shyfully forget to mention their political prisoner Julian #Assange.   

      • It is not China but the US that is militarizing and stoking tensions in the South China Sea. The US should stop its provocative military actions that endangered regional peace and stability.  

• • • • • For years Fake stories and investigations, then the phony Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX, next Ukraine and the failed Impeachment, now the crummy Atlantic Magazine’s MADE UP STORY, and lastly, the political hit job by rapidly fading Bob Woodward and his boring book. It never ends! 

• Appeal to Fear. Seeking to discredit or undermine the reputation of a rival by instilling anxiety and/or panic in the population about hypothetical situations it may provoke. This technique may also aim to dissuade an opponent from doing something, fearing the consequences it will have in the future.  (Johnson-Cartee & Copeland, 2004). 

  • • • • We won't allow any impediment to China's reunification or interference in domestic affairs under the pretext of Taiwan. Those harming our core interests will meet countermeasures & get severe punishment from history if going further astray. 

• Doubt. Casting doubt on the credibility or honesty of the intentions, actions or capacities of someone (Da San Martino et al, 2019) 

  • • • • Soul-searching questions for Navarro: What's behind the closure of the biolab at Fort Detrick? What's the connection between the closure, vaping lung disease, the flu & #COVID19? When will US invite experts to investigate the origin of the virus in US?

Group 3: Loaded Language  

This group mostly refers to pathos. Propaganda does not just seek to convince and persuade through what is logical but seeks to move us physically (change our behaviors, encourage us to spread the message, etc) by moving us first emotionally (Miles, 2019). Loaded Language involves hyperbolic language, evocative metaphors and specific words and phrases with strong emotional implications (either positive or negative) to influence an audience.  Our notion of loaded language is wider than the one employed by Da San Martino et al (2019) , as we also include what these authors consider exaggerations 

• #OTD in 1699, ‘Peter The Great ordered #StAndrew’s flag to be used as Russian naval ensign. In 1992, #Russian Navy raised the glorious banner on board its battleships again   

References:

Bennett, G.  (2019). “Propaganda and Disinformation: How an historical Perspective Aids Critical Response Development”. in Baines, P., O’Shaughnessy, N., Snow, N. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Propaganda. SAGE. 244-260.  

Bjola, C. & Pamment, J. (2019) Countering online propaganda and extremism. The dark side of digital diplomacy. Routledge.  

Bjola, C. (2018). Digital diplomacy and impression management. Presentation, Canada House, London, as cited in Manor (2019) The Digitalization of Public Diplomacy. Palgrave McMillian.  

Colley, T. (2020). Strategic narratives and war propaganda. En P. Baines, N. O’Shaughnessy, & N. Snow (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of propaganda (pp. 491-508). SAGE.  

d’Hooghe, I. (2021). China’s Public Diplomacy Goes Political, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 16(2-3), 299-322. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10067 

Da San Martino, G. Nakov, M., Piskorski, J. Stefanovitch, N. (2022). “Detecting the genre, the framing, and the persuasion techniques in online news in a multi-lingual setup”. Task for the Semeval research workshop 2023. https://propaganda.math.unipd.it/semeval2023task3/  

Da San Martino, G. Yu, S., Barrón-Cedeño, A. Petrov, R and Nakov, P. (2019). Fine-Grained Analysis of Propaganda in News Article. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pages 5636–5646, Hong Kong, China. Association for Computational Linguistics.  

Davis, J. E. (s. f.). Davis, J., (Ed.). (2002). Narrative and social movements: The power of stories. In Stories of change: Narratives and social Movements (pp. 3–31). Albany: State University of New York Press.  

Hedling, E. (2020). Storytelling in EU public diplomacy: Reputation management and recognition of success. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 16(2), 143-152. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-019-00138-2  

Hobbs, R. and Mcgee, S. 2008. Teaching about propaganda: An examination of the historical roots of media literacy. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 6(62):56–67.  

Johnson-Cartee, K., Copeland, G. (2004). Strategic Political Communication: Rethinking Social Influence, Persuasion, and Propaganda. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.   

Lefebvre, V.A., & Lefebvre, V.D. (1984). Reflexive Control: The Soviet Concept of Influencing an Adversary’s Decision-Making Process. Englewood: Science Applications  

Miles, C, (2019). “Rhetorical Methods and Metaphor in Viral Propaganda” in Baines, P., O’Shaughnessy, N., Snow, N. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Propaganda. SAGE. 244-260 154-170.  

Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 

Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (Eds.). (2017). Forging the world: Strategic narratives and international relations. University of Michigan Press. 

Moral, P. (2023a). A tale of heroes and villains: Russia’s strategic narratives on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2023.2182862 

Moral, P. (2023b). Restoring reputation through digital diplomacy: The European Union’s strategic narratives on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic. Communication & Society, 241-269. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.36.2.241-269 

Moral, P., & Marco, G. (2023). Assembling stories tweet by tweet: Strategic narratives from Chinese authorities on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic. Communication Research and Practice, 9(2), 159-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2023.2188699 

Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic Narratives. Communication Power and the New World Order. Routledge.    

Paul, C., Matthews, M. (2019). “Defending Against Russian Propaganda”, in Baines, P., O’Shaughnessy, N., Snow, N. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Propaganda. SAGE. 286-302  

Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Sage Publications.  

Sparkes-Vian, C. (2019). Digital Propaganda: The Tyranny of Ignorance. Critical Sociology, 45(3), 393-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920517754241 

Starr, P. (2020). The Flooded Zone: How We Became More Vulnerable to Disinformation in the Digital Era. In W. Bennett & S. Livingston (Eds.), The Disinformation Age (SSRC Anxieties of Democracy, pp. 67-92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108914628.003 

  Van Vleet, J. (2011). Informal Logical Fallacies. A brief guide. University Press of America.  

Wanless, A., Berk, M. (2019). The Audience is the Amplifier: Participatory Propaganda. The SAGE Handbook of Propaganda. SAGE. 85-104 154-170.  

Weston, A. (2018). A Rulebook for Arguments (5th Edition). Hackett Publishing Company