Alternative media training (On Propaganda)

In the following section, we will explore different theories explaining how media influence collective behavior:

1. Bullet Theory (Hypodermic Needle Theory)

The "bullet theory" suggests that mass communication systems effectively mobilize large groups of individuals, particularly when these individuals lack clearly defined viewpoints, cohesive communities, or the ability to organize counter-hegemonic narratives. During the Cold War, for instance, propaganda successfully influenced public opinion, keeping populations aligned with government-sanctioned beliefs.

2. Propaganda and the Acceptance of War

Historically, propaganda has rapidly convinced populations to accept war as inevitable—this occurred notably before the First World War and continues today. It has also been instrumental in facilitating some of the worst atrocities in history, such as the Holocaust. Propaganda often prioritizes managing public attention rather than presenting factual information. It simplifies complex issues by constructing clear, singular enemies, directing public focus effectively toward targeted groups. This strategy involves using terms and concepts that facilitate easy labeling and marginalization of perceived enemies.

In response to criticism, propagandists often employ diversion tactics, shifting attention away from valid critiques toward the alleged faults or threats posed by the "other."

3. Information Overload and Selective Visibility

Propagandists disseminate numerous lies and half-truths, making it nearly impossible for opponents to fact-check and refute every falsehood thoroughly. Additionally, they strategically render positive actions or achievements of adversaries invisible, particularly regarding left-leaning governments or political organizations. This tactic fosters the perception that such governments are ineffective, obscuring the importance of political organization as a means of achieving meaningful social change.

Ultimately, propagandists are not primarily interested in truth but rather in appearing credible. Their communication aims to seem truthful to the audience, even when it is not.

4. False unanimity, the creation of boubbles

There is an attempt to present there is consensus, even where there is not, so people feel that they are the minority when the ideas are much less commonly accepted as it is pretended.

This has been used to spread feelings against minority groups, or very problematic traditions like bull fighting, or to support the monarchy in Spain.

The capacity of propaganda to affect people will depend on  several factors:

• the self steem of the subjects
• under which circumstances the information is given
• economic harshness

It is important to understand that communication must be analyzed in all its complexity. This includes differentiating the capacity of specific channels, messages, and audiences to trigger particular behaviors within the context of a propaganda campaign. Individual psychology and broader social context are key to understanding how certain messages influence people’s perspectives.

It is also worth noting that, given the historical legacy of manipulation, even highly effective communication may only produce a small shift in voting behavior. This highlights how difficult real change can be to achieve. The key question is whether this slow pace of change can be applied to specific issues, especially considering that voting is a far more collective process than previously assumed. Social context plays a crucial role in shaping people's openness to changing their views.

I'm reflecting on what we can take away from all this. On one hand, we are witnessing—and even experiencing firsthand—the strength of propaganda. But on the other, we're also discovering its limitations, especially when strong social norms and ideological bubbles come into play, restricting the potential for political change.

So the question is: how can we, on the left, apply these lessons to transform our communication strategies? How can we work toward building lasting hegemonic change without resorting to manipulation or unethical tactics?

Concluding remarks

Propaganda has worked in the past and will continue to work—especially within fragmented groups—when applied strategically and in ways known to be effective.

Key insights include:

• Use fear wisely. Fear can prompt immediate reactions but tends to lose effectiveness over time—particularly with issues like climate change, where sustained fear may lead to apathy.

• Be perceived as a reliable source. Establishing credibility through transparent and consistent sourcing is essential for building trust.

• Ensure the information is relevant and engaging. Avoid being overtly political when addressing depoliticized or disengaged audiences; instead, connect with their lived experiences.

• Leverage shared understanding. Use common ground as a foundation for introducing more radical ideas, reducing resistance and increasing receptiveness.

• Avoid triggering defensiveness. Communication should not feel like persuasion or imposition, as this often provokes resistance. Instead, it should feel like a shared reflection or dialogue.

This can be summarized as follows:

We tend to overestimate what can be achieved in the short term and underestimate what is possible in the long term.

Moreover, collective spaces can serve as fertile ground for the introduction of radical ideas. This is why localized community-building efforts are often more effective in the long term than purely mass media campaigns.