Lasswell Propaganda Theory

Propaganda mechanism of action

The purpose of propaganda is to ensure the mobilization and consolidation of the masses around a single goal. However, Lasswell clarifies that this common goal is both specific for each social group and social layer - it is formulated in a variety of ways, each of which is designed for a special layer of the population. To ensure the active assistance of all, the propagandist must learn to turn “War into a procession into the promised land that is most attractive to each of the interested groups” ^[2] . Propaganda as the management of significant symbols suggests, according to G. Lasswell, the spread of primarily political myths and stereotypes.

A political myth is something that is not in doubt and therefore does not require proof. Lasswell believed that political myth is realized in political doctrines and ideologies. To demonstrate that propaganda appeals to both the mind and the feelings of the recipients, Lasswell introduces the concepts of “credits” and “Miranda” ^[3] .

• Credenda (trust) is a sphere of rational consciousness that is more in line with political doctrines; it includes charters, constitutions, declarations, treaties addressed to the mind and providing confidence in the authorities at a cognitive level.
• Miranda (mirage, supernatural) is a combination of rituals and symbols; it contains such communicative means as slogans, flag, anthem, leader (hero) of the movement, and is designed for emotional perception, for awakening feelings of loyalty.

According to Lasswell, through propaganda, political management of society is carried out, the language of power is realized. Moreover, the function of the language of power has rational goals and emotional effects ^[4] .

Lasswell argued that people should be gradually prepared to accept ideas and actions. The propaganda campaign should be long-term, based on a detailed strategy, in accordance with which it is necessary to gradually introduce and then cultivate new images and ideas. It is necessary to create symbols and develop in people associations between specific emotions and these symbols.

Advocacy and democracy

Most of what could be achieved before through violence and intimidation should be achieved today by bringing arguments and persuasion. Democracy proclaimed the dictatorship of chatter, and the technique that allows the dictator to be pointed is called propaganda ^[5] .

Original text

Most of that which formerly could be done by violence and intimidation must now be done by argument and persuasion. Democracy has proclaimed the dictatorship of palaver, and the technique of dictating to the dictator is named propaganda.

Lasswell proposed transferring control of propaganda through the media to a new elite, a scientific technocracy that will use knowledge for the good and ensure the stability of society.

War Propaganda

Lasswell's main work on this topic is the monograph “The Technique of Propaganda in the World War”, which analyzes the goals, objectives and strategies of propaganda in the First World War. On the example of military propaganda, conclusions are drawn about effective information impact technologies, working tools and methods of organizing propaganda activities ^[6] .

As a representative of Freudianism, Lasswell is convinced that the basic instincts are irrational and not subject to conscious control ^[7] . A critical situation, such as war, gives vent to primitive primitive instincts, and military propaganda is based on their mobilization. The higher the level of tension in society, the more primitive instincts are expressed in it, the more effective propaganda will work.

Lasswell believes that propaganda - the application of suggestion to both its own citizens and citizens of other countries - is one of the three instruments of the state to combat the enemy leading the war, along with military pressure and economic pressure. He identifies the following tasks of military propaganda: incite hatred of the enemy, maintain friendly relations with neutral states and allies, restore neutral states against the enemy, decompose the enemy and weaken the strength of enemy resistance ^[6] .

Lasswell believes that in order to mobilize the ideas and opinions required in a war, power over opinion should go into official hands. The reason for this is that the danger resulting from freedom of opinion is higher than that which could result from a distortion of these opinions.

Ethical Aspect

Lasswell sees propaganda as a tool that in itself cannot be considered either bad or good from an ethical point of view: it is detrimental to society not to use propaganda itself, but to broadcast and propagate ideas that are unfavorable for society. Propaganda as an attempt to change people's views is a type of weapon - more “economical” than traditional ones: it is “an instrument of total politics along with diplomacy, economic activities and the armed forces. Its goal is to save material costs for world domination ” ^[7] .

Lippman

W. Lippman agreed with Lasswell that the average person is not able to get an adequate idea of ​​the events that are taking place, and therefore believed that not everyone who lives in a democratic society is able to make the right decisions and have the right judgment. In this regard, contrary to libertarian theory, Lippman, like Lasswell, believed that the media should function under control. Lippman proposed the creation of a special body, which should carefully analyze the information and send it to the ruling elites, so that later it would inspire the public with the required picture of reality, thus “freeing” the average person from the need to delve into the wide variety of social problems ^[8] .

Dewey

D. Dewey agreed that the public was poorly versed in the real situation, but denied the idea that technocracy should influence the information disseminated and control the agenda. Instead, he believed, the media should teach a person to think critically. Dewey believed that the concepts of Lippman and Lasswell in vain reduce the role of the media to the role of external agents who manipulate stereotypes and emotions. The model of linear communication on which Lippman and Lasswell based their judgments also seemed to Dewey too primitive and not taking into account all the features of the process. Dewey advocated public education as the most effective means of protecting democracy from totalitarianism. Dewey gave the media a leading role in facilitating the process of public discussion, which he considered a crucial feature of a democratic society ^[9] , while Lasswell found the debate to be potentially dangerous to public order.

Lazersfeld and Klapper

Lasswell, studying propaganda, developed a linear model of communication that reflects his behaviorist approach: communication is presented as a simple effect of the communicator on the recipient, which acts as an object that responds to the received message. Thus, all of Lasswell's conclusions about the effects of propaganda are based on a model that was later recognized as incomplete. Communications research, such as P. Lazersfeld’s People’s Choice and D. Clapper's Mass Communication Effects, cast doubt on Lasswell’s thesis about the helplessness of the object of communication before the overwhelming influence of the media, which Lasswell takes for granted: Lazersfeld introduced the concept of a two-step flow of information according to which the media impact is mediated by small groups, in particular, the " opinion leaders ", and, on Lazersfeldu, mass communication rather is capable of either fixed e existing respondent conscious preferences or actualization of latent preferences, and only in very rare cases leads to a transition to the opposite position ^[10] . Clapper, in his book, claims that the objects of mass communication are selective and select only those media messages that correspond to their existing beliefs and views ^[11] .