Propoganda

Propaganda in the modern day is much more subtle and pervasive than the examples we associate with historical events like World War II. It is not only used by governments but by corporations, political parties, and media outlets, leveraging modern technology to shape public opinion.

While propaganda is typically viewed negatively, it can also be used for good when it promotes positive social change. This includes things like public health campaigns, environmental awareness, or human rights initiatives. Propaganda is effective at getting people on board with a cause and moving them quickly. An example of this would be the campaigns during the COVID-19 pandemic that encouraged safety precautions like mask use, social distancing, and vaccinations. The image below references positive propaganda related to COVID-19, drawing on the iconic WWII image of Rosie the Riveter.

However, modern propaganda can also have harmful effects. Misinformation (false or misleading information spread unintentionally) and disinformation (deliberately false information) are key tools in harmful propaganda. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, anti-vaccine propaganda falsely claimed vaccines were dangerous. This led to widespread vaccine hesitancy, contributing to the virus's continued spread and lead to preventable deaths.

At the same time, NetReputation notes that modern propaganda leverages social media algorithms to shape perceptions on a broader scale. This can bring people together around important causes like human rights, but it can also create division when misinformation spreads. The way it affects society really depends on how it’s used, highlighting just how powerful it can be in shaping our beliefs and actions.

Propaganda can affect different segments of society in distinct ways. One of these groups is the rich and poor. Rich individuals may be less influenced by economic scare tactics, while poorer populations might be more vulnerable to propaganda that exploits financial fears or job insecurity. Richer people are also more likely to be higher educated which can make them less susceptible to buying into negative propaganda. 

Older adults, especially those over 65, are more vulnerable to misinformation on social media. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, older Twitter users encountered more political fake news than younger users. A study by the National Library of Medicine found that this group not only saw more misinformation but also shared it more often. Factors such as cognitive decline, reduced media literacy, and a lack of familiarity with new digital tools all play a role in this heightened vulnerability.

Younger people, though more familiar with technology, face different challenges. They are often targeted by propaganda through memes, influencers, and viral content that appeals to emotions rather than facts. This makes it easier to influence opinions without them realizing they're seeing biased information. Studies also show that younger people may be less likely to critically assess the credibility of sources, especially when the content is shared by friends. Additionally, younger people may be more susceptible to emotionally charged content, such as memes or viral posts, which can easily sway opinions without strong evaluation​(American Psychological Association).

Another group is gender-targeted propaganda which can reinforce traditional stereotypes, influencing men and women differently. For example, research highlights how marketing often taps into distinct emotional triggers for each gender. According to an article from Optimonk, women are more likely to be influenced by emotionally driven messages and content focusing on community and relationships, whereas men tend to respond to messages emphasizing individualism and achievement. This dynamic can lead to the perpetuation of outdated gender norms, with propaganda aiming to reinforce traditional roles for women, such as homemaking, while men are targeted with messages promoting authority and success.

Propaganda also affects majority and minority groups differently, particularly in relation to sexual orientation. LGBTQ+ communities might face messages that undermine their rights or promote harmful stereotypes, while straight individuals often see narratives that reinforce traditional family roles. Majorities, such as heterosexuals or specific racial groups, are often targeted with content that reinforces their privileged status. In contrast, minorities often face propaganda that’s splitting or dehumanizing, pushing them further to the margins. Digital tactics like targeted ads and influencer campaigns really amplify these effects for both groups.

As a Jewish woman in the LGBTQ+ community, I have witnessed firsthand how propaganda can shape perceptions and experiences within my communities.

For instance, the phrase "From the river to the sea, Palestine should be free" has often been used in antisemitic contexts, implying the eradication of the Jewish state of Israel. While advocating for Palestinian statehood is not inherently antisemitic, calls for the destruction of Israel certainly are. This kind of phrasing can push hatred and division, contributing to a toxic environment for Jewish individuals. For more information click here.

Since the events of October 7th, there has been a staggering 337% increase in antisemitic incidents, fueled largely by negative propaganda and misinformation. I have personally observed a rise in hate speech online, even before Israel's military response.

Propaganda doesn’t just impact me; it also affects my family and friends, often filling us with fear and vulnerability. For my generation, the real challenge is dealing with a flood of misinformation that can widen divides and keep cycles of hate going.