Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download propaganda techniques - Highline Public Schools
Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Recognizing Propaganda Ask yourself the following questions regarding EACH of these propaganda techniques: Technique #1: Word Games Type Name Calling Glittering Generalities Stereotypes/Euphemisms Technique #2: False Connections Type Transfer • • • Testimonial • • • • Card Stacking • • • Questions What does the name mean? Does the idea in question have a connection with the real meaning of the name? Is the idea being dismissed by giving it a name I don’t like? Ignoring the name, what are the merits of the idea itself? What does the value word really mean? Does the idea presented have a legitimate connection with the real meaning of the value word? Is an idea being “sold” to me by connecting it to a word I like? What are the merits of the idea without the value word? What does the stereotype or euphemism really mean? What does the stereotype or euphemism attempt to hide or cover up? What emotional message does the word create? Does the idea presented have merit without the stereotype or euphemism? Questions What is the proposal of the speaker? What is the meaning of the thing the propagandist is trying to transfer onto the original image? Is there any legitimate connection between these two ideas? What are the merits of the core idea on its own? Who or what is quoted in the testimonial? Why should we regard this person (organization or publication) as having expert knowledge or trustworthy information on the subject? What does the idea amount to on its own merits, without the benefit of the testimonial? Are facts being distorted or omitted? What other arguments exist to support these assertions? What do you want to know about this issue that isn’t being said? Technique #3: Special Appeals Type Plain Folks • • Bandwagon • • • Assertion Fear • • • • • • • • • Questions What are the propagandist’s ideas worth when divorced from his/her personality? What could he/she be trying to cover up with the “plain folks” approach? What are the facts? What are the propagandist’s ideas worth when divorced from his/her personality? What could he/she be trying to cover up with the “plain folks” approach? What are the facts? What assertion is being made? What evidence is provided for this assertion? Is an explanation given for this assertion? Is speaker expecting the assertion to be accepted without evidence? Is the speaker exaggerating the fear or threat in order to obtain support? How legitimate is the fear the speaker is provoking? Will performing the recommended action actually reduce the supposed threat? Ignoring the presumed threat, what are the merits of the speaker’s proposal? Technique #4: Logical Fallacy Type Unwarranted Extrapolation • • • Bad Logic • • • Lesser of Two Evils • • • Questions Is there enough evidence to support the speaker’s predictions? Can I think of other ways that things might turn out? If there are many ways things might turn out, why is the speaker painting such an extreme picture? What is the basic premises of the argument presented? What connections are being made? – Are these relationships reasonable? Are the conclusions of the argument realistic and reasonable? What are the two “evils” being proposed? Are there other options than what is being presented? What consequences might result from taking the “lesser” evil?
