How is democracy concerned with propaganda and disinformation?
"Democratic governments must tolerate a free press, regardless of criticism. It is a measure of their democracy." (
Disinformation is not at all the contrary of democracy.
The idea that democracy means a system to disclose disinformation or even to be the opposite of disinformation, is itself a disinforming message, because democracies themselves frequently use that tool, if it serves their purposes, like in war, economy and elections.
No (contemporary) political/ideological system is safe from propaganda and disinformation. All of them are using them if it seems necessary and appropriate. Democracy, always pretending to be the most liberal and most human system, is no exception.
For Military disinformation/propaganda see:
TEXTBLOCK 1/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658545
In the USSR manipulation of the population was one of the big tasks for the government. But manipulation got even further, for example when the English expert John Maynard came back from a visit in the Ukraine in 1933, he told about poverty but not about hunger. In fact he did not have seen anyone starving as the Soviets just showed him the things they wanted to show. Maynard was involuntarily used to spread Soviet disinformation. As a person from the West, the Western media tended to believe him.
A nearly humorous variety of disinformation was ordered by
TEXTBLOCK 2/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658512
Disinformation might also be welcome:
While the ones criticize disinformation and try to fight against it, others do nothing against it. And others again seem to enjoy getting disinformed. How this works? It is the result of a society that does no longer want to live under the pressure of doing and hearing everything at the same time. Acceleration of life seems too fast. The only way to get out is to refuse certain things/messages/truths. Receiving disinformation can be more comfortable than getting so-called correct information. This is especially true for the readers of the yellow press. The yellow press lives on that perspective, the commodity of getting light news, mostly wrong news and lies - but those being wrapped up in nice pictures and stories about those who seem to reign the world.
The aim is the escape out of reality.
A surplus of information, information terror, can produce disinformation. The profusion can get exploited for disinformation. This works in that way that in the mass of information the individual has no possibility to get an overview of the different ways of thinking and to reach a stage of objective knowledge.
TEXTBLOCK 3/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658602
With the invention of the printing press and - as a consequence - the distribution of information in masses (by then already mostly in the shape of propaganda), propaganda could change its methods. It could not only be produced but also reproduced and therefore spread widely.
The Protestant Reformation profited by this. The idea of translating the Bible into local languages was successful, because it got possible for many people to get a Bible, as books no longer were affordable only for the nobles and the Church.
Royalty and the Courts realized that prestige asked for propaganda and that it was impossible to reign over the people if their mood turned against the king. This gave the impetus for acting. Pamphlets were used for spreading royal messages; like the so-called "mazarinades" (
When - in
From that time on propaganda and manipulation were carried out for the most different political ideas and nearly without frontiers. Censorship - a part of disinformation - seems to have been the only barrier then. Sometimes even the source of a message kept hidden, which was part of the disinformation process. It is easier to spread ideas against somebody if the own name is kept hidden; and speaking out some kind of laudation that the own party is better without mentioning that it was oneself who spread it and therefore claim that it was someone else who praised the very idea.
TEXTBLOCK 4/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611661/100438658462