Why is foreign* propaganda so unconvincing?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

*Foreign relative to where you're reading this obviously, this may be US centric. How is it possible that a great many people can be so competent at spotting and dismissing the propaganda of other countries, and at the same time be almost helpless in the face of their own domestic propaganda?



This is something I've be asking myself a lot lately with the hysteria over daesh, but also with Ukraine and Russia that I've encountered in real life over the last couple months. For the moment I feel that Russia tops the American fear chart even above daesh in spite of all their media savvy. So it sticks out to me that when anything pertaining to Putin or Russia's political system in general manages to pierce the American attention span, it's almost always dismissed for the farce that it inevitably is. For instance, no one in the US was dumb enough to believe that those green dudes in Crimea were anything other than Russian marines, or that their presence had anything to do with protecting the population from 'fascism'. No one found it confusing that the head of state was going on international tv and just straight lying about anything, it was perfectly natural to expect him to do that. With great damnation they all began denouncing this 'modern day land grab!' that Russia was committing, lamenting that such a thing was supposed to be a thing of the past! The outrage, ugh! Yet this same population gets itself lied into supporting almost any new idiotic land grab that comes along every 3 years or so, provided the announcement for it comes from the mouth of their own corrupt head of state. Some not-so-political friends of mine joked about the elections in North Korea; 99%, 100% of votes in favor of the ruling regime? Ha! Obviously a rigged sham of an election. Yet none of them could really piece together what it meant when shown that US elections also see 99% of votes cast in favor of the ruling regime. In an odd exchange with a conservative workmate of mine I had recently, he mentioned how inspiring the occupy central movement was. This same individual had been extremely hostile to occupy wall street, going as far as to say that the police should drop napalm on the park...He had bragged about harassing people at the local encampment here.


What causes this situation? Is it simple nationalism? If one could somehow make these people live a day as a Russian or an Iraqi, could they suddenly recognize all the lies they believe for what they are, or is it something deeper and more conscious? How willing are we to believe facts and stories, even when we know for sure that they are lies?

[Illegalitarian]

It's certainly part nationalism.

military expansionism and atrocity is above us, we're a fine nation would never stoop so low. Why, if we were truly doing such things, it would be all over the news!

But ignorance is the mother of nationalism, I would say. Or at least, the creepy uncle. If these people were to take anything more than an elementary interest in history and politics and scratched just below the surface, they would either be forced to come to the same conclusions we have or dismiss everything but their own narrow worldview as propaganda, which is a bit hard to do even for the most ardent conservative.

[The Intransigent Faction]

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." - George Orwell

There's plenty of research and writing out there on this topic. Say what you will about Noam Chomsky, but he's written some great stuff on this issue. When the national media ignores American atrocities or British atrocities and is inundated with messages of American or British exceptionalism, for example, combined with demonization of foreigners, is it really that hard to understand how "foreign propaganda" is so quickly dismissed (indeed, as the distortions in domestic propaganda are ignored, the grains of truth in foreign propaganda are also ignored)?

Propaganda isn't just about saying "We're exceptional", it's about saying "They're dangerous and deceptive".

As for how to combat it, well, pointing out hypocrisy is important, and if people plug their ears and ignore that hypocrisy, beats me! Saying foreign media is full of shit, though, shouldn't preclude saying local media is full of shit, and vice versa. Sometimes, also, people who aren't sure of what to believe might default toward believing domestic rather than foreign propaganda simply because it fits with everything else they've been taught or the attitudes of others around them.

Simply put, the effectiveness of propaganda directed mainly at people in states with certain specific conditions (local populations) won't usually translate into effectiveness on those in different states with different specific conditions (foreign populations), as a general rule. Of course, as an exception, sometimes foreign propaganda might have a certain appeal to marginalized groups in an "enemy state", but not always.

[Rad]

It's not like people do not know better. It is called attachment. We don't normally want to believe the worst about the people we are attached to - parents, siblings, spouse, friends, etc. Even if there is a lot of evidence against them, we dont want to believe. So if we are attached to country, the same logic would apply.

[John Nada]

It's called psy-ops. There's whole parts of the military and police dedicated to it. They do everything from handing out leaflets to false-flags. A combination of many things are used to build up a narrative and affect the people's perception, both friend and foe. All countries do it, but the US is one of the best at it, having cultural hegemony.

Probably the reason why, say DPRK's, propaganda seems so awkward is one's country might not be the target audience. Then there's translation issues. Also a rival may already have prepared counter-propaganda.

How to counter this, I don't know. Trying to get both sides doesn't mean the truth is in the middle. They've thought of that beforehand, and will mix in lies and omission, with some of the truth.

[consuming negativity]

people see what they want to see

propaganda just reinforces what people want to believe; that their side is good and that the other side is bad

nobody actually believes the propaganda unless they're particularly stupid, but they still want to believe that their side is the more moral one and so they'll find a middle ground wherein foreign propaganda is ridiculous and domestic propaganda is overinflated but better

the entire point of propaganda is playing into shit; you don't use propaganda to convince someone of something, you use it to rally the masses around a cause they already want to believe in

[John Nada]

people see what they want to seePeople see what's real. How they perceive it is determined by their relations to the environment and the superstructure of society.
propaganda just reinforces what people want to believe; that their side is good and that the other side is badNot necessarily. Propaganda could try to convince them both sides are bad, good, neutral and everything in between. Or it could make them think multiple sides are one, or one side is many. It's an appeal to what they could believe.
nobody actually believes the propaganda unless they're particularly stupid, but they still want to believe that their side is the more moral one and so they'll find a middle ground wherein foreign propaganda is ridiculous and domestic propaganda is overinflated but betterVery smart people can fall for propaganda. Dumb people can see through it. A "middle ground", "foreign" and "domestic" can be part of the propaganda, and may not be a fact that's favorable. Domestic propaganda can be ridiculous, and foreign inflated but better. Or it can be exaggerated and ridiculous, or inflated and better. If it's particularly bad it could be a lack of understanding of the target audiences' relations in their lives. It could also be intentionally bad to create confusion or deception. All can and are used together on purpose to effect the superstructure.
the entire point of propaganda is playing into shit; you don't use propaganda to convince someone of something, you use it to rally the masses around a cause they already want to believe inIt might not be shit, and can convince them to buy into something they don't believe in. It can also be used to give them the truth, lies or a mixture of both.

Propaganda need not be just ideas or discussion. It can also involve manipulation of their environment and relations to it. Think about it. If you and everyone you know has always been well-fed, could you know what it's like to starve? If you always lived in the dark, what is light? If you've been in a cage your whole life, could you know what freedom is? If one person says the ocean's black and another says it white, does that mean it's gray? There is an objective reality with facts, regardless of one's perception. But social relations are real, and can be manipulated to influence actions. Billions are spent on PR, advertizing and propaganda for a reason.

[OzymandiasX]

And of course the media in the states came out and said that it was a farce.

We are told what to believe. We like to perceive our peers as though they are cognizant rational beings, and a certain percentage of the people definitely are, but they are a minor portion of the population. The vast majority is represented in the framework of very predictable conventional thought.

And this thought is very easily swayed through propaganda. And the propaganda told us that Russia is an imperialistic empire, as their propaganda tells their people that the U.S. is an imperialistic empire (Russia Today)