This article examines the origins of propaganda by analyzing the historical evolution of the concept, and contemporary techniques for manipulating public opinion. Particular attention is paid to the problem of defining propaganda, which has long remained a subject of debate in academic circles. It is shown that the main difficulty lies in distinguishing propaganda from other forms of persuasive communication, such as advertising, political lobbying, and public relations, which may employ similar methods of psychological and rhetorical influence. The study explores both critical and pragmatic interpretations, within which propaganda is understood either as a tool for manipulation, the imposition of opinions and perceptions, and control over narratives, or as an inalienable feature in the functioning of contemporary society and the political system. Specific focus is placed on the relationship between propaganda and the concepts of ‘soft power’ and ‘public consensus engineering’. Finally, most relevant techniques and methods for influencing public and personal opinion are studied, including the replacement of concepts, appeals to emotions, to authority, and to the majority, the use of stereotypes and labels, as well as the de-contextualization of information. The conclusion is drawn that propaganda is a sophisticated and multifaceted phenomenon requiring further comprehensive interdisciplinary studying, as the means of disguising propagandistic techniques (enhanced with digital technologies, social media, and algorithms) continue to evolve.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stovpets et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: