Abstract
AbstractHow does propaganda differ from the legitimate persuasive practices that animate a healthy democracy? The question is especially salient as digital technologies facilitate new modes of political persuasion and the public square saturates with information factual and fabricated alike. In answer, we propose a typology based on the rhetorical strategies that propaganda and its legitimate counterpart each employ. We argue that the point of contrast between the phenomena turns on two key features: whether the rhetorical strategy sufficiently engages our deliberative capacities, and whether it runs counter to our epistemic interests. While in practice the boundary between the concepts is not always sharp, the account identifies a set of conceptual tools that help better frame and come to grips with propaganda and legitimate political persuasion in an information-dense and increasingly complex media landscape.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science
Reference43 articles.
1. How Propaganda Became Public Relations
2. Valverde, M. (2020). ‘Fact-Checking Whether Biden Called Trump ‘Xenophobic’ for Restrictions on Travel from China.’ PolitiFact, 27 March. PolitiFact | Fact-checking whether Biden called Trump ‘xenophobic’ for restrictions on travel from China.
3. Making Sense of Spin
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. The defectiveness of propaganda;The Philosophical Quarterly;2024-05-16