What are the types of Propaganda?

Identifying propaganda is definitely a problem. The primary difficulties possess involved differentiating propaganda from other styles of persuasion, and avoiding a biased approach. Richard Alan Nelson offers a definition of the word: “Propaganda is neutrally thought as a systematic type of purposeful persuasion that attempts to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions, and actions of specified target audiences for ideological, political or commercial purposes through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which might or might not be factual) via mass and direct media channels.” This is targets the communicative procedure involved – or even more precisely, on the goal of the process, and invite “propaganda” to be looked at objectively and interpreted as positive or negative behavior based on the perspective of the viewer or listener.

Source: gabriel bryan

Propaganda poster in North Korean primary school

According to historian Zbyněk Zeman, propaganda is thought as either white, grey or black. White propaganda openly discloses its source and intent. Grey propaganda comes with an ambiguous or non-disclosed source or intent. Black propaganda purports to become released by the enemy or some organization besides its actual origins (equate to black operation, a kind of clandestine operation where the identity of the sponsoring government is hidden). In scale, these various kinds of propaganda may also be defined by the potential of true and correct information to contend with the propaganda. For instance, opposition to white propaganda is often readily found and could slightly discredit the propaganda source. Opposition to grey propaganda, when revealed (often by an internal source), may create some degree of public outcry. Opposition to black propaganda is often unavailable and could be dangerous to reveal, because public cognizance of black propaganda tactics and sources would undermine or backfire the campaign the black propagandist supported.

Propaganda poster in North Korea

The propagandist seeks to improve just how people understand a concern or situation for the intended purpose of changing their actions and expectations with techniques that are desirable to the interest group. Propaganda, in this sense, serves as a corollary to censorship where the same purpose is usually achieved, not by filling people’s minds with approved information, but by preventing folks from being met with opposing factors of view. What sets propaganda aside from other forms of advocacy is definitely the willingness of the propagandist to change people’s understanding through deception and confusion rather than persuasion and understanding. The leaders of an organization know the information to be one sided or untrue, but this may not end up being true for the rank and file members who help to disseminate the propaganda.


Propaganda was often used to influence opinions and beliefs on religious issues, particularly through the split between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches.

More good religious roots of the word, propaganda can be used widely in the debates about new religious movements (NRMs), both by individuals who defend them and by individuals who oppose them. The latter pejoratively call these NRMs cults. Anti-cult activists and Christian countercult activists accuse the leaders of what they consider cults of using propaganda extensively to recruit followers and keep them. Some social scientists, like the late Jeffrey Hadden, and CESNUR affiliated scholars accuse ex-members of “cults” and the anti-cult movement of earning these unusual religious movements look bad without sufficient reasons.


Post-World War II using the term “propaganda” more typically identifies political or nationalist uses of the techniques or even to the promotion of a couple of ideas.

Propaganda is a robust weapon in war; it really is used to dehumanize and create hatred toward a supposed enemy, either external or internal, by creating a false image in your brain of soldiers and residents. This is often done through the use of derogatory or racist terms (e.g., the racist terms “Jap” and “gook” used during World War II and the Vietnam War, respectively), avoiding some words or language or by making allegations of enemy atrocities. Most propaganda efforts in wartime require the home population to feel the enemy has inflicted an injustice, which may be fictitious or may be based on facts (e.g., the sinking of the passenger ship RMS Lusitania by the German Navy in World War I). The home population must also believe that the cause of their nation in the war is just. In NATO doctrine, propaganda is defined as “Any information, ideas, doctrines, or special appeals disseminated to influence the opinion, emotions, attitudes, or behaviour of any specified group in order to benefit the sponsor either directly or indirectly.” Within this perspective, information provided does not need to be necessarily false, but must be instead relevant to specific goals of the “actor” or “system” that performs it.