Only one side of anything being propagandised is effectively a non-existent concept. Propaganda is simply promotion of an opposing idea. People tend to equate the term with outright lies, but propaganda is far more often truth that’s specifically chosen to influence opinions in a certain direction.
The very notion of “only one side” propagandising is, in and of itself, propaganda (and in my opinion, a very common form of it, one you’ll find much more egregiously used in US politics). I was simply pointing out the irony without meaning any implications to either side.
Ok, I understand that. Surely you can agree that one side has a significant propaganda advantage? There’s a massive difference between splashing news across every Western Source, and dropping a propaganda video on telegram.
I think I get what you’re communicating, no worries! I didn’t understand what aelwero was saying.
Only one side of anything being propagandised is effectively a non-existent concept. Propaganda is simply promotion of an opposing idea. People tend to equate the term with outright lies, but propaganda is far more often truth that’s specifically chosen to influence opinions in a certain direction.
The very notion of “only one side” propagandising is, in and of itself, propaganda (and in my opinion, a very common form of it, one you’ll find much more egregiously used in US politics). I was simply pointing out the irony without meaning any implications to either side.
You know what? No.
OP says specifically that only one side uses “atrocity propaganda”.
Only one side is here, so fuck off with the both sides bullshit.
Ok, I understand that. Surely you can agree that one side has a significant propaganda advantage? There’s a massive difference between splashing news across every Western Source, and dropping a propaganda video on telegram.
haha, he was asking if i meant that only one side uses (atrocity/war/… )propagaganda