Listen to the article
In a groundbreaking study examining the effectiveness of authoritarian-style propaganda in democratic settings, researchers have uncovered compelling evidence that “hard propaganda” techniques can successfully project strength even in established democracies like the United States.
The research, conducted by Philipp M. Lutscher of the University of Oslo and Karsten Donnay from the University of Zurich, challenges conventional assumptions about the limitations of heavy-handed visual propaganda outside authoritarian regimes. Their findings suggest both concerning implications for democratic norms and evolving dynamics in politically polarized societies.
The study focused specifically on the Trump administration’s use of overt visual propaganda during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests—a rare instance of authoritarian-style messaging deployed within a democratic context. Between June 12-16, 2020, at the height of nationwide demonstrations, the researchers conducted a preregistered online survey exposing participants from across the political spectrum to randomized pairs of real-world propaganda images.
“Hard propaganda is a well-documented tool in authoritarian countries where governments regularly employ overt, heavy-handed visual messaging to signal regime strength and deter protests,” explained Lutscher. “What we wanted to understand was whether these techniques could work similarly in a democratic setting, or if they would backfire due to democratic norms about leadership behavior.”
The results revealed a nuanced picture of how propaganda effectiveness intersects with partisan identity in polarized democracies. Compared to standard political messaging, the hard propaganda techniques employed by the Trump administration successfully communicated greater strength to both supporters and opponents—achieving one of the primary goals such messaging serves in authoritarian contexts.
However, the researchers identified a critical difference in how this messaging functioned in the democratic setting. While the propaganda effectively projected strength across partisan lines, it simultaneously fostered increased opposition among Trump critics. This oppositional response represents a significant departure from how such messaging typically functions in authoritarian regimes, where it often successfully deters resistance.
Perhaps most troubling for democratic norms was the finding that Trump supporters did not perceive the authoritarian-style propaganda as any more or less appropriate than standard political communication. This acceptance suggests an increasing tolerance for authoritarian communication practices among segments of the American electorate.
“The normalization of authoritarian communication tactics among supporters of a democratic leader signals a potential erosion of democratic norms regarding acceptable political messaging,” noted Donnay. “In highly polarized contexts, partisan identity may override traditional democratic expectations about leadership communication.”
The research contributes to growing academic literature examining the fragility of democratic norms in polarized societies. As democracies worldwide face challenges from populist movements and increasing political division, the study provides empirical evidence that communication techniques once considered exclusive to authoritarian regimes can find receptive audiences within democratic societies.
Political communication experts not involved in the study suggest these findings should prompt renewed attention to the safeguards that traditionally prevented authoritarian-style messaging from gaining traction in democratic contexts. The research indicates that partisan polarization may weaken these safeguards, creating conditions where segments of the population become increasingly accepting of communication styles previously considered incompatible with democratic values.
The study’s timing during the 2020 protests provided researchers a rare opportunity to examine these dynamics during a period of significant social tension—precisely the conditions when governments typically deploy hard propaganda to project strength and deter opposition.
As democracies continue navigating unprecedented polarization and social tensions, this research suggests greater vigilance may be necessary to preserve democratic communication norms against the encroachment of authoritarian messaging techniques that, as this study demonstrates, can effectively communicate strength even in established democratic contexts.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
15 Comments
Kudos to the researchers for tackling this important and timely topic. The findings highlight the need for robust media literacy education and a renewed commitment to critical thinking in the face of authoritarian-style propaganda tactics. It’s a wake-up call for all of us.
As someone with a background in energy and commodities, I’m particularly interested in how this research could apply to the public perception and policy decisions surrounding industries like mining, oil and gas, and renewable energy. The implications are quite troubling.
I’m not surprised by these findings, but that doesn’t make them any less troubling. The implications for industries like mining and energy, where policy decisions can be heavily influenced by public perception, are particularly worrying. This research underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability.
As someone with a keen interest in mining and commodities, I wonder how this type of propaganda could potentially impact public perception and policy decisions around extractive industries. It’s an angle worth exploring further.
This is a sobering and eye-opening study. The ability of hard propaganda to project strength, even in democratic contexts, is deeply concerning. It’s a reminder that we must remain vigilant in defending democratic norms and institutions against manipulation.
Fascinating research. I’m curious to see if the findings hold true in other democratic contexts beyond the US, and how the dynamics might differ across various political and economic landscapes. This is certainly an area worth further investigation.
As someone with a professional interest in the mining and commodities sector, I’m particularly intrigued by the potential implications of this research. The ability of hard propaganda to influence public perception and policy decisions in a democratic context is quite alarming. It’s a sobering reminder of the fragility of democratic norms and the importance of critical thinking.
This is a fascinating and troubling study. The ability of heavy-handed visual propaganda to project strength, even in established democracies, is deeply worrying. I’d be curious to see how the findings hold up across different political and cultural contexts.
I agree, the implications are quite concerning. It’s a sobering reminder that democracies are not immune to the manipulative tactics of authoritarian regimes.
Fascinating research, though the conclusions are quite unsettling. The use of authoritarian-style propaganda tactics in a democratic setting is a troubling development that warrants further investigation and discussion. This is a wake-up call for all of us who value democratic principles.
I agree, this is a concerning trend that deserves close scrutiny. The potential impacts on public discourse and policy decisions, especially in industries like mining and energy, are deeply troubling.
This is a concerning development, but not entirely surprising given the current state of political discourse. The ability of heavy-handed propaganda to gain traction, even in established democracies, is a sobering reminder of the challenges we face in upholding democratic values.
I’m not surprised by these findings, unfortunately. Polarization and the spread of misinformation are major threats to democratic societies. This research highlights the need for robust media literacy and critical thinking education to counter the effects of hard propaganda.
The use of authoritarian-style propaganda tactics in a democratic context is deeply troubling. This study underscores the fragility of democratic norms and the importance of vigilance in protecting them. It’s a wake-up call we can’t afford to ignore.
Interesting research on the effectiveness of authoritarian-style propaganda in democracies. I wonder how the findings would apply to other countries and political contexts beyond the US. The implications for democratic norms are certainly concerning.