How could modern propaganda be more effective? - Or have we reached maximum propaganda potential?

[Pomniman]

So I am writing a short story and in it just as an aside I wanted a character to suggest a way that modern mass media propaganda could be made more effective. And I suddenly came to a stop because I couldn't think of anything. Everything it occurred to me to suggest was already being done and done very well. I pulled up a Wikipedia page (irony when researching propaganda) to get a list of propaganda techniques. There wasn't one I couldn't immediately point out in modern society used at great length.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques https://archive.md/4xijb
Third Party Technique? Countless well-financed examples. Scopes, ADL, et al. Virtue Words? Oh, ha ha! Good Lord, yes! 'Diversity' and 'Equity' are everywhere. Milieu Control? Every university in North America. Latitudes of Acceptance? I.e. start with what you can get away with and then slowly creep it forward? LGBTQTSIOMGBBQ++ is a case in point where we now have paedophiles trying to rebrand themselves as "MAPs"

Honestly, with almost anything in society, opinionated me, I can point at it and say "well it would be better accomplished if they..." But on propaganda I'm drawing a blank. Which leads me to ask, have we reached the point where propaganda has reached its maximum viable effectiveness in our society? There's not a technique that doesn't seem to be used and used to its maximum possible effectiveness.

Is there actually any way that propaganda in Western society could be made more effective?

You're thinking about this too rationally to click with it on an aesthetic level. It's more of a declaration and repetition of intent from enough mouthpieces that subsumes the collective will of the masses by means of a false consensus; the peasants will obey so long as a king has divine right; the mandate of heaven; the guidance of the stars and spirits. For all the thinktanks and seemingly modern window dressing this stuff is more a product of ancient shamanic rites where the key is disrupting thought through emotions and artificially induced states of delirium. You're better off thinking of new technologies and contemporary uses of the news/entertainment mediums as extensions of ayahuasca type hallucinogens, oracles, and ecstatic ritualistic singing/dancing/chanting.

All in all humans are a lot more primitive than we like to pretend we are on a fundamental psychological level.

 

[No. 7 cat]

Some have said that Soviet propaganda was less about convincing people, and more about showing dominance and humiliating the viewer who knew the claimed bountiful present was a fraud but could do nothing about it. Modern stuff works well enough on that level of 'suck it up prole'.

 

[Overly Serious]

I'd argue propaganda is more effective this days then it used to be last couple of decades. But that's frankly due to population lacking in critical thinking and common fucking logic and sense.

And what brought about this reduction in critical thinking and sense? That's the question.

@Overly Serious If your fictional short story includes the seizing of children from parents for illegitimate reasons, forcing them to change their name as a means of creating a schism between them and their parents seems like a natural start of the indoctrination process and a hellish way of removing ALL connection the child had to their parents.

It's more just that I needed a quick example of how modern day real world propaganda could be made more effective than creating an overt dystopia. To show the way a character thinks. But then I realised I genuinely couldn't think of anything for them to say because it was all already happening. Perhaps some way of ramping up the penalties for not believing the propaganda?

I think a way Clown World propaganda can be more effective is when it's passed off as "being a decent human being", or "progress". Like one is called a "bigot" and a "bad person" if they think there's 2 "genders", or that "transgender" is delusion. Or calling sexually explicit LGBTQ+ books that are meant for small kids "stunning and brave".

I think this falls under "Virtue Words" in part. Diversity, Equity, LGBTQTS+, etc. And Thought Terminators. Basically, you don't have to prove someone is bad or that an action is bad, you just have to show that it meets some criteria for a Bad Word. E.g. "racist" or "transphobe". Basically a Thought Terminator is something that kicks in the moment one of those things is raised as the person realises they're about to start thinking a Bad Thing and stops themselves. No need to think more about that because it's transphobic or whatever.

Some have said that Soviet propaganda was less about convincing people, and more about showing dominance and humiliating the viewer who knew the claimed bountiful present was a fraud but could do nothing about it. Modern stuff works well enough on that level of 'suck it up prole'.

I think that well applies to modern Western propaganda. It's hard to see making people say something as fundamentally and obviously wrong as "this man is a woman" and not see it as a demoralisation technique or purity test.

 

[Linako 2.0]

Sleep deprivation could also be ramped up.

We already do that with technology.
Many don't want to admit it, but the reason we sleep less is because of engagement with the internet through phones and the computer.
How many have said they don't get enough sleep because they have to sleep late but won't admit it's because they were busy scrolling through the internet until the ungodly hours?

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Honestly, with almost anything in society, opinionated me, I can point at it and say "well it would be better accomplished if they..." But on propaganda I'm drawing a blank. Which leads me to ask, have we reached the point where propaganda has reached its maximum viable effectiveness in our society? There's not a technique that doesn't seem to be used and used to its maximum possible effectiveness.

There are ways for it to be more all consuming, either ways that are so costly that are beyond the scope of modern media to be affective, or ways that will need to have the government and the justice system involved to not be stopped immediately.

For the former, full on scrubbing physical media. Everything that is not online is burned for maximum gaslighting potential. For the latter full on 1984 smart TVs everywhere recording your expression and constantly showing wrongthinkers.

Also in general the scale is far smaller than Asian countries that can employ cults/emperors to drive the message, while modern media is relatively low on appealing to religion.

 

[Clout $ Monei]

Leveraging AI would be the obvious answer. You can personalize propaganda down to the individual, for example with chatbots that can debate and flood with data (true or false) tirelessly, has an answer to every question on retort, and has access to a psychological profile and history of the recipient to better angle every argument. The other approach is what's already called Dead Internet Theory : flooding the Internet with bots regurgitating advertisement/propaganda (same thing), but with better text generation or even photo and video generation to accompany it. Bonus if you combine the two and make every roboshill on Xitter a full pseudo-person that can reasonably pass as human and answer anyone calling them out as a human would.
The illusion of consensus is one of the most potent strategy of propaganda, because it appeals to the desire to conform and belong, and avoidance of confrontation and exclusion. If anyone who wrongthinks feels outnumbered one to a thousand, it takes truly a exceptional individual to keep doing so, let alone dissent openly.

The other answer is porn.
Thist trap propaganda

 

[Pomniman]

The other answer is porn.
Thist trap propaganda

There's a very old, perhaps ancient, espionage technique widely known to be practiced by the Soviets and Chinese called "honey potting" or "honey trapping" where female spies would be recruited to have sex with and even marry foreigners in positions of authority or with access to some sort of classified information in order to infiltrate enemy intelligence assets and countries.

 

[Angry Alt Right Nerd]

It's not a mystery how they control the people on their own side, the true mystery is how they also managed to turn all of their domestic enemies into drooling retards.

 

[Overly Serious]

For the former, full on scrubbing physical media. Everything that is not online is burned for maximum gaslighting potential. For the latter full on 1984 smart TVs everywhere recording your expression and constantly showing wrongthinkers.

This might be what I'm looking for. An increase in the erasure of conflicting previous information. For whatever reasons, this is one area where they could do more, perhaps. I guess with the shift to more online only sources this is rapidly becoming more viable.

Leveraging AI would be the obvious answer. You can personalize propaganda down to the individual, for example with chatbots that can debate and flood with data (true or false) tirelessly, has an answer to every question on retort, and has access to a psychological profile and history of the recipient to better angle every argument. The other approach is what's already called Dead Internet Theory : flooding the Internet with bots regurgitating advertisement/propaganda (same thing), but with better text generation or even photo and video generation to accompany it. Bonus if you combine the two and make every roboshill on Xitter a full pseudo-person that can reasonably pass as human and answer anyone calling them out as a human would.
The illusion of consensus is one of the most potent strategy of propaganda, because it appeals to the desire to conform and belong, and avoidance of confrontation and exclusion. If anyone who wrongthinks feels outnumbered one to a thousand, it takes truly a exceptional individual to keep doing so, let alone dissent openly.

Again, there's an answer to my question here. This is undoubtedly being done. The question is to how much. The second question would be what measures are they taking to prevent people defending against it - e.g. forming their own circles of trust.

The other answer is porn.
Thist trap propaganda

Sadly very effective.

It's not a mystery how they control the people on their own side, the true mystery is how they also managed to turn all of their domestic enemies into drooling retards.

That... is a very good point. I would first question the assumption: is it so? Secondly, the question you pose of how? I would say they're tied together. It's very easy to promote the more idiotic of your enemies and grant them more screentime and coverage and portray them as the face of your enemy, even granting them the resources to help them. Just don't misjudge things like Hillary did when she instructed the media to give Trump more coverage and help him become the candidate.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

This might be what I'm looking for. An increase in the erasure of conflicting previous information. For whatever reasons, this is one area where they could do more, perhaps. I guess with the shift to more online only sources this is rapidly becoming more viable.

The main issue is that the various elites aren't that unified due to political/economic difference, so any organised taking down of previous truths depends on whatever the oligarch controlling the platform wants. In the end the elites goal is more money and power, the same way that the party in 1984 keeps eating itself.

There is also the risk of the people in charge in implementing the harder issues to be good enough to use his power to sabotage the entire venture.

That... is a very good point. I would first question the assumption: is it so? Secondly, the question you pose of how? I would say they're tied together. It's very easy to promote the more idiotic of your enemies and grant them more screentime and coverage and portray them as the face of your enemy, even granting them the resources to help them. Just don't misjudge things like Hillary did when she instructed the media to give Trump more coverage and help him become the candidate.

My guess is that even capable world leaders are at risk of buying the hype that mass media says about them and stop thinking critically on their actions.