PRO CON WEBSITE ARGUMENTS FOR MY POSITION
Propaganda In The Internet Age

Arguments against my position: The China government used social media as a weapon to fight back against Hong Kong people democracy protests.

Argument #1: Big social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, ... were not on China side and deleted all the Chinese government propaganda on their sites.

The development of Internet has changed the way propaganda works, which one powerful individual or group cannot control the media anymore. These argues are backed up by such democratic social media, where people can easily boycott or call out bias news or propaganda. (Herman, 109)

        “In fact, one could argue that new technologies are exacerbating the problem. They permit media firms to shrink staff even as they achieve greater outputs, and they make possible global distribution systems that reduce the number of media entities.” (Herman, 109)

Argument #2: The information that the Chinese government used were being called propaganda, which makes many people distrust it.

If the message or symbol of one party or organization serve other people, group interest, people do not perceive it as propaganda despite its nature. In contrast, the message or symbol that does not match with people interest or mindset, the message is seen as propaganda, which in modern day is considered negative. (Laswell, 629)

        “... the propagandist may be said to be concerned with the multiplication of those stimuli which are best calculated to evoke desired responses, and with the nullification of those stimuli which are likely to investigate the undesired responses.” (Lasswell, 630)

Sources

Herman, E. (2000). The Propaganda Model: a retrospective. Journalism Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 101-112.

Lasswell, H. (1927). The Theory of Political Propaganda. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 21, No. 3, 627-631.