Propaganda used to be a source of shame. Now governments take pride in it.

Coverage Type: 

[Commentary] Censorship and propaganda were once regarded as sources of shame, even in authoritarian settings, and the officials who carried out these shabby projects were shadowy figures unknown to the outside world. In the 21st century, however, things have changed.

Ironically, elements of democratic culture have contributed to the rise in modern propaganda. Propositions that there is no such thing as objective truth and that history is nothing more than a contest between competing narratives owe their popularity to radical theorists and even some journalists. While accusations that the press is biased are common fodder in American political campaigns, the exaggerated and repeated charges of media bias expressed during the presidential campaign reinforced the propagandist’s depiction of a world in which truth is determined by which side argues the loudest and formulates the cleverest lies. Others have cynically made use of the too-trusting model of Western journalism, which, in an effort to see both sides, has treated patently false assertions as symmetrical with legitimate views or facts. The struggle over the future of global democracy is still in its early stage. Right now, unfortunately, it is democracy’s adversaries who are advancing the tawdry case for propaganda and censorship with self-assurance, and freedom’s champions whose response is mired in bewilderment and hesitation.

[Arch Puddington is distinguished fellow in democracy studies at Freedom House.]


Propaganda used to be a source of shame. Now governments take pride in it.