Using of propaganda and persuasive statements in polish political discourse

2017;
: pp. 142-147
1
Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland

The purpose of presented study is to discuss chosen theories, mechanisms and tools of social impact, understood as a process that allows influencing individuals and groups, in reference to Polish political discourse. The issue of effectiveness of media content on the recipient, defined as achieving results expected by the sender (such as changes in behaviour, attitudes etc.) is still current and worth being analysed.  

This paper is both theoretical and empirical. Theoretical background consists of the concept of social impact and origins of forming public opinion. The empirical contribution involves content analysis of set of examples from presidential and parliamentary elections 2015 in Poland. Describing which techniques classified and outlined by American Institute of Propaganda Analysis (1937) has been broadly used in contemporary Polish political discourse and in media content.

Information struggle is a special case of combat: part of a social control process, aimed to destroy opponent (or enemy) by means of information. Contemporary societies are not resistant to propaganda technique – despite the fact of highly developed communication skills and “technology literacy” (in comparison to earlier stages of social development).

Presenting techniques classified and outlined by American Institute of Propaganda Analysis that were broadly used in latest Polish election campaigns a conclusion can be drawn that some appeals remain effective and worth repeating.  No matter how educated and aware of language use contemporary societies.

 Referring to already classical examples of media impact, the accuracy of propaganda tools was discussed. Analyzing cases mentioned below, a conclusion is drawn, that techniques such as word games, false connections, special appeals, name calling, glittering generalities, work effectively in contemporary persuasive communication.

1.  Pratkanis A., Aronson E., Wiek propagandy. Uzywanie i naduzywanie perswazji na co dzien, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe WN, Warszawa 2004.  

2. Baran S.J., Davis D.K., Teorie komunikowania masowego, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellonskiego, Kraków 2007.

3. Institute of Propaganda Analysis, source; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Propaganda_Analysis.

4. Nieć M., Komunikowanie polityczne w nowoczesnym państwie, Wolters Kluwer business, Warszawa 2013.

5. Zaller J., The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion, University of California, Los Angeles, first published 1992 (reprinted 1993, 1995, 1996, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003).  

6. Marks K., Kapital. Krytyka ekonomii politycznej, tom 1, Warszawa 1951.

7. Toffler, A., The Third Wave, Random House Value Publishing, 1980.

8. Kto hejtem wojuje, od hejtu ginie, “Polityka” 14.08.2015, access: http://www. polityka. pl/tygodnikpolityka/kraj/1629547,1,ile-hejtu-w-internecie-kogo-internauci-nie-lubia.read.

9. Szulczewski M, Propaganda polityczna. Zarys problematyki teoretycznej, Warszawa 1972.

10. Radio TOK FM: Makowski o Beacie Szydło: Jej kampania manipuluje obrzami i faktami, access: http://www.tokfm.pl/Tokfm/1,130517,18477360,makowski-o-beacie-szydlo-jej....

11. Podstawowe narzędzia propagandowe i ich praktyczne zastosowania, access: http://www.id.uw.edu.pl/zasoby/profile/47/Anatomia %20propagandy/6-7. %20 Podstawowe %20narzedzia %20propagandowe %20i %20ich %20zastosowania.pdf.