Return to the Prehistory of Communication Studies in the United States: Reasons and Implications for the Departure of Propaganda from Communication Studies

DANNA • Bawuerjiang, SU Jing

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (7) : 114-136.

PDF(1531 KB)
PDF(1531 KB)
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (7) : 114-136.
Research Articles

Return to the Prehistory of Communication Studies in the United States: Reasons and Implications for the Departure of Propaganda from Communication Studies

Author information +
History +

Abstract

In the narrative of the history of US mainstream communication study, there has been a collective misreading of “propaganda analysis”. This paper attempts to find the reasons and reflections of propaganda’s departure from communication studies by retelling the background of the birth of propaganda analysis, and completing the prehistory of US communication research in the early 20th century. It is found that although “propaganda analysis” once appeared as a mainstream in the field of social science research in the US, it is not an academic paradigm but a social trend in the context of US progressivism. With the fundamental reversal of this social context, “propaganda analysis” has fallen into disuse. Subsequently, the institutionalization of communication research and the underlying logic of science continue to marginalize and ideologize the concept of propaganda. The intentional misinterpretation of “propaganda analysis” in the history of communication studies originates from the legitimacy anxiety of US communication studies, as the contradiction and tension between value rationality and instrumental rationality in the context of US rationalism could not be solved.

Key words

propaganda analysis / communication research / history of communication studies / establishment / modernity

Cite this article

Download Citations
DANNA • Bawuerjiang , SU Jing. Return to the Prehistory of Communication Studies in the United States: Reasons and Implications for the Departure of Propaganda from Communication Studies[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2023, 45(7): 114-136

References

[1]
罗杰斯(1994/2002). 《传播学史:一种传记式的方法》(殷晓蓉译). 上海: 上海译文出版社.
[2]
郭镇之(2020). 对外宣传的现代化:西方的观点与美国的历程. 《国际传播》(02),41-55.
[3]
克拉珀(1960/2016). 《大众传播的效果》(段鹏译). 北京: 中国传媒大学出版社.
[4]
李彬, 黄卫星(2012). 从去政治化到再政治化——读赵月枝《传播与社会:政治经济与文化分析》. 《新闻大学》(01),1-9+27.
[5]
李希光, 杜涛(2009). 超越宣传:变革中国的公共政策传播模式变化——以教育政策传播为例. 《新闻与传播研究》(04),71-79+109.
[6]
刘海龙(2007). 西方宣传概念的变迁:从旧宣传到新宣传. 《国际新闻界》(09),36-40.
[7]
刘海龙(2015). 解放灰色地带:对传播思想史叙事的反思. 《山西大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》(01),73-80.
[8]
刘海龙(2008). 《大众传播理论:范式与流派》. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
[9]
刘海龙(2013). 《宣传:观念、话语及其正当化》. 北京: 中国大百科全书出版社.
[10]
刘海龙(2014). 宣传的理由:重读伯内斯的《宣传》. 《国际新闻界》(04),32-41.
[11]
刘海龙(2020). 《宣传:观念、话语及其正当化》. 北京: 中国大百科全书出版社.
[12]
牛可(2009). “堡垒国家”:美国冷战史上的一个议题. 《世界知识》(05),62-63.
[13]
牛可(2020). 美国国家构建过程中的科学公益. 《文化纵横》(05),75-85+158.
[14]
赛佛林, 坦卡德(1979/2006). 《传播理论:来源、方法及应用》(郭镇之等译). 北京: 中国传媒大学出版社.
[15]
唐爱军(2011). 现代性批判的问题域:韦伯与马克思. 《理论与现代化》(05),11-17.
[16]
辛普森(1994/2017). 《胁迫之术:心理战与美国传播研究的兴起》(王维佳等译). 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
[17]
徐秉鹏(2016). 论当代批判性思维的早期形式:宣传分析. 《重庆理工大学学报社会科学版》 30(10),10.
[18]
吴畅畅(2019). 施拉姆的学术遗产与美国传播学四大奠基人的神话. 《国际新闻界》(08),52-80.
[19]
吴飞, 武传珍 (2017). 为宣传正名:基于进步主义与功能主义的视角. 《南京社会科学》(10),106-113.
[20]
展宁(2019). 学术与政治:国际传播研究在美国的兴起. 《新闻界》(10),92-100.
[21]
赵辉兵 (2006). 美国进步运动研究评述. 《史学集刊》(01),88-96.
[22]
郑杭生, 李霞(2004). 关于库恩的“范式”——一种科学哲学与社会学交叉的视角. 《广东社会科学》(02),119-126.
[23]
朱豆豆(2020). 从宣传到战略传播:美国宣传观念分野、影响及新宣传话语研究. 《新闻界》(07),78-87+95.
[24]
Altheide D. L., & Snow R. P. (1979). Media Logic. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
[25]
Bagdikian B. (1983). The Media Monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
[26]
Beard C. A. (1919). Propaganda in the School. Dial, 6(14), 598-599.In Sproule, J. M. (1987). Propaganda Studies in American Social Science: The Rise and Fall of the Critical Paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73(1)60.
[27]
Bernays E. L. (1952). Public Relations. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.
[28]
Bryce J. (1921). Modern Democracies. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
[29]
Bussemer T. (2005). Propaganda: Konzepte und Theorien. Wiesbaden, GER: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. In Zollmann, F. (2019). Bringing Propaganda Back into News Media Studies. Critical Sociology (Sage Publications, Ltd.). 45(3), 329-345.
[30]
Buxton W. (2003). From radio research to communications intelligence: Rockefeller philanthropy, communications specialists, and the American policy community.In S. Braman (Ed.), Communication Researchers and Policy-Making. Cambridge, UK: MIT Press.
[31]
Cattell J. M. (1923). The psychological corporation. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, (110), 165-171.
[32]
Collins S. (2012). Propaganda Studies. London, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
[33]
Delia J. G. (1987). Communication Research: A History. In Handbook of Communication Science, edited by C. R. Berger and S. H. Chaffee. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
[34]
Dewey J. (1918). The New Paternalism. New Republic, 12(21), 216-217.
[35]
Garber W. (1942). Propaganda Analysis: To What Ends. American Journal of Sociology, (1), 240-245.
[36]
Gary B. (1999). The Nervous Liberals, Propaganda Anxieties from World WarsⅠto the Cold War. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
[37]
Ginsberg B. (1986). The captive public: how mass opinion promotes state power. New York, NY: Basic Books.
[38]
Gruening, Ernest (1931). The Public Pays:A Study of Power Propaganda. New York, NY: Vangard Press.
[39]
Harlow R. V. & Davidson P. (1941). Propaganda and the American revolution, 1763-1783. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 47(02), 555-557.
[40]
Hodder F. H. (1922). Propaganda as a source of American History. Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 9(1), 3-18.
[41]
Howe Quincy. (1937). England expects every American to do his duty. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
[42]
Irwin W. (1919). Age of lies: How the propagandist attacks the foundation of public opinion. Oakland, CA: Sunset Publishing Corporation.
[43]
Irwin W. H. (1936). Propaganda and the News. New York, NY: Whittlesey House.
[44]
Katz E., & Lazarsfeld P. F. (1955). Personal Influence. New York, NY: The Free Press.
[45]
Lasswell H. D. (1927a). Propaganda Technique in World War One. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[46]
Lasswell H. D. (1927b). The Theory of Political Propaganda. The American Political Science Review, 21(3), 627-631.
[47]
Lasswell H. D. (1950). Propaganda and mass insecurity. Psychiatry, 13(3), 283-299.
[48]
Lasswell H. D., Casey R. D., & Smith B. L. (1935). Propaganda and Promotional Activities, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
[49]
Lee A. M., & Lee E. B. (1939). The Fine Art of Propaganda. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Company.
[50]
Lippmann W. (1919a). The basic problem of democracy: I. What modern liberty means. The Atlantic Monthly, 11(124), 616-627.
[51]
Lippmann W. (1919b). Liberty and the news. The Atlantic Monthly, 12(124), 779-787.
[52]
Lippmann W. (1965). Public opinion. New York, NY: The Free Press.
[53]
Lubken D. (2008). Remembering the Straw Man:The Travels and Adventures of Hypodermic. In Park, D. W. & Pooley, J. (Eds.). The History of Media And Communication Research: Contested Memories. NewYork, NY: Peter Lang.
[54]
Lumley F. E. (1929). The nature of propaganda. Sociology and Social Research, (13), 315-324.
[55]
Manning M. J. (2004). Historical dictionary of American Propaganda. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
[56]
Merriam C. E. (1934). Political Power. New York, NY: Whittlesey House.
[57]
Mullen A. (2010). Twenty years on: the second-order prediction of the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model. Media, Culture & Society, 32(4), 673-690.
[58]
Mumford L. (1946). Values for survival. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Co.
[59]
Ponsonby A. (1991). Falsehood in wartime: Propaganda lies of the First World War. Costa Mesa, CA: Institute for Historical Review.(Original work published 1928).
[60]
Qualter T. H. (1985). Opinion control in democracies. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
[61]
Raymon Dodge. (1920). The Psychology of Propaganda. Religious Education, 15(5), 241-251.
[62]
Schiller H. I. (1969). Mass communications and American empire. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
[63]
Sproule J. M. (1984, November). The Propaganda Analysis Movement since World War I. Paper presented at Conference on: Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago.
[64]
Sproule J. M. (1987). Propaganda Studies in American Social Science: The Rise and Fall of the Critical Paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73(1), 60.
[65]
Sproule J. M. (1989). Progressive Propaganda Critics and the Magic Bullet Myth. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 6(3), 225.
[66]
Sproule J. M. (2005). Propaganda and Democracy: The American Experience of Media and Mass Persuasion. Cambridge, CA: Cambridge University Press.
[67]
Zollmann F. (2019). Bringing Propaganda Back into News Media Studies. Critical Sociology, 45(3), 329-345.
With the ascendance of liberal democracy, propaganda activities have vastly increased. The main aim of propaganda has been to protect state-corporate power from the threat of public understanding and participation. Because of its societal importance for public opinion formation, the news media constitutes an obvious channel for the dissemination of propaganda. However, contemporary communication, media and journalism studies have mostly neglected to critically assess the news media's role in producing and distributing propaganda. In fact, despite of the news media's integration into the state-corporate nexus, the term propaganda is rarely used in academic treatises on the news media. Furthermore, only a small number of scholars have engaged in elaborating a systematic understanding of the manifold propaganda techniques that are currently applied in liberal democracies. To fill these research gaps, this article maps out various concepts of propaganda and relates them to the process and content of the news media. On the basis of theoretical and empirical studies, the article demonstrates how different forms of propaganda can manifest in news media content. Based on an integration with, as well as a development of, existing literature, the essay aims to build a tool box that can be applied and refined in future studies in order to detect propaganda in news media texts.

Footnotes

1. Gitlin, T. (1978). Media sociology: The dominant paradigm. Theory and Society, 6(2), 205-253.在这篇经典的批评主流传播学范式的文章中,吉特林认为尽管卡茨和拉扎斯费尔德主导的主流范式有很大问题,但是对“魔弹论”观念进行了矫正。吉特林没有对“魔弹论”神话追根溯源,导致随着这篇文献的知名度越来越大,传播学界对于“魔弹论”的误解也越来越深。

2. Jowett, G. S., & O’Donnell, V. (1986). Propaganda and Persuasion. Washington, DC: SAGE Publications.作者在2012年以后的修订版中修正了自己对于“魔弹论”的错误论述。

3. Sproule, J. M. (1989). Progressive propaganda critics and the magic bullet myth. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 6(3), 225-246.厄普顿•辛克莱在代表作《屠场》中揭露了芝加哥肉类加工肠肮脏的环境,成为扒粪运动的开端,欧文在《谎言时代》中指出了美国新闻业对大型企业利益的偏袒。两位作家将矛头指向垄断大企业的腐败与大企业的舆论操纵,斯普鲁尔以流行作家的作品属于案例经验性研究为由,将大众文学作品与批判的宣传分析混为一谈。

Funding

Major Program of The Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region Social Science Fund(22BXW007)
by the Program of the National Social Fund of China(22BXW069)
PDF(1531 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/