Propaganda: Nobody's Immune
Welcome to PsyberSpace. I'm your host, Leslie Poston. When I've said in the past that no one is immune to propaganda, I meant it, and that includes myself. I have the tools to spot it early, and after listening to PsyberSpace since 2024, you should too. Still, I thought I'd use an example from my life as a starting point to illustrate this in more depth for this episode.
Leslie Poston:A few days ago, I came across a news item about a law that revokes the passports of people who fail to pay child support. My first thought was an enthusiastic good. I felt this little flicker of satisfaction because deadbeat parents are a real problem, and their children suffer real consequences when the support payments don't come through. Passport revocation felt emotionally proportionate. And then I checked myself because I know that a strong emotional response to a news story that immediately eliminates a desire to think more deeply about it is often a sign that the framing may be questionable or too simplistic and that it can hide downstream effects or hidden motives.
Leslie Poston:So I started asking the questions I should have asked first. How is nonpayment defined here, and who defines it? What does the appeals process look like? What happens to someone who fell behind due to job loss or medical debt before they could petition the court? What prevents this mechanism from being used against people who are technically in arrears through no real fault of their own or against people whose cases may still be contested?
Leslie Poston:Who decides when the threshold is crossed? And maybe most importantly, what else could a passport revocation law be used for, and who else could this be used against once this infrastructure exists? The more I pulled at it, the more the clean framing started to fray at the edges, and I started to dig deeper. In other words, a demonstration of exactly how we're supposed to alert ourselves to and avoid falling for propaganda and manipulated storytelling. The most effective propaganda has never depended on lies.
Leslie Poston:It always has at least a grain of truth, and it often has an emotional trigger within the message. The most effective propaganda has never depended on lies. It always has a grain of truth and often has an emotional trigger within its message. The frustration people feel about weak child support enforcement is completely legitimate. Propaganda doesn't manufacture your personal values.
Leslie Poston:It locates them and uses them as entry points for its message. What agenda setting theory tells us is that the goal isn't to change what you believe. The goal is to change what you think about first, in what order, and through what emotional lens. If you get that sequencing right, you don't need to deceive anyone about the underlying facts. There's a useful distinction between agitation propaganda, which is designed to produce a specific reaction quickly, and integration propaganda, which operates over a longer timeline and shapes the basic framework through which people interpret the world over time.
Leslie Poston:Integration propaganda is what makes certain ideas feel like what we call common sense something we've debunked in another episode already. Agitation propaganda is the spark. The passport law framing is agitation propaganda. It's engineered to produce an immediate gut response before slower reasoning has time to engage. And it works better the less time you spend with it.
Leslie Poston:The foundations of modern public relations were built on this same understanding well before the research existed to explain the mechanism. The insight was that you don't need to convince people of things they don't already believe. You identify existing beliefs and emotional associations and then connect them to whatever you're trying to sell: a product, a political position, or maybe even a policy. The emotional architecture is the work of propaganda. I've talked on this show before about the effect heuristic, system one and system two processing, confirmation bias, and in group and out group moral exclusion.
Leslie Poston:If you do a search on the website, you should be able to find episodes using all of those keywords. All of these were active in my initial reaction to that passport proposal. Rather than retread background, I want to go a little deeper. Because naming individual biases understates what's actually happening. These aren't separate mechanisms running in parallel.
Leslie Poston:They're components of one integrated response. A useful starting point is the concept of moral conviction, which research distinguishes carefully from moral opinion. A moral opinion is something you hold with some strength but could potentially update given new information or a fair process. A moral conviction functions differently. It operates more like a core identity commitment, resistant to compromise, capable of overriding other values that you'd normally endorse, like procedural fairness or due process.
Leslie Poston:When a belief reaches that level, the motivation to scrutinize it doesn't just weaken. It can reverse, so the scrutiny itself starts to feel like a kind of disloyalty. You see this often in religious propaganda. You don't fact check your conscience. When the child support framing activated something that felt like moral conviction protect children, hold negligent adults accountable it moved the question out of the deliberative zone before deliberation had a chance to begin.
Leslie Poston:Analytical capacity doesn't protect you here either, and the research on this is kind of uncomfortable. People with stronger quantitative and reasoning skills do not perform better on politically or morally charged questions. They perform better at constructing defenses of the conclusions they've already reached. The analytical capacity gets redirected toward the prior rather than toward accuracy. So sophistication is a tool, and tools work in whatever direction you point them.
Leslie Poston:Cognitive fluency adds a final piece. When information is easy to process, with coherent framing, clear categories, and emotionally consistent logic, our brain registers it as familiar, and familiarity gets misread as true. Deadbeat parents lose their passport is a fluent emotional sentence. It's simple, it's direct, and it arrives with what we can call an emotional payload that feels self explanatory. That same cognitive mechanism that makes it feel right also makes it feel true, and those two sensations are really difficult to separate from the inside.
Leslie Poston:And by the time all of this processing has run its course, moral conviction is engaged, analytical capacity is recruited to protect the conclusion, fluent framing is registered as self evident you haven't been deceived in any simple sense of the word. You've been routed routed through your own cognitive architecture. Propaganda didn't override your thinking. It used it against you. The passport proposal illustrates the technique clearly enough to be useful as a reference point.
Leslie Poston:The policy is anchored to the most sympathetic possible subject: a child who isn't receiving support they're legally owed. We've talked about using the phrase for the children in Propaganda before. You can look those episodes up as well. If you're inclined to scrutinize the policy, the framing of the propaganda has already positioned that scrutiny as potentially working against the child rather than in service of getting the policy correct. Doubt is made to feel morally costly before you've even asked a single specific question.
Leslie Poston:The mechanism itself is left a little vague. Revoke passports for nonpayment sounds targeted and proportionate, But the actual administrative realityhow nonpayment is defined, over what timeframe, through what legal process, and with what avenue for appeal, enforced by what agencyis considerably more complicated. And that complication is what the vague framing prevents you from thinking about. This pattern recurs often enough in policy history that it's worth treating as a recognizable structure. For example, civil asset forfeiture was built on the premise that it would target criminal enterprises, and it does sometimes.
Leslie Poston:But it also produces the routine seizure of property from people who are never charged with a crime and who must then navigate an expensive legal process to recover what was stolen. Welfare fraud provisions are meant to catch deliberate deception, and they've stripped benefits from people who make administrative errors on government forms. In each case, the original propaganda framing pointed to a sympathetic victim and a clearly culpable offender. And in each case the mechanism reached considerably further than the framing suggested it would. The propagandistic move is to attach a genuine problem to a broad mechanism before there's time to examine what that mechanism actually does.
Leslie Poston:So what can you actually do with this information? The most practical thing I can offer is a set of habits rather than a checklist. Our goal is to build a reflex that kicks in before the framing has fully landed. The first is to treat a strong immediate emotional response as a signal to slow down rather than a signal that you've understood the situation. The underlying concern that produced my reaction to the passport story was legitimate.
Leslie Poston:It's about recognizing that the speed and intensity of a gut response is often a feature of the framing rather than a property of the issue. Something that needs your agreement before you've had time to think about it usually needs that for a reason. The second is to look for who isn't in the frame. Every piece of policy framing foregrounds a particular subject. Almost always a sympathetic victim.
Leslie Poston:And that choice shapes everything that follows. Deliberately ask who else is present in the actual situation who isn't present in the framing. Who else does this mechanism reach and what will happen to them? The third is to locate the mechanism and examine it separately from the stated goal. So how does this actually work in practice?
Leslie Poston:Who will administer this? Under what criteria? And with what oversight? What happens if it's applied in error? What recourse exists for people who are harmed by it?
Leslie Poston:Policy that can't survive those questions was probably not designed to. We're seeing this play out right now in real time with AI pegging people as criminals for shoplifting or other crimes. And when they're misidentified by the AI, they have no recourse against it. The fourth is to notice when a binary is being offered and decline it. So much policy framing presents only two options: support this specific proposal or side with the problem that it claims to address.
Leslie Poston:Rejecting that binary framing isn't indifference to the underlying problem. It's a precondition for finding solutions that actually work for the most people. The fifth habit requires the most honest self examination. Pay close attention to which topics make you want to skip the first four habits. That list is a reasonably accurate map of where you're most susceptible to propaganda.
Leslie Poston:The issues that feel most morally urgent to you, where scrutiny feels most unnecessary and kind of gives you a little bit of physical discomfort in your body, are precisely where a well constructed frame has the most room to operate unexamined. None of this produces certainty or neutrality, and it's not supposed to. What it does give you is a slightly longer gap between the framing of propaganda landing and the conclusion forming. And within that gap is where your actual thinking happens. I nearly skipped that gap on the passport story.
Leslie Poston:The question was never whether you're informed enough or value driven enough to be immune. None of us are. The only variable is whether you've practiced creating that gap enough that you can actually use it. Thanks for listening to PsyberSpace. I'm your host, Leslie Poston, signing off.
Leslie Poston:As always, until next time, stay curious and don't forget to subscribe so you never miss a week and send it to a friend that you think might find this helpful.
Creators and Guests
