"As though we didn't know that the gov't propagandises".
Amusing how a world-weary tone can minimise and rationalise: Ah, well, all governments propagandise, so what's new?
Given that approach, why bother with media analysis?
It's a luxury for westerners to imagine they aren't vulnerable to the effects of ever more intense, refined, calibrated, computerised and generously-funded propaganda methods.
All governments propagandise: the bigger question is: who falls for the propaganda? And what is the danger of falling for propaganda?
Ironically, studies show that it's more educated people who are most vulnerable to propaganda.
"Noted she didn't touch the wars and capitalism : )".
Do progressives have no issue with hundreds of trained psychologists being employed by the state, using their neuro-psychology degrees to assist the state to whip up fear?
Dodsworth argues that behavioural psychology has been weaponised; that the government has knowingly allowed its behavioural psychologist advisors to manipulate the ordinary citizen into fear-based thinking. (Difficult to reverse and immoral/unethical - in terms of real-life impact viz. socially-induced disruptions, depressions, suicides)
What's different now, compared to earlier propaganda eras perhaps, is that more people are passive and online, dealing with a virtual world and less exposed to thought-provoking views because the media bandwidth has been narrowed.
People are more reliant on social media and groupthink and have probably developed more of a hive mind. This vulnerability is exploited by advertisers, marketers, authorities, media, military planners, politicians.
If progressives think none of this is worth parsing or raising awareness about (each generation has to raise new awareness of old issues) then what we have is frogs marinating in a pot, on a slowly-rising flame