ICCMTD - 2013

International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design

May 02 - 04, 2013 Famagusta North Cyprus

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Academic Coordinator Ali Simsek Organizing Coordinator Agah Gumus Technical Coordinator Fahme Dabaj

AKNOWLEDGEMENT
We are holding the second International Conference on Communication, Media Technology and Design in Famagusta North Cyprus. This is going to be a great and significant event as the experience will be shared and actions will be explored. This Conference is organized by Anadolu University - Institute of Communication Sciences and powered by the Eastern Mediterranean University, Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, Journal of Contemporary Educational Technology and Online Journal of Art and Design. Around 100 well-known colleagues and audiences from 30 different countries have been invited to participate in this conference. Here, please allow us to express our sincere welcome on behalf of the Anadolu University and Eastern Mediterranean University to all the colleagues and audience that have participated in the conference This international conference provides a very good opportunity for all the participants to share experiences and cooperation with international colleagues. International Conference of Communication, Media, Technology and Design aims to gather academicians who are interested in communication, media studies and design from all over the world. The ultimate aim is to promote different ideas to offer a place for participants to present and discuss their innovative recent and ongoing research and theoretical work and/or their applications or development. We are very willing to share experience with international friends. On the other hand, we also hope to learn more from international experience through extensive exchange, discussions and cooperation to improve our work. We hope that you all will discuss the issues deeply, freely and openly, Finally, we wish the conference a complete success, and wish all the participants and the international friends a good time in North Cyprus ICCMTD 2013 Organizing Committee

Conference Coordinators

Ali Simsek Anadolu University, Turkey Agah Gumus - Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC Fahme Dabaj - Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC

Anabel Quan Haase - University of Western Ontario, Canada Bahadir Eristi - Anadolu University, Turkey Bahire Efe Ozad - Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC Besim Mustafa - Edge Hill University, UK Bilgen Aydin Sevim - Sakarya University, Turkey Bruno Cora - Cassino University, Italy Demet Gencer Kasap - Suleyman Demirel University, Turkey Eirini Sifaki - Greek Open University, Greece Elirea Bornman - University of South Africa, South Africa Eric Zhi Feng Liu - National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan Eugne Loos - University of Amsterdam, Netherlands Eylem Simsek - Turkish Air Forces, Turkey Fatos Adiloglu - Bahcesehir University, Turkey Gregory C. Lisby - Georgia State University, USA Jairo Lugo Ocando - University of Sheffield, United Kingdom Jale Balaban Sali - Anadolu University, Turkey Jenepher Lennox Terrion - University of Ottawa, Canada Lee Humphreys - Cornell University, USA Linda Harasim - Simon Fraser University, Canada Majid Abbasi - School of Visual Communication, Iran Ming Cheung - City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Miriam J. Metzger - University of California Santa Barbara, USA Murat Ataizi Anadolu University - Turkey Necip Serdar Sever Anadolu University - Turkey Ngu Teck Hua - Universiti Teknologi Mara, Malaysia Omer Ozer - Anadolu University, Turkey Rachel Barker - University of South Africa, South Africa Rauf Yildiz - Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Turkey Renata Matkeviien - Vilnius University, Lithuania Rukhsana Ahmed - University of Ottawa, Canada Senih Cavusoglu - Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC Serra Gorpe - Lefke Avrupa University, TRNC Tahseen Mansour - Yarmouk University, Jordan Umit Inatci - Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC Zane L. Berge - University of Maryland Baltimore County, USA

International Advisory Board

Keynote Speakers
Professor Clarke L. Caywood Northwestern University, USA Presentation Title: Reputation and Brand Building in High Risk Organizations with Integrated Marketing Communications Presentation Date: 02 May 2012 10:00 Professor Eugne Loos University of Amsterdam, Netherlands Presentation Title: Towards accessible information for senior citizens in a multimedia landscape: Debunking myths of age related communication barriers Presentation Date: 02 May 2012 11:15

II. International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design 02-04 May 2013 Famagusta North Cyprus THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF PROPAGANDA FORMERLY AND NOW ukasz Szurmiski, Ph.D. Institute of Journalism University of Warsaw lukasz.szurm@id.uw.edu.pl ukasz Szurmiski - Ph.D., Adjunct in the International Communication Unit and Vice-director for teaching and programs of studies in the Institute of Journalism at University of Warsaw (Poland). Interests: Polish, Russian, British media system, propaganda, manufacturing consent Abstract Mechanisms and tools of propaganda to influence public opinion have evolved with the development of society and were dependent on technological progress. Institutions such as the U.S. Committee on Public Information, the Soviet Council of Propaganda, the German Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, the British Ministry of Information, the Polish Internal Propaganda Bureau, despite the differences which divide these institution ideologically, used the same set of tools and the same media for persuasive communication. The aim of paper is an attempt to answer the question, which tools, used in the early twentieth century, are being used today? Is in a world where so much developed digital media technology, social media and Web 2.0 is still a chance to use the same media of communication and if so, in what circumstances is this? At a time when so commonly used are Facebook and Twitter (see conflicts of last two years in North Africa) it turns out that the old and proven methods to reach customers with posters and leaflets constantly check and are used (see the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq). Keywords: institutions of propaganda, new media and propaganda, propaganda techniques, Web 2.0 Introduction Two looks at the history of the propaganda exist. One from them is working on the assumption that the history of the propaganda is over a few thousand years old (Thomson, 2001, s. 9). This statement is legitimate because the amount of resources that have been preserved from the past makes it possible to derive this conclusion. On the other hand propaganda should be associated with the activities of institutionalized, conducted in as quick a planned, modified according to the current situation. Another important factor, are also carriers that popularized the propaganda. Therefore, the word formerly, is for me the beginning of the end of the nineteenth and early in the twentieth century. But even in those days newspapers did not have wide circulation, there was no radio or television. Joweet and ODonnell notice that rumour and gossip continued to be an important means of maintaining communication links between groups and individuals wishing to circulate specific messages (Jowett, ODonnell, 2006, p. 94). The situation has changed after the emergence of mass society and mass media, especially popular newspapers addressed to the common people. Beginnings of the systematized propaganda Institutions which beginnings of systematized propaganda activity created it is among others U.S. Committee he Public Information, the Soviet Council of Propaganda, the Ministry Germanium of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda, the British Ministry of Information, the Polish Office of Internal Propaganda. They usually used the same set of tools, but beside the differences which divide these institution ideologically, there was also different point of view on the intellectual tradition to treat public opinion. Sproule (1991, p. 212) pointed out that American intellectual tradition to treat public opinion as enlightened discussion, rather than as the European intellectuals concern about the rise of the masses. One of the most important institution on the field of persuasive communication was U.S. Committee on Public Information. It was created by President Woodrow Wilson through Executive Order 2594 on April 13, 1917. Because of the chairman name George Creel it was also known as Creel Committee and was established to influence American public opinion toward supporting United States participation during First World War (Jackall, Hirota, 1995, p. 137-140; Manning, Romerstein, 2004, p. 65-66). The committee used posters, flags, radio, cable and movies to broadcast and spread its message. How Jowett and ODonnell (2006, p. 160) noticed: Nationwide industrial efforts were mounted with great haste and the support of civilians who worked in industry was enlisted. The Committee on Public Information (CPI), a civilian committee under the direction of George Creel, was commissioned to sell the war to America. (...) Propaganda was developed and used to bring about cooperation between industrialized society and the fighting forces. Posters, designed to look like movie posters, depicting workers and soldiers arm in arm, were plastered over walls in factories throughout America. The 1914 recruitment poster, Your Country Needs You, (...) turned British Secretary for War, Lord Kitchener, into as instantly recognizable icon. Essentially the Committee prepared over 1438 pictures, 1 687 408 postcards were issued. With peculiar feature of posters, though of not only them, using similar visual treatments was. They weren't caring also about the copyright and the leading motif was subject to only slight alterations (Jarecka, 2008, p. 73-74).

303

II. International Conference on n Communicatio on, Media, Technology and Des sign 02-04 May 2013 3 Famagusta No orth Cyprus

Lord d Kitchener on po oster by Alfred Leete Your Coun ntry Needs You and its later vers sion and America an I Want You by b James Montgomery Flagg. Solu ution which paid attention and be ecame a cause of o the popularity of o the project Lee ete'a was turning g to the recipient t in the form whic ch was direc ct verbal and gr raphical. The ex xtended hand po ointing a finger o of the Lord Kitchener directly at t the viewer attr racted eyes. The e form beca ame enough attr ractive, that even n Russians, at le east in the firmly y modified versio on used this mot tive (Jarecka, 20 008, pt. 76). He waited until l also a Polish ve ersion, at least already after the World W War II.

Russian R and Polis sh version of pos ster based on Lo ord Kitchener motive In Russian version n Soviet soldier is s saying: Have you y enrolled as a volunteer? Or in n another version n of translation: Did D you volunteer?.In Polis sh version of the e poster the pivot t is turning to the e recipient: What you did for the im mplementation o of a plan? British Min nistry of Informat tion was establis shed after the De epartment of Pro opaganda, at the e end of World War W I (February 1918 1 Janu uary 1919) and during World War W II. Cate Ha aste noticed tha at British government had no need to establis sh formal propa aganda mac chinery to the home front. No national newspaper r opposed the wa ar (...). Governm ment propaganda was necessary, however, to just tify the war encourage recru uitment. Justifica ation of the war was w the corollary of the call for vo olunteers. The ap ppeal to sacrifice e was inseparable from the image i of just war the crusade which, w it was clai imed, Britain was s fighting in the name n of civilisatio on (Haste, 1995, , p. 105). In Poland institution established to influe ence polish publ lic opinion was Internal Propaganda Bureau along with and Foreign F Prop paganda Bureau u. The decision to t create the Inte ernal Propagand da Bureau was connected c with th he difficult geopo olitics of Poland which rega ained independence in 1918. Territorial disputes with Germany ( (plebiscites in so outhern East Pru ussia and Upper Silesia were pro ovided for) and the issues of other norther rn, eastern and southern border rs remained undetermined, inviting of the militar ry action). The second s conf flict with Soviet Russia R from 1919 9 to 1921 was also and great pro oblem and Polish h government used the Bureau it mobilize people e and it crea ate spirit of freedo om. In the short life cycle of the e Bureau manag ged to prepare th he row of materia als. How he resu ults from archive materials depos sited in the Archive A of New Acts A (AAN, Presidium of the Cou uncil of Ministers s, 1920, 1921, file e 34) in Warsaw w Bureau have pr repared booklets s about social-economic con ntents (22 titles) ), about informat tion and politica al issues (14 title es) and about e ethical-civil conte ents (3 titles). Po osters, appe eals and magazines were supple ementing this act tivity "Messenger r from Warsaw" and a "Our Newspaper". Reich Ministry of Public En nlightenment and d Propaganda was founded on March M 13, 1933, I It was headed by y Dr. Joseph Goe ebbels and was responsible e for controlling the press and culture c of Nazi G Germany. Nazis used u to control situation s two diff ferent tools; prev ventive cens sorship and carriers of mass propaganda. Of cou urse posters, leaflets and radio broadcast b were v very popular but Nazis N included in nto the arse enal of the propaganda influence also number of movies and som me of them are as s far as until toda ay regarded as cl lassic. The simila ar situation took place in the Sov viet Union, where e the censorship Glavlit (General l Directorate for the Protection of f State s under the Coun ncil of Ministers of o the USSR)and d the propaganda a were also being used to built th he new political system s Secrets in the Press io, a cinema not to say propaganda trains were carriers of the propaganda. p To history h and contradicting the public opinion. A press, a radi wever a Soviet pr ropaganda poste er underwent. how

II. International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design 02-04 May 2013 Famagusta North Cyprus Propaganda after the World War II In propaganda actions led after the World War II we have deal with the interesting phenomenon which I would call the mirror effect ". Authorities of communist countries charged the West and the United States for conducting propaganda imperialist policies, alone simultaneously also practising the propaganda. They were using west textbooks about persuasion, announcing and influencing people, which inspiration are for example noticeable in Polish and Soviet textbooks from seventies and eightieth of XX century. On the other hand in Poland officially was printed only one book of American author to this subject. She was it is The Mind Managers" by Herbert Irving Schiller, really critical publication towards American system media. Simultaneously in textbooks published Western Europe and the United States a lot of space the were being devoted to propaganda actions in USSR and People's Republic of China, concentrating largely on the communist ideology. At justifying own action by the information politics I just named perceiving the political opponent, as this one which is practising the propaganda, the mirror effect". Propaganda action led in two earlier recalled, geopolitical areas of world, was based on diametrically other principles. Communist authorities thanks to the censorship with the help and of secret services controlled the current political situation and weren't forced to ask their own public opinion for acceptance of their actions. Politicians in Western Europe and in the United States, for the majority of one's action, had to get supporting the public opinion using different tools of the influence on this opinion. It led it to the situation, in which having a full control over the own society, communists widening the range of carriers, in practice didn't elaborate tools described in the twentieth and thirtieth of XX century (vide IPA classification), apart from the ones which resulted from the technological progress. Differently a situation was in the United States, where First Amendment to the constitution and free media being based on it, forced politicians into building the latest models of the relation with media. However in countries about democratic system of the power, manipulating public opinion and the conduct of business propaganda is a certain paradox. From one side political leaders should hold the card for steps taken by oneself and therefore will do a lot so that it is a consent "to produce". On the other whereas sides a deliberate participation of citizens in made decisions is an immanent element of democratic systems, whereas the one is possible only in case of having a necessary resource of information. In practice we dealt with the evolution of behaviours of uses of the context of their openness to the access of journalists to a front line and it seems that it is possible to single out at least three models of behaviours ruling on that subject matter: the first model - full openness to journalists, the second model - total control over the flow of information by making impossible the access to the battlefield, the third model - mixed - the access to the battlefield is possible, but surrendered to certain restrictions and closely limited. The first- model full openness to journalists Conflict in Vietnam was one from first which waited until such a wide media cover. It wasn't certainly a "television war", but the manner of the cooperation with journalists, facilitating the access for them and encouraging by United States Information Agency (USIA) in order to form one's opinion on the spot about Vietnamese conflict constituted the new quality. However they didn't discontinue own information, or rather propaganda activity, in which according to the Senator's of Fulbright about 2800 persons acted (Kunczik, Zipfel, 1998, pt. 277). It was however a military most recent operation, in which ruling let journalists relate events, without surrendering those transmissions to the more detailed control. It was connected particularly with a criticism of circles of servicemen which media accused about "losing the war". Every next armed conflict, into which involved was states of the liberal democracy, was already related under "discreet" with control of the army which has often constituted sources of information for journalists. The second model - total control over the flow of information by making impossible the access to the battlefield The first example is a War about Falklands War in 1982. Conflict started 2 April 1982, when these are Argentine soldiers, committing an act of aggression of aggression, landed on Falkland. The island relatively poorly was defended, because a little contingent of British persons was on it, nevertheless soldiers turned up stiff resistance. After all however the governor of the Rex Hunt island and British soldiers left to Uruguay. On the same day UK authorities made a decision to reflect the island. 21 April 1982 Great Britain took first military action, sending on Falklands Island group of commandos from Special Air Service (Saxon). Conflict lasted in total 72 days and both sides invested in all kinds of military forces, from the infantry through special individuals, on jacket and aviation having finished. Conflict officially was ended 20 June 1982 with victory of Great Britain which recovered the total control on Falkland Islands, widened the protective zone around islands around 150 up to 200 nautical miles, potential of the Argentine jacket and aviations were also very seriously leveled. The system of cooperation between servicemen and media was organised this way, that on every British ship on which journalists were, also a civil specialist had travelled for by public relations, of which instructing journalists was a task, what principles can relate conflict on. A censorship of all materials which via connections of the navy were supposed to be sent was his second task to Great Britain. What's interesting he was it is first conflict, from which television transmission didn't occur "live". Both Bernard Ingham, the press spokesman of the British government, as well as alone Prime Minister M. Thatcher stated that much more important cases existed, with which devoted powers of communications satellites, than television transmissions must be. How M. Hudson and J. Stainer are concluding (1998, pt. 104), if conflict about Falkland Islands would be supposed to be in some aspect unique, it was it with respect to the total weakness of media, as regards showing events live - of soldiers in the action. Second from examples of using the second model in relations army - media, is intervention USA in 1983 on the Caribbean island Grenada, former British colony. Intervention was aimed at overthrowing the Marxist government of Maurice Bishop, which after committing the coup d'tat in 1979 he took the close cooperation with Cuba as well as almost automatically was in a sphere of influence of the Soviet Union. The suspicions of the USA associated with the structure were an indirect reason of intervention on an island airports at supporting Cuba. Officially the airport was supposed to streamline tourist movements, but administration of president Ronald Reagan supposed it could be used as the staging post by Russians. What essential on an island over two hundred American students, studying at university were also St Jerzy and 400 Americans staying on an island in other purposes. Media didn't have chances to relate intervention. Commander-in-chief with operation John William Vessey forbided media the access to the island. Originally the ban was supposed to be in force but for 24 hours, then however was prolonged and J. Vessey issued the consent of landing of journalists on an island 28 October. On an island later he regarded the decision to delay landing of journalists as his mistake. Since however amongst the American public opinion a criticism associated with entering reporting restrictions grew, J. Vessey announced establishing the common commission under the chairmanship of the former head clerk public relations of the American army, general Winant Sidley. Into the make-up of the committee 6 officers and 8 representatives of the media which were supposed together to gain the compromise concerning the relation knew the right people army - media. A statement was unusually valid for it, because J. Vessey also announced that conversations would be supposed to concern marking the group of journalists out, which when the opportunity arises of next intervention and armed conflicts they could, retaining the due discretion, to move with linear units of the American army. And so an announcement of creating the latest model of the relation which for the first time was put into practice during the Gulf War turned up at 1991. 305

II. International Conference on Communication, Media, Technology and Design 02-04 May 2013 Famagusta North Cyprus

The third model - mixed - the access to the battlefield is possible, but surrendered to restrictions and closely limited First there was intervention from examples of the third application from discussed models in Iraq in 1991. USA stood up before unusually with difficult task, because the Saddam Hussein could still have a USA 1990 the year to the financial assistance and was treated as the stabilizer of situations in the Middle East. In the moment whereas when attacked Kuwait, in front of the propaganda machine USA a task of creating from the monster and showing the public opinion, especially in the USA, stood up that armed intervention in the Persian Gulf was essential. Of course CNN photographs proceeded from bombed Baghdad to the history of media which became a key as a matter of fact for popularizing the brand of this sender. Thanks to such relations the Gulf War was regarded first "television war" - related live. A system of obtaining information was a novelty, so-called "news pool system". He consisted in forming mobile teams of journalistic different media (MRT - Reporting Teams Media), assigned to different battle individuals operating on the battlefield, that is this answer directly referring to the proposal was J. Vessey and of commission established from his initiative after intervention on Grenada. Journalists from MRT teams collected audio-visual material later through hands of press officers, later whereas which he passed, thanks to military connections, found his way to London and Washington and to other journalists. He was a plus of the created model photographs "live" from the line of fights and access to most recent information. A fact that 200 of 1500 journalists which went to Saudi Arabia were in these mobile groups was a minus to relate this conflict. They also imposed restrictions, for the ones which would like to relate conflict on one's own initiative. They appointed to stay from the 100 kilometre zone, in which one wasn't allowed and they forbided to use satellite phones. Sanctions and the entire developed system turned out to be quite effective. Just a few journalists got "on one's own initiative" to Iraq in order to relate events. Repeatedly a disclosure of information only happened in news bulletins which could be potentially dangerous. Whereas the overall effect of recipients was so are participating in lasting conflict non-stop, whereas in the theory about media two new concepts appeared; "CNN effect" and "embedded journalism". With next stage which served the formalization of contacts on the line army - journalists, former intervention in Iraq, wearing the code name "Iraqi Freedom", lasting on 20 March to 15 April 2003. For directed activity propaganda in the Middle East in the federal budget a sum of 750 million dollars was set aside. Apart from developing the information strategy, a sequence of projects which let reach the population of Arab countries was started. They were these are mainly radio broadcasting stations. However before the first attack on Iraq 40 million leaflets were knocked off. CIA started also broadcasting station being engaged in a black propaganda (Tikrit Radio), which the programme line underwent the slow change from pro-Saddam for on pro-American. As for the cooperation with journalists they enabled for them, the same as 12 years earlier, informing the public opinion practically from the forefront of the warfare. What's interesting it was held at full understanding civil administration of the USA. the Pentagon allowed as far as 600 journalists to relate the warfare by branches American, taking the participation in the operation. Victoria Clarke, being an assistant for public relations of the Defence Secretary, pointed, why it is in the interest of a USA: is in our business so that people see via news media, lies and deceptive tactics which the Saddam Hussein is using. Whereas media went so far that the part of journalists obtained the equipment allowing for fast bringing up from the richest stations oneself in field conditions. A team of principles prepared by the Department of Defence was a price for luxurious working conditions USA which had to be accepted through with departure for the mission. They constituted the significant novelty in relations on the line army journalists and were a next stage of formalizing these relations. Old techniques - new challenges In the course of seventy last years propaganda techniques evolved. It is effect of technological progress, especially processes connected with the digitization but earlier also with the development of techniques of processing of a television picture and the photograph. In classical putting together drawn up by Institute of Analysis Propagation of propaganda techniques was seven: name calling, glittering generalities, transfer, testimonial, plain folks, card stacking, band wagon (IPA, Propaganda Analysis, Vol. I, No. 2 (1937). Soviet scientist R. Borecki is exchanging them as many as seventeen. There are elements repeated from classification drawn up by IPA here, but are and new techniques so as "overtaking version", "information-propaganda induction", whether technique "of assembly mystifications. In contemporary publications it is possible to find these techniques already several dozen (Borecki, 1987, p. 127-139). From perspective for the recipient however something changed. Technological progress is not only propaganda new techniques but also a birth of the Internet which reached recipients to the mass scale in the nineties. Peculiarly the occurrences associated with the new philosophy of the Internet were crucial - with philosophy "2.0 Web". Instead of with passive consumer if it took place so far, every Internet user could become an author of his content. It resulted in the appearance of community media. Linking such institutions as Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, Vimeo and blogophere, became a tremendous tool of the influence on the public opinion. The tool, on which goverments lost the control. Passive users, according to the concept "2.0 Web" became active participants in the process of announcing, creatively elaborating the ideas of the classical propaganda, concerning for example a poster. Using photomontages and caricatures with classic propaganda motives they are used today to attack and to compromise action of ruling but also global corporations and the Internet serves diffusing them. Conclusions Thanks of the technological evolution, conduct of operations from the scope of the internal propaganda, addressed to own citizens, became much more difficult. Recipients gained the new communication channel which are among them popular, are more and more often an alternative to traditional media and are difficult to control. For the first time and so we are dealing with the process of the communication about more even-tempered character. The decision-makers responsible for the propaganda and the political public relations, irrespective of the latitude, must stand up to this process. References Borecki R. (1987). Propaganda a polityka. Warszawa: Centralny Orodek Metodyczny Studiw Politycznych; Haste C. (1995). "The Machinery of Propaganda". In Jackall R., Vidich A. J. (Ed.) Propaganda, pp. 105-136, New York: New York University Press,; Hudson M., Stainer J. (1998). War and the Media, New York; IPA, Propaganda Analysis, Vol. I, No. 2 (1937), [in:] Jackall R., Vidich A. J. (ed.) Propaganda, pp. 217-224, New York: New York University Press; Jackall R., Hirota J.M. (1995). Americas First Propaganda Ministry: The Committee on Public Information During the Great War, [in:] Jackall R., Vidich A. J. (ed.) Propaganda, pp. 137-173, New York: New York University Press; Jarecka U. (2008). Propaganda susznej wojny. Media wizualne XX wieku wobec konfliktw zbrojnych. Warszawa: IFiS PAN; Jowett G.S., O`Donnell V. (2006). Propaganda and persuasion. Thousand Oaks: Sage; Kunczik M., Zipfel A. (2005). Wprowadzenie do nauki o dziennikarstwie. Warszawa: Scholar; Manning M., Romerstein H. (2004). Historical Dictionary of American Propaganda. Westport, Connecticut; London; Grenwood Press; Schiller H.I. (1976). Sternicy wiadomoci. Krakw: Orodek Bada Prasoznawczych; Sproule J.M. (1991). Propaganda and American ideological critique. [in:] J.A. Anderson (Ed.) Communication Yearbook 14 Thomson O. (2001). Historia propagandy. Warszawa: Ksika i Wiedza. 306