The concept of information warfare
Information influences on the mass consciousness have always existed. Shamans and priests also used it as a technology when they tried to "design the future" in one direction or another.
For the first time, the term "psychological warfare" was used in 1920 by the British historian J. Fuller, who analyzed the First World War. And this term was adopted by the Americans. They date the actual use of the term to 1940. The corresponding English version of this term is "political war". The term "psychological operations" was first used in the document by Captain (then Rear Admiral) E. Zakharia. It was this term that began to be used in American official documents in 1957, because it made it possible to apply the appropriate tools in the absence of large-scale military operations. This toolkit can be applied not only to enemies, but also to neutral countries or even allies.
Interestingly, the modern term used by NATO, namely "information operations", can be used in general in the absence of a hint of hostilities. This is, for example, the case of peacekeeping operations. However, according to analysts, a peaceful situation is even more difficult for the use of psychological operations, since it is characterized by a fairly dynamic change in the environment, whereas in the case of military operations it has a relatively stable character.
Psychological/information operations in different periods attracted varying degrees of attention from government and military structures. As a result of the Vietnam War, for example, the importance of this area decreased, it was not represented at the highest levels of military leadership. And it was then that American society felt disillusioned with its own military forces.
Education in this field in the United States began with the Air Force Special Operations School, where a corresponding course was introduced in 1967. But already in 1968, due to the lack of additional funding, it was closed. Since 1974, training of officers in the strategy and tactics of psychological operations, its planning and implementation began again at the same school.
The term "propaganda" is the oldest of all these terms. The word first appears in the name of the relevant institution in 1622, when Pope Urban VIII founded the Congregation for Propaganda as a commission of cardinals who were to be responsible for the church's foreign missions. Here, as in the case of psychological warfare, we are talking only about a foreign audience. In the XVIII and XIX centuries, the word propaganda was completely neutral, it meant the spread of political ideas.
In the 20th century, the active use of this term during the First World War in both the USSR and Germany turned it into a far from neutral concept, which in some cases received a purely negative meaning.
Today, the term propaganda can again be neutral for general consumption, although it is more often used as a journalistic negative definition of the actions of certain information units, especially the military. This applies to cases of political confrontation, when opponents may point to their opponent's statement as propaganda.
Definition We are primarily interested in various types of systemic effects on individual and mass consciousness. There are quite a lot of such impacts. It can be a newspaper article, a totalitarian sect, or the advice of an authoritative person. These are all cases of how information affects our decision-making.
Psychological warfare (operations) are communication technologies aimed at making changes in an individual's behavior by modifying his model of the world, which is carried out by making changes to information flows.
All American definitions clearly point to a foreign audience as an object of communicative influence. The American military dictionary also points in this case to a "hostile foreign audience", which further "diverts" the use of these methods from its own audience. However, today, in the presence of global communication flows, it is difficult to influence another audience without simultaneously misleading your own. Any messages can easily cross borders and become known simultaneously to everyone at once.
Interestingly, even the requirements for the personnel of psychological operations units speak of understanding, or even love for the target audience, hatred for it should stay at home. This again speaks not only about the need to know your audience, but also about the fact that emotionally this audience may be a stranger to the communicator.
Information wars are information technologies that affect information systems in order to mislead the mass or individual consciousness, disable or desynchronize the processes of managing society and its components, primarily the military.
Win Schwartow, who is an adept in this field in the United States, writes: "Information warfare is an electronic conflict where information is a strategic achievement worth capturing or destroying. Both computers and information systems are becoming an attractive first strike destination."
Propaganda is a term that has been causing negative associations since the First World War, so some countries still avoid it.
By propaganda, we will understand intensive communication processes aimed at changing the behavior of the audience they are attuned to. The origins of propaganda can be seen in any human civilization.
It is essential for views on propaganda to try to separate it from other options for communicative influence, such as advertising or selective technologies. In history and theory, two possible variants of influence have been identified, called manipulative and amplifying theories. As an example of the possibilities of manipulative theory, fascist Germany is cited, which, under the leadership of Goebbels, achieved unprecedented success in this. According to this theory, communication can change the attitude of the population in any direction. Today's example of such an active role is the theory that considers the press as such, setting the order of the day for society. We are discussing only what is written in this list. The facts that were not included in it remain unknown to society. Within the framework of reinforcement theory, it is believed that it is quite difficult to convince people otherwise if they already have their own opinion about an object or event. Propaganda in its old sense is more about the first approach. Advertising is already a representative of the second, it is closer to the amplifying theory.
Another approach to distinguishing these processes is an attempt to focus on two variants of communication goals: on the one hand, it can be the generation of messages, on the other - the generation of positive contexts of a future decision. Public relations (and with it propaganda) may concern the generation of positive contexts. Advertising - generates a message. Although modern image advertising is also aimed at creating contexts. Based on the fact that propaganda is distinguished by how dedicated the propagandist is to it.
The search for the right definition can go in this direction as well.
Propaganda is "white" when the source is known, "black" if not, or the source is distorted. "Gray" propaganda can have both a known and an unknown source. The source becomes hidden if the propagandist does not want to associate the goals of the message with himself. Such an emphasis on secrecy even makes it possible to classify propaganda messages, to talk about both significant changes in behavior that the propagandist wants to cause, and about the inconsistency of these goals with the norms of the audience. In addition, effective postcards encouraging desertion never hide that they are coming from the enemy.
Hitler distinguished between propaganda and organizational needs: the task of propaganda is to recruit supporters, the task of the organization is to recruit party members. Successfully completed the first task reduces the need for a second one. There is also an opposite view, when the importance of propaganda training is belittled, it is believed that the transition of power can be carried out by any circumstance by a successful choice of the direction of the strike. However, L. Trotsky himself, whom the author praises and promotes as a model, spoke negatively about the book.
K. Malaya defined an important aspect of the modern methodology of military operations - an asymmetric strike. The state always acts symmetrically where it is much stronger, so it can only be defeated in asymmetric situations that are fundamentally unexpected. It was not only the revolutionaries of K.'s time who did this. Rice and parte, but also modern terrorists.
Here are some other approaches to defining propaganda. J.
Brown speaks of propaganda as some kind of doctrine or practice that is based on influencing the emotional attitude of others. Effective propaganda is really located and operates in the emotional layer of influence, and not in the rational, because in the rational one can find not only arguments, but also counterarguments, and this can immediately include counteraction.
F. Taylor, director of the Institute of Communication Studies at the University of Leeds (UK), focuses in propaganda on trying to serve the one who organizes this process. This is a communication whose task is to satisfy the interests of the people who carry out this communication. At the same time, he considers Public Relations the best name for this direction in general. But, in our opinion, in this case it will be difficult to distinguish between advertising and propaganda. Successful in his approach is the emphasis on the fact that propaganda is defined by what needs to be talked about and what needs to be kept silent.
J. Jowett and W. O'Donnell define propaganda as "pre-planned and systematic attempts to shape perception, manipulate understanding and direct behavior in order to achieve results that satisfy the propagandist" * 148. Here again, the emphasis is on the discrepancy between the aspirations of the propagandist and the one who receives his information. But, in our opinion, it is quite difficult to distinguish what corresponds and what does not correspond to the desire of the audience.
A. Edelstein introduces the concept of new propaganda, which, in his opinion, is being formed today according to other laws. If the old propaganda is totalitarian and is directed from a small number of communicators to many, then the new propaganda is democratic and is set as a product of communication from many to many. If the old propaganda was characterized by limited access and homogeneity, the new one is characterized by wide access and diversity. The old propaganda is characterized by simplified messages and the security of its forms, the new propaganda is characterized by the complexity of messages and the creation of new language forms. He believes that the modern American president, communicating with voters via the Internet, is an example of new propaganda. Everyone has access to such communication, everyone is its creator, therefore, this is a variant of a new version of propaganda.
The old propaganda is focused on the values of production, the new one is focused on the values of consumption. If the first one is set by the leaders, then the second one is set by consensus. If the first is governed by rules, then the second is the situation as a whole, if communication facilitates the opportunities for individuals and groups to participate in popular culture, then this is new propaganda, if it reduces, then this is old propaganda. The model constructed by A. Edelstein focuses on the changes that occur in propaganda itself when there is a transition to new forms of influence.
Propaganda as an intensive communication technology constantly needs the use of new methods and new research theories, since it has applied goals that require constant updating in all mechanisms. Humanity is changing, and with it the methods of influence are changing, moving from simple to much more complex.
