propaganda

Bandwagon as a propaganda technique: When ‘participating’ is used as a geopolitical weapon

What is the bandwagon technique?

Bandwagon is a propaganda technique that utilizes the instinct of human participation in a systematic manner. It has a simple but deadly basic idea, creating the impression that “everyone is on this side” and that others will join in not because they think critically, but because they are afraid of being left behind, afraid of being seen as wrong, or afraid of being ostracized. In international relations, this technique not only affects public opinion but is also used to pressure countries to follow certain geopolitical positions, build alliances that seem “inevitable,” and delegitimize anyone who chooses not to participate. Motin (2024), in his study on bandwagoning in international relations, explains the behavior of the bandwagon of small and medium countries that are greatly influenced by the perception of global power distribution. When a great power manages to convince the world that it is “winning” or that its position is already the consensus of the majority, other weaker nations tend to conform to that power to avoid the risk of being on the losing side. This is the essence of the bandwagon in propaganda, manipulating perceptions of who is superior. (Dylan Motin, 2024)

Theoretical Roots: Balancing vs Bandwagon

In the theory of international relations, bandwagoning always coexists with the concept of its opponent, namely balancing. According to Cladi & Locatelli (2015), he explained about the alliance theory that states basically have two choices when facing dominating powers, namely by balancing or following (bandwagoning). These decisions are not always taken solely based on strategic calculations but are greatly influenced by the way information regarding the balance of power is conveyed and perceived. This is where the propaganda bandwagon comes into play: through the manipulation of views about who is stronger and more numerous, countries can be invited to ‘join in’ even though the current has actually been set up. A study on alliance theory, published by OPS Alaska Academic in 2003, confirms that in an anarchist international system, small countries are particularly vulnerable to pressure to join because they do not have the resources to independently verify claims about international consensus. They tend to respond to the signals that are most powerful and appear most often in their information environment. These signals can be easily affected by large forces through various operations. (Cladi & Locatelli, 2015) (Thomas Gangale, 2003)

How Does Bandwagon Work in the Field?

To understand this technique concretely, we can look at the example of Sri Lanka discussed in the International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (2015). The study notes how Sri Lanka, during various periods of internal conflict and international pressure, constantly had to navigate between two great powers, each trying to create a narrative that ‘joins us because all that is rational is here.’ ‘Sri Lanka is a prime example of a small country that is the target of bandwagon propaganda from multiple parties at once, where each major power seeks to create the illusion of consensus that they represent the majority of the world. Nanyang Technological University’s RSIS said that the simple division between balancing and bandwagoning is no longer sufficient to explain the behavior of countries in the now much more complex international system. Countries not only choose to fight or follow but also hedge, that is, pretend to follow while secretly maintaining a strategic distance. In addition, bandwagon propaganda techniques are increasingly being used to complicate these hedging options by creating increasingly strong social and reputational pressure on countries that are reluctant to publicly declare their choice (Gunasekara, 2015) (Ian, 2003) (Ian, 2003).

Bandwagon in the Global Disinformation Machine

One of the aspects that makes the bandwagon even more dangerous today is the way it works, which is integrated with large-scale disinformation operations. In the Journal of Advanced Military Studies, it is explained that contemporary political warfare involves not only conventional military power but also efforts to create an information environment that makes resistance feel illogical and futile. The bandwagon serves as a key psychological mechanism in building such an environment: when all sources of information seem to convey the same message, even the most critical individuals begin to doubt their own judgment. The Oxford Internet Institute notes in their in-depth report that in 2020, at least 81 countries have used organized social media strategies to reinforce the impression that their governments have broad support from the public, both domestically and internationally. Thousands of bot accounts and cooperating accounts are launched to fill public discussion spaces with consistent messages, creating a very convincing illusion of consensus. When people turn to social media and see that ‘everyone’ seems to support a certain narrative, the bandwagon effect automatically takes effect, even without realizing it. (Forest, 2021) (Forest, 2021) (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020), (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020)

Closing: Thinking Independently as the Last Fortress

The effective bandwagon technique is not because the people or the target country are less intelligent. Its effectiveness lies in the use of something fundamental, namely, the desire to side with the right side and the fear of the consequences of loneliness. In the context of international relations, the consequences can be diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions, or loss of access to security alliances. This pressure prompted many countries to go with the flow even though the currents were made up of the Oxford Internet Institute emphasizing that to counter the modern bandwagon propaganda operation, goodwill alone is not enough. It requires a real combination that includes the state’s ability to detect information manipulation early on and the public’s critical awareness of the narrative it constructs, as well as a serious investment in an analytical capacity that is completely independent of the influence of great powers. The state can verify claims about its own ‘international consensus’ and not only rely on information crowded in the media or digital platforms. A state that has true sovereignty in the era of this global information war. Ultimately, the most effective weapon against bandwagon propaganda is the ability to question things in a simple but critical way: is it true that everyone is involved, or is it just an illusion deliberately created to force your involvement? (Samantha Bradshaw et al., 2020)

Source link

Milano Cortina acting as ‘propaganda for Russia’, says banned Heraskevych | Winter Olympics News

Ukrainian skeleton racer Heraskevych says 2006 Winter Olympics ‘acts as propoganda for Russia’ after IOC decision.

The Court ⁠of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) began hearing Ukrainian skeleton racer Vladyslav Heraskevych’s appeal on Friday, with a decision expected later in the day on whether he can return to competition at ⁠the Milano Cortina Olympics after his disqualification over his “helmet of remembrance”.

The 27-year-old was removed from the Olympic programme on Thursday when the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation jury ruled that imagery on the helmet — depicting ⁠athletes killed since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 — breached rules on political neutrality at the Games.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Heraskevych is seeking reinstatement or at least a CAS-supervised run, pending a decision by sport’s highest court in advance of the final two runs set for Friday evening.

“I’m pretty positive about how it went,” he told reporters outside the office of CAS ‌in Milan following his appearance before the court. “I hope the truth will prevail, and I know that I was innocent.”

The racer said he was now getting threats from Russians and blamed the IOC’s decision for that.

“I believe that these Games now and this act of the IOC also serves as an instrument of propaganda for Russia,” Heraskevych said. “I still receive a lot of threats from the Russian side.”

The IOC, whose president, Kirsty Coventry, met Heraskevych on Thursday in a last-ditch effort to break the impasse, has ⁠allowed the athlete to keep his credentials despite his disqualification, so he can ⁠stay at the Milano Cortina Games.

“For me, sitting down with Vladyslav and his dad, the conversation was extremely respectful,” Coventry told a news conference on Friday. “After that, I asked the disciplinary commission to re-look at not pulling his accreditation, out of respect for him ⁠and his dad. I thought that was the right thing to do.”

The case has dominated headlines in the first week of the Olympics.

CAS Secretary-General Matthieu Reeb ⁠could not say exactly when they were likely to reach a ⁠decision, despite the tight schedule.

“We hope to have a final decision announced today, but it’s difficult for me to say when,” Reeb told reporters. “Obviously, we know the schedule of the competition, and it is an objective for CAS to be able to run the decision ‌before the start of the race, but we don’t know how long the hearing will take.

“We have only one arbitrator from Germany, and she will be in charge of this case. We have participants attending in ‌person, ‌like the IOC, the athlete is here, the father of the athlete is here.

“We have a representative of IBSF attending remotely. The athlete is also assisted by legal counsel speaking from Kyiv.”

Source link