Editing Propaganda (section)

===Contestation===

The term is essentially contested and some have argued for a neutral definition,<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/14616700220145641 |title = Strategic Communications or Democratic Propaganda?|journal = Journalism Studies|volume = 3|issue = 3|pages = 437–441|year = 2002|last1 = Taylor|first1 = Philip M.|s2cid = 144546254}}</ref><ref name="Briant2015p9">{{Cite book |jstor = j.ctt18mvn1n|title = Propaganda and Counter-terrorism|last1 = Briant|first1 = Emma Louise|year = 2015|isbn = 9780719091056|publisher = Manchester University Press|location=Manchester|page=9}}</ref> arguing that ethics depend on intent and context,<ref name="Briant2015">{{Cite book |jstor = j.ctt18mvn1n|title = Propaganda and Counter-terrorism|last1 = Briant|first1 = Emma Louise|year = 2015|isbn = 9780719091056|publisher = Manchester University Press|location=Manchester}}</ref> while others define it as necessarily unethical and negative.<ref>Doob, L.W. (1949), Public Opinion and Propaganda, London: Cresset Press p 240</ref> [[Emma Briant]] defines it as "the deliberate manipulation of representations (including text, pictures, video, speech etc.) with the intention of producing any effect in the audience (e.g. action or inaction; reinforcement or transformation of feelings, ideas, attitudes or behaviours) that is desired by the propagandist."<ref name="Briant2015p9" /> The same author explains the importance of consistent terminology across history, particularly as contemporary euphemistic synonyms are used in governments' continual efforts to rebrand their operations such as 'information support' and [[strategic communication]].<ref name="Briant2015p9" /> Other scholars also see benefits to acknowledging that propaganda can be interpreted as beneficial or harmful, depending on the message sender, target audience, message, and context.<ref name=":0" />

David Goodman argues that the 1936 [[League of Nations]] "Convention on the Use of Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace" tried to create the standards for a liberal international public sphere. The Convention encouraged empathetic and neighborly radio broadcasts to other nations. It called for League prohibitions on international broadcast containing hostile speech and false claims. It tried to define the line between liberal and illiberal policies in communications, and emphasized the dangers of nationalist chauvinism. With Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia active on the radio, its liberal goals were ignored, while free speech advocates warned that the code represented restraints on free speech.<ref>David Goodman, "Liberal and Illiberal Internationalism in the Making of the League of Nations Convention on Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace." ''Journal of World History'' 31.1 (2020): 165-193. [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/750118/pdf excerpt]</ref>