Media Education as a Tool for Global Justice - An overview of dissemination and propaganda and how to combat it through media literacy

“Media plays a significant role in our lives. The world of news has undergone a  fundamental change in both scope and content.” (Merkki Museo, Helsinki) 

Introduction 

Europe has long navigated complex challenges, but today, the continent faces a climate of  growing tension fuelled by issues such as immigration and climate change. This is not just another  European situation; it is happening globally. Amplifying these tensions is the pervasive spread of  propaganda, which has become a powerful driver of far-right ideologies worldwide. Social media  platforms exacerbate the problem by using algorithms that prioritise sensationalist content, creating  echo chambers where extremist views are normalised. Biased news channels reinforce these  ideologies by framing societal issues such as immigration, economic inequality, and cultural identity,  in ways that incite fear and division. Influential public figures and media personalities further  perpetuate this rhetoric, leveraging their platforms to spread xenophobic, misogynistic, and  nationalist narratives. 

  The consequences of this propaganda-driven dynamic are profound. As Leiviskä (2024)  highlights, propaganda fosters ideological and emotional divides, intensifying political polarisation.  This polarisation erodes trust in democratic institutions, legitimises anti-democratic attitudes, and  makes political compromise increasingly unattainable. The result is a climate of hostility and mistrust  that threatens the cohesion of European societies and undermines their democratic foundations. 

  In this context, media education offers a critical solution. By equipping individuals with the  skills to analyse media discourses critically, media education can counteract propaganda and foster a  more informed, democratic society. This essay examines how propaganda sustains far-right  ideologies, explores the role of media education in improving media literacy, and presents actionable  strategies at macro, meso, and micro levels to address this pressing issue. 

Propaganda and far-right discourses 

  Bruce Lannes Smith (2024) defines propaganda as disseminating information—facts,  arguments, rumours, half-truths, or lies—to influence public opinion. This definition encapsulates how propaganda has become a powerful tool for promoting far-right ideologies in Europe, exploiting emotional and cognitive vulnerabilities to foster division and extremism. The rise of social media and online platforms has further amplified its impact, enabling the rapid spread of misinformation and disinformation, which fuels societal fractures. 

Propaganda operates through diverse mechanisms that shape public opinion in distinct ways.  Social media platforms, for instance, prioritise engagement over accuracy, creating spaces where sensationalist and polarising content thrives. This dynamic allows fabricated stories aligned with far right narratives, such as exaggerated claims about immigration or cultural "threats", to go through unchecked. Wodak (2015) highlights how far-right movements capitalise on fear of "the other" to construct divisive "us vs. them" narratives, further deepening societal divides. 

  Even legitimate news channels contribute to this phenomenon, though unintentionally, by  embedding subtle biases in their reporting. Coverage of immigration, for example, often  disproportionately emphasises crime or economic burdens, perpetuating harmful stereotypes.  Zembylas (2023) points out such language undermines citizens' ability to engage in rational,  constructive discourse, exacerbating polarisation and eroding trust in democratic processes. 

 Beyond these systemic mechanisms, charismatic leaders and influencers play a pivotal role in normalising extremist rhetoric. By appealing to fears of economic insecurity, cultural change, and societal decline, they present themselves as defenders of traditional values, effectively sidelining dissenting voices. Together, these interwoven mechanisms amplify and sustain far-right ideologies,  reshaping public discourse and societal attitudes to align with divisive and exclusionary narratives. 

The widespread use of propaganda contributes to political and affective polarisation. Leiviskä  (2024) notes this polarisation weakens democratic institutions, fosters hostility toward marginalised groups, and normalises antidemocratic attitudes. This creates a vicious cycle where propaganda undermines trust, making societies more susceptible to authoritarian and populist rhetoric. 

Media Education  

 Media education is a powerful measure of countering the spread of propaganda by equipping  individuals with the skills to recognise, analyse, and challenge manipulative media content. Media  education fosters the ability to critically engage with media messages, assess their credibility, and  understand broader socio-political implications. Also, media literacy extends beyond evaluating  factual accuracy, it requires emotional awareness. Propaganda frequently exploits emotions such as  fear and resentment to influence perceptions and deepen societal divides. As Zembylas (2023)  emphasises, addressing these affective dimensions is essential for building resilience against  manipulative narratives and fostering informed, critical engagement with the media.

 In a world saturated with information, media education provides the tools necessary to navigate disinformation and combat the manipulation of public opinion. Critical analysis forms a cornerstone of media education, enabling individuals to deconstruct media messages by identifying biases, emotional triggers, and the intent behind the content. This skill allows learners to move beyond surface-level engagement, developing a deeper understanding of how media manipulates emotions and reinforces stereotypes. Fact-checking skills are another critical component of media education, providing individuals with practical tools to assess the validity of information. Frameworks such as the “STOP-THINK CHECK” model encourage users to pause when confronted with emotionally charged content,  evaluate the motives behind it, and cross-reference claims with credible sources. These steps reduce the spread of propaganda by promoting discernment in digital spaces, helping users distinguish between information and disinformation. 

Solnit’s (2016) notion of embracing uncertainty can also be integrated into media education  strategies. Educators can foster a mindset that values inquiry and open dialogue by teaching  individuals to recognise the gaps and biases in media narratives. For example, rather than seeking  immediate answers or succumbing to fear-based propaganda, learners can be encouraged to explore  multiple perspectives, echoing Solnit’s call for hope as an active and critical engagement with the  unknown. 

Finally, media education fosters empathy and dialogue, which are essential for countering  divisive narratives. Promoting open discussions on controversial issues encourages understanding of  diverse perspectives and challenges polarising ideologies. Constructive dialogue creates opportunities  to address both the emotional and relational aspects of propaganda, as Zembylas (2023) highlights,  building resilience against manipulation. 

Together, these components of media education empower individuals to critically engage with  media, resist propaganda, and contribute to a more informed, equitable, and democratic society. 

Levels of Action 

Macro-level: national and international policy initiatives 

Efforts to combat propaganda and disinformation at the macro level often focus on regulating digital platforms and promoting transparency. In the European Union, the Digital Services Act (DSA)  and the Code of Practice on Disinformation, social media platforms are required to act against fake news and harmful disinformation. These regulations enforce transparency in moderation practices, limit the monetisation of fake content, and require platforms to report on their efforts, particularly in times of crisis. Although, the EU does not require platforms to verify all user-generated content.  

However, current policies fall short, as propaganda endures and often relies not on pure  inventions, but on presenting misleading contexts to specific situations. For example, Leiviskä (2024)  highlights how carefully crafted narratives can exploit pre-existing fears and prejudices, subtly reinforcing far-right ideologies without breaking explicit rules. These subtleties make dealing with  propaganda more complex than simply debunking fake news. 

A key factor contributing to the persistence of propaganda is the role of journalists and content creators. Headlines are framed in ways that sensationalise or distort the interpretation of events. Revising and strengthening professional codes of ethics in journalism is essential to address this.  Journalism education should emphasise ethical reporting and accountability, ensuring that future  professionals prioritise transparency and fairness. In addition, the emergence of new roles such as  communicators and influencers demands the creation of ethical guidelines designed for these  professions. These measures are essential to ensure the integrity of information and, by extension, the  health of democratic societies. 

Consequences must be enforced for organisations and individuals who knowingly disseminate false or misleading information, such as platform fines or legal action against intentional disseminators. Transparency requirements, such as disclosure of funding sources for political campaigns or media outlets, could further deter manipulative practices and protect democratic values. 

However, implementing such measures comes with challenges. Propaganda spreads at a pace that far exceeds the capacity of fact-checking tools, and efforts to monitor content often raise concerns about freedom of expression. Moreover, as Zembylas (2023) points out, elites and powerful political actors may have a personal stake in maintaining the current landscape of misinformation, as it often serves their agendas. 

Meso-level: local communities and organisations 

At the meso level, institutions and communities play a pivotal role in expanding media  education and promoting media literacy across different demographic groups. Local communities,  educational establishments and organisations can implement initiatives that facilitate critical  engagement with media content, while also addressing the broader societal impacts of propaganda and disinformation. 

One of the most impactful strategies is the incorporation of media education into the  curriculum of educational establishments. Group discussions highlighted the importance of critical engagement with media content. These insights underscore the necessity of incorporating media education into curricula to develop discerning audiences. As Mihailidis (2020) observed, integrating  media literacy into the educational system is vital for equipping future generations with the critical thinking abilities to navigate the intricate media environments they encounter. To ensure the success  of this initiative, it is essential to provide teacher education.  

Furthermore, faculties of education should integrate courses designed to equip future  educators with the skills to promote critical thinking and media literacy (Leu et al., 2008). Teacher  training programmes can also provide current educators with the necessary tools to guide their  students in analysing media narratives and identifying biases. In addition, schools could host  workshops to enhance students' media literacy. These initiatives may also be classified as micro-level  actions. 

Beyond the educational establishment, communities can engage with a broader audience through intergenerational workshops. Propaganda and misinformation affect all age groups, making community-wide media education necessary. Group work sessions during the course also reinforced the importance of intergenerational approaches in media education. A key takeaway was how community-driven initiatives, like those implemented by Mediakasvatusseura in Finland, can bring  together diverse age groups to navigate media landscapes. Incorporating these practices ensures that  media education is inclusive and relevant, catering to varied learning needs and fostering communal resilience against misinformation. 

Furthermore, public media channels can be an example of fair practices. Television and radio broadcasts, social media campaigns, and publicly funded media outlets could be utilised to disseminate clear, accurate, and engaging content that emphasises the significance of media literacy.  As the European Commission (2022) asserts, public media can play a pivotal role in fostering democratic engagement and transparency, particularly when they spread dependable, fact-checked information. This approach establishes a standard for responsible media communication. For instance, producing brief documentaries, interactive programmes or segments focusing on identifying misinformation and examining media bias could enhance awareness on a more extensive scale.  

An additional illustration of institutional initiatives can be observed in the Netherlands, where  the Central Planning Bureau (CPB) works to enhance transparency in electoral campaigns. The CPB  performs an independent assessment of the feasibility of campaign policy proposals, evaluating their economic and social impact. In advance of elections, the results are publicised, enabling voters to check the viability of the various party platforms. While not all political parties participate, this  process amplifies public trust in democratic processes and promotes informed decision-making.

Nevertheless, these initiatives are confronted with considerable obstacles. Integrating media education into an already congested school curriculum can prove challenging, particularly for institutions with restricted resources (Kellner, 2009). Furthermore, promoting critical engagement with the media may be controversial in ideologically driven contexts, such as some religious schools  in Spain, where the subject matter of disinformation could conflict with existing narratives.  

Micro-level: classroom initiatives 

At the micro-level, empowering students to engage with media critically is fundamental to developing media literacy. One of the most effective methods for cultivating this skill in students is integrating media into classroom activities. Using media in education should not be seen as an obstacle, but rather as a valuable instrument for engaging students, initiating discussions, and making learning more pertinent to the issues that affect their daily lives. Using media can facilitate students to establish a connection between the theoretical concepts they are learning and the practical applications they encounter in the real world. 

One of the most pivotal aspects of teaching media literacy is establishing a secure and  nurturing environment where students can explore and discuss complex or controversial topics in a comfortable and supportive manner. In this context, it is important to encourage students to recognise their capacity for critical analysis and evaluation of media messages. Such an environment should also equip students to navigate the internet safely, understand the potential risks, and discern credible sources from those unreliable.  

A specific proposal for a classroom activity could begin with examining headlines on the same issue from different news sources, to then analyse their words and content. The goal is to discover how disparate news outlets present the same event. In this activity, students examine the nuances in how stories are presented and, the implications these differences have on public perception. To  illustrate, one headline might portray a protest as an "outburst of violence," whereas another might  depict it as a "peaceful demonstration for justice." This exercise enables students to recognize how language and framing shape narratives and influence reader's responses. 

After this exercise, students could then describe a situation from their school or classroom from their perspectives. Then, read them aloud so students can learn first-hand how the choice of words can alter the narrative and the perceived significance of the event. This exercise enhances students' media literacy while facilitating the discourse on the mechanisms of media manipulation within society. Topics such as propaganda, bias, and misinformation may arise naturally from these discussions, making them more pertinent and engaging for students.

However, integrating media literacy into the classroom also presents a few challenges. Again,  the lack of time and resources often impedes the implementation of such activities. Furthermore,  some topics, particularly those about controversial or political matters, may evoke resistance from families or communities who perceive these subjects as unsuitable for the classroom. Moreover, the structure of media literacy activities may give rise to the perception that they are promoting a specific agenda or ideological stance, which could be perceived as indoctrination. It is crucial to balance facilitating open dialogue and demonstrating sensitivity to these concerns to integrate media literacy into the classroom. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, propaganda poses a significantly concerning threat to the foundations of  democracy and social cohesion in Europe and globally. By capitalising on fear and division,  manipulative narratives erode trust in institutions and polarise societies. Media education provides an essential way to tackle this challenge, teaching individuals the necessary skills to engage with media content critically, recognise biases, and resist manipulation. 

It is essential for a multi-level approach to effectively address the propaganda phenomenon,  necessitating collaboration between initiatives at the macro, meso, and micro levels. Implementing policies such as the Digital Services Act fosters transparency and accountability among digital platforms. Also, community workshops and institutional programmes can enhance media literacy amongst individuals from different demographic backgrounds. In educational settings, students must have the skills to effectively navigate media landscapes and challenge misleading narratives, fostering critical thinking and informed engagement. 

Despite challenges such as resource limitations and ideological resistance, these initiatives are vital for reducing the harm caused by propaganda. Media education strengthens democratic values by encouraging dialogue, empathy, and resilience against misinformation. 

My experiences dealing with misinformation have demonstrated how pervasive and  influential manipulative narratives can be. The ability to critically analyse media content has enabled me to resist propaganda and facilitated a deeper understanding of societal dynamics. This has reinforced my belief in the transformative potential of media education, both at an individual level and within society. By prioritising media literacy, we can empower others to uphold the values of truth, equity and the democratic principles that bind us.

REFERENCES 

Bruce Lannes Smith. (2024). Propaganda. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from  https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda 

European Commission. (2022). Guidelines for teachers and educators on tackling disinformation  and promoting digital literacy through education and training. Retrieved from  https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/312488 

European Commission. (n.d.). Code of Practice on Disinformation. Retrieved from https://digital strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-disinformation 

Hilde, T., & Kellner, D. (1996). Media culture: Cultural studies, identity and politics between the  modern and the postmodern. South Central Review, 13(1), 84.  

https://doi.org/10.2307/3189938 

Leiviskä, A. (2024). Political polarization, legitimacy and democratic education. Ethics and  Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2024.2414628 

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., & Donnelly, K. (2008). Handbook of research on new literacies. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Mihailidis, P. (2020). Media literacy. Encyclopedia of Journalism (2nd ed.). 

Munro, A. (2024, September 28). Populism. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from  https://www.britannica.com/topic/populism 

Solnit, R. (2016). Hope in the dark: Untold histories, wild possibilities (3rd ed.). Haymarket Books. 

Wodak, R. (2015). The politics of fear. SAGE Publications Ltd.  

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270073 

Zembylas, M. (2023). Affective governmentality, political sensitivity, and right-wing populism:  Toward a political grammar of feelings in democratic education. PROSPECTS, 53(3–4),  325–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-021-09569-3 

Zembylas, M. (2023). Moving beyond debunking conspiracy theories from a narrow epistemic lens:  Ethical and political implications for education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 31(4), 741– 756. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1948911