Indicators of Propaganda and Scholarship

(Bodi, 1995, pp. 23-24; Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23)

Propaganda Scholarship

Excessive and grandiose “claims of certainty” (Gambrill, Describes and acknowledges “limits of data” (Gambrill,
1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Employs ridicule or personal attacks (Gambrill, 1992, as “Presents an accurate representation of alternative”
cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). viewpoints (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p.
23).

Appeals to emotion, rather than logic (Gambrill, 1992, as Offers data supporting and refuting viewpoint (Gambrill,
cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Manipulates or distorts data to support point-of-view Encourages discussion, debate, criticism, and question
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 24). (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Suppresses opposing point-of-views and contradictions Answers disputes by employing widely “accepted criteria
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). for evaluating data” (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi,
1995, p. 23).

“Appeals to popular prejudices” and biases(Gambrill, Searches for countering viewpoints and examples
1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

“Relies on Suggestions” and Negative Innuendo “Uses language in agreed-upon”, accepted ways
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Devalues and dismisses critical thinking and appraisal Information is updated (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi,
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). 1995, p. 23).

Transforms or augments language to suit purpose Ignorance is admitted (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi,
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). 1995, p. 23).

Minimizes/Magnifies Suggested Remedies/Problems Makes “attempt to discuss general laws” and universal
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). principles (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Advances views, information, and data out of context Finds area of investigation and field of expertise difficult,
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). complex, and their own understanding incomplete
(Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Ignores or skews data that does not favor their point-of- Depends “on critical thinking skills” (Gambrill, 1992, as
view (Gambrill, 1992, as cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23). cited in Bodi, 1995, p. 23).

Produces and operates on many levels of both truth and “Admits weakness” and “strives for truth” (Bodi, 1995, p.
falsehood (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). 24).

Presents a premise or point-of-view as the only point-of- Includes or acknowledges “dissenting point-of-
view (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). views” (Bodi, 1995, p. 24).

Deliberately Misleading (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). “Admits bias or viewpoint” and “attempts to be fair-
minded” and not misleading (Bodi, 1995, p. 24).

Employs manipulative uses of charts, graphs, statistics, Carefully interprets data and presents it if it supports or
and tables to support point-of-view (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). refutes point-of-view (Bodi, 1995, p. 24).

Provides made-to-order answers and “solutions to Encourages and “invites critical analysis” (Bodi, 1995, p.
problems” (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). 24).

Successful use results in changing attitudes, behavior, Encourages and “invites continuing research” (Bodi,
and motivations (Bodi, 1995, p. 24). 1995, p. 24).

References:

Bodi, S. (1995). Scholarship or propaganda: How can librarians help undergraduates tell the difference? The
! Journal of Academic Librarianship, 21(1), 21-25. doi:10.1016/0099-1333(95)90150-7