Countering Propaganda and Disrupting Radicalization: A Systematic Review of Evidence on Counter-Propaganda Tools

• In Event: Activism, Social Movements, and Online Dimensions of Extremism

Abstract

Radicalization refers to the adoption of extremist beliefs and whatever the beliefs at issue, scholars agree that radicalization is a process. The process contains many “cogs”, and we focus attention on propaganda as a cog as cited across theories of radicalization. Propaganda is “…a process which deliberately attempts through persuasion-techniques to secure from the propagandee, before he can deliberate freely, the responses desired by the propagandist” (Henderson, 1943 p. 83). Researchers have developed several tools to detect and disrupt propaganda, thereby hindering radicalization and reducing extremist violence (i.e., politico-ideological violence – PIV). In this paper, we review the literature to determine the scope of, and conclusions from, available evidence on counter-propaganda tools and their effectiveness against PIV and use these to develop a mechanism scheme outlining what evidence suggests about how – and whether – counter-propaganda should work to reduce engagement in PIV. We discuss limitations in the scope and conclusiveness of the current science and directions for future research to address gaps and test our theoretical model. We conclude with a critical examination of dominant assumptions undergirding much of radicalization research and outline an alternative vision (an “option B”) for how this science might be pursued in the future.

Authors

• Jeremiah Perez-Torres, John Jay College of Criminal Justice / CUNY Graduate Center

• Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill, Arizona State University