[Sam6late]

The so-called Arab spring has shown us how manipulation works by using favored slogan words that bypass our logic. Islamists often repeat a hilarious slogan: ‘Islam is the solution’. Don’t worry about questioning ‘solution to what’, or ‘how’. Illiterate or lesser educated people will support that identity factor that may also attract educated folks. This way language could also be seen as a tool for reduction. Complex realities are messy, but language allows us to "package" them into neat little boxes as with politicians and preachers as great examples. They come up with slogans as solutions: A weak idea can be turned into a catchy three-word slogan. It feels powerful because it’s easy to remember, even if it doesn't actually solve the problem. Language also uses metaphors and "loaded" words to bypass our logic and go straight to our feelings. Once you're emotionally invested, you stop checking if the idea actually makes sense, it sounds like common sense. Now which one for of language is the most effective: Spoken, Printed, digital?

[chvgchvg]

I feel pretentious to continually quote 1984, but those slogans seem eerily close to the way that the Party instilled propaganda through slogans.

Every form of language is super effective. But I believe if 100 people around you say the same idea, and only 5 oppose it, you will believe the 100 people. Since digital media is so easy to upscale to thousands, and even millions of users, I believe digital language has the biggest capability of making a change (good or bad (often bad imo)).

[therobots927]

Blah blah “Muslims bad” blah blah blah. Sounds like you missed the point of the article, and demonstrated your own susceptibility to propaganda. Also this reads like LLM slop btw. Might want to read over your slopagraphs before posting.

[Sam6late]

I am not saying 'Muslims bad, I am Muslim and my English is not bad as AI slop. I am showing language manipulation examples, I am not familiar with examples from your side. The idea of the article is what I am talking about, we value how something looks or sounds more than pondering what it actually means.I think it is also focusing on the idea that the form overpowers the message. But what you and I are saying are copies of the main idea of the article.