Propaganda has long been a central tool of authoritarian control, used to shape beliefs, suppress dissent, and legitimize power. Yet the effectiveness of propaganda depends not just on the message itself, but on how information flows through society. In this paper, Konstantin Sonin presents a theoretical model that illuminates the complex interplay between media bias, citizen engagement, and the structure of social networks.
Sonin builds a model to show how propaganda spreads through a society, depending on how people are connected and share information. Citizens can choose to acquire information either directly (by subscribing to media) or indirectly (by receiving messages from others in their network). The dictator chooses how biased the propaganda should be, constrained by whether citizens are still willing to engage with the message. The model reveals the following:
- Network connectivity determines how easily messages spread. When society is atomized (no links) or fully connected, the regime can slant its message heavily and still achieve wide reach.
- At intermediate levels of connectivity, the regime faces a trade-off: the message must be more informative (less biased) to keep citizens engaged, limiting its ability to manipulate beliefs.
- If the cost of subscribing is high and the network is sparse, few citizens hear the message at all, and propaganda becomes especially ineffective.
- The structure of the network (not just the number of links) also matters. The same number of connections can produce different levels of persuasion depending on how they are arranged.
- Counterintuitively, targeting peripheral citizens rather than central influencers can increase overall reach, because central figures can crowd out others’ incentive to subscribe.
- If a regime can coordinate subscription behavior (e.g., through social pressure or design), it can overcome individual resistance and spread a more biased message more effectively.
- In some cases, a regime may prefer to suppress social ties entirely, recreating an atomized society that is most susceptible to slanted messaging.
This research highlights how network features, such as connectivity, structure, and access costs, shape the trade-offs regimes face in designing persuasive propaganda. While the analysis is theoretical, it offers a framework for thinking about why certain regimes may tolerate or suppress social ties, or adjust the slant of messaging over time. These insights can inform a better understanding of how information spreads in different political contexts and the subtle ways in which regimes manage belief formation.