Last week’s discussion highlighted how Russian TV commentators can come off as harsh and provocative, using blunt, sensational lines that aim to inflame viewers. They stand before cameras and deliver stark, sometimes brutal slogans about Ukrainians. The tone feels crude and dated, echoing old propagandistic playbooks. Yet a newer analysis reveals that networks often employ more refined, calculated methods to steer opinion.
One striking example involved large posters in Moscow and Saint Petersburg, featuring a grandmother who appears sympathetic to pro-Russian or anti-Ukrainian sentiments. The image, paired with a spoken line or caption, is designed to lodge itself in viewers’ memories. When such visuals align with a looming political narrative, they create a powerful emotional imprint that can feel almost undeniable to audiences across different channels.
There is a venerable theory about crowd psychology that helps explain this phenomenon. Gustave Le Bon’s classic study, The Psychology of the Masses, demonstrates how emotion can drive collective behavior and shape perception. In modern contexts, this emotional pull is often exploited to guide how people interpret events and messages. Historically, simple, human-scale icons — like a grandmother in a vulnerable moment — can become potent symbols that resonate deeply and broadly.
There are echoes of early propaganda strategies in various regions and periods. A notable historical reference comes from Catalunya in 1937, when a propagandist graphic featured a child with a flag and a raised fist, symbolizing popular anti-fascist resistance. The image proved extraordinarily effective, and its adaptability was a key asset: the flag could be swapped to match different audiences, reinforcing a shared emotional narrative without changing the underlying message. This adaptability highlights how symbols can travel across contexts, morphing to suit different political aims.
From a contemporary perspective, the idea of a changing flag carrying multiple meanings underscores the ways symbols and stories are deployed to manipulate perception. If a banner can be reinterpreted to suit either side of a debate, the overall emotional impact on viewers remains substantial. The conversation around flags — those simple pieces of dyed fabric — often reveals the deeper truth: symbolism wields real influence in shaping public opinion, and media ecosystems frequently rely on this truth to frame complex geopolitical tensions in more digestible, emotionally charged terms.