Down to the present day the luminous image of democracy has often served as a pretext for the most undemocratic actions.

Since the time of Plato and Aristotle philosophers have had an interest in taking note of common fallacies in reasoning.

The best goal for propaganda analysis is to develop such an understanding of the phenomenon that it will no longer be profitable for people to engage in it.

Aristotle writes that persuasion is based on three things: the ethos, or personal character of the speaker; the pathos, or getting the audience into the right kind of emotional receptivity; and the logos, or the argument itself, carried out by abbreviated syllogisms, or something like deductive syllogisms, and by the use of example.

The special harm attaching to prior restraint is that the government can keep materials from reaching the public, so there can be no accountability, no judgment by the people that the power to suppress was wrongly exercised.

There is arguably something wrong with a method of persuasion that cannot pass the test of publicity.

It is true that advertising often gives information and is valuable for doing so, but some forms of advertising give precious little information, and even that little is wrong.