During my stay in Budapest, I visited the Light Art Museum. I just wanted to see some different stuff and get inspired, and that is also what happened. The museum was packed with installations all around light, movement, and space. Some of them were a bit trippy and overwhelming, and some made me think differently about how to approach a project.
One of the first installations that totally pulled me in was “Immensia” by Kati Katona. It’s this full-on 360° projection that fills the whole room and makes you feel like you’re stepping into an infinite, constantly shifting space. Shapes, colors, dimensions, and everything change. What I found super interesting was how simple the animations actually were, but because the entire room was part of it, the experience felt bigger and intense for the viewer. I realized that it’s way more powerful when the viewer gets fully wrapped into the visuals instead of just watching them from a distance.
Another piece that stayed with me was “Oh Lord” by Guillaume Marmin. It’s a project that is based on real data and images of the sun, some of them even from the 1930s, and it’s animated into this flowing, almost hypnotic video installation that uses music to make you feel even more immersed. I loved how he took something scientific and made it feel so alive. For my own project, it thought about using textures and natural movements to make my visuals feel more grounded and emotional.
Yasuhiro Chida’s installation “Analemma” was a completely different experience, but just as inspiring. His work was really delicate and the one that impressed me the most. He stretched tiny points of light through a massive grid of strings within a dark room. While you were walking through the installation, the little light spots moved. Sometimes it felt like they were racing past you, sometimes like they were standing still. What stuck with me here was how perspective changes everything. The setup itself seemed to take a lot of work, but the way the light moved was quite simple, and the feeling it created was super complex. It made me realize that I don’t need to overcomplicate things within a project; sometimes it’s about doing less but doing it right.
The final piece that I found really fascinating was “Onirica” by FUSE*. It’s based on thousands of dreams that people volunteered to describe, and then turned into flowing visual worlds through AI. Watching the dreams melt into each other without clear beginnings or endings felt weirdly emotional as you were part of a told dream story. I loved how they managed to translate something as intangible as dreams into something you can actually see and experience. It showed me that using personal or collective stories could give my own project a deeper meaning, instead of just focusing on visuals for the sake of it.
Overall, the Light Art Museum visit turned out to be way more helpful and inspiring than I expected. It gave me a lot of new ideas and inspiration on what kind of different projects can be done while “only” using the light as a source. I’m thinking a lot more now about using organic movements, playing with perspective, and keeping transitions as fluid as possible.
This week I finally started with the technical side of my projection mapping project. First, I borrowed a beamer from a friend, but that didn’t go too well. The quality wasn’t that great and I forgot to take the remote with me. Then I got one from our media center at uni, which was made for short distances, so it fit my setup way better. Still, getting it to work wasn’t as easy as I thought. I guess I made things more complicated for myself by just plugging it in and hoping it would just work instead of reading the manual first. Once I got the beamer working and connected it to my Mac, I watched a short introduction tutorial about how to use MadMapper. That really helped me get started. It’s important to make sure it’s not mirroring the laptop screen, but instead working as an extended display. In MadMapper, you also have to make sure to select the correct screen (the projector) and activate fullscreen mode for the output. This way, it’s still possible to control things on the laptop while projecting. Three key technical steps I learned for setting it up properly:
Set the projector as an extended display, not mirrored
Match the resolution between MadMapper and the projector for the sharpest image
Use the correct shapes in MadMapper (like Ellipse, Quad, or Masks), depending on what object you’re projecting on
After that was done, I moved on to experimenting with the software. At first, I didn’t upload any of my own files. I just played around with the materials that are already available in MadMapper. I projected some of the basic visuals directly onto my wall to get a feeling for how the software works. I spent some time trying out different shapes, effects, and settings to understand what everything does. To support that, I also watched a tutorial. It gave me a better overview of the platform and helped me understand how to create different scenes and manage the workflow. Later, I started getting a bit more creative. I projected some of the visuals onto my analog film photos that I had hanging on my wall. It was interesting to see how the light interacted with the pictures. I chose visuals that would highlight the details of the photos and kind of bring them to life. It actually looked really cool and added a new layer of depth to the images.
After that, I wanted to try something more organic, so I used my Monstera plant as a surface. It has these big, leaves with lots of holes in them – not exactly the easiest shape to work with. First, I projected a still image onto it. I realized that starting with a static image made it much easier to get the mapping right. Once the shape was aligned, I switched to moving visuals. Because the surface was so irregular, the animation sometimes looked a bit distorted, but in a nice way. It felt more alive and playful than just projecting onto a flat surface.
Some of the main takeaways from the tutorial and my own tests were that I now understand how to set up scenes and cues in MadMapper, which will be really helpful when I want to switch between projections during a show or installation. I also learned how to import and organize media like videos and images, which made my workflow feel more structured and less chaotic. And I got a better idea of how to align projections to real-life objects, even tricky ones like plants, curved shapes, or detailed textures.
All in all, I’m happy with my progress this week. I’m still figuring things out, but I’m slowly getting more comfortable with both the technical and creative sides of projection mapping.
After getting a first introduction to projection mapping in my last blog post, it’s time to go further with exploring different program options. Since I’m still figuring out the technical side of things, I decided to test two software options that seem to make the most sens to use for my project: MadMapper and After Effects. As both of them provide different possibilities when it comes to animation and projection mapping I wanted to give both a try. This meant that I started to follow two beginner-friendly tutorials for projection mapping: one for MadMapper and one for After Effects. My goal was not only to understand how these programs and tools work but also to see which one might be the better choice for the project I have planned. As I am right now, also dealing with the challenge of learning a few different platforms at once it sometimes feels like I’m jumping from one tool to another without really getting the chance to master any of them in depth. This makes it difficult to decide which platform to commit to for projection mapping, as I don’t want to add another complicated software to my workflow if it doesn’t help me in the future.
MadMapper
Starting off with one of MadMapper’s tutorials which introduced me to the basics of the software and started to explain how to set up a projection hereby using simple shapes to create its visuals. What I did like was how intuitive the interface was. Everything seemed to make sense and intuitive, which is great when you want to start learning new software. I started to play around with different shapes and movements, trying to understand how I could later apply these. But mostly it was important to me to just get a sense of the software and understand the basic workaround. When it comes to layering and fine-tuning the animations I however still a bit lost. Since MadMapper is mainly built for projection mapping, it makes sense that it focuses more on mapping visuals rather than creating complex animations from scratch. A big advantage of MadMapper is its real-time contour control, which allows for live adjustments during the production phase and not just before it. That is something After Effects doesn’t really offer, as it mostly stacks layers to create detailed effects.
After Effects
I also wanted to do another After Effect tutorial that was more specifically for projection mapping as this is something I haven’t specifically looked at so far. I already have some basic knowledge of After Effects, so the workflow didn’t feel completely new. The tutorial covered mostly simple animation techniques and how to export the visuals for projection mapping. Which was the part that interested me the most. The biggest advantage I see in using After Effect would be its flexibility. As After Effects is not really made for projection mapping, it still allows for more detailed and layered animations, which could be nice if I decide to go for a more artistic approach when approaching the flowers. At the same time, it also means that I would need another software to actually map the animations onto my objects, which again means I need to familiarize myself with another one and also add another layer of complexity. Another important factor is price. Since I already have access to After Effects through my Adobe Cloud subscription, there would be no additional cost to me. MadMapper, on the other hand, requires a one-time commercial license. I would need to purchase this to be able to use it without watermarks or other restrictions.
Now that I’ve tested both, I have to decide which one makes more sense for my project. Right now, I feel like MadMapper is the better choice if I want a more direct way to work with projections, while After Effects would allow me to create more detailed visuals. The question is: do I want to focus on animation first and then figure out the mapping part, or should I go straight into projection mapping and accept some limitations in animation?
Concept Idea
Looking at another aspect besides the technical side, I also thought about the mood or concept idea as well as the aesthetic of my project. Since at the end of the project I want to project onto flowers, I have two main ideas. One would be to work with motion that brings the flowers to life, almost like they are moving or shifting beyond a still life. Another idea would be to approach it from a different perspective which would be to visualise the process of photosynthesis more abstractly. I am still thinking about both concept ideas and I will go more into depth maybe brainstorm more and create different animations to work with, but I also don’t want to overcomplicate things especially because this is my first attempt at projection mapping.
Challenges
One of the challenges I already thought about is to balance aesthetic and technical feasibility. And also, I have a bit of a frustration limit. I tend to learn fast but if I get a sense that I am not developing or constantly get the same issues I get frustrated and that leads to procrastination. While I would love to create something detailed and unique, I also have to be realistic about what’s possible with my current skill level. Here I think a good way would be to start with simple shapes and flat surfaces for the next step in my project and then refine the concept once I have a better understanding of the tools.
I’ve been interested in projection mapping for a while now, but I never got around to trying it so far. It always seemed like one of those things that required a lot of technical knowledge, and I wasn’t sure where to start. This semester, I finally decided to change that and use it as my practical project. My plan is to document the whole process—from figuring out the basics to creating a finished projection. Since I have no experience with projection mapping or the software involved, I will be starting completely from the start.
The idea would be to project onto different kinds of flower bouquets hereby working with a different more organic shape to project onto That makes things a bit more difficult because flowers aren’t flat, so I’ll need to be more precise to make it work and maybe do a bit of trial and error to achieve the visuals I want. But before I even get to that part of the project, I need to figure out which software I will be learning to use for this project.
Right now, I don’t have a clear concept yet, just a rough idea of the direction I want to go in. I know I want to create something immersive and simply learn more about projection mapping. I like the contrast between nature and digital projections, and flowers seem like an interesting choice because they’re delicate and always changing. That also makes them a challenge, since most projection mapping is done on flat, static surfaces. I have no idea how well this will work, but that’s part of the reason I want to give it a try.
When researching projection mapping, I quickly realized that there are a lot of ways to approach this but also a lot of different softwares to learn and use. Three of the most commonly used programs that spoke to me are MadMapper, Resolume, and After Effects. Each of them has a different focus, so choosing the right one depends on the specific needs that it can be used for.
Choosing the Right Software
MadMapper for example is one of the most well-known tools for projection mapping. It’s designed specifically for this purpose, making it a strong candidate. It allows users to easily map visuals onto different surfaces, and from what I’ve seen so far, it seems relatively intuitive when starting to learn it.
Resolume is often used by VJs and performers who need real-time video editing and projection. It has strong capabilities for live performances, which makes it different from MadMapper. However, I’m not sure if it’s the best option for a pre-planned, artistic projection onto flowers and it also seems a bit more complex to get into as a beginner.
After Effects is an industry-standard tool for animation and motion design. While it’s not a projection mapping software per se, it allows for highly detailed animations. The downside is that it doesn’t work in real-time, meaning I’d need to pre-render all visuals before projecting them onto the surfaces I plan on using. This could be fine in general however when using different flowers I would constantly have to go back and forth.
My next step will be to test them out and see how they function in practice. I expect that hands-on experimentation will give me a clearer idea of which tool fits best.
First Practical Steps
To get started with the practical part, I plan to do some small projection tests. Rather than jumping straight to mapping onto flowers, I will begin with a flat surface as they are easier to start with. This will help me understand the basic workflow of the software I choose and allow me to focus on the technical side before adding any more complexity to the whole project.
When starting to test simple projections, I will create a basic shape or animation and project it onto a blank wall or another flat surface to understand how the software works. Following that, I want to experiment with 3D surfaces. Once I am more comfortable with flat surfaces, I will move on to objects with different textures and shapes to see how projection mapping handles uneven surfaces. Another option would be to try different software, where I could compare MadMapper, Resolume, and After Effects to see which one feels most intuitive and produces the best results. However, I might already decided what platform I want to use based on the previous research I did for each of them. After deciding on the software, I will begin designing the visuals for my projection that will be later used for the flowers. Following that will be a lot of trying out and testing, supported by learning from different tutorials and research.
Challenges and Considerations
One of the biggest challenges I think I will encounter is getting into the platform I will choose as well as working with organic shapes later on in the project. Unlike traditional projection surfaces like buildings or screens, flowers are delicate and constantly shifting in shape when using different ones. This means I need to find a way to adapt the projections dynamically or carefully plan around their natural form.
Another technical challenge will be aligning the projections accurately. Since flowers are small and three-dimensional, any misalignment will be much more noticeable than on a larger, flat surface. I may need to experiment with different positioning techniques or adjust the projection settings frequently.
From a creative perspective, I also need to consider what kind of visuals will work best on such an unusual surface. The question is do I want to focus on abstract patterns, realistic imagery, or something completely different? This will be part of my exploration in the coming weeks.
Next Steps
As I move forward, I’ll keep documenting both my research and practical progress. My next steps will focus more on refining the concept and understanding the technical side of projection mapping.
Continue researching projection mapping on organic objects, especially how light interacts with different textures like flowers, fruits, and fabric
Compare software options: After Effects and MadMapper seem the most relevant, but I want to understand their limitations before committing to one
Develop a clearer creative direction, looking at how textures and colors can enhance natural forms
Start thinking about technical challenges, like how to align projections correctly on uneven surfaces and how different materials react to light
Animation, originally created for entertainment in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, quickly evolved into a persuasive tool that could be used for other purposes. During World War I, its potential to influence public opinion became clear (First World War Cartoons, n.d.). Animated short films encouraged citizens to support war efforts, such as buying war bonds or embracing patriotic values. Its visual nature made it accessible across diverse populations, overcoming barriers like language and literacy. By World War II, animated propaganda became even more prominent. Both the Allied and Axis powers harnessed animation to promote their agendas. Governments recognized that cartoons could simplify complex political or military issues, making them relatable to the general public. The United States collaborated with major studios like Walt Disney and Warner Bros (Chase, 2023) to produce animations that supported the war effort.
Disney’s involvement in wartime propaganda was very different from their usual family-friendly stories. But it showed how flexible animation can be. In The New Spirit (1942), Donald Duck was used to explain why paying taxes was important for supporting the war. The film made the topic of taxes, which can be boring, feel like a personal and patriotic duty. It showed how small actions, like paying taxes, were connected to the bigger fight for freedom. By using Donald Duck, a character people already knew and liked, The New Spirit made the message easier to understand and more relatable. The film explained complex ideas, like how money supports a war, in a simple way that everyone could follow. It encouraged people to feel proud of their contributions and motivated them to take action. At the same time, Warner Bros. used characters like Bugs Bunny to mock Axis leaders. In these cartoons, Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito were shown as clumsy and ridiculous (Chase, 2023). This made them seem less threatening and helped people feel like the Allies were clearly on the winning side. These animations worked because they were entertaining while still sending a clear message. The humor and storytelling kept people interested, and the emotions behind the stories shaped their opinions. This way of mixing fun with important messages set the tone for how propaganda would be used in the future.
The Soviet Approach
The Soviet Union had its own style of animated propaganda. State-supported studios like Soyuzmultfilm made films that promoted Marxist-Leninist ideas. These animations often celebrated collective work, criticized capitalism, and showed the successes of socialism.
One example is Buratino v Sovetskom Soyuze, a Soviet version of the Pinocchio story. In this film, the characters are saved from exploitation by working together, showing how collective values can solve problems. The films often used symbols and metaphors to explain socialist ideas. Bright colors, hopeful themes, and unique visuals were common features, designed to make people feel proud and optimistic about the future.
Soviet animations were less about entertainment and more about education (Marshall, 2021). They focused on teaching people about their roles in society, the importance of working together, and the benefits of a planned economy. Unlike Western propaganda, which often tried to reach international audiences, Soviet animations focused mainly on their own people, shaping how they thought and supported state goals.
Transition to the Modern Era
With digital technology and social media, animated propaganda has completely changed. Unlike in the past, where governments controlled most propaganda, today it often comes from unknown or decentralized sources. Platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram make it easy to create and share short, engaging animations that can go viral in just a few hours and reach millions of people. Political campaigns now use animations to explain complex topics like climate change or healthcare in a simple way. Activist groups also rely on animation to raise awareness or push their messages. These modern examples are similar to wartime cartoons, they’re simple and emotional, but they spread much faster and to a much larger audience.
Sources:
First World War cartoons. (n.d.). https://www.nfsa.gov.au/collection/curated/harry-julius
Chase, M. (2023, October 26). How Disney propaganda shaped life on the home front during WWII. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-disney-propaganda-shaped-life-on-the-home-front-during-wwii-180979057/
Marshall, C. (2021, April 20). The Beautiful, Innovative & Sometimes Dark World of Animated Soviet Propaganda (1925–1984). Open Culture. https://www.openculture.com/2021/04/the-beautiful-innovative-sometimes-dark-world-of-animated-soviet-propaganda.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
War propaganda can be a powerful way of shaping international relations and conflicts. It doesn’t just justify armed conflict; it can also prolong it by spreading fear, hatred, and national pride. While propaganda has been part of almost every war looking at historic battles or today’s disputes and wars, there are clear ways to push back against its influence.
The first step in addressing propaganda is understanding how modern conflicts are no longer limited to one region. Today’s wars often reach far beyond their borders, especially through digital platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, or the platform X. State media and proxy groups target different audiences, including diaspora communities, allied countries, or neutral states, by framing their messages in a way that triggers emotional responses. To counter this, efforts to fight propaganda must also be international and not just dealt with on a national basis. Hereby one possible way of tackling this issue could be for Journalists, fact-checkers, and global organizations to work together to respond to false claims in real time. For example, when misleading reports about civilian casualties or so-called “liberation missions” are spread, these alliances can quickly correct them (“Hiding Behind the Coalition,” 2023).
Source: Eyes on Russia map. (n.d.). https://eyesonrussia.org/
Global partnerships, like those between NGOs and governments, also make it possible to share resources amongst each other. By combining expertise, they can train journalists in conflict zones, translate key reports, or use satellite imagery to verify on-the-ground events and with that do real-time fact-checking. Open-source intelligence communities, for instance, have shown how tools like satellite photos and geolocated social media posts can expose lies about troop movements or ceasefire violations. One example is the “The Eyes on Russia Map” which is an interactive, publicly accessible map created by the OSINT platform Bellingcat. Its main purpose is to visually document and track information about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The map relies on verified sources such as satellite images, geolocated photos, and videos, as well as eyewitness reports. It offers a clear and reliable way to understand the situation on the ground by combining and presenting this data in one place. Sharing this information publicly increases transparency, which directly challenges the secrecy that propaganda depends on (Strick, 2023).
Media reform is another important piece of the puzzle to be able to solve this problem. Many news outlets, driven by clicks and advertising revenue, unintentionally amplify war propaganda by rushing to report sensational stories without proper verification. The saying “If it bleeds, it leads” still drives many headlines (Zehndorfer, 2025). To fix this, stricter editorial rules are needed, like requiring multiple sources or working with independent fact-checkers before publishing sensitive reports. Although this could slow the news cycle, it would also lower the chances of media becoming a tool for propaganda.
Education is also key to tackling propaganda in the long term. In countries exposed to frequent conflict, teaching media literacy and critical thinking in schools can help people question one-sided or extreme narratives. Nonprofit groups can also organize workshops for older populations or rural communities who might not be used to navigating digital information. These efforts should go beyond simple fact-checking tips. They need to explain how propaganda works, how it taps into emotions like fear and nationalism, and why people might be drawn to such messages, especially in times of crisis. Technology can also play a role, though it comes with challenges. Automated fact-checking tools and AI systems can flag false information, but they aren’t perfect. Errors or biases in these systems could block legitimate content, and sophisticated propagandists can adapt to avoid detection. Still, a balanced approach using ethical AI, transparent data practices, and user-reporting features can slow the spread of false information (How AI Can Also Be Used to Combat Online Disinformation, 2024). Collaboration between tech companies, governments, and civil society is essential to ensure these tools are both fair and effective.
One of the hardest challenges is breaking through echo chambers, both online and offline. Even if false claims are quickly replaced, people who already believe in a certain narrative may dismiss corrections as more propaganda from the “other side.” Repeated exposure to the same viewpoint can deepen these beliefs, creating a loop where new propaganda only strengthens existing biases (Alatawi et al., 2021). To interrupt this cycle, campaigns can focus on fostering dialogue between divided communities, highlighting shared experiences, and promoting open discussion. While these efforts may face resistance, even small steps toward engagement can help disrupt this kind of continues thinking. Finally, whistleblowers and investigative journalists also play a critical role in exposing propaganda operations. Leaks, insider accounts, and in-depth reporting reveal how governments or other groups create and spread propaganda. While whistleblowers often face legal risks and personal threats, their actions can spark public awareness and demand accountability. Laws that protect whistleblowers and investigative journalists are essential for maintaining transparency and countering the secrecy that allows propaganda to thrive.
In conclusion, fighting war propaganda requires many efforts working together—international cooperation, media changes, education, and technology. Each of these approaches tackles a different way propaganda spreads, from emotional manipulation to misleading media practices.
Sources:
Alatawi, F., Cheng, L., Tahir, A., Karami, M., Jiang, B., Black, T., & Liu, H. (2021, December 9). A survey on echo chambers on social media: Description, detection and mitigation. arXiv.org. https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.05084
Hiding behind the coalition. (2023). In Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/08/24/hiding-behind-coalition/failure-credibly-investigate-and-provide-redress-unlawful
How AI can also be used to combat online disinformation. (2024, June 14). World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/06/ai-combat-online-misinformation-disinformation/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Strick, B. (2023, July 24). Over 500 Days of the Russia-Ukraine Monitor Map – bellingcat. Bellingcat. https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2023/07/24/over-500-days-of-the-russia-ukraine-monitor-map/
Zehndorfer, E., PhD. (2025, January 23). Why are news headlines always so negative? Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/political-animals-and-animal-spirits/202501/if-it-bleeds-it-leads
Image Source:
Eyes on Russia map. (n.d.). https://eyesonrussia.org/
In recent years, few personalities have been as polarising in American political theatre – or as effective in dominating the national conversation – as Donald J. Trump. From his first venture into presidential politics in 2015 to his previous term in office and subsequent campaigns, Trump has consistently employed propaganda techniques to reach and influence tens of millions. Whether through speeches at rallies or posts on social media platforms, his messaging strategy relies on repetition, stirring rhetoric, and a constant stream of polarising content. These tactics ensure that his messages are strengthened by supporters and remain unavoidable for his opponents.
At the core of Trump’s propaganda strategy is his ability to create a spectacle. Drawing large crowds isn’t just a way to measure his popularity; it also serves a psychological purpose. The sight of packed arenas gives the impression of power and ‘certainty.’ By filling venues to capacity, Trump can argue that public support for him is greater than what polls suggest, using the visual impact of these events to push back against negative media coverage. Supporters often describe these rallies as high-energy gatherings where a shared sense of identity is on full display. Chants, slogans, and the symbolic red hats become signs of belonging to a larger group. This creates a double effect: it motivates his base and, at the same time, ensures that these events dominate the news cycle, as the media rush to cover every controversial or provocative moment (Rakich, 2019). Trump’s approach to social media is just as calculated. Following controversy on established social platforms, he has looked for alternative networks that offer him more freedom to publish content without so many restrictions. Here he is capitalizing on a model of political communication that appeals directly to consumers and bypasses the traditional press. Researchers note that Trump’s online posts often mix patriotic appeals with targeted attacks on his opponents, blending declarative statements such as ‘America First’ or ‘Make America Great Again’ with accusations against political opponents, journalists or other perceived enemies (Internationales Forscherteam Analysiert 200 Millionen Social, n.d.). His contributions – short, emotional, and often aggressive – are very well received by his followers, who are conditioned to expect provocative content from him. One of the most well-known propaganda tactics in Trump’s toolbox is the ‘big lie,’ or the repetition of unproven allegations. During the 2020 and 2024 election cycles, he has repeatedly questioned the integrity of elections, claiming widespread voter fraud or wrongdoing despite no court-approved evidence. Psychologists call this technique the ‘illusory truth effect,’ in which repeated statements can appear true to the public over time, regardless of their veracity (Illusory Truth Effect – the Decision Lab, n.d.). Even when fact-checkers, courts or election officials contradict these claims, the persistence of the narrative can sow doubt in parts of the electorate. By the time official denials are leaked, the seeds have often taken root among the believers.
Trump’s campaign often uses scapegoating as a key strategy, blaming political opponents by calling them “radical leftists” or presenting immigrants and foreign nations as threats. This helps focus public anger on specific groups or issues. This approach works especially well during times of economic problems or social tension because fear makes people react quickly without thinking about other important topics. By turning complex problems into a simple “us versus them” idea, his campaign builds stronger support from his followers (Roberts, 2021). Critics, on the other hand, say this kind of talk makes the country even more divided.
Another big part of Trump’s strategy is the feedback loop he creates with conservative media. Things he says at rallies or on social media, like claims about “election fraud” or “Democratic corruption,” are quickly picked up by certain TV channels, radio shows, or websites. These platforms repeat his words and make them seem more believable to his supporters. When Trump is criticized by other media, he points to these friendly outlets as proof that he is right. This helps him control the story and keep his followers on his side. In this sense, Trump’s brand of propaganda isn’t just about spreading misinformation; it’s also about creating an emotional connection with voters who feel ignored or left out by more traditional politicians (The Trump-Fox Feedback Loop Is Powering an Assault on Democracy, 2020).
Another important part of Trump’s strategy is how he handles his own controversies. When faced with scandals—whether personal, legal, or related to his policies—he often reframes them as “witch hunts” created by his political enemies. This tactic, which can be seen as a projection, turns accusations against him into part of a bigger conspiracy. By doing this, he encourages his supporters to see any criticism as proof that he’s fighting against powerful forces that want to stop him. This creates a repeating pattern where every new controversy fits neatly into his existing story of being unfairly targeted.
Overall, Trump’s campaign relies on several connected strategies to keep his supporters engaged and loyal. These include his large rallies, which feel more like community events than traditional political gatherings, and his polarizing social media posts, which are spread and supported by friendly media outlets. While his communication style may seem chaotic, he is meticulous about keeping his community happy. Some see this as a way to give a voice to ordinary people, while others see it as a way to twist public discussion and create division. Either way, his methods have a strong impact on how political debates in America are shaped.
Sources:
Rakich, N. (2019, September 5). Don’t Let Crowd Sizes Mislead You. FiveThirtyEight. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont-let-crowd-sizes-mislead-you/
Internationales Forscherteam analysiert 200 Millionen Social. (n.d.-b). https://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/fakultaet/de/news/4890
Illusory truth effect – The Decision Lab. (n.d.). The Decision Lab. https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/illusory-truth-effect
Roberts, K. M. (2021). Populism and polarization in comparative perspective: constitutive, spatial and institutional dimensions. Government and Opposition, 57(4), 680–702. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2021.14
The Trump-Fox feedback loop is powering an assault on democracy. (2020, November 9).
Media Matters for America. https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/trump-fox-feedback-loop-powering-assault-democracy
In corners of TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, a growing contingent of women has taken up a lifestyle that many would consider a throwback to the 1950s: the “traditional housewife.” Figures like Nara Smith, who has amassed a large following on TikTok, showcase daily vlogs of home cooking, tidying routines, and meticulously styled outfits reminiscent of an era where the man of the house was the primary breadwinner, and the woman’s role revolved around homemaking. Under hashtags such as #TradWife, #TraditionalLifestyle, or #WifeLife, these influencers share snapshots of a life that appears orderly, domestic, and, to some viewers, refreshing in its simplicity.
However, this new revival of housework is not just a pastime. Rather, it is a constellation of viewpoints and experiences. Some women see it as an empowering personal choice, freeing them from the pressures of business life and the stressful juggling of two incomes. Others argue that it reinforces patriarchal norms and oversimplifies the very real social, economic, and political achievements that women have made over the last century. Regardless of perspective, the phenomenon is now too widespread to ignore and raises questions about nostalgia, identity, and autonomy in society. (Garfinkle, 2024).
The longing to escape the demands of ‘hustle culture’ is a common theme among self-proclaimed ‘trad wives’. At a time when digital networking is blurring the lines between personal space and professional obligations, many people – including women – are feeling burnt out by the relentless productivity standards that exist in today’s culture. For some, withdrawing from their professional lives and focusing on the home is a relief. In her TikTok videos, Nara Smith often talks about the peace she finds in a cozy home environment where she plans home-cooked meals and maintains a daily routine free from performance reviews or endless Zoom calls (Walden, 2024). In an economy that prioritizes ambition and measurable success, such a change can seem radical. Critics see it as a retreat from women’s hard-won gains in the public sphere, but supporters argue that the choice, to go from CEO to homemaker actually validates the spirit of personal preference that feminism has always advocated. In other words, the opportunity to ‘ plug into’ domestic life is just as valid for some as the opportunity to have a high-powered career.
Rapid technological changes, political tensions, and social turmoil can stir up a longing for supposedly simpler times. An important selling point in the #TradWife scene is the idea of stability. Traditional domestic roles are portrayed as an anchor in a chaotic world: The man’s role is clearly defined as a provider, and the woman’s role is equally clear as a nurturer of home and family. Although it is debatable whether the 1950s were really as idyllic as they were portrayed in black-and-white television programs – given the raging gender and racial inequalities – the romantic image remains strong to this day (Gerhard, 2021b). The #TradWife trend, as seen on Nara Smith’s feed, capitalizes on this romanticization: carefully set dining tables, slow-cooked recipes and a calm domestic atmosphere resonate with followers seeking a sense of security or control.
A remarkable twist in the modern version of being a housewife is the very public way in which this domestic life is presented. While historical housewives lacked the platforms and networks to share tips beyond their local communities, today’s ‘trad wives’ foster online communities that reach a wide audience. Influencers share recipes, household tips, and relationship dynamics – all in real time. Some even fund their content through sponsorship or affiliate marketing, turning homemaking into a revenue-generating business. This complicates the question of whether this lifestyle is ‘regressive’.From a certain perspective, these modern housewives are not just domestic helpers, but also content creators, small business owners, and community leaders. Their brand is based on a nostalgic aesthetic but utilizes the tools of modern entrepreneurship – social media analytics, influencer marketing, and virtual networks.
For many feminists and social activists, the glorification of the 1950s housewife role somewhat ignores the inequalities that characterized this era as well. In the past, women did not always have the free choice to stay at home but it was expected and seen as the norm within society. Social norms and legal structures often excluded them from higher education, significant careers, and financial independence.Today, critics worry that the portrayal of domesticity as an escape from ‘toxic’ modern culture masks the real barriers that women still face, including pay inequality, discrimination in the workplace, and the burden of unpaid care work that can maintain dependence on a partner’s income (Tradwife-Trend: Nostalgie Oder Antifeministisches Risiko? – ING, n.d.).Others question whether celebrating the #TradWife trend risks fostering a romanticized illusion. The curated nature of social media can mask the realities of domestic labor, financial vulnerability or the dissatisfaction that can arise from leaving the workforce. Furthermore, in families dependent on a sole earner, the economic risks are multiplied when a spouse loses their job or faces unexpected difficulties – factors that are not easily captured in aesthetically pleasing Instagram images (Schuster, 2024).
Ultimately, the resurgence of traditional housewife ideals embodies the tension between choice and cultural influence. For some, staying home is a personal preference that can foster fulfillment, strengthen mental health, and create strong family bonds. For others, it raises broader societal concerns about eternalizing gender roles that restrict future opportunities. Maybe the real question is whether society can embrace diversity in how women choose to structure their lives—be it as full-time homemakers, professionals, or something in between. While hashtags like #TradWife represent a specific aesthetic and worldview, there is room in modern discourse to acknowledge that not all women (or men, for that matter) find empowerment in the same roles. By understanding the motivations, challenges, and appeals of the trend, we can foster more conversations about identity, family, and the evolving meaning of work in the 21st century.
Sources:
Garfinkle, M. (2024, July 29). What Is a Tradwife? All About the Controversial Lifestyle — And Why It’s Having a Viral Moment. People.com. https://people.com/what-is-a-tradwife-8684651#:~:text=Researcher%20Mariel%20Cooksey%20defined%20%E2%80%9Ctradwifery,norms%2C%E2%80%9D%20per%20the%20Political%20Research
Gerhard, U. (2021b, December 7). 50 Jahre Gleichberechtigung – eine Springprozession – Essay. bpb.de. https://www.bpb.de/shop/zeitschriften/apuz/31157/50-jahre-gleichberechtigung-eine-springprozession-essay/
Schuster, K. (2024, September 15). Tradwife: Warum der TikTok-Trend gefährlich ist. ZDFheute. https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/ausland/tradwife-bewegung-trend-tiktok-100.html
Tradwife-Trend: Nostalgie oder antifeministisches Risiko? – ING. (n.d.). ING-DiBa. https://www.ing.de/wissen/tradwife-trend/
Walden, K. (2024, August 16). 5 times Nara Smith made us question if #TradWife life is just a big joke. Brit + Co. https://www.brit.co/nara-smith/
War propaganda has never been as easily accessible, as fast, and as present as today. Unlike in the past, where censorship and physical distance could limit the dissemination of information, digital technology has erased borders and anyone with an internet connection now has access to a global megaphone. This new environment is now creating a new way for nations, non-state actors, and even individuals to participate in conflict. Whereby platforms such as TikTok, YouTube, and Telegram can be used as unparalleled weapons of persuasion.
At the center of modern war propaganda is the struggle for control over how it is portrayed, particularly in the media. Both governments and armed groups have recognized that shaping public perception is often just as important as victory on the ground. Russian state media, for example, utilize an entire ecosystem of television channels and social media channels to justify actions in conflicts – particularly in Ukraine – by portraying them as patriotic or humanitarian missions (Helmus & Holynska, 2024). These narratives are further reinforced by orchestrated disinformation campaigns, sometimes using fake videos or ‘bot armies’ that push certain hashtags. Such tactics aim not only to gain support within the country but also to create confusion among international audiences (RussischeDesinformationskampagnenBundesregierung, 2022).
In Ukraine, a different, more hands-on approach has been chosen. Citizens and soldiers are posting real-time updates from the battlefield, sharing personal stories and the human cost of the conflict. The two purposes of these reports: are to boost support at home and to generate international empathy and aid. In this context, war propaganda becomes a community project rather than a top-down responsibility (Sk, 2024). Platforms such as Twitter (X), TikTok, and Instagram allow ordinary people (influencers) to share footage on the ground and shape narratives at the speed of a retweet, significantly influencing global sentiment.
One remarkable development is the weaponization of viral culture. Memes, for example, are not just trivial internet jokes but can become effective propaganda tools. A single meme can summarise a conflict by portraying one side as heroic and the other as villainous (Poepsel et al., 2024). This visual representation often resonates more than long-winded statements or official declarations. Experts point out that memes bypass traditional fact-checking and academic strictness and appeal directly to emotional responses. They can be spread quickly across language barriers and use humor and simplicity to anchor messages in the public’s consciousness.
However, the digital sphere offers more than just memes. Deepfake technology has become a new frontier of war propaganda. Videos that appear to show high-ranking leaders surrendering or making inflammatory claims can spread quickly before they are exposed. Which can lead to momentary chaos. Although fact-checkers often quickly disprove these clips, the remaining doubt destabilizes any agreement about what is true (Kleemann, n.d.). This atmosphere of uncertainty benefits those who profit from the confusion and makes it increasingly difficult for observers especially those without advanced media literacy, to distinguish truth from fake.
Another influential aspect of modern war propaganda is the role of diaspora communities. Digital networking allows people far from the conflict zone to share and strengthen their views from home. People living abroad can become vocal supporters or critics, organizing international protests or fundraising campaigns. Likewise, state-sponsored campaigns can also target these diaspora communities to influence their views and secure their financial or political support. The result is a highly networked environment in which propaganda easily crosses national borders and can continue to be influential. Media literacy therefore becomes an important tool of defense against war propaganda. Educational initiatives can teach citizens how to evaluate sources, cross-check information, and recognize manipulative content (Bildung, 2022). Numerous NGOs and fact-checking organizations are struggling to keep up with the flood of tweets, videos, and articles being produced in real-time in conflict zones. Although these organizations play an important role, their work can be overshadowed by the sheer volume and spread of misleading information.
Ultimately, war propaganda in the digital age is about more than controlling a single narrative; it is about fragmenting information environments so that multiple competing stories coexist. This fragmented reality complicates attempts at diplomacy and can prolong conflicts, as neither side has a single point of reference for negotiations. For the global public, the flood of competing claims can lead to a sense of cynicism or overwhelm, making it tempting to withdraw altogether. While technology has democratized the distribution of information, it has also multiplied the opportunities for propaganda. States and other organizations involved can adapt quickly to this new environment and with that influence minds and hearts more effectively than ever. Navigating this information battlefield requires alertness, nuanced judgment, and a global commitment to transparency so that truth does not become another casualty of war.
Sources:
Russische DesinformationskampagnenBundesregierung. (2022c, August 30). Die Bundesregierung Informiert | Startseite. https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/aus-narrativen-desinformation-2080112?
Helmus, T. C., & Holynska, K. (2024, September 3). Ukrainian Resistance to Russian disinformation: lessons for future conflict. RAND. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2771-1.html?
Sk. (2024, February 2). Russia-Ukraine War through the eyes of social media | GJIA. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2024/02/02/russia-ukraine-through-the-eyes-of-social-media/
Poepsel, M. A., Malo, A., Obuekwe, C., Wilhelm, M., Góngora, V. P., & Daiber, D. (2024). “Tears have never won anyone freedom:” a multimodal discourse analysis of Ukraine’s use of memes in a propaganda war of global scale. Online Media and Global Communication, 3(1), 55–81. https://doi.org/10.1515/omgc-2023-0050
Bildung, B. F. P. (2022, January 26). Kritische Medienkompetenz als Säule demokratischer Resilienz in Zeiten von “Fake News” und Online-Desinformation. bpb.de. https://www.bpb.de/themen/medien-journalismus/digitale-desinformation/290527/kritische-medienkompetenz-als-saeule-demokratischer-resilienz-in-zeiten-von-fake-news-und-online-desinformation/
The recent live discussion between Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter), and Alice Weidel, leader of the Alternative for Germany (AfD), became a hot topic in both Germany and internationally. Musk, one of the most recognizable figures in tech, hosted the event on his platform, and Weidel didn’t miss the chance to frame her controversial political stance for a massive audience. (Kramer, 2025). But why is this conversation so significant, and what does it tell us about propaganda in the modern era?
The Context of the Conversation
The AfD, a right-wing populist party, has gained momentum in recent years, partly through its adept use of social media to disseminate its messages. Within the conversation, Musk expressed support for the AfD, describing it as the only party capable of “saving Germany.” Weidel however tried to use the platform to criticize past German leadership, labeling Angela Merkel as a “green chancellor” who allegedly caused significant harm to the country. However, one of the most controversial moments came when Weidel claimed Adolf Hitler was a communist, a statement Musk did not challenge but appeared to agree with.
This statement again showed the spread of historical inaccuracies, which are a hallmark of propaganda tactics. By distorting facts, such statements are intended to provoke reactions, attract attention, and create a favorable narrative for their supporters.
Social Media as a Propaganda Tool
Social media platforms like X allow public figures to bypass traditional media channels and connect directly with audiences. This can empower marginalized voices, but it can also provide fertile ground for disinformation to spread unchecked. Algorithms amplify controversial or engaging content, meaning provocative or false statements often reach a wider audience simply because they generate reactions – be it outrage or support (Menczer, n.d.).
Musk’s ownership of X complicates matters further. As a prominent entrepreneur and influential figure, his public support for political entities can lend credibility to their messages, regardless of their validity. This dynamic emphasizes the fuzzy boundaries between personal opinion, platform governance, and corporate influence.
Lessons from History
The use of propaganda to influence public opinion is not new and has been around for quit some time. As mentioned in previous blog posts during the Nazi era, Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s chief propagandist, effectively used radio, film, and print media to spread the regime’s ideology (Deutschland, n.d.). While the mediums have changed, the underlying principles remain similar: controlling the narrative, evoking strong emotions, and repeating messages to create a sense of inevitability.
The Characteristics of Modern Propaganda
Propaganda has evolved significantly in the digital age. Today, it often relies on emotional appeals, oversimplified narratives, and repetition to resonate with audiences. The conversation between Musk and Weidel demonstrates these tactics:
Emotional Appeals: By portraying Merkel’s policies as a problem and presenting the AfD as Germany’s savior, the discussion taps into fears about the future of the nation
Historical Revisionism: Weidel’s claim about Hitler distorts historical facts to provoke outrage and attract attention, which is a common propaganda technique
Repetition and Amplification: Social media algorithms reward engagement, which means that controversial posts are likely to reach a larger audience through sharing and commenting, regardless of their accuracy
The Risks of Unregulated Platforms
Musk’s leadership of X has been criticized for its laissez-faire approach to content moderation. Critics argue that this policy allows harmful content, including propaganda and hate speech, to flourish unchecked. The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) seeks to address these concerns by holding platforms accountable for illegal content and public safety risks (Digital Services Act: Ensuring a Safe and Accountable Online Environment, n.d.). The Musk-Weidel conversation has already prompted investigations into whether X violated the DSA (Keskin, 2025b).
Without regulation, platforms like X risk becoming megaphones for disinformation or fake news. This not only distorts public discourse but also undermines trust in legitimate media and democratic institutions, making it difficult to decide between fake and truth. The DSA represents a step toward addressing these issues, but its enforcement will be critical.
Ethical and Regulatory Challenges
Combating propaganda requires more than just regulating certain media on social platforms. Media literacy is essential. People need tools to critically evaluate what they see online. This includes recognizing manipulative tactics, checking sources, and understanding the algorithms that shape their feeds. For example, if viewers had better media literacy skills, they might question Weidel’s outlandish claims about Hitler or consider why Musk’s endorsement of the AfD matters. Hereby education systems and public campaigns can play a vital role in building this awareness for a younger audience.
Conclusion
The conversation between Elon Musk and Alice Weidel is a strong reminder of the power and pitfalls of social media in shaping political discourse nowadays. It illustrates how influential figures can use these platforms to spread their messages, often blurring the lines between fact and fiction. As social media continues to evolve, so too will the methods of those who seek to manipulate it for their own benefits.
Digital Services Act: ensuring a safe and accountable online environment. (n.d.). Eurojust. https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/de/publication/digital-services-act-safe-and-accountable-online-environment#:~:text=The%20Digital%20Services%20Act%20(DSA,safe%20and%20trusted%20online%20environment.
Deutschland, S. D. H. M. S. H. D. G. D. B. (n.d.). Gerade auf LeMO gesehen: LeMO Das lebendige Museum Online. https://www.dhm.de/lemo/biografie/joseph-goebbels
