(De)stigmatized Propaganda: A Skinnerian Analysis of Definitional Genealogy and Conceptual Shifts

ABSTRACT This paper investigates the term ‘propaganda’ by identifying definitional trends across classical texts, historical documents, and contemporary academic sources. Despite growing academic efforts to neutralize the word, propaganda remains an ethically charged concept associated with manipulation, deception, and political control. The purpose of this research is to examine how definitions of propaganda have developed and what conceptual assumptions have persisted across time. Using Quentin Skinner's history‐of‐ideas method, the paper analyzes 71 definitional and conceptual statements and organizes them into five recurring dimensions: Normative Orientation, Psychological Manipulation, Intentionality, Symbol Use, and Emotional vs. Rational Appeal. The findings show that 74.6% of statements contain a normative orientation, with negative judgment forming the largest share, confirming the term's long‐standing stigma. Psychological Manipulation appears in 40.8% of statements, while Intentionality appears in 32.4%, indicating that propaganda is widely understood as a purpose‐driven and psychologically influential act. This study reconstructs the definitional field of propaganda by providing conceptual groundwork for future work.