In 1928, Edward Bernays argued that shaping public opinion was not only inevitable but essential in a democratic society. His groundbreaking work, Propaganda, laid the foundation for modern public relations, casting persuasion as a neutral tool.

Fast forward to 2019, and Shoshana Zuboff’s The Age of Surveillance Capitalism paints a far darker picture: a world where personal data is weaponized, and human behavior is engineered for profit. Together, their perspectives offer a powerful lens through which to examine today’s Propaganda 2.0—a digital phenomenon that manipulates minds invisibly, blurring the line between persuasion and control.

The Dual Nature of Propaganda

Bernays saw propaganda as a means of organizing public opinion in an increasingly complex world. “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society,” he wrote. For him, propaganda could rally a nation during wartime, promote public health initiatives, or drive social change.

But even Bernays acknowledged the potential for abuse. Today’s digital propaganda takes his vision to an extreme. Unlike the overt messaging of his era, Propaganda 2.0 operates stealthily. Algorithms track every click, every pause, every scroll, tailoring messages to exploit our emotional triggers. This isn’t just persuasion—it’s manipulation, designed to bypass rational thought and tap directly into our subconscious.

The Surveillance Machine

Here, Zuboff’s critique comes into sharp focus. Surveillance capitalism, as she describes it, turns human experience into raw material for behavioral prediction and modification. The personal data harvested by tech giants fuels micro-targeted ads that don’t just persuade—they shape behavior in real-time, often without the user’s awareness.

Take the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where data from millions of Facebook users was weaponized to influence political outcomes. These “dark ads” exploited psychological vulnerabilities, crafting personalized messages that nudged voters toward specific candidates or policies. The result was a seismic shift in political landscapes, achieved through invisible, unaccountable means.

“This is not just about marketing,” Zuboff warns. “It’s about power—the power to shape human behavior at scale.”

The Ethical Quagmire of Corporate Activism

It’s not just political campaigns leveraging these tactics. Brands, too, have embraced Propaganda 2.0, often under the guise of social responsibility. Following the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, corporations flooded social media with messages of solidarity. Yet behind closed doors, some of these same companies were funding political actions or policies that contradicted their public stances.

This performative activism raises a critical question: Are brands genuinely committed to the causes they champion, or are they simply exploiting societal issues to build consumer loyalty? Bernays might argue that such campaigns can unify and inspire, but Zuboff would likely see them as another layer of manipulation, reinforcing surveillance capitalism’s grip on society.

The Feedback Loop of Polarization

One of the most insidious effects of Propaganda 2.0 is its role in deepening societal divisions. Algorithms prioritize content that maximizes engagement, which often means amplifying the most emotionally charged and polarizing messages. Over time, this creates echo chambers where individuals are exposed only to information that reinforces their existing beliefs, further entrenching political and cultural divides.

Consider the events surrounding the 2020 U.S. presidential election. In the months leading up to the vote, false narratives about election fraud spread rapidly on social media, fueled by targeted misinformation campaigns. These messages weren’t random—they were designed to sow doubt about the integrity of the election and erode trust in democratic institutions. The result was a deeply divided electorate and, ultimately, the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Bernays and Zuboff offer complementary solutions to this crisis

Bernays would advocate for professional codes of ethics, urging advertisers and political strategists to use their tools responsibly. He believed in the power of persuasion to educate and unite, provided it was wielded with integrity.

Zuboff, on the other hand, demands systemic reform. She calls for stricter regulations on data collection and use, greater transparency from tech platforms, and robust public education to equip individuals with the critical thinking skills needed to resist manipulation. “We must fight for a future where the digital world serves humanity, not the other way around,” she insists.

The stakes in this fight couldn’t be higher

In an era where information is both ubiquitous and weaponized, the battle for public opinion is a battle for democracy itself. Propaganda 2.0 offers unparalleled power to influence—but with that power comes a profound responsibility. By combining Bernays’ emphasis on ethical persuasion with Zuboff’s call for systemic accountability, we can envision a future where advertising and political messaging inform and inspire without undermining autonomy. The health of our democracy depends on it.