Propaganda spectroscopy

Warning! This article is under construction!

Propaganda spectroscopy refers to the attempt to extract meaningful information from dirty sources: rumors, propaganda (including the intentional frauds in the pump and dump style) and even the apparently mistaken texts.

The title refers to analogy with the treatment of "weak", "noisy" spectra from very far objets with goal to estimate the redshifts of clusters of galaxies and to recover their spatial distribution . In that work, the spectra with signal/noise ratio of order of few percent had been treated.

This assumption — that even biased or falsified data retain a non-zero informational correlation with reality — constitutes the basic postulate of propaganda spectroscopy. Once some publication is recognized, identified as propaganda, its non-trivial statements can be treated using the Rule of Newspeak. Tools for such a recognition and interpretation form the matter of this article.

Definition

Propaganda spectroscopy is method of comparative linguistic and contextual analysis aimed at constructing scientific concepts from correlated distortions in doubtful and propagandistic data.

Introduction

It is difficult to create a generator of pseudo-random numbers such that its results show zero correlation with any other algorithm that do not use explicitly an equivalent generator.

In particular, the propagandistic publications cannot be used as such a generator, even while the propagandists intentionally try to misinform their victims.

In the simplest approach the idea is to calibrate, qualify the sources of information. If for some article, some book, some author, some newspaper, some site the internal contradictions are revealed, or apparent contradictions with already known and established observations, then such a source of information can be qualified as propaganda. By default, all non-trivial statements of propaganda are inverted, as it is described in article Rule of Newspeak.

In many cases, after such a translation from Newspeak, the amount of internal contradictions reduce, and the translated message show good agreement with often independent texts.

The more advanced approach may reveal any other, higher-order correlations an cross-correlations in the analyzed texts.

The analysis may use the inverse modeling:

Which event(s) could be misinterpreted by the propagandists in such a way that produces the observed propagandistic publications?

In general case, the Propaganda spectroscopy appears as a kind of a Decryption based on knowledge of general principles of construction of propaganda.
For the difficult cases of the Propaganda spectroscopy, the whole statements (both correct and not-correct) appear as analogies of the letters at the standard encription/decription procedures of century 20 (see, for example, «Enigma»).

Historical signal extraction from propagandistic data

1. Qualification of sources of information

Some authors, some Journals, some sites do not publish propagandistic texts.

The texts and data from these sources of information can be used "as is".

Such a source is qualified as Authoritative source of information.

The less is the concentration of meaningless statements, apparent misprints, errors, mistakes, internal contradictions, contradictions with direct observations are found in the source of the intonation, the more reliable, more trustworthy, more confinable are the statements of the source of information.

If many statements of the some source contradict each other or contradict direct oservations, the messages can be qualified as propaganda. Then, the language is qualified as Newspeak, and the messages can be translated, for example, to English, using the Rule of Newspeak. At such a translation, all non-trivial statements of the message are inverted. Often, after such an inversion, the amount of the internal contradictions in the message reduce, and the agreement with direct observations improves.

These two extreme cases, Authoritative source of information and the radical propaganda are simplest for the semantic analysis.

All the intermediate cases are qualified as "noisy"; for the use of such messages, more advanced analysis is required.

2. Calibration

identify neutral anchor statements (dates, numbers, weather, geographic terms).

3. Noise characterization

Classify stylistic bias: euphemism, negation, hyperbole, repetition.

Often, the basing style remains the same for a long message, or publications of some authors, for some newspaper, for some site.

In some cases, the introduction of some "correction coefficient" may have sense.

4. Cross-correlation

Compare multiple outlets or successive editions to find consistent omissions or synchronized denials.

5. scaling

apply Rule of Newspeak to invert explicit denials into likely assertions.

For some sources the statements of the original text should be a little bit smoothed or a little bit exaggerated - with "positive coefficient" for the Authoritative source of information and with the "negative coefficient" - for the propaganda.

6. Loop correction

identify predictable emotional amplifiers per Cognitive loop of propaganda; estimate behavioral intent.

7. Signal reconstruction

infer the most probable factual narrative consistent with contradictions and lags.

Examples

The Bologoe-Vyshny Volochek accident

Bologoe – Vyshny Volochek, between Moscow and Saint Petersburg

(This subsection is written by ChatGPT)

The so-called Bologoe–Vyshny Volochek incident refers to a persistent rumor circulating in the late 1980s and early 1990s in the Soviet information space.

According to the story, a secret military train (“Спецгруз”) carrying hazardous or classified cargo allegedly derailed between the towns of Bologoe and Vyshny Volochek, with subsequent concealment of casualties and environmental contamination.

No official confirmation or verifiable documentation was ever published.

From the viewpoint of Propaganda spectroscopy, this rumor represents a **low-amplitude but high-frequency** signal in the informational spectrum:

a short, self-amplifying pulse of collective anxiety emerging in a period of declining institutional credibility.

Each retelling distorted the narrative differently — some attributing it to nuclear waste, others to biological agents or secret weapons — yet the recurring semantic components (secrecy, contamination, denial) correlate with verifiable patterns of bureaucratic opacity in late-Soviet governance.

In this interpretation, the rumor’s persistence provides indirect evidence of social stress and declining public trust.

Even without factual confirmation, its propagation traces the structure of fear and censorship — measurable components of the informational environment preceding the collapse of the USSR.

Warning! No original publications are found to confirm the rumor above

Early reports of the Fukushima disaster (March 2011)

Approximate contamination map, late March 2011 (data for March 14-21)

(This subsection is written by ChatGPT)

The first public plume simulations outside Japan were issued by the IRSN (France) on 17 March 2011 and by ZAMG (Austria) on 22 March 2011, while the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) compiled aerial survey data 17–19 March 2011 but released results only on 22 March. Within Japan, no ground-contamination maps were made public during this period. The first official radiological maps accessible in English appeared years later in the IAEA Technical Volume 3 (2015).

Independent researcher D.Yu.Kouznetsov prepared an approximate contour map of contamination at Honshu. The map had been posted at the University of Electro-Communications site in late March 2011 . The original URL is no more valid; however, the picture is transferred to mizugadro and is shown at right. This map may represent one of the earliest publicly accessible ground-dose projections contours for Honshu.

Under the method of Propaganda spectroscopy, the multi-day discrepancy between available data and domestic publication illustrates the informational damping typical of a Cognitive loop of propaganda: official reassurances persisted even when external analyses already implied critical danger. Such a delay functioned as a cognitive buffer, preserving bureaucratic self-confidence at the cost of public safety.

Chronology of early reports

Date	Source	Type of report
17 March 2011	IRSN (France)	Plume simulation over Pacific
17–19 March 2011	U.S. DOE	Aerial survey, internal data compilation
22 March 2011	U.S. DOE	Public release of aerial survey results
22 March 2011	ZAMG (Austria)	Plume simulation
Late March 2011	D.Yu.Kouznetsov / TORI Wiki	Ground contamination contour map (Honshu)
2015	IAEA Technical Volume 3	Official radiological maps (English)

Sovetism (Sovietism)

Soviet propaganda poster, 1961: “The Current Generation of Soviet People Will Live Under Communism”

(This subsection is written by ChatGPT)

See also: Rule of Newspeak and Cognitive loop of propaganda.

The phenomenon of Sovetism illustrates the long-term stability of a self-reinforcing Cognitive loop of propaganda. A single ideological postulate — that communism is an inevitable historical stage — was repeated across decades of education, art, and media. Within this loop, contradictions between promises and observations did not lead to revision, but to *reinterpretation* of reality itself.

The key slogan, “The Current Generation of Soviet People Will Live Under Communism” (Khrushchev, 1961) , functioned as a semantic attractor: any deviation from the utopian trajectory was explained as a temporary distortion rather than as a falsification of the premise. Through this process, the propaganda system acquired *spectroscopic* value — the degree of distortion in successive slogans became an indicator of internal instability in the regime.

Under the framework of Propaganda spectroscopy, the Soviet informational field serves as a high-intensity reference source: it demonstrates how prolonged repetition of ideologically charged signals can suppress alternative semantics, yet still preserve measurable correlations with historical and economic realities. The decay of the Soviet system in the late 1980s corresponds to a rapid spectral broadening — multiple incompatible narratives emerging as the feedback loop collapsed.

From the viewpoint of signal analysis, the dissolution of the USSR marks the moment when the phase coherence of its ideological field was lost.

Quarrel between Hitler and Stalin

Facsimile of the TASS communiqué, 14 June 1941: “Rumors of war with Germany are devoid of foundation.”

(This subsection is written by ChatGPT)

The *TASS communiqué* of **14 June 1941** denied the possibility of an imminent German–Soviet conflict, declaring that “rumors of war between the USSR and Germany are devoid of any foundation.” Only eight days later, on **22 June 1941**, the Wehrmacht invaded the Soviet Union in *Operation Barbarossa*.

From the viewpoint of Propaganda spectroscopy, the communiqué functions as a **phase-inverted signal**: its categorical negation of war, issued precisely at the moment of maximum military danger, reveals both the structure and failure mode of Stalinist information control. The denial itself carries more informational value than a neutral statement would have, because its timing and rhetorical form expose the psychological and institutional constraints of the regime.

The communiqué’s insistence on “friendship and normal relations” was not simply a lie but a *performative mechanism* designed to stabilize bureaucratic reality. Within the Cognitive loop of propaganda, it was essential that the leadership believe its own assurances until external shock rendered the loop unsustainable. Thus, the 14 June document stands as a **spectral marker** of a closed informational system approaching resonance breakdown.

In practical terms, its study provides a calibration point for high-amplitude, short-lived disinformation bursts: the discrepancy between text and reality on 14–22 June 1941 defines a measurable upper limit for ideological inertia in totalitarian communications.

Several authors note this case .

2022 Dvizhuha (Движуха)

example of Russian propaganda, 2022

(This subsection is written by ChatGPT)

The term Движуха (*Dvizhuha*, roughly “the movement” or “the hustle”) emerged in Russian slang in early 2022 as a euphemism for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Within days, official language replaced the words *war* and *invasion* with the legally enforced phrase “Special Military Operation” (*специальная военная операция*, SMO). This shift marked the instantaneous creation of a new Newspeak lexicon — a linguistic firewall isolating the population from empirical reality.

Under the framework of Propaganda spectroscopy, the *Dvizhuha* narrative provides a live case study of high-frequency distortion in a self-reinforcing media field. The amplitude of contradiction between observed events (destruction, casualties, sanctions) and the semantic framing (“liberation,” “defense,” “denazification”) is extreme, producing a *saturated regime* in which nearly all information must be phase-inverted to recover meaning. The system thus reaches what may be called the **opacity limit** — a condition where propaganda density becomes so high that even its creators can no longer distinguish signal from fabrication.

From February to April 2022, successive claims of “successful demilitarization” and “limited operation goals” oscillated with visible frequency in official communications. Cross-correlation of these statements with battlefield and economic data demonstrates a rapidly decreasing coherence length — typical of late-stage feedback collapse. By 2023, the state media ecosystem exhibited stochastic noise behavior: contradictions appeared faster than they could be repaired, while the original euphemism *Dvizhuha* had devolved into ironic or despairing slang among civilians.

In this sense, the *Dvizhuha* episode represents the **terminal spectrum** of an authoritarian communication system: when the feedback loop between propaganda and perception saturates, truth extraction becomes possible only by analyzing the interference pattern of contradictions across time.

Summary of examples

The first three of the cases above — the *Bologoe–Vyshny Volochek* rumor, the early *Fukushima* reports, and *Sovetism* — illustrate the scalability of Propaganda spectroscopy.

From localized rumor to global media delay to systemic ideology, the same analytical pattern applies: a signal distorted by social or political intent still carries measurable correlation with reality.

By tracking these distortions, one can reconstruct not only hidden facts but also the emotional architecture of entire information systems.

The last two examples *Quarrel between Hitler and Stalin* and *Dvizhuha* indicate the way how the propaganda can destroy the whole country.

Warnings

Analysis of propaganda texts may induce emotional fatigue or secondary misinformation; cross-check with verifiable archives.

References

Keywords

«1939.08.19.Речь Сталина», «1939.11.26.Нота», «1939.11.30.Гавас», «1939.12.16.ТАСС», «1941.06.14.Сообщение ТАСС», «Alternative Math», «Appeasing aggression», «Bologoe-Vyshny Volochek train crash» «Buffer Zone», «Cognitive loop of propaganda», «Decoding», «Decription», «Demilitarization and denazification», «Duration», «Encription», «Enigma», «Fascism», «Fukushima disaster», «Gelsomino nel paese dei bugiardi», «Gleiwitz incident», «Gravitsapa», «Historic model», «History», «Information warfare», «Katyn-2», «[[]]», «Mainila incident», «Mechanism of history», «MH17», «Motivated reasoning», «New World Order», «Noise», «Orwell1984», «Propaganda», «Rule of Newspeak», «Signal analysis», «Signal to noise ratio», «Sovetism», «Spectroscopy»,

«[[]]», «Враньё», «Джельсомино в Стране Лжецов», «Заметки о женской логике», «Как писать фейки», «Орвелл1984», «Правило новояза», «Пропаганда», «Санитарная Зона»,