Abstract:
Wartime lends itself to a particular form of communication. This type of communication is often regarded as propaganda, which is used to promote or alternatively dissuade pro-war fervour. This theory is no different during the Border War of South Africa (1966-1989). During the years that the war waged, the public’s sentiment towards the war had changed instigated by the continuing political unrest found both in South Africa and on its borders. The South African Defence Force (SADF) attempted to use its official magazine Paratus to disseminate pro-war communication in order to subdue the objectors and sway public opinion. Thus, this study aimed to understand how the magazine was used as a propaganda medium in terms of its editorial philosophy. Furthermore, attention was given to the main propaganda devices used in magazines as well as in Paratus itself, while changes in the editorial philosophy of the magazine during wartime formed the background of the study. By making use of the single case and longitudinal study, continuous data from a core single source, from 1970-1988, was investigated to gather data including the cover, advertisements, letters, articles and design features that will form the subject of rigorous content analysis in order to obtain rich and holistic information. An amagalmation of the propaganda devices identified by Lasswell (1927), the Institute of Propaganda Analysis – the IPA (1937) and the Propaganda Model (1988) was used as set criteria to base this propaganda study on. The study is rooted in a comprehensive literature review in order to contextualise the findings and avoid bias from the researcher. Ultimately, the study revealed that pro-war and Afrikaner nationalism and Calvinism ideals were supported and furthered through the means of mass communication approaches, specifically that of strategic communication, agenda-setting theory and framing, as well as propaganda devices, most notably the glittering generalities and transfer propaganda devices, while the ideology of anti-Communism alongside the rhetoric of “total onslaught” also formed part of the narrative of the magazine.
