ii

ABSTRACT

While propaganda is often discussed in the context of the World Wars, it was used long
before the 20th century, and its prevalence shows no signs of stopping. The World Wars
changed the previously neutral dynamic perceptions of propaganda to far more sinister
connotations. Definitions of propaganda are fluid, changing with context and culture.
Still, there is a widespread scholarly agreement that propaganda undeniably influences
public opinion and relates to persuasion and communication. Regardless of how
propaganda is used, it has continually proven effective in communicating to the masses,
making it a crucial area for scholarly research. This study is a comparative analysis of
propaganda posters created during the Second World War, from 1939–1945. Although
many nations participated in the war, this research examines posters by The United
States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy. Through qualitative and quantitative
content analysis, this research addresses the following questions: What narratives are
embedded in the propaganda posters made by America, Great Britain, Germany, and Italy
during World War II? How do design elements such as color, text, font, and symbols
contribute to the meanings of WWII propaganda? What narratives are consistent
throughout propaganda made by countries in the same alliance? Which are different?
What are the situational factors that affect the prevalence and strategy of propaganda
posters? Answering these questions contributes to research both about World War II
propaganda and persuasive and effective communications in the modern day. Results
indicate that propaganda posters are more alike than dissimilar and employ many of the
same overarching features regardless of producer. Multiple narratives were present across
the samples from different countries, executed to various degrees of similarity. Every
design element plays a role in developing the poster's meaning, as without one, the
poster’s message would differ.
 iii

Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................................................... v

LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, & ILLUSTRATIONS ....................................................................................... vi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................................... 3

2.1: WWII Context ....................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2: Propaganda’s Relevance to The War ................................................................................................... 5
2.3: Defining Propaganda ........................................................................................................................... 6
2.4: Poster Propaganda .............................................................................................................................. 8
2.5: Content Analysis and Coding ............................................................................................................... 9

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................... 13

CHAPTER 4: METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 14

4.1: Overview ............................................................................................................................................ 14
4.2 Poster Collection and Sampling .......................................................................................................... 15
4.3: Content Analysis and Coding Technique ............................................................................................ 16
4.4: The Coding Criteria............................................................................................................................. 17

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 22

5.1 Production of Italian Propaganda ....................................................................................................... 22
5.11 Production Group ......................................................................................................................... 22
5.12 Stance of Italian Propaganda Posters .......................................................................................... 24
5.2: Subject Matter ................................................................................................................................... 24
5.21: Overarching Subject Matter ........................................................................................................ 24
5.22: Roles of Human Subjects ............................................................................................................ 25
5.23: General Ages of Subject(s) ......................................................................................................... 27
5.3: Color ................................................................................................................................................... 29
5.31: Colors Used in Posters ................................................................................................................ 29
5.32: Prevalence of Each Color ............................................................................................................ 30
5.4: Text, Type Categories, and Language ................................................................................................ 31
5.41: Presence of Text .......................................................................................................................... 31
5.42: Typeface Use Statistics ................................................................................................................ 31
5.43: Number of Type Categories per Poster ...................................................................................... 32
5.45: Word Choice and Language ........................................................................................................ 34
5.45: Typeface Similarities ................................................................................................................... 39
5.5: Visual Elements .................................................................................................................................. 42
5.51: Presence of Symbols ................................................................................................................... 42
 iv

5.52: Prevalence of Each Symbol.......................................................................................................... 43

5.53: Presence of Flags ......................................................................................................................... 45
5.54: Prevalence of Each Flag ............................................................................................................... 46
5.6: Propaganda Devices ........................................................................................................................... 47
5.61: Presence of Propaganda Devices ................................................................................................ 47
5.62: Prevalence of Propaganda Devices ............................................................................................. 48
5.7: Appeals ............................................................................................................................................... 50
5.71: Presence of Appeals .................................................................................................................... 50
5.72: Prevalence of the Appeals ........................................................................................................... 51
5.73: Emotional Appeals ....................................................................................................................... 53
5.74: Emotion Type ............................................................................................................................... 54
5.8: Calls to Action ..................................................................................................................................... 57
5.81: Presence of a Call to Action ......................................................................................................... 57
5.82: Call to Action Categorization ....................................................................................................... 57

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 59

6.1: Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 59
6.2: Production of Italian Propaganda ...................................................................................................... 59
6.3: Subject Matter .................................................................................................................................... 60
6.4: Color ................................................................................................................................................... 67
6.5: Text, Type Categories, and Language ................................................................................................ 69
6.6: Visual Elements .................................................................................................................................. 75
6.7: Propaganda Devices ........................................................................................................................... 79
6.8: Appeals ............................................................................................................................................... 80
6.9: Calls to Action ..................................................................................................................................... 83
6.10: Overall .............................................................................................................................................. 84
6.11: Limitations ........................................................................................................................................ 87

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 90

WORKS CITED (MLA 9)....................................................................................................................... 92

 v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to thank my research mentor, Dr. Kenn Gaither.

From our first meeting, I was assured that he was the right person to guide me through

this process, and his support has never wavered. Thank you for always believing in me,

even when I do not believe in myself. You make even the most impossible task seem

doable and have been my biggest supporter throughout my time at Elon. I feel incredibly

fortunate to have worked so closely with you over the past two years, and I will miss our

weekly meetings and world travels immensely.

Dr. Harlen Makemson and Dr. Damion Blake deserve a special thank you for

serving on my defense committee. I appreciate your time, effort, encouragement, and

feedback. I could not have done this without your expertise and guidance. I also thank the

Elon University Honors Program for the opportunity to conduct undergraduate research

and work with incredible faculty along the way.

Additionally, I would like to thank Dr. Jessalyn Strauss for her support and help

throughout this process. I immensely appreciate your flexibility and willingness to work

with me on my thesis throughout our Great Ideas course. I would not have made the

progress I did on my thesis without your commitment to my work.

Lastly, I would like to thank my incredible parents for providing me with the

opportunities to attend Elon University and follow my dreams. Elon has provided me

with an incredible undergraduate education and experience, and I could not be more

thankful for the past four years.

 vi

LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, & ILLUSTRATIONS

Tables:
• Table 1: Reported/ hypothesized group producing Italian posters
• Table 2: Roles of human subjects by country (N/As excluded)
• Table 3: General genders by country
• Table 4: Color prevalence in posters by country
• Table 5: Typeface usage breakdown by country
• Table 6: Total number of typefaces used by group
• Table 7: Prevalence of all identified symbols by country
• Table 8: Prevalence of all identified flags by country
• Table 9: Prevalence of each propaganda device by country
• Table 10: First, second, and third most used propaganda devices by country
• Table 11: First, second, and third most used propaganda devices by alliance
• Table 12: Appeal frequency by country
• Table 13: Frequency of observed emotional appeals by country
• Table 14: Breakdown of emotional categories used by countries

Charts:
• Chart 1: Observations about poster's text by country
• Chart 2: Categorization of observed emotions

Figures:
• Figure 1: USA 3 Text Example
• Figure 2: USA 6 Text Example
• Figure 3: UK 2 Text Example
• Figure 4: UK 5 Text Example
• Figure 5: GER 11 Text Example
• Figure 6: GER 20 Text Example
• Figure 7: ITL 5 Text Example
• Figure 8: ITL 6 Text Example
• Figure 9: ITL 24 Full Poster
• Figure 10: ITL 5 Full Poster
• Figure 11: UK 6 Full Poster
• Figure 12: USA 9 Full Poster
 Shugar 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

We must remember that in time of war what is said on the enemy’s side of the front is
always propaganda, and what is said on our side of the front is truth and righteousness,
the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace.

– Walter Lippmann, cited in Shah 2005

Following decades of tension, and eight years of on-and-off fighting, on February

22, 2022, Russia attacked Ukraine and relaunched the Russo-Ukrainian War into action

(Ukraine in Maps: Tracking the War with Russia). Since the initial invasion in early

2022, there have been tens of thousands of casualties across Eastern Europe and renewed

interest in propaganda, disinformation, and misinformation across the globe (Hayda et

al). Propaganda has played a critical component in this conflict, as Russia has invoked

heavy censorship, Ukraine has launched huge media campaigns, and other nations have

tried keeping their own citizens up to date with accurate information (Russia vs Ukraine:

The Fog of Propaganda and Disinformation; Meaker). Free speech in Russia is limited, as

well as independent news production, allowing state media to dictate the narrative that

Russian citizens and the citizens of Russian-controlled territories are told (Clark). The

Russian government made it illegal for the media to describe what was happening as a

“war,” communicating a narrative of “special military operations” rather than ruthless

invasions (Russia vs Ukraine: The Fog of Propaganda and Disinformation). Although it

does not directly affect what is happening on the war front, propaganda has a massive

impact on public opinion of the war worldwide.

While propaganda is often discussed in the context of the World Wars of the 20th

century, it has existed centuries beforehand and is still prevalent today, as demonstrated

in the Russo-Ukrainian War. The propaganda associated with World War I and II imbues
 Shugar 2

the term with a decidedly negative connotation, but propaganda originated as a neutral

term (Rusu and Herman 119). Furthermore, the meaning of propaganda is situational,

changing over time depending on how it is employed. Propaganda was widely studied in

the 20th century once it was demonstrated to play a significant role in wartime strategy

(Rusu and Herman 120). The study of propaganda has not diminished in post-war times,

and propaganda is still being created, used, and analyzed today. Multiple world powers,

such as Russia and China, still have ministries that create propaganda (United States,

Department of State 12). Aside from traditional propaganda, social media has established

a new form of information warfare (Prier 12). With propaganda constantly circulating, it

is imperative to study what elements contribute to its creation and effectiveness.

This study analyzes propaganda posters made during the Second World War,

between 1939 and 1945, by The United States, The United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy.

This thesis takes an in-depth look at the narratives created in these propaganda posters, as

well as the design elements such as colors, linguistics, fonts, symbols, and visuals that

contribute to constructing the propaganda’s messaging. In looking at qualitative and

quantitative data through a mixed-methods content analysis, the full meaning of a poster

can be analyzed as a text. Through this analytic framework, visuals, words, and themes

allow for complex analysis in a way in which meaning is broadly constructed through all

aspects of a poster. The sample consists of 120 posters, thirty from each nation of focus.

The project aims to better understand propaganda, specifically from World War II but

also as a general concept of wartime communications.

 Shugar 3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Although propaganda is not a new concept, its study increased significantly

during and after the Second World War in 1945. Researchers have examined propaganda

in many contexts, from war to election campaigns and public health. Existing studies of

World War II propaganda often focus on the campaigns of one nation rather than

comparing design elements and narratives across global powers. This literature review

covers a basic history of World War II, the war’s connection to propaganda, what

propaganda is, and the use of content analyses and coding to analyze visual artifacts.

2.1: WWII Context

To understand the complexities of propaganda, particularly the modern view of it,

it is essential to provide context around the Second World War. The Axis and Allied

powers were the main alliances in WWII (Cornelison and Yanak). The major countries

within the Axis power alliance were Germany, Italy (until 1943), the Soviet Union (until

1941), and Japan (Cornelison and Yanak). The Allied powers originally consisted of

Great Britain, France, and China, until the United States and the Soviet Union joined in

1941 (Cornelison and Yanak). Although the war did not officially start until 1939, it

arguably began politically long before the physical fighting began, with Germany as the

imitator. (Cornelison and Yanak). The outcome of World War I left Germany’s economy

and political structure in shambles, and “the Global Slump of 1929–33 was … the

watershed event [that] marked the point where the ‘postwar era’ ended and ‘another pre-

war era’ began” (Anievas 152). Nazism fully emerged by 1933, and Adolf Hitler gained

power through promises of rebuilding the military, economic stability, and restoring

greatness to Germany (Anievas 156).

 Shugar 4

Germany and the USSR invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, and Britain and

France declared war immediately, beginning World War II (Cornelison and Yanak). The

USSR switched alliances in June 1941 after Germany abandoned its non-aggression pact

and invaded the Soviet Union (Bellamy). Immediately, the “Soviet Union became an ally

of Britain and a recipient of Lend-Lease aid from the United States” (Bellamy). After

Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the Axis powers declared war on the

United States (Cornelison and Yanak). Italy switched alliances to the Allied powers in

1943, a change with multiple implications for propaganda (U5LF SR Italy Timeline).

World War II ended gradually, beginning on D-Day, when the Allies invaded Normandy,

France, on June 6, 1944 (D-Day: The Allies Invade Europe). A little less than a year later,

following Hitler’s suicide, Germany surrendered on May 7, 1945 (Klein). Germany’s

capitulation ended the war in Europe, but battles raged in the Pacific until August 1945.

To put the war to an end, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the cities of

Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan (Klein). Japan’s surrender became official on

September 2, 1945, ending the Second World War (Klein).

Of the four nations compared in this research — the United States, United

Kingdom, Germany, and Italy — three stayed on the same side the entire war. However,

Italy’s alliances and path in the war were quite complex because it switched from the

Axis to the Allied powers. Italy entered the war as a member of the Axis powers in June

1940, although the nation’s dictator, Mussolini, had initially declared neutrality in the

“German conflict” (U5LF SR Italy Timeline). Italy maintained its alliance with Germany

and Japan until July 1943, when “the fall of Palermo in the Allied invasion of Sicily

inspired a subsequent coup d'état against Mussolini” (U5LF SR Italy Timeline). Less than
 Shugar 5

two months later, the new government headed by Pietro Badoglio signed an armistice,

and Italy surrendered, secretly making agreements with the Allied powers (Heddlesten).

Simultaneously, Mussolini was rescued from imprisonment by the Germans and

appointed the head of the Repubblica Sociale Italiana, or the Italian Social Republic, a

fascist group in northern Italy supported by Hitler (Heddlesten). On October 13, 1943,

Italy declared war on Germany, its former ally, and supported the Allied powers until

their victory. This complicated history cannot be ignored, as propaganda made by Italy

during World War II was either made by Fascist Italy (1939-1943), Allied Italy (1943-

1945), or the RSI (1943-1945). This is unlike the other nations whose propaganda is

studied in this research, as they maintained one alliance and stance throughout the war.

Propaganda from Italy will require special attention in analysis, as the date does not

necessarily indicate in what context the propaganda was made, and there was more than

one position of the country throughout the war.

2.2: Propaganda’s Relevance to The War

Among naval battles, blitzkrieg tactics, and the atomic bombs, propaganda was an

important strategy used by both alliances (Cornelison and Yanak). Nations expertly used

posters, films, radio broadcasts, speeches, leaflets, and other forms of propaganda to

shape public opinion (Hobbs and McGee 58). The content and themes in the propaganda

varied by country, as the world powers each had different goals and ideals during the war

that translated into their propaganda. For example, some American propaganda spread

pro-democratic messages to rally support for the nation (Hobbs and McGee 58). On the

other hand, some German propaganda falsely “present[ed] World War II as a war waged

by and for the Jews” rather than a war begun by Hitler (Herf 54). The unethical
 Shugar 6

impropaganda made by Germany, specifically, is notable for shaping public opinion with

black propaganda, misinformation, and censorship (Rusu and Herman 120). Regardless

of the type of propaganda or the ethical implications, the propaganda created during

World War II was highly effective and shaped how propaganda is studied today. As

previously mentioned, the usage of propaganda has not waned, especially during

wartime. For example, as previously mentioned, propaganda is currently being created

and dictating the Russo-Ukrainian war in Eastern Europe. Furthermore, the rise of social

media has given propaganda a new life, and information warfare now takes place online,

creating new avenues for pushing communications (Prier 52).

2.3: Defining Propaganda

Propaganda can be defined as a “semantic label that is neither good nor bad; it is

simply a descriptor and unit of measurement for a particular device, text, image, or

grouping of any of these” (Gaither 44). Despite the fluidity of its definition and

connotations of the public, at its’ core, it is about persuasion and communication. The

word was first used in English in 1718 through a religious frame of reference (Fellows

182). Since then, the context of the word propaganda has quickly “shift[ed] in meaning

from a religious to a military and then to a political context” (Fellows 188). During the

nineteenth century, propaganda gained a negative connotation, defined as a “reproach to

secret associations for the spread of opinions and principles” (Fellows 183). This

negative connotation solidified during the Second World War when propaganda

flourished to both lead and mislead people. Although much of the propaganda used in

WWII is seen as harmful, the fact of the matter is that it worked. Now, over half a
 Shugar 7

century after the war’s conclusion, there is little debate that propaganda can be incredibly

effective in persuading (Gaither 41).

Since the drastic expansion of propaganda during World War II, scholars have

accepted propaganda as an umbrella term for multiple types of persuasive messaging,

both good and bad, including multiple types of propaganda (Rusu and Herman 120). In

“The Implications of Propaganda as a Social Influence Strategy,” Rusu and Herman

define the differences in types of propaganda: white, gray, and black. According to the

authors, white propaganda is ideal, as it is propaganda in which the information is

accurate and the source is trusted (Rusu and Herman 120). “In black propaganda, the

issuer is fake and sends untrue messages, and the basic element is a lie,” which

characterizes some propaganda used during World War II (Rusu and Herman 120). Gray

propaganda is in the middle and is the most common; the source can be known or

unknown, and the accuracy is unknown (Rusu and Herman 120). Gaither classifies

neutral communications as “propaganda” and unethical pieces as “impropaganda”

(Gaither 44).

Another way to categorize propaganda is based on whether the nation making it is

at war or peacetime. Jacques Ellul, a French sociologist, classified propaganda made

during peacetime as “integration propaganda” and propaganda during wartime as

“agitation propaganda” (Rusu and Herman 120). While integration propaganda is subtle

and relates to everyday life, agitation propaganda aims to mobilize the public (Rusu and

Herman 120). Regardless of the type, to be effective, the creators of propaganda use

rhetorical strategies to push their message.

 Shugar 8

The tools used in propaganda vary depending on the medium. For example, in

radio broadcasts, messages are spread through spoken words and tone of voice. For

posters, films, and leaflets, visual elements such as color, font, symbols, and semiotics

help communicate the desired message (McCrann 66). Similarly, textual messages might

rely on rhetorical strategies. One of the first formal introductions of propaganda in the

United States was through the Institute for Propaganda Analysis or the IPA. In 1937, the

IPA produced a list of seven propaganda devices: Name Calling, Glittering Generalities,

Transfer, Testimonial, Plain Folks, Card Stacking, and Band Wagon (Sproule 136).

While the IPA initially wanted to teach about propaganda so citizens could detect

negative influences, these devices have transformed into techniques and categories for

analysis (Sproule 137). Another propaganda tool is misinformation, for example, black

propaganda, as it communicates false information to an audience (Rusu and Herman

120). Misinformation is one aspect of propaganda that gives the term a negative

connotation, and it was commonly used in some WWII propaganda, such as that made by

Nazi Germany.

2.4: Poster Propaganda

This research project focuses specifically on WWII propaganda posters, which

allows for analysis of both content and design elements. Propaganda posters became

popular during World War I, 1914–1918 (Allen 54). There are many reasons attributed to

the success of posters, some of which are low production costs, their usage throughout

history, and the ability of the masses to understand them (Welch 33). Furthermore,

according to Allen, “the makers of effective posters know their audience– what symbols

best link to [experiences of person] in that audience. They then use words and other
 Shugar 9

symbols on their posters to help shape the audiences’ disposition to act, believe, or feel

the way the postermaker’s client wants” (Allen 54). Understanding mass publics and

persuasion strategies are imperative in the connotations and success of propaganda. In

McCrann’s study, she found that “reciprocal behavior was the underlying theme of a

number of propaganda posters,” giving the reader the impression that they needed to give

back to the country that was fighting for them (McCrann 56).

While propaganda posters can carry any message, Lt. R. Chambers categorized

three main types of wartime propaganda posters: those that appeal to patriotism, those

that concern the war effort, and those that make a negative statement about the enemy

(Chambers 54). One significant aspect of propaganda posters is symbols, as posters aim

to “reduce their image to a single element, usually exaggerated, which will be fixed in

memory after a single glance” (Allen 52). Symbols are often patriotic and can represent

the ideals of a nation or group, making them an integral part of propaganda (Chambers

55). Propaganda posters and other visual genres allow multiple elements to disseminate

messages in ways other genres cannot. Posters allow for visual, linguistic, and thematic

analysis, creating a sweeping canvas for research via content analysis.

2.5: Content Analysis and Coding

Among the most common methods for primary research are surveys, interviews,

focus groups, content analyses, and experiments. This research employs content analysis

to study 120 propaganda posters created during World War II from 1939-1945.

Specifically, this project looks at posters created by the United States, the United

Kingdom, Germany, and Italy. Content analysis is a “qualitative analysis method that

focuses on recorded human artefacts… Content analysis investigates these written,

 Shugar 10

spoken and visual artefacts without explicitly extracting data from participants,” making

it an unobtrusive research method (Jansen). Content analyses can be used to find specific

elements, themes, or concepts within a dataset to be quantified and analyzed (Content

Analysis). According to Columbia Public Health, there are two types of content analyses:

conceptual and relational (Content Analysis). A conceptual analysis “determines the

existence and frequency of concepts in a text,” whereas a relational analysis “develops

the conceptual analysis further by examining the relationships among concepts in a text”

(Content Analysis). This study is a relational analysis, examining narratives, messages,

symbols, and other rhetorical elements found in the posters.

Not only are there different types of content analyses, but there are also multiple

approaches to their use: conventional, directed, and summative (Hsieh and Shannon

1278). Hsieh and Shannon define a conventional approach as one “generally used with a

study design whose aim is to describe a phenomenon” (Hsieh and Shannon 1279). On the

other hand, a directed approach is a form of deductive reasoning in which the “goal is to

validate or extend conceptually a theoretical framework or theory” (Hsieh and Shannon

1281). Lastly, a summative approach begins by identifying specific aspects, such as

words or symbols, and then includes a latent content analysis, which interprets the

content to discover underlying ideas and meanings (Hsieh and Shannon 1283-1284). The

summative approach most closely matches the content analysis conducted for this project.

In conducting a content analysis, the data is coded or separated into categories for

specified analysis (Content Analysis). Coding can be done manually or with specialized

software. According to scholars, the goal of coding in content analysis is to “organize

large quantities of text into … content categories” and then to identify relationships in
 Shugar 11

and between those categories (Hsieh and Shannon 1285). The success of content analyses

depends on the coding process’s reliability and validity (Content Analysis). Using a

human coder requires all efforts toward reliability by the researcher. Columbia Public

Health (CPH) identifies three criteria that must be met for reliability: stability,

reproducibility, and accuracy (Content Analysis). CPH also notes three criteria that can

compromise validity: closeness of categories, conclusions, and generalizability of the

results to a theory (Content Analysis). Double coding is a method often used to showcase

intercoder reliability and validity. Intercoder reliability is “a numerical measure of the

agreement between different coders regarding how the same data should be coded,” and it

is when an external party codes the data set in the same way as the original coder to see

the degree of similarity in the results (O’Connor and Joffe). Coding is typically used in

tandem with performing content analyses as a supplemental research method.

Several studies have performed content analyses on research topics like this but

have yet to compare propaganda posters in the same manner. However, these studies

showcase the benefits of content analysis as a research method. For example, Banerjee

and Greene conducted a content analysis of anti-smoking posters created by adolescents.

They had a three-tiered coding scheme focused on the effects of smoking portrayed in

posters, tools for message depiction used in posters, the use of slogans, and through the

content analysis and coding, answered their research questions (Banerjee and Greene

121). Similarly, two researchers completed a content analysis of gender representation in

posters for children’s animated movies and coded quantitative data found in the posters

(Aley and Hahn). Research on war propaganda has also been done, like the content

analysis performed on Polish and Soviet war posters that looked at motives and
 Shugar 12

communication strategies (Dymarczyk). These studies, and many more, conclude that

content analyses and coding are appropriate and effective research methods.
 Shugar 13

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research questions that will guide this study are:

1. What narratives are embedded in the propaganda posters made by America, Great

Britain, Germany, and Italy during World War II?

2. How do design elements such as color, text, font, and symbols contribute to the

meanings of WWII propaganda?

3. What narratives are consistent throughout propaganda made by countries in the

same alliance? Which are different?

4. What are the situational factors that affect the prevalence and strategy of

propaganda posters?
 Shugar 14

CHAPTER 4: METHODS

4.1: Overview

The research method employed in this study is a content analysis of 120

propaganda posters, where mixed-method data was collected, coded, and interpreted. To

be considered for the sample, posters had to be made during World War II and produced

by one of the identified countries. Posters were selected as the genre for propaganda

analysis due to the opportunity for thematic, textual, and visual interpretation and to

include parameters to keep the project manageable.

The researcher developed an original coding sheet to manually code, organize,

and analyze each poster. However, despite the researcher’s best efforts to code each

poster with her prior knowledge, the use of external research was sometimes necessary to

complete the coding. This occurred in cases where the researcher needed to research an

event alluded to in the poster or needed assistance identifying a symbol, flag, or item, for

example. Most of the data was taken directly from the poster. However, some aspects are

rarely included on the posters themselves, such as the production year. This information

was found from sources that house digitized posters or other websites. These details from

the coding process must be noted for the reproductivity of this study.

A content analysis was conducted because of its comparison capabilities and the

opportunity to look across artifacts for qualitative and quantitative data. It is the method

best suited to answer these research questions, as this study looks at the elements that

contribute to the design of posters. The following subsections offer extensive detail on

the research design and methods for this project.

 Shugar 15

4.2 Poster Collection and Sampling

The first step in the research process was collecting propaganda posters. In a

spreadsheet, the researcher created one page per nation and added all links to posters

found that were made/circulated between the acceptable years (1939-1945). Notably,

poster timelines are different from other forms of media, as they can circulate long after

they are produced. All posters coded were dated between 1939 and 1945, but it is

possible that these may be years of circulation rather than production for some posters.

However, the theme of war is clear in the posters, lending to a confidence that they were

produced during WWII rather than before it.

Posters were located online and in person from websites, professional databases

from libraries, and museums. Some examples of websites that had access to posters are

History.com, Alamy.com, The Palestine Poster Project Archives, Comando Supremo, and

Propadv.com. Posters were also collected from databases such as the United States

Holocaust Memorial Museum Online Exhibition, Imperial War Museum Online

Collections, United States Library of Congress, United States National Archives Catalog,

The New Orleans National WWII Museum’s Online Exhibit, Hoover Institution Library

and Archives Digital Collection, Victoria and Albert Museum’s Online Collections, and

more. Lastly, during the researcher’s semester abroad in London in the Spring of 2022,

posters were collected from London’s Imperial War Museum and Churchill War

Museum. For posters analyzed in person, the researcher took photos of them, stored them

in folders by the producing country, and curated links for each poster for later use.

With the original goal to collect 50 posters per nation, the researcher stopped

collecting posters once it became increasingly difficult to find new ones within the
 Shugar 16

applicable time range. Not all propaganda posters created during World War II by the

countries of interest were available to the researcher, either online or in person, as some

no longer existed. Ultimately, each country had between 53 and 87 posters on its master

list. However, not all these posters were coded— only a random sample of thirty per

nation was. To determine which thirty posters per country would ultimately be coded, the

researcher ran a random number generator corresponding to the poster’s link’s row in the

master spreadsheet. The random generator was redone if duplicates were listed until

thirty individual posters were selected.

4.3: Content Analysis and Coding Technique

Coding is an integral part of content analysis, used to collect, evaluate, and

synthesize data. As previously mentioned, an original coding sheet was designed

specifically for this project (Hsieh and Shannon 1278). In developing this coding scheme,

the researcher first considered what aspects of the posters required analysis to answer the

research questions. These elements, identified from the literature review of propaganda,

were used to draft the first coding sheet. For the second draft, the researcher used studies

by Aley & Hahn, Benoit, and Dymarczyk to further inform coding criteria. Next, five

sample posters were coded with this coding sheet as a pilot run. Following this test,

additional changes and edits were made to fill in any gaps in the criteria. In its final form,

the coding sheet used to code the posters has eight main sections: Basics, Subject, Color,

Text, Symbols, Propaganda Devices, Appeals, and Calls to Action. In categories

checking for the presence of something, the number zero represents no, and the number

one represents yes.

 Shugar 17

Notably, after the coding was final, the data cleaning process led the researcher to

include additional questions or categories to sort the data with. Some researchers

conducting content analyses determine their categories for coding after looking at their

artifacts. Similarly, a “post-coding thematic analysis,” used by Banerjee and Greene in

their content analysis of anti-smoking posters was conducted to supplement the content

analysis with thematic observations (Banerjee and Greene 3). Although this is not the

method initially chosen for this study, it shows that these additions are acceptable for this

project and do not detract from its reliability.

4.4: The Coding Criteria

The “Basics” section of the coding sheet collects the base information from each

poster, most notably the country of production and the year or range of years it was

produced. For the posters in Italy’s sample, this section also included additional

categories to determine the producing group of the poster as well as the poster’s stance

due to changes in alliances. Using the poster’s content, artist signatures when present, and

external research, the researcher hypothesized the producer of each Italian poster, totaling

five possible producers. Similarly, using the content of the poster was coded to determine

what stance the poster has or what ideals it supports.

The “Subject” section covers a plethora of information about each poster’s

subject(s). During the coding process, the specific subject of each poster was recorded by

the researcher and in the data cleaning process, additional categories and subcategories

were curated to analyze the data quantitatively. A question that originally asked for the

subject of the poster was revised as follows: What is the subject? If the subject is human,

what role does the person/people play in society, as demonstrated by the poster? If the
 Shugar 18

subject is human, what age is the subject(s)? If the subject has a gender, what is it? These

questions enable data interpretation to determine trends and prominence of various

elements, such as the inclusion of occupational roles and gender or age diversity.

Regarding the subject of each poster, the qualitative notes the researcher took

while coding were considered and transcribed into a list of categories. The categories

consisted of person, people, object(s)/item(s), body part(s), flag(s)/symbol(s),

word/letter(s), food, landscape, animal(s), or other. Analysis continued to classify subject

matter but only looked at human roles within the posters. Knowing that some posters

feature a person or multiple people as the subject, the next step was to break down who

the people are or what their societal role is as portrayed within the poster. Using the

qualitative observations of each poster’s subjects, seven roles were created by the

researcher: Soldier/enlisted personnel/someone involved in the war effort, General

Citizen(s), Political Figure(s), Spy(ies), Jew(s), Other(s), and N/A (meaning the subject is

not a person). Three additional categories were created via observation of the subjects in

Italy’s posters, as there are posters in which one subject has one role, and the other has a

different role.

The researcher used qualitative observations from coding to create eight

categories to include all age combinations: adult, child, children, adults, adults and

children, adults and a child, an adult and a child, and n/a. N/A means that the subject of

the poster does not have an age and that this number would be excluded from the total for

this portion of the analysis to calculate accurate percentages. These eight categories were

simplified using summations into three overarching groups: “only adult(s),” “only

child(ren),” or “both.” Having both ages means that there are multiple people as the
 Shugar 19

subject, and overall, they are neither solely adults nor solely children. To find the “only

adult(s)” total, the count for adult and adults were summed. Similarly, for the “only

child(ren)” total, the counts for child and children were summed. The “both” category

added the counts for adults and children, adults and child, and adult and child.

The last area of subject-based analysis is gender. Using the qualitative

observations from coding, 13 unique gender combinations were formed, which were

simplified into four categories: only male(s), only female(s), both, and unsure. Two

options of the 13 unique combinations were “unsure, likely male,” and “unsure, likely

female,” and these are included in the male count and the female count, respectively.

Overall, the categories that were summed to find the “only male(s)” total were male,

unsure, likely male, male & unsure but likely male, and males. The categories summed to

find the “only female(s)” total was female and unsure, likely female. The data for males

and females, male and female, male and females, males and female, and male, male,

female, male, were summed to curate the total for “both.” Notably, the “unsure” category

only includes data from which the gender was solely coded as unsure.

The “Color” section of the coding sheet captured notes on the primary, secondary,

tertiary colors, and all other colors visible on each poster. As all posters coded employed

some color, even if in black and white, the total number of posters for color analysis per

country is thirty, per alliance is sixty, and in total is 120. For consistency, shades, tones,

and hues were excluded from the analysis, and all colors were coded as their most

simplified, overarching color name. For example, “maroon” was recorded as “red,” and

“navy” was recorded as “blue.” The data was first organized to find out how many colors

were used by each country, in total, and on each poster. Unique lists of each nation’s used
 Shugar 20

colors were created to display how many colors each country used throughout their

sample. Following this, each country's five most prominent colors were aggregated into a

list and counted to see which colors were the most utilized across producers.

The section titled “Text” looks at if there is text on the poster, what that text says,

what type categories were used, similarities in language, and aesthetic similarities. The

first question addressed in this section asks if the poster has any text. If yes, the text was

recorded. The text was translated into English using multiple translation services if it was

in a different language, as each website translates slightly differently. These translation

platforms are Google Translate, DeepL Translate, and Google Lens Search’s translation

feature. The type categories (sans serif, serif, etc.) used were recorded, and the researcher

described text placement, coloring, alignment, and design. External to the coding sheet,

the researcher noted her observations regarding the language used in text as well as

within the design of the fonts used on the posters.

The “Symbols” section covers if and which symbols and/or flags are present.

Because flags are a type of symbol, they were included in observing and counting

symbols. While coding, the researcher noted if symbols and/or flags are present in each

poster, and their names and potential meanings. If a symbol or flag was observed that the

researcher could not label, additional research was conducted to identify the symbol or

flag. If it could not be identified, detailed descriptions were used in its place. Another

notable point is that many nations have different flags during wartime used by the armed

forces, meaning national flags were not always included on the posters, instead and a

lesser-known flag was included to represent the country.

 Shugar 21

Following the seven propaganda devices identified in the 1936 publication of The

Intelligent Teacher’s Guide Through Campaign Propaganda, the researcher recorded the

presence of propaganda devices in each poster in the “Propaganda Device” section of the

coding sheet. The poster recorded if any propaganda devices were used, and if so, which.

The devices are Name Calling, Band Wagon, Glittering Generalities, Flag Waving, Plain

Folks, Testimonials, and Stacking the Cards.

The “Appeal” section of the coding sheet also utilized a mixed-methods research

design to identify any appeals in the poster. Before coding, the researcher hypothesized

there are six appeals based on previous research: patriotism, emotion, inspiration to act,

blame, demean, and education. If a poster had an emotional appeal, the researcher

recorded the specific emotion targeted through the appeals. These specific emotions were

later categorized into positive, negative, and neutral emotions.

Lastly, the “Call to Action” section of the coding sheet checked for the presence

of a call to action within each poster. If a call to action was identified, the researcher

noted if it was implicit or explicit. This section also gave the researcher a place to note

any miscellaneous comments or external sources used for coding each poster.
 Shugar 22

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS

The researcher manually coded and analyzed 120 propaganda posters, thirty from

each country of interest. A content analysis was completed through quantitative coding

and qualitative observation, seen in the coding sheet (Appendices 1A and 1B). The

Appendix for this project is organized into letter-based sections. Appendix A contains

documentation relating to the coding process. Appendix B is home to additional data

tables. The results flow in the same order the coding sheet is written in, beginning with

the “Basics” section, which covers the production of Italian propaganda. The results will

discuss subject matter, color, text, visual elements, propaganda devices, appeals, and calls

to action. The data was analyzed by the producer of the posters, including the country,

alliance, and in total, allowing for optimal comparisons. The countries contributing to

data on behalf of the Allied Powers are the United States and the United Kingdom.

Similarly, the data for the Axis Powers is curated using the posters made by Germany and

Italy.

5.1 Production of Italian Propaganda

5.11 Production Group

Unlike the other four nations studied in this research project, Italy switched

alliances during World War II, from the Axis to the Allied Powers. Accordingly, the

Italian propaganda posters in this study can be analyzed through the additional lenses of

the producer and the stance. Using the content of each poster, artist signatures,

symbolism, and sometimes additional research, the researcher either recorded or

hypothesized who, or what group, produced each poster.

 Shugar 23

The data shows that only one poster of the thirty-poster sample was produced by

Italy on the Allied Powers, and that most were likely produced by Italy while on the Axis

side, or by the RSI, a fascist group that emerged once Italy had switched alliances. It is

important to note that although the RSI existed while Italy was a member of the Allied

Powers, they are considered different entities. They are separated because it is possible

the RSI with pro-Axis ideals was simultaneously making propaganda while the Italian

government was through pro-Allied ideals, and the primary way to clearly differentiate

this propaganda is by the message’s stance. Posters in the “Italy (RSI)” category can be

confidently identified as created by the RSI due to artist signatures or external

information on the website that houses the poster. Posters in the “Italy (Likely RSI)”

category are predicted to have been created by Italy while under the RSI through poster

content and context of the production/circulation year. The most prevalent group in

Italy’s sample is the RSI, with 46.67% of posters likely made by an RSI artist, and

another 13.33% of posters hypothesized to be made by the RSI (Appendix B1). Five

posters could not be confidently identified, so the researcher noted them as “unsure,” and
 Shugar 24

these made up 16.67% of the sample (Appendix B1). Only one poster from the sample

was produced by Italy from the Allied Powers (Appendix B1).

5.12 Stance of Italian Propaganda Posters

Aside from the producing group, the data was also broken down to analyze the

ideals of each poster, whether pro-Axis or pro-Allied ideals (Appendix B2). Similarly

with recording the producer of the poster, the researcher identified the stance of each

poster using information such as the poster’s content, symbols used, text used, and year

produced. An overwhelming majority, 93.33% of the posters in Italy’s sample, support

the ideals and messages of the Axis Powers, which is the alliance Italy began the war on.

One poster supports the ideals of the Allied Powers, and one poster does not clearly

support the ideals of either alliance, which each makes up 3.33% of the sample.

5.2: Subject Matter

5.21: Overarching Subject Matter

Ten categories encompass each subject described in coding the 120 posters, and

the use of these categories allows for in-depth analysis. These categories are person,

object(s)/item(s), people, body part(s), flag(s)/symbol(s), word/letter(s), food, landscape,

animal(s), and other. For this data, the total number used for percentages varied by

grouping— for individual countries, it is thirty; for each alliance, it is sixty; and in total,

it is 120. The first section of the analysis looked at the prominence of the subject type in

the posters, and the data demonstrates that the subjects that were the three most

prominent for every nation were the same: person, people, and an object/item (Appendix

B3) Notably, animals are included for the UK’s top three most seen subjects because a
 Shugar 25

person and an object/item have the same number of features as subjects. However, the

prominence of the top three subjects is different for each country.

This data reveals the most prominent subject matter in posters from the two

alliances are the same, just in a different order. These subjects are a person, object/item,

and people (Appendix B4). Within this, posters from both alliances have a person as the

most prominent subject, but the second and third most used subjects were swapped for

the alliances. Regarding the overall sample, out of 120 posters, the overall most featured

subject is a person in 49.17% of posters, followed by people in 19.17% of posters, and

then by an object/item in 15.83% of posters (Appendix B5).

5.22: Roles of Human Subjects

Following this overarching subject analysis, data analysis was completed to see

which roles were the most prominent within subjects of the posters. Because some

posters have multiple people as the subject, three additional categories were created when

one subject filled one role, but another subject fit a different role. For example, in the

poster ITL24, there are four people as the subject. One of these people is Uncle Sam, who

the researcher classified as a political figure. The other three people are general citizens

of Italy, and because the subjects do not have the same role, an additional category was

created, called “political figure(s) and general citizen(s).” The other categories made for

similar situations are “soldier/enlisted personnel/someone involved in the war effort and

general citizen(s),” “spy(s) and soldier/enlisted personnel/someone involved in the war

effort.” These categories are only necessary to use for the Italian posters, which means

they are included in the Axis data and the overall data as well. For the analysis on subject
 Shugar 26

roles, only the posters in which the subject is human were included in the total. This

means each group has a different value used to calculate its percentages.

Of the thirty posters analyzed per country, the United States has seventeen with

human subjects, the United Kingdom has fifteen, Germany has twenty-five, and Italy has

twenty-seven, as seen in Table 2. Across all countries, soldiers/enlisted

personnel/someone involved in the war effort has the most significant prevalence in the

roles of the subject matter. Notably, the most German posters feature either enlisted

personnel/someone involved in the war effort or Jews, with nine posters each for those

two subject groups. The data shows that no nation has subjects in all the categories.

Within all their posters, the United States and Germany have five roles of subjects

present, the UK has three, and Italy has seven.

In comparison across alliances, the most prominent category is “soldiers/enlisted

personnel/someone involved in the war” for both the Allied Powers and Axis Powers,

with more than 40% of posters having the subject or subjects in that role for each alliance

(Appendix B5). General citizen(s) is the next most featured role for the Allied Powers,

followed by political figure(s). For the Axis Powers, general citizen(s) and Jew(s) are
 Shugar 27

both the second most prominent subjects, with nine posters each. Jews are identified

within the sample due to features like the Star of David on their clothes, stereotypically

“Jewish” facial features, the context of the poster, and the text on the poster. These

groups are followed by the combined category of soldiers/enlisted personnel/someone

involved in the war effort and general citizen(s). Overall, the most prominent role of the

subject(s) is soldiers/enlisted personnel/someone involved in the war effort (Appendix

B6). The second most prominent role within subjects for the overall sample is a general

citizen(s), followed by Jews.

5.23: General Ages of Subject(s)

The next topic of analysis is the age of the subjects (if human). Similarly, with the

roles of human subjects any N/As recorded in coding were excluded from the dataset.

This leaves the United States with seventeen posters to analyze for age, the United

Kingdom with fifteen, Germany with twenty-five, and Italy with twenty-seven. The data

shows that each nation has a majority of its posters featuring an adult or adults and only a

few posters showing young subjects or subjects of both age groups (Appendix B7). The

highest number of posters featuring non-adults were from Italy, with three posters having

children subjects and four showcasing people of both age groups. The United States,

United Kingdom, and Germany have only one poster each that did not solely feature an

adult or adults as the subject matter.

Of the sixty posters in the samples, the Allied Powers had thirty-two posters

eligible for age analysis, and the Axis Powers had fifty-two (Appendix B8). The finding

of adults being the most prominent subject was also present while comparing the two

alliances. This trend continues when looking at the data for the overall sample (Appendix
 Shugar 28

B9). This data shows that adults are a more common subject in propaganda posters than

children or the combination of both age groups. Furthermore, according to the overall

data, it is more common to have subjects of both age groups than solely a child or

children.

Gender of Subject Matter

This category includes all posters with gendered subjects, both human and animal.

For example, a propaganda character used by the United Kingdom is the Squander Bug, a

pig used to discourage waste and overconsumption, and is the subject of a poster (UK6).

Although the researcher was unsure of the gender of the pig, because pigs anatomically

have genders, this poster was included for gender analysis. The United States has twenty-

one posters available for gender analysis, the United Kingdom has eighteen, Germany has

twenty-seven and Italy has twenty-nine. Most posters for each country feature only males

as the subjects. Having only female subjects is slightly more prominent than having

subjects of both genders and a subject in which the gender is unknown for all four

countries as well.

Gender-focused data was also compared between the alliances and curated for the

overall dataset of all posters. The Allied Powers have thirty-two eligible for gender

analysis, and the Axis Powers have fifty-six (Appendix B10). For both alliances, only

having male subjects was most common, followed by only female subjects, unsure, and

then both genders. This trend is also present in looking at the overall data (Appendix
 Shugar 29

B11). Of the ninety-five posters that were looked at for gender, 73.68% of them have a

male or multiple males as the subject(s), which is the majority.

5.3: Color

5.31: Colors Used in Posters

The colors used by each country across its entire sample culminated into lists of

“uniques,” detailing which country used which colors. In total, the United States uses ten

different colors, the United Kingdom and Italy each use nine, and Germany uses eight

(Appendix B12). Although the United States uses the most colors throughout the sample,

this is by a slim margin. Per poster, Italy has the highest number of colors used on

average, with 5.97 colors (Appendix B13). Following Italy’s average is the United

Kingdom, then the United States, and then Germany with the lowest average number of

colors used per poster. Italy and the United Kingdom have the highest (maximum)

number of colors used per poster, followed by Germany and then the United States.

Regarding the lowest number of colors used per poster, Italy has the lowest (minimum)

number of colors used per poster at four, and all other countries’ minimums are three.

The mode demonstrates which value is most common within a dataset. The mode shows

that most of the United States’ posters have four colors on each, most of the United

Kingdom’s posters have six, most of Germany’s posters have four, and most of Italy’s

posters have six.

 Shugar 30

5.32: Prevalence of Each Color

The data is also analyzed to determine the prevalence of each color in posters by

country, alliance, and total. The top five colors used by the United States in its posters,

from most prominent to least prominent, are red, white, blue, black, and green, as

reported in Table 4. The top five colors used for the United Kingdom’s posters are white,

black, red, blue, and tan. Germany’s five most prominent colors are black, red, tan, white,

and gray. The most used colors in Italy’s posters are red, white, gray, black, and brown.

The same analysis used to compare colors across countries was completed to

compare across alliances and the overall data to understand the trends. Red is the most

prominent color for the Allied Powers, followed by white, black, blue, and tan (Appendix

B14). The most used colors in the Allied Powers posters are red, black, white, gray, and

tan, also shown in that table. In looking at the overall sample of posters, red is the most

prominent color, followed by white, black, tan, and blue (Appendix B15). The researcher

used the data to identify the colors that are the five most prevalent colors for each country

to see how many times each color is in “the top five” (Appendix B16). Overall, red,

white, and black are a part of the top five most prevalent colors for all four countries.

Blue, tan, and gray are in the top five most prominent colors for two countries each.

Lastly, green and brown are in the top five most popular colors for one country each.
 Shugar 31

5.4: Text, Type Categories, and Language

5.41: Presence of Text

The data was organized to count how many posters have text in comparison to

how many do not have text per country (Appendix 17). The United States has the most

posters using text, at 100% of the sample for both nations. The United Kingdom,

Germany, and Italy’s samples all had 96.67% of the posters using text, with one poster

for each of those two countries without text. 98.33% of the Allied Powers’ sample has

text, whereas 96.67% of the Axis Powers posters have text (Appendix 18). Overall,

97.50% of the posters analyzed have text on them, and 2.50% do not (Appendix 19).

5.42: Typeface Use Statistics

A statistical breakdown of the number of fonts or typefaces used on each poster

by country, alliance, and overall was performed (Appendices B20, B21, B22). It is

important to note that each different typeface was counted, meaning, for example, a

poster could have one serif and two sans serifs typefaces on it, totaling three typefaces

despite only having two types of typefaces (serif and sans serif). As a country, the United

Kingdom has the highest average number of typefaces in use per poster, followed by

Germany, the United States, and then Italy (Appendix B20). The Allied Powers has a

higher average number of typefaces in use per poster (1.57) than the Axis Powers does

(1.40), and the overall average is 1.48 typefaces per poster (Appendices B21 and B22).

Regarding the maximum number of typefaces used for each country, Germany

and Italy have the highest maximums with four typefaces per poster (Appendix B20). The

United Kingdom has a maximum of three typefaces per poster, and the United States has

the lowest maximum of two typefaces per poster (Appendix B20). In looking at the
 Shugar 32

alliances, the Axis Powers have a higher maximum than the Allied Powers (Appendix

B21). Overall, the most typefaces used on a poster is four (Appendix B22). The minimum

number of typefaces per poster was zero for three countries, aside from the United States

which had text on all posters (Appendix B20). This minimum is the same for both the

Allied Power and the Axis Powers, as well as when looking at the overall data. The mode

reflects the number most commonly recorded, and this is also the same across the

countries, the alliances, and the overall dataset. The mode is one across all groups,

meaning most posters from all three groupings have one typeface on them.

5.43: Number of Type Categories per Poster

The data regarding how many type categories were employed per poster was also

organized by the researcher to further break down how often each group used how many

type categories on the posters. The type categories were sans serif, serif, display, script,

and N/A. 53.33% of the United States’ posters have one type category, 46.67% have two

type categories, and 0% have zero, three, or four type categories (Appendix B23).

Similarly, a majority of the United Kingdom’s posters have one type category as well, at

46.67% (Appendix B23). 36.67% of the United Kingdom’s posters have two type

categories, 16.67% have three type categories, 3.33% have one, and 0% have four

(Appendix B23). Germany’s most common number of type categories is also one, with

63.33% of the sample having one type category, followed by 20% having two type

categories, 13.33% having three type categories, and 3.33% having four or zero type

categories (Appendix B23). 80% of Italy’s sample has one type category, 13.33% has two

type categories, and 3.33% of its posters has zero, three or four type categories

(Appendix B23).
 Shugar 33

This data is also presented by alliance and for the entire 120 poster sample.

Having one type category per poster is most frequent for both the Allied and Axis

powers, with 48.33% and 68.33% of the samples having one type category, respectively

(Appendix B24). For the Allied Powers’ and the Axis Powers’ samples, having two type

categories is the second most prevalent, with 41.67% and 16.67% of the samples

respectively (Appendix B24). The Allied Powers has 8.33% of the sample with three type

categories per poster, 1.67% with zero, and 0% with four (Appendix B24). Similarly, the

Axis Powers has 8.33% of the sample with three type categories per poster, and 3.33%

with four and zero type categories (Appendix B24). Having one type category per poster

is also the most frequent for the overall sample, with 58.33% of the sample having one

type category (Appendix B25). For the overall sample, 29.17% of posters have two type

categories, 8.33% have three, 2.50% have zero, and 1.67% have four (Appendix B25).

5.44: Type Category Usage

For every poster with text, each individual type category was counted to allow for

analysis on which category was used most frequently by each group. Each group has its

own total, specific to how many type categories were used overall in their sample, and
 Shugar 34

these totals are displayed in Table 6. Between the countries, as seen in Table 5, the

United Kingdom has the most type categories used in their sample, followed by

Germany, the United States, and then Italy. The most used category for both the United

States and United Kingdom is sans serif, but the most used for Germany and Italy is

display, and this data is consistent that for the respective alliances (Appendix B26)

Overall, the most used type category is sans serif, followed by display, and then serif,

script, and N/A, meaning having no type categories (Appendix B27).

5.45: Word Choice and Language

In looking at the text on the propaganda posters, the researcher listed 20 terms

that she expected to observe based on the context of World War II propaganda. Using this

list, the researcher counted the frequency of each term from each country as well as the

alliances (Appendices B28 and B29). Duplications of words in a single poster, such as if

a poster said “your” twice, were not removed, as the repetition may have been

intentional. Notably, the posters from Germany and Italy were translated from various

languages by Google Translate, and the English translation was used for this analysis, as

it is the researcher’s native language.

As seen in the data, the use of these terms varies greatly by nation (Appendix

B28). The word “Jew” is seen once in the United States’ sample, and seven times in

Germany’s sample. “Your” is used the most times by the United States, followed by the

United Kingdom, Germany, and then Italy. The words “ally” or “allies” are only used by

the United States and United Kingdom, and the word “hate” is only used once and

appears in Italy’s sample. The word “victory” is used once by the United States, zero

times by the United Kingdom, but four times each by Germany and Italy in their
 Shugar 35

samples. Both the terms “front” and “frontline” are only seen in Germany’s sample, with

four uses and one use respectively. “War” is seen in posters by all four nations, but has

nine uses by the United States, four uses by the United Kingdom, and only two uses by

both Germany and Italy. The only nation to use the word “careless” is the United

Kingdom. E country uses the word “talk” between 2 and 3 times.

Appendix B29 compares the frequency of these words being used across the two

alliances. The word “enemy” is used twice as many times by the Axis Powers than it is

used by the Allied Powers. “Your” is seen 18 times in the Allied Powers’ sample and

only five times in the posters analyzed from the Axis Powers’. Both “ally” and “allies”

are only used in the Allied Powers’ sample. Similarly, the word “join” is seen four times

in the Allied Powers’ posters but zero times in those by the Axis Powers. The word “war”

is used 13 times by the Allied Powers and only four times by the Axis Powers. However,

“victory” is used only once in the Allied Powers’ sample and eight times in the Axis

Powers’. The term “information” is only seen in the Allied Powers’ sample of posters.

The words “fear” and “hope” were not used in posters by the Allied or Axis Powers.
 Shugar 36

Chart 1 encompasses the researcher’s observations and qualitative notes from

looking at the language used on the propaganda posters by all four countries. As noted in

the chart and in the frequency data, the United States used the word “your” frequently

throughout its poster sample. The United States had some language about ending the war,

such as saying “Get the Jap and Get it over,” in USA9, referring to the war’s end in

Europe and the hopeful conclusion of the war in the Pacific. Another observation in

United States’ posters is language encouraging the reader to get involved in the war

effort, often through strong verbs. As previously mentioned, the United States uses the

term “Jew” once, and notably, this was in a positive context, referring to Jews as allies.

With respect to the text on the United Kingdom’s posters, the researcher

recognized a pattern in which the text made large, exaggerated statements to make a point

or persuade, such as “a clear plate means a clean conscience,” seen in UK3. Another
 Shugar 37

observation the researcher noted is that posters referred to England/Great Britain/The

United Kingdom in the third person. The researcher also observed the frequent use of the

word “your,” but to a lesser extent than used in the United States’ sample. This is

consistent with the word frequency data, which shows that the United Kingdom has seven

uses of the word “your,” but the United States has 11 (Appendix B28).

In looking at patterns observed in the text used on German and Italian propaganda

posters, it is important to emphasize the impact that translation has on the text, as the

researcher based her perceptions on the English version of the text. Regarding the text

and language used on German posters, the researcher noticed the word “victory” was

used frequently, both regarding Germany’s victory as well as Europe’s victory. Secondly,

the researcher observed the prominence of the term “Jew” in the German sample, all in

negative connotations. The language surrounding the word “Jew” paints the group as the

enemy, and oftentimes mentions disease. For example, GER28 roughly translates to

“Jews kill in the shadows, mark them to recognize them," portraying Jews as murderers

and encouraging the labeling of the group with the Star of David based on fear. The

researcher also noted repetition on some German posters, such as GER17, which repeats

the word “one” three times. German posters also used terminology like “front” and

“frontline,” and these words are not seen in the samples from the other countries.

Another observation the researcher noted for the posters in the Italy sample is the

use of short sentences or phrases of between 3 and 5 words. However, single-word

phrases were also observed to be very common in the posters by Italy, such as ITL13,

where the only text on the poster is “fratricidio,” or “fratricide” in English. A few of

Italy’s posters used language revolving around friendships or alliances, which frames a
 Shugar 38

country or group in a positive light by referring to them as a friend. However, it is notable

that the translated terms for “ally” and “alliance” are not present on any Italian posters.

Some posters from Italy’s sample included sarcasm or humor, often at the expense of the

Allied Powers, such as mocking Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the President of the United

States during the majority of WWII (USA26).

The researcher observed all four nations employing similar language on their

posters by mentioning some form of “careless talk costs lives,” a propaganda slogan

coined by the United Kingdom (Fox 936). The specific words itself were not used by

every country, but each group discouraged spies, and people in general, from sharing

information (especially private intel) about the war to others, as one never knows who

could be listening. The United States has three posters that speak to this theme (USA 8,

12, and 15), with text stating “someone talked!” “Quiet! Loose talk can cost lives,” and

“He’s watching you.” The United Kingdom has two posters that directly say, “careless

talk costs lives” (UK 15 and 25), and another that features a play on this campaign—

“Careless walk costs lives” (UK 10). Two posters in Germany’s sample support this

narrative, one saying, “Beware— spies. Be careful what you say!” and the other saying

“be ashamed of yourself, chatterbox!” (GER 7 and 16). Italy’s sample has one poster with

this type of language, which says, “the enemy is listening, beware” (ITL 30).
 Shugar 39

5.45: Typeface Similarities

Figure 1: USA 3 Figure 2: USA 6

In observing and analyzing the various typefaces present within the samples of

posters, several similarities emerged, most commonly within a singular country’s sample.

Fonts imply a personality, contributing to the meaning of the poster by adding to it tone,

making them important to analyze. From the posters produced by the United States, there

is an abundance of sans serif type categories. The classification of sans serif simply

means the typeface lacks serifs, the small extensions of the strokes of letters (Chapman).

There are numerous sans serif fonts, and within the United States sample, very similar

sans serifs are employed, distinguishable by the design of the letter “R,” as seen in the

examples above. Images 1 and 2 above are from USA 3 and USA 6, and these two

typefaces are undoubtedly incredibly similar. The researcher cannot determine that the

fonts themselves are the same solely from their appearances, but it is a possibility. The

typefaces in the examples have slight differences, such as the weight, or thickness of the

letters, but are overall quite similar, especially in looking at the decoration of the letter

“R.” The eyes of the “Rs” are different shapes and sizes, but the design of both bottom

right stems are almost identical, with a small flare and curve at the bottom of the letters.
 Shugar 40

Figure 3: UK 2 Figure 4: UK 5

A similarity observed in the United Kingdom’s posters is the western-style

display typefaces used on many posters. Display typefaces are typically exaggerated,

decorative, and better suited for heading or titles rather than body copy (Chapman). Many

of the posters in the United Kingdom’s sample used display typefaces, and several of

them have similar styles or characteristics. Like the example discussed above for the

United States, these typefaces with similar styles have a few key differences, so they are

likely different fonts. In looking at the letter “G” in both examples, there is a much larger

gap between the serifs on the right portion of the character in Image 4 (UK 5) than in

Image 5 (UK 2). Although there are clear differences between the typefaces, there are

also many similarities, such as the style of the letter “R,” which has a decorative flare and

curve at the terminal of the letter. The letter “G” looks very similar in these examples as

well, as the structure of the letter is the same in both fonts, but the main differences are

the sizes of the open counters (open spaces created by the letters) and the width and

thicknesses of the serifs. The similarities are more important to this analysis than the

differences, as they demonstrate repetition within the sample as well as how the design of

a typeface contributes to the meaning of the visual.

 Shugar 41

Figure 5: GER 11 Figure 6: GER 20

The most prominent type-related similarity on posters created by Germany is the

use of blackletter typefaces, which are also classified as display typefaces. Blackletter

typefaces resemble the letter style of the early printing press and give a medieval quality

to the design. Many of Germany’s posters employ blackletter typefaces, as seen in

Images 5 and 6 above. Although these are different fonts, they have similarities, most

notably the angular, ornate letters, which also creates non-rounded counters. These

typefaces are bold, creating a dramatic and important feel, like the nameplate of a

newspaper.

Figure 7: ITL 5

Figure 8: ITL 6

From the posters in Italy’s sample, the researcher noticed many typeface

variations that looked painted, with inconsistent letters across the same typeface,
 Shugar 42

variations in opacities, and incomplete, unconnected letters. Images 7 and 8, pictured

above, are two examples of these typefaces, which would be classified as display

typefaces. As seen in both examples, some letters do not connect, such as the bottom of

the “D” in ITL 5 or the top of the “Os” in ITl 6. The variation in opacities, best

exemplified in ITL 5, contributes to the painted or handwritten aesthetic, as it appears

there are multiple layers to the typeface, similar to how an artist can build up layers with

paint. Each letter looks unique from the others, even others of that character, such as the

“Os” in ITL 6. The first “O” in the word is wider and more circular than the second,

which also has thicker strokes in the letter. The gaps in letters make the typeface seem

imperfect, like it was painted on by a human.

5.5: Visual Elements

5.51: Presence of Symbols

The researcher organized the data to see the presence of one or more symbols in

each poster (Appendices B30, B31, B32). Italy has the most posters with symbols,

followed by Germany, the United Kingdom, and then the United States (Appendix B30).

For Germany and Italy, more posters use symbols than do not (Appendix B30). The

United Kingdom has the same number of posters that use symbols and that do not

(Appendix B30). The United States has more posters without symbols than with symbols

(Appendix B30). The data for each alliance shows that the Axis Powers use symbols in

18 more posters than the Allied Powers (Appendix B31). The Allied Powers have more

posters that do not use any symbols than those that do, and the data Axis Powers shows

the opposite (Appendix B31). Regarding the overall data, 61.67% of posters have

symbols, and 38.33% do not (Appendix B32).

 Shugar 43

A statistical breakdown was conducted regarding the number of symbols in each

poster (Appendix B33). Italy has the highest average number of symbols used per poster,

followed by Germany, then the United Kingdom, then the United States. The observed

maximum number of symbols on a poster is six for the United States, Germany, and Italy,

and five for the United Kingdom. The minimum number of symbols used in a poster for

all the countries studied is zero. However, most United States and United Kingdom

posters have zero symbols, shown by the mode. Most of Germany's posters have one

symbol, and most of Italy's posters have two symbols. Italy has the highest use of

symbols per poster, as demonstrated by the average and mode.

5.52: Prevalence of Each Symbol

Among the 120 propaganda posters analyzed, there were fifty-eight total symbols

observed. Table 7 illustrates how many times each symbol is used in the posters from

each country and includes all fifty-eight symbols. However, not every country used all
 Shugar 44

fifty-eight symbols, so four additional tables (Appendices 34-37) break down the data to

only show the number of times each country used each symbol. The most used symbols

for the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy are the American Flag, Royal

Air Force Roundel, Star of David, and United Kingdom Flag, respectively (Table 7).

The counts and sums for each nation regarding symbols in its posters can be

found in Appendix B38. The “count” represents the number of the different symbols

used, whereas the “sum” showcases the total number observed across the entire sample.

The “sum” counts symbols more than once if they are used in more than one poster. Italy

has the highest number of different symbols used throughout its posters, followed by

Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States (Appendix B38). Similarly, Italy’s

posters also use the most total symbols, followed by Germany, the United Kingdom, and

The United States (Appendix B38).

The countries' data was organized into their respective alliances (Appendices B39,

B40, B41). Similarly with the countries, neither alliance uses all fifty-eight symbols in

their samples. The top three used symbols for the Allied Powers are the American Flag,

Royal Air Force Roundel(s), and swastikas (Appendix B40). For the Axis Powers the top

three symbols are the Star of David, the United Kingdom’s flag, and swastikas (Appendix

B41). Overall, the most prominent symbol throughout all the posters is the swastika,

followed by the UK Flag, American Flag, Star of David, and Reichsadler/ Parteiadler

(Eagle and Swastika) (Appendix B42)

The Allied Powers use thirty-three different symbols across its sixty posters, and

the Axis Powers use forty-two (Appendix B43). Regarding the total instances of symbols

being featured, the Allied Powers use a total of sixty-two posters, while the Axis Powers
 Shugar 45

use 102 (Appendix B43). For both the count and sum, the Axis Powers alliance uses

more symbols in their posters (Appendix B43). For the count and sum of the overall data,

there are fifty-eight different symbols in the 120-poster sample (Appendix B43). Within

those 120 posters, there are 164 symbols observable in total (Appendix B43).

5.53: Presence of Flags

For all four countries, more posters did not include flags than did include flags

(Appendix B44). Out of the four countries, Italy has the most posters that use any flags

with fourteen posters, followed by the United States and the United Kingdom with nine

each, and then Germany with seven. For both the Allied and Axis Powers, more posters

did not use flags than did (Appendix B45) Between the two alliances, the Axis Powers

have more posters that include a flag or flags, than the Allied Powers. However, this

margin is slim with the Axis Powers having twenty-one posters including flags and the

Allied Powers having 18. Overall, the number of posters without any flags is more than

double the number of posters that have flags (Appendix B46).

On average, Italy includes the most flags in its posters (Appendix B47).

Following Italy, the United Kingdom has the second-highest average, followed by the

United States and Germany. The table also shows that the highest number of flags per

poster is five for Italy and the United Kingdom. Germany’s highest number of flags per

poster is three, and the United States’ is two. The minimum number of flags featured in

the country’s posters is zero for all four nations. Additionally, the modes show that the

most posters by each nation use no flags, which demonstrates a lack of prevalence of

flags in the sample.

 Shugar 46

5.54: Prevalence of Each Flag

Of the 120 propaganda posters analyzed, there are twenty-three different flags

shown in posters, seen in Table 8. Like symbols, not every country showed all twenty-

three flags in its sample of posters. Appendices B48-B51 show the data by country, only

including flags uniquely featured in that nation’s sample. The most employed flag in the

United States and Germany’s samples is the American Flag in three posters each

(Appendixes B48 and B50). The most featured flag in the United Kingdom and Italy’s

samples is the United Kingdom’s Flag, the Union Jack, in six posters per country

(Appendices B49 and B51).

The “count” represents the number of different flags used, whereas the “sum”

showcases the total number of flags used (Appendix B52). Italy and the United Kingdom
 Shugar 47

used the largest number of flags throughout their samples at eleven each, followed by

Germany with six and then the United States with five. Similarly, the ranking for sums

follows the same order: Italy, with twenty-four instances of flags; followed by the United

Kingdom with nineteen; Germany with ten; and the United States with nine.

Appendices B53, B54, and B55 organize the flag prevalence data into the

respective alliances, and Appendix B66 displays this data for the overall sample. The

Allied Powers' most shown flag is the United Kingdom’s Flag, followed by the American

Flag, and then a deconstructed American Flag, which uses “the general design and colors

of the flag to imply the flag concept (McCrann 62). The Axis Powers most commonly use

the United Kingdom’s Flag, then the American Flag, and then the Nazi Flag (Appendix

B55) Overall, the most prevalent flags throughout all 120 posters are the United

Kingdom’s Flag, the American Flag, and the Nazi Flag (Appendix B56)

The Allied Powers feature eleven flags throughout its sixty posters, showing

twenty-eight flags throughout their sample of sixty posters (Appendix B57). The Axis

Powers shows fourteen different flags within its sixty posters, featuring thirty-four total

flags (Appendix B58). Overall, the sample of 120 posters shows twenty-three different

flags and sixty-three flags are seen within the full 120 posters (Appendix B58).

5.6: Propaganda Devices

5.61: Presence of Propaganda Devices

Posters were coded for the presence of the seven propaganda devices. Using the

device descriptions provided in Hobbs and McGee’s article source, each poster was

checked for employed devices. For each nation, a majority of the thirty posters included

at least one propaganda device (Appendix B59). Italy has the most even distribution, with
 Shugar 48

53.33% of posters having at least one device and 46.67% not having any. The United

States, United Kingdom, and Germany have a much higher percentage of posters with

devices than without, 76.67%, 66.67%, and 76.67% respectively. Grouping the countries

into their respective alliances, the Allied Powers have a higher percentage of posters with

at least one propaganda device than the Axis Powers (Appendix B60). Overall, 68.33% of

the 120-poster sample includes at least one propaganda device (Appendix B61).

The data representing the presence of propaganda devices does not analyze how

many propaganda devices used in a poster, rather if any were employed at all. Using the

number of devices employed per poster, Appendix B62 provides a statistical analysis of

each country’s sample. On average, Germany has the highest number of propaganda

devices per poster, followed by the United States, the United Kingdom, and then Italy.

The highest number of devices found per poster is three for the United States, United

Kingdom, and Germany, and two for Italy, which are the statistical maximums. Similarly,

most posters from the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany have one

propaganda device each, and most from Italy have zero, as seen by the mode for each

country.

5.62: Prevalence of Propaganda Devices

The data shows the prevalence of each propaganda device by country, alliance,

and overall (Table 9, Appendices B63 and B64). Each country has a different total, based
 Shugar 49

on the total number of propaganda devices used in that country’s sample, shown in Table

9. Germany had the highest number of propaganda device usages (34), followed by the

United States (thirty-two), the United Kingdom (twenty-nine), and Italy (eighteen), seen

in Table 9. This also affects the totals for the alliances and overall, and the totals for each

group are presented in Appendix B65 for reference. Using the data from the individual

nations, the researcher created the following tables to better understand the most used

propaganda devices within the samples.

Table 10, shown above, displays the top three most prevalent propaganda devices

for each county's samples. For the United States, the most prominent propaganda devices

are, from first to third, flag waving, glittering generalities, and plain folks, as seen in

Table 10. The most used device from the United Kingdom’s sample is glittering

generalities, followed by flag waving, and then plain folks. Germany’s most used device

is stacking the cards. After stacking the cards, glittering generalities and name walling

were second and third most recorded. Lastly, for Italy, flag waving is the most used

device, followed by stacking the cards and then name calling. The most times a device

was used by a country was ten total instances of flag waving by the United States and ten

of stacking the cards by Germany. Notably, the United States is the only nation to have at

least one use of each device.

 Shugar 50

Table 11 organizes the countries into their respective alliances and compares the

data between the Allied and Axis Powers. The most used propaganda devices in the

posters produced by the Allied Powers are flag waving, with nineteen cases, glittering

generalities with eighteen, and plain folks with twelve. For the Axis Powers, the most

used devices are stacking the cards with sixteen usages, flag waving with fifteen, and

glittering generalities with nine. For the overall sample, flag waving was the most

prevalent propaganda device, with thirty-four usages between 120 posters (Appendix

B66). The second most used device overall is glittering generalities with twenty-seven

usages, and the third is stacking the cards with nineteen usages (Appendix B66)

5.7: Appeals

5.71: Presence of Appeals

Appendices B67-69 display the presence or lack thereof of appeals made by the

posters. Looking at the country-based samples, the United States has two posters in its

sample that do not have any appeals in it (Appendix B67). No other county’s sample has

posters without any appeals. Still, a high majority of the USA’s posters have an appeal or

multiple appeals. All the posters produced by the United Kingdom, Germany, and Italy

were recorded by the researcher to have at least one appeal. Between the alliances, the

data shows that 96.67% of the Allied Powers’ posters have at least one appeal, and 100%
 Shugar 51

of the Axis Powers’ posters do (Appendix B68). Similarly, 98.33% of the overall sample

have appeals within the posters (Appendix B69).

Similarly with other elements, each poster can, and often does, have more than

one appeal present. A statistical breakdown of how many appeals were used on each

poster can be found in Appendix B70. The average numbers of appeals per poster were

close across all four countries. The United States has the highest average of 2.233,

followed by Italy at 2.2, Germany at 2.13, and then the United Kingdom at 1.967. Each

country’s maximum number of appeals per poster is three besides the United States, who

has a maximum of four. This means that the greatest number of appeals made in a poster

from the United States’ sample is two, and for the other three countries studied, is three.

As the only country with posters without any appeals in its sample, the United States has

a minimum of zero, and the other countries all have a minimum of one. Each country has

the most posters in the sample with two appeals.

5.72: Prevalence of the Appeals

For observing and recording the appeals used in the propaganda posters, the

researcher noted six appeals, one of which requiring additional qualitative observations.

The “emotion” appeal was further observed, with the researcher recording the specific

emotion targeted by the poster, which will be discussed separately. The data on these

emotions is presented in Table 13, but as this list is expansive, Table 12, as well as

Appendices B71 and B72, group them together into a singular “emotion” appeal.
 Shugar 52

Appendix B73 provides the total number of appeals used by each group, as these

numbers are used to calculate their respective percentages.

Table 12 shows the data for each country and shows that the United States’ most

used appeals are patriotism and inspiration to act, with nineteen instances each. The

United Kingdom’s most used appeal is also patriotism, with seventeen. The most

recorded appeal for both Germany and Italy’s samples is emotion, with twenty-two

instances of this for each country. The United States has more appeals in their posters

than the other countries, but by slim margins. The United States has sixty-seven, Italy has

sixty-six, Germany has sixty-four, and The United Kingdom has fifty-nine.

It is also necessary to analyze the data from the perspective of the alliances. The

Allied Powers’ three most used appeals are patriotism, inspiration to act, and emotion,

being 28.57%, 25.4%, and 24.6% of the sample respectively (Appendix B71). Emotion is

the most used appeal for the Axis Powers at 29.3% of the sample, followed by patriotism

at 23.08% and then blame at 15.38% of the sample (Appendix B71). Notably, the Allied

Powers have zero posters in which the appeal is to demean an enemy, but the Axis

Powers have 18 instances of this, making up 13.85% of their total appeals (Appendix

B71). Both alliances have posters which place blame on someone/something, such as the

Jews, but the Axis Powers have thirteen more instances of this than the Allied Powers

(Appendix B71). It is also important to highlight that the Allied Powers have twenty

instances of appeals to education, whereas the Axis Powers have one (Appendix B71).

Overall, the most used appeal is emotion, followed by patriotism and inspiration to act

(Appendix B72). The least used appeal for the overall sample is to demean, with 7.03%

of the total appeals (Appendix B72).

 Shugar 53

5.73: Emotional Appeals

As previously mentioned, the researcher recorded the specific emotions each

poster appealed to. Across the 120-poster sample, seventeen different emotions were

recorded, seen in Table 13, which displays the data collected on how many times each

emotion was used per country. The total for each country is different, as each country

used emotions a different number of times in their samples. Furthermore, each emotion

could have been used multiple times. The sums may be different from the number of

“emotions” cited in Table 12, as some posters may have used more than one emotion.

Table 13 shows how many times posters from each country used each of the

observed emotions. The emotions most appealed to by the United States are guilt, fear,

and excitement. The posters by the United Kingdom most often appeal to guilt and

excitement. Fear, pride, and anger are the three most prominent emotions cited for

Germany’s sample. Italy’s most observed emotions from its sample are excitement and

guilt. Germany is the country with the most instances of those seventeen observed

emotions with twenty-three appeals, followed by Italy with twenty-two, the United States

with nineteen, and the United Kingdom with fifteen.

 Shugar 54

The data was also organized for comparison across the alliances (Appendix B74)

The Allied Powers appealed to guilt eleven times in their sample, making guilt their most

frequent emotional appeal. Guilt was primarily appealed to in the posters’ language.

Following guilt, the other highly used emotions are fear, excitement, and pride. The Axis

Powers’ most frequently appealed to emotion is excitement, which their sample has nine

instances of. The next most used emotions for the Axis Powers are fear, disgust, and

guilt. The data was combined in Appendix B75 which shows that across all posters in this

study, the most appealed to emotion is guilt, being 21.52% of all the specific emotional

appeals. Following guilt is excitement with 18.99%, fear with 17.72%, and disgust, pride,

and anger with 7.59% each.

5.74: Emotion Type

It is imperative to study the emotions targeted within propaganda, because “mood

and emotion, particularly those associated with wartime, can influence persuasion and

memory for a persuasive message profoundly” (Halbesleben et al. 75). Notably, emotion

is rooted within symbolism, as these are the vessels that evoke emotion in the reader

(Allen 54). The observed emotions were manually organized into three categories that the

researcher based on their connotations: positive, negative, and neutral. This

 Shugar 55

categorization is displayed in Chart 2, which also associates each category with a color—

green with positive emotions, red with negative emotions, and gray with neutral

emotions. This was done off the connotation of the emotion itself, as one cannot assume

color meaning related to the war is standard across countries or cultures. For example,

“excitement” has an objectively positive connotation.

The data from Chart 2 into four additional tables (Appendices B76-B79), split by

country and includes the color categorization system. Of the United States three most

used emotions, two are negative emotions and one is positive (Appendix B76). The top

two emotions are negative for the United Kingdom (Appendix B77). For the emotions

evoked by Germany’s sample, the most used emotion is negative, but of the next two

most prominent emotions, one is positive, and one is negative (Appendix B78). Italy’s

most used emotion is positive, but the next most prominent emotion is negative

(Appendix B79).

The data was also combined into the alliance groups (Appendices B80 and B81).

As previously mentioned, the Allied Powers' most prevalent emotions are guilt, fear, and

excitement. Both guilt and fear are categorized as negative emotions, but excitement is a

positive emotion. For the Axis Powers, the most used emotion is excitement, which is

positive, followed by fear, guilt, and disgust, which are all categorized as negative

emotions. For the entire dataset, the most used emotion overall is guilt, which was

categorized as negative (Appendix B82). This is followed by excitement, a positive

emotion; and then fear, which is negative (Appendix B82). All negative emotions had at

least two uses overall, aside from hate (Appendix B82). The three neutral emotions only
 Shugar 56

had one use each across the entire dataset (Appendix B82). Five of the eight positive

emotions only had one use overall (Appendix B82).

The researcher further used the categorization of the emotions to see which

category was most frequently appealed to by each group. Table 14 provides a breakdown

of these appeals by country. The United States has four appeals to positive emotions,

thirteen to negative emotions, and two to neutral emotions, meaning that most emotional

appeals by the United States were of negative emotions. The United Kingdom mostly

appealed to positive emotions, which nine appeals. The United Kingdom's sample has six

appeals to negative emotions and zero to neutral emotions. Germany has fifteen appeals

to negative emotions, which is most of its appeals. Germany has eight appeals to positive

emotions and none to neutral emotions. Lastly, Italy’s sample has mostly negative

emotional appeals as well. Twelve of its appeals are to negative emotions, nine are to

positive emotions, and one is to a neutral emotion.

In comparing across alliances, most of the appeals made by the Allied Powers are

to negative emotions, with nineteen appeals (Appendix B83). The Allied Powers’ sample

has thirteen appeals to positive emotions, and two appeals to neutral emotions (Appendix

B83). The Axis Powers’ sample also has most of its appeals to negative emotions, with

twenty-seven appeals (Appendix B83). The Axis Powers has seventeen appeals to

positive emotions in their sample, and one to a neutral emotion (Appendix B83). Overall,

negative emotions are more frequently appealed to than positive or neutral emotions

(Appendix B84). The overall sample has forty-six appeals to negative emotions, which is
 Shugar 57

58.23% of all appeals (Appendix B84). There are thirty appeals to positive emotions,

which is 39.97% of the sample (Appendix B84). 3.8% of emotional appeals are to neutral

emotions, with three appeals overall (Appendix B84).

5.8: Calls to Action

5.81: Presence of a Call to Action

The final section of data collected and analyzed in the content analysis regards

calls to action. The data was compared across the groups to identify if posters had a call

to action present (Appendices B85-B87). Most posters from all four nations had a call to

action (Appendix B85). 73.33% of posters from the United States, United Kingdom, and

Italy's samples have a call to action, and 26.67% do not (Appendix B85). Two-thirds, or

66.67%, of Germany’s posters have a call to action, and 33.33% do not (Appendix B85).

For the Allied Powers, 75% of the posters have a call to action, and 25% do not

(Appendix B86). 71.67% of the Axis Powers’ sample has call to actions, and 28.33% do

not (Appendix B86). The majority of posters for both alliances have a call to action

(Appendix B86). Overall, this trend continues, as 73.33% of the overall sample has a call

to action (Appendix B87). Thirty-two of the 120 posters, being 26.67% of the entire

sample, do not have calls to action (Appendix B87).

5.82: Call to Action Categorization

Regarding the posters with identified calls to action, the researcher further

categorized those calls to action as either explicit or implicit. Explicit calls to action are

when the poster clearly addresses what it wants the reader to do, whether this be

enlisting, donating, or rationing. Implicit calls to action are when the next step is implied,

rather than clearly stated for the viewer. Appendix B88 shows the breakdown of explicit
 Shugar 58

and implicit calls to action for each country’s sample. The total, or sum, for each group is

dependent on the number of posters with calls to action in general. Of the twenty-two

posters produced by the United States with calls to action, 54.55% have explicit calls to

action and 45.45% are implicit. The United Kingdom’s sample has twenty-three posters

with calls to action. Of these twenty-three posters, 43.48% have explicit calls to action,

and 56.52% have implicit ones. Of Germany’s twenty posters with calls to action, the

majority are implicit at 75% of the sample. One-fourth, or 25% of Germany’s posters

with calls to action are explicit. Lastly, of Italy’s twenty-three posters with calls to action,

73.91% have implicit calls and 26.09% have explicit calls to action.

This data is also organized to compare the usage of explicit and implicit calls to

action across alliances. There are forty-five posters by the Allied Powers with a call to

action (Appendix B89). Of these, 51.11% have implicit calls to action (twenty-three

posters), and 48.9% have explicit calls to action (twenty-two posters). This is a very close

split in the data, and the Axis Powers’ data spread is quite different. Of the forty-three

posters by the Axis Powers with calls to action, most are implicit, which is the same for

the Allied Powers. However, as opposed to a one-poster difference, many more posters

have implicit calls to action than explicit calls for the Axis Powers; 74.42% of the Axis

Powers’ sample with a call to action have an implicit call to action (thirty-two posters),

and 25.58% have an explicit call to action (eleven posters). Overall, the trend of having

more implicit calls to action than explicit ones continue (Appendix B90). The proportion

of posters with implicit calls to action is 62.5%, and 37.5% of the overall poster sample

includes explicit calls to action.

 Shugar 59

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION

6.1: Overview

This section of the research follows the same overarching structure as the results,

which is based on the sections of the coding sheet. The discussion begins with synthesis,

analysis, and a discussion of the producers and stances in Italy’s sample, and then moves

through subject matter, color, text, visual elements, propaganda devices, appeals, and

calls to action. The final section of the discussion is an overview of the comprehensive

findings in which the research questions are addressed and answered.

6.2: Production of Italian Propaganda

Italy is the only nation studied in this project to change stances and alliances once

active in the war. Propaganda was produced by, and on behalf of, three groups from then

until the war’s end: the Axis Powers, the Allied Powers, and the RSI. This allows for an

in-depth analysis of who produced the posters in Italy’s sample and from what stance the

poster represents.

Within the sample, the researcher noted which posters were produced by the RSI,

the “underground” fascist group, and these make up most of the sample. This prevalence

should be applied to the consideration of how many propaganda posters created by Italy

during the war produced by the RSI rather than by the governments in power, such as

Fascist Italy or Badoglio’s Italy, aligned with the Allied Powers. This suggests that the

RSI was a significant propaganda producer, particularly in posters, during its time as an

organization. Knowing that the Nazis backed the RSI, it is possible that the production of

propaganda was inspired by how prominently and persuasively the Nazis used

propaganda.
 Shugar 60

The researcher manually categorized the Italian posters into three categories based

on their stances: pro-Allied ideals, pro-Axis ideals, and unsure. An overwhelming

majority of the thirty posters analyzed exemplify pro-Axis ideals, with only one poster in

the other two categories. The data suggests that it is likely that a high majority of all

Italian propaganda posters made throughout WWII were produced with pro-Axis ideals,

and this can be extended to consider posters outside of this sample. It is reasonable to

suggest that after Mussolini’s coup and the government surrendering to the Allied

Powers, upon switching alliances, a priority of propaganda would be informing the public

of this change and whom to support. The researcher hypothesized that multiple posters

would have Allied ideals, as the new government would be trying to change the public

opinion of Italians about their new allies and enemies. However, the data does not

support this, with only one identified pro-Allied Powers poster. It is possible that after the

coup, this may not have been a priority for Badoglio, as an entirely new government

needed establishing.

6.3: Subject Matter

The categories related to subject matter reveal that most posters in all of the

sampling groups (country, alliance, and overall) feature a person. Although one may

hypothesize that having multiple people “telling” someone something may be the most

effective persuasive technique and, therefore, most common, the data suggests otherwise.

The overall data shows that a singular person is the most used subject in the sample,

demonstrating that creators may have believed a one-on-one relationship between the

subject and reader would be the most effective. Based on this trend in the data, as a

person is the most common subject for all groups, the researcher believes that propaganda
 Shugar 61

consumers may feel a deeper personal connection with the poster if the subject is one

person. Another possibility is that a one-on-one relationship between the subject and

consumer may allow the viewer to see his or herself within the subject and therefore want

to act as the subject does. This theory of using personal relationships for persuasion is

supported by existing literature. One article states that “many attempts were made by

designers of war effort posters to make them as personally relevant as was possible. The

posters were meant to speak directly to [viewers]” (Halbesleben, et al. 72). It is likely that

propaganda creators considered the impact the number of subjects may have on

persuasion while making propaganda.

For all four countries, alliances, and the overall sample, multiple people and

object(s)/item(s) are the two most prominent subjects after a person. However, the

ranking between the second and third changes depending on which dataset is considered.

The data reveals that overall, for all 120 posters, people are a more commonly featured

subject than an object/item, being the second and third most prominent subjects

respectively. Propaganda creators may have chosen to include multiple people as a

subject as opposed to one to have a more credible appeal to the viewer.

The researcher believes the prevalence of an object/item as a subject is partially

due to its ability to provide opportunities for content and symbolism. The lack of

prominence in symbol or flag subjects was unexpected and suggests that visual elements

may not be as persuasive as they are recognizable. The data also reveals that food is only

used as a subject for posters by the Allied Powers and not at all by the Axis Powers. The

Allied countries may have had more severe food shortages than those in the Axis Powers,

causing food to be a more prominent subject. In his article about British and Nazi
 Shugar 62

propaganda, Guatam discusses the British theme of rationing within propaganda, stating

that “rationing was of utmost importance and a lot of propaganda was directed towards

it” (Guatam 1101). Although Guatam found instances of conservation within German

propaganda, its absence in this sample is notable and demonstrates that perhaps food

conservation was of higher priority to the Allied Powers. It is also a possibility that the

Nazi’s saw needing to conserve food or materials as a weakness, and this is why they did

not focus propaganda on it.

The next category of analysis is the role of human subjects. Across the overall

sample of posters, the most featured human subject is a soldier/enlisted

personnel/someone involved in the war effort. The data suggests that soldiers could be a

prominent subject due to their authoritativeness, as a viewer may feel inclined to “listen

to” a person who is risking his or her life for their country. This is supported by other

researchers, as modeling is a persuasive technique used in the creation of propaganda

(Halbesleben et al. 76). According to the literature, “posters would feature workers doing

a variety of different jobs and/or tasks in a specific job in order to demonstrate that

workers, particularly women, were capable,” suggesting that the viewer could and should

get involved in the war effort (Halbesleben et al. 76). It makes sense that a civilian would

be more likely to get involved in the war effort if a soldier were the one asking, as it may

make them feel guilty for saying no or ignoring the message.

The lack of prominence of political figures as subjects allows one to question if

they lack authority, despite being respectable leaders. Political figures are used less

frequently, possibly because some citizens are bound to dislike or disagree with them,

whereas the soldiers fight regardless of personal political views. Across all groupings,
 Shugar 63

general citizens are a more visible subject than political figures, contributing to this idea

that political figures are less impactful than they seem. Using regular people as a subject

could represent “plain folks,” a propaganda device that capitalizes on the like mindedness

of individuals. Plain folks capitalizes on using everyday people as propagandists to

showcase their likeness to the viewer (Hobbs and McGee 59). This coincides with the

idea that people may be more inclined to listen to similar people, supporting the

prominence of general citizens as subjects in propaganda.

Italy provides a unique situation in which posters with multiple subjects have

different roles, such as in ITL24, the example previously discussed. The data suggests

that using multiple roles within subjects is

a way of portraying relationships to the

viewer as a means of persuasion. In

ITL24, shown to the right, Uncle Sam is

portrayed as an angry man, forcing an

Italian to shine his shoes while the rest of Figure 9: ITL 24

the family watches. This creates a negative dynamic between Americans and Italian

citizens, suggesting the viewer should dislike America and American political figures and

leadership. Italian propaganda creators could have emphasized the dynamics of various

relationships to make it clear to viewers whom to support and dislike in the war, as Italy

changed stances throughout the war. Within his book, World War II Propaganda:

Analyzing the Art of Persuasion During Wartime, Welch states “In modern warfare,

propaganda is required to (1) mobilize hatred against the enemy,” supporting the idea that
 Shugar 64

relationships displayed in propaganda can be used to incite hate for the enemy, as ITL24

does (Welch XIV).

Jews are only featured as the subject in the sample of posters made by Germany.

This demonstrates that the hatred of Jews throughout World War II is a narrative mainly

from Germany, as not even Italy, its ally, has Jews as primary subjects in its sample of

posters. Only one Italian poster (ITL5) portrays the Jews as an enemy, but a Jew is not

the poster’s subject, a child is. In that poster, an arm labeled with a Star of David on its

sleeve is outstretched towards a child, suggesting that Jews are a threat to children.

Interestingly, the only country with Jews as a subject in its sample of propaganda posters

is Germany because other countries, like America, also had antisemitic ideals during the

war. This could have multiple explanations, either that this sample does not represent

America’s antisemitism, that America’s propaganda hides antisemitic attitudes, or that

Jews were not a significant threat to Americans through the eyes of propagandists. One of

America’s posters, USA22, paints the Japanese as an enemy, with the tagline “Avenge

December 7,” the date of the Pearl Harbor attack. The data suggests that regardless of

antisemitic attitudes among American citizens, the nation prioritized war enemies over

personal enemies within propaganda.

The data also shows a lack of prominence in spies as the subjects of posters,

despite clear repeating narratives of discouraging excess, public conversations about the

war. Multiple posters in the overall sample have a tagline or narrative like “Careless Talk

Costs Lives,” encouraging citizens to be aware of their surroundings when discussing

sensitive information or opinions regarding World War II. This is to warn against the

presence of spies and discourage rumors and gossip. Gautam says, “One of the most
 Shugar 65

important propaganda themes … was that of cautioning people against the spies and to

not letting out any secrets,” emphasizing the high priority of this type of messaging

(Gautam 1103). However, only two posters (2.38%) of the entire sample feature a spy as

the subject. This does not align with the supposed importance of cautious messaging. The

data suggests that the poster’s subject does not always correlate with the overarching

message or call to action, as many more than two posters discourage loose lips.

Most posters, across each group feature only an adult/adults as the subject(s).

Adult subjects may be frequently used because they allow the reader— assuming it is an

adult, perhaps a parent, to see themselves within the subject. Furthermore, adults may be

more inclined to listen to another adult rather than a child, attributing to the credibility

and authority of adult subjects, as a sense of equality is present. Additionally, having an

adult subject shows the reader that if one adult can do something, so can the viewer.

Although not commonly seen in the sample, children may be persuasive

propaganda subjects because they might produce an

emotional appeal. For example, ITL5, the poster previously

mentioned in the context of the Jewish threat, showcases a

scared child as the poster’s subject. In the poster, shown to

the right, three arms are outstretched toward the child, each

labeled with a different threatening symbol, and the text

translates to “defend him!” This poster’s subject, art, Figure 10: ITL 5

symbols, and text make a clear emotional appeal to the viewer that the child is in danger.

None of the posters in the Allied Powers’ sample feature a child or only children

as the subject(s), whereas the Axis Powers have four posters with children subjects. The
 Shugar 66

Axis Powers’ posters that feature children portray the enemy as putting children at risk,

such as in ITL5. Aside from calling for viewer protection, it is hypothesized that children

also can inspire action for the war front, depending on the narrative created. For example,

in Nazi Germany, children were seen as the empire’s future and for use in the war effort

through organizations like the Hitler Youth. The presence of this type of posters from the

Axis Powers suggests that the countries in the Axis Powers wanted to reinforce the ideas

both of protecting children and using them for the war, while the Allied Powers had other

narratives of priority not focused solely on the youth.

Out of the four countries, the United Kingdom has the most even distribution of

gender across its poster sample. More of the United Kingdom’s posters feature only

males (eight posters) than only females (six posters). There is at minimum a twelve-

poster difference between the number of posters with male and female subjects for the

other countries. In looking at the individual countries, each nation has more posters

featuring only male subjects than female ones. This could be because males may have

been seen as more “valuable” during wartime and therefore are the subject of more

posters than their female counterparts. The lack of female figures like Rosie the Riveter

and Lady Liberty in the United States’ sample was noted. The United Kingdom likely

wanted to emphasize female involvement in the war effort more than other countries,

which is supported by the narratives of the posters. The United Kingdom’s posters

highlighted opportunities for women on both the war and home fronts. Furthermore, the

Allied Powers have more posters showing only female subjects than the Axis Powers do.

The sample suggests that although men are the most used subject in the posters, in
 Shugar 67

looking at the alliances, Allied Powers capitalize on everyone’s capabilities to help,

including women, while the Axis Powers rely more on men to mobilize the public.

6.4: Color

The United States used the most total colors (ten), followed by the United

Kingdom and Italy (nine each), and then Germany (eight). A drastic difference in totals

could suggest countries using a predetermined color palette. However, the total number

of colors used are close amongst the countries, which detracts from this theory. On

average, Italy uses more colors per poster than the other countries, at 5.97 colors per

poster. The United Kingdom uses five, the United States uses 4.4, and Germany uses 4.3

colors per poster on average. Germany’s lower average could support the theory of a

color palette, mainly because propaganda in the Nazi Regime was controlled by the

Ministry for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda rather than by different organizations

or individuals. If any nation were to have set colors to use, it would make sense to be

Germany due to the government’s total control of propaganda. However, the use of

multiple colors per poster is likely intended to grab the viewer’s attention (Halbesleben

75).

The data also demonstrates which colors are most prominently used in posters by

each country. Red is the most used color in the United States’ and Italy’s samples. The

most prevalent color in the posters created by the United Kingdom is white, and for

Germany, it is black. Red, black, and white are in all the top five most used colors for all

four countries. Kleynhans believes that red has the biggest emotional impact of all the

colors, and this aligns with the color’s high prominence in propaganda (Kleynhans 49)

Overall, red has many connotations that could contribute to its use in persuasive
 Shugar 68

messaging, such as anger, power, lust, love, hate, revolution, and danger (Kleynhans 50).

Furthermore, as a vivid color, red is likely to grab a viewer’s eye, which could also

contribute to its usage.

Another theory about the prevalence of red in the sample is because the color is in

the flags of all four nations studied. The United States Flag, United Kingdom Flag, Nazi

Flag, and Italian Flag all have three different colors, one of which is red. It is reasonable

that one would assume the colors of a propaganda-producing nation’s flag would be

prevalent within propaganda. For example, the top three most used colors in the United

States’ posters are red in 90% of posters, white in 66.67%, and blue/black in 53.33%.

Red, white, and blue are the colors of the American flag and are the colors most prevalent

in American posters. This could be an attempt to appeal to patriotism and make the

viewer feel more connected to the United States and more receptive to its messages. A

country’s flag’s colors are recognizable to most if not all citizens, and this recognition

gives viewers a moment to resonate with the ideals that flag represents.

Black and white are prominent colors in the sample, the second and third most

used colors overall. One explanation for the high use of black and white is their

readability and ability to contrast with most colors. Propagandists aim to make

compelling creations; a poster must be legible to a reader to be effective. Furthermore,

Kleynhans says that using “black and white together equals authority and truth,” which

supports the prominence of those colors within the posters, as a propagandist needs

credibility to be persuasive (Kleynhans 49). Individually, the colors have various positive

and negative connotations; most important for the context of propaganda is black’s

relation to death (Kleynhans 49).

 Shugar 69

6.5: Text, Type Categories, and Language

As long as the term “poster” has existed, it has referred to a document with text

and images developed to attract public attention (Allen 52). The text on posters and other

means of visual communication is integral to the poster’s meaning. Text provides

numerous items to analyze, such as the language itself, what the poster says, the type

categories used, the coloring and sizing of the text, how text is visually organized, and

how different pieces of text vary on a poster. The first analysis in this study determines

the presence of any text on each poster. A small proportion of the sample did not have

any text on the posters (1.67%). This is consistent with the data by each nation and

alliance, showing that it is prevalent for propaganda posters to utilize text. This has many

possible reasons, mainly how text can sometimes tell a viewer something that solely a

picture or illustration cannot. The high usage of text in the samples suggests that the

meaning of a poster is better expressed when text is included.

Most posters use multiple type categories on a poster. The maximum number of

type categories used on posters in the sample is four. All the United States’ posters had

either two or three type categories, but the other countries had a wider range of data.

Having one or two type categories is the most common for the sample, which makes

sense from a designer’s perspective. Design principles often encourage one or two

different type categories at maximum, as using more than that can make a design hard to

read and overwhelming (Poster Design Principles & Tips). Poster producers likely

considered text’s impact on aesthetics, using a reasonable number of typefaces.

Four categories of type were observed on posters: serif, sans serif, script, and

display. Another category was added, N/A, for posters without text and, therefore,
 Shugar 70

without type categories. For both the United States and the United Kingdom, and

therefore the Allied Powers alliance, the most used type category is sans serif. Both

countries studied in the Axis Powers, Germany, and Italy, have display type categories as

their most used category. For all countries, scripts and serifs were much less prevalent

than their counterparts. Overall, the type category with the most use is sans serif.

Following sans serif, typefaces in the display category are the next most used for the

entire sample.

This prevalence of sans serif fonts follows typography “rules,” as many designers

agree that sans-serif fonts are the best for displayed print media (Mike). The readability

of sans serifs and serifs make them especially suitable for body copy, but sans serif fonts

have a clean and modern feel, making them more

suitable for a poster (Mike). The prevalence of display

fonts is also consistent with existing research, as

display or decorative typefaces are designed for large-

scale text like the text on a poster or for a headline

(Mike). Display fonts can contribute to the tone and

assist in communicating a message, making them a

strategic tool for use in propaganda creation. For

Figure 11: UK 6
example, UK6 mimics a wanted poster commonly

associated with “the Wild West.” The display font used for the word “wanted” has a

western feel, with thick, tall letters and flared accents. This is an example of how a

typeface can contribute to a poster’s meaning and strengthen the impact the poster has on

the viewer.
 Shugar 71

In addition to how words are presented visually, the researcher focused on which

words were used on posters. The researcher selected twenty words/terms using her

expectations of language in World War II messaging for a frequency test across each

country and alliance. The English translation was used to analyze posters produced in

other languages. The first significant finding from this test was the variation in the

context of the word “Jew,” which was used once by the United States, zero times by the

United Kingdom and Italy, and seven times by Germany. A possible explanation for the

high usage of the word “Jew,” on German posters is the common use of Jews in Nazi

propaganda as a scapegoat for the loss of WWI and the cause of WWII. Previous

researchers have discussed “the Jewish war” as a key theme in Nazi propaganda, and the

prominence of the word “Jew” in Germany’s sample supports this idea (Herf 51). To

paint the idea of the Jews as the enemy, the German propaganda must talk about them,

explaining the prominence of this word in their sample.

Another term with notable usage is “your,” which was used by all four countries

but much more frequently by the United States and the United Kingdom. It is likely that

the word “your” is seen so prominently in the sample due to its personal feel. “Your”

speaks directly to the viewer, as it is in the second person, bringing them into the poster

and its goals. Directly targeting the consumer makes them feel like they have a personal

stake in the matter at hand and may make them more likely to follow the poster’s call to

action if applicable. For example, USA1 says, “Build for your navy! Enlist! Carpenters,

machinists, electricians, etc. For information, apply to your nearest recruiting station.”

Saying “your navy” rather than “the navy” was likely a strategic choice by the poster

producer, as it invites a more personal association.

 Shugar 72

In the samples from all four countries, the terms “ally” and “allies” are only used

in posters by the countries of the Allied Powers, the United States, and the United

Kingdom. A possible reason behind this is that the countries in the Allied Powers were

more focused on their alliance and maintaining strong connections within it than the Axis

Powers. Notably, one of Italy’s posters refers to other countries as friends. However,

these friends are countries of the Allied Powers, making it likely that the poster was

produced when Italy switched alliances in or after 1943. However, many of the Axis

Posters indirectly mention their alliances through visuals, such as flags or soldiers in

uniforms, detracting from the idea that the Allied Powers cared more about their alliance.

Chart 1 includes observations regarding word choice and language used in the

sample. Each country had posters with language that aligned with the “Careless Talk

Costs Lives” theme. Although this propaganda campaign originated in Great Britain, the

international use of this narrative suggests that nations sometimes based their propaganda

on that of other countries. This implies that privacy protection was a primary goal of all

four nations during the war, not just the United Kingdom. According to external research,

the primary “players” in the Second World War all relied on spies stationed around the

world (Espionage and the SOE). Having their own spy network makes sense for a nation

also to be wary of spies sent by other countries. Although the tagline “careless talk costs

lives” was not used by every country, each nation had language revolving around

protecting themselves from spies, such as ITL30, which says ““Il nemico vi ascolta,

Tacete!” which roughly translates to “the enemy is listening to you, shut up!” Although

the direct language is not used, this poster clearly communicates the same message as one

saying, “careless talk costs lives.”

 Shugar 73

A theme observed throughout the posters produced by the United States is

recruitment for the war effort. Posters encouraged people to enlist, join the Navy,

contribute to the USO, see the U.S. employment services, and more. This theme within

American WWII propaganda has been observed by other researchers as well. In another

study on American war effort posters from WWII, researchers concluded that war effort

posters were successful in recruiting many to the wartime workforce through concrete

language, vivid imagery, and providing relevant information (Halbesleben et al. 72).

Multiple posters from the United States sample were aimed towards women, explicitly

asking them to get involved in the war effort, and this was also seen in the United

Kingdom’s sample. Some posters from the United Kingdom spoke directly to women,

requesting their involvement in various women’s organizations, such as the Women’s

Auxiliary Air Force.

The final trend identified across the language used in the propaganda posters is

repetition, often to emphasize numbers, in the German and Italian samples. GER17

translates to “one people, one realm, one leader!” and GER3 says, “Germany’s victory,

Europe’s freedom.” Similarly, ITl3 translates to “two nations, one war,” ITL7 to “two

nations, one victory,” ITL17 to “for honor, for life, Italy SS Legion,” and ITL27 to “three

peoples, one war.” These examples showcase repetition, often involving numbers

regarding the countries fighting in the war. Within her article titled “The Power of

Repetition: Propaganda and Persuasion,” Engler discusses how repetition, both in terms

of rhetorical language as well as in repeating ideas, branding, or symbols, can trick the

brain into thinking something is true (Engler). This phenomenon, called the Illusionary

Truth Effect, is a cognitive bias that stems from the recognition and fluency heuristics,
 Shugar 74

two tendencies of the human brain to make quick decisions based on recognition and

information processing (Engler). These concepts support the use of repetition in

propaganda, both in terms of repeating words and repeated themes, like recruitment to the

war effort.

Regarding the visual aspect of the text—the typefaces and fonts used on the

posters— the researcher noted similarities within each country’s sample. Germany’s

sample has the most distinct example of typeface prominence using blackletter fonts,

which are types of display typefaces. Blackletter fonts, “Inspired by old English and

gothic script from the Middle Ages,” were often seen on posters in Germany (Moran).

Medieval times played a significant role in the development of the Nazi Party, which

likely inspired these gothic typefaces for use on propaganda posters. During the late-

nineteenth century, “Castles and medieval villages functioned as objects of mediation

between the local culture and the nation-state in Germany,” Medievalism was a marker of

identity for Germans until the end of World War I (Link and Hornburg 213-214). After

the loss in World War I, the politicians of the Nazi Party believed “that the medieval era

was important for demonstrating the alleged cultural and racial superiority of

contemporary German Reich” and wanted to lean back into it as the nation was rebuilt

(Link and Hornburg 215). In Nuremberg, a city with major involvement in the Nazi

Regime, buildings were rebuilt during the rise of the Nazi Party to look like they did in

medieval times, and many buildings still have signs in blackletter fonts in 2023 (Estel).

The use of gothic fonts on Nazi Propaganda Posters was likely an intentional decision by

the poster’s creator to appeal to the glory days of Germany, persuading viewers that

winning WWII would bring Germany back to its peak.

 Shugar 75

6.6: Visual Elements

Symbols are essential to political messaging, as they are recognizable and can

implicitly carry much meaning without text. Researchers say symbols “provide a great

deal of information and often spark a quick emotional response” (Mahaney 41). The data

shows that the Allied Powers have more posters without symbols than with them, while

the Axis Powers have more posters with symbols than without. Furthermore, the

countries in the Axis Powers use more symbols than their Allied counterparts. The data

suggests that the creators of posters for the countries in the Axis Powers (Germany, and

Italy), saw more value in using symbols than those for the Allied Powers. Both nations

studied for the Axis Powers were fascist regimes during the war versus democracies in

the west, possibly contributing to this idea of symbols as threatening or persuasive tools.

Overall, more posters in the 120-poster sample have symbols than did not, showing that

symbols are an essential and prevalent tool for propaganda and communication, which

researchers like Mahaney support.

Italy uses the largest number of different symbols in its sample (the count) and

has the highest number of total symbol uses (the sum). Germany has the next highest

count and sum, followed by the United Kingdom, then the United States. This data

supports the theory that symbols were seen as more valuable for propaganda by the Axis

Powers than the Allies. This is also reflected in the data combined by alliances, as the

Axis numbers are higher for both the count and sum, suggesting that the Axis Powers use

a wider variety of symbols in its posters and use symbols more frequently than do The

Allies.
 Shugar 76

For posters created by America, the most common symbol is the American flag.

The national flag rallies citizens and promotes patriotism, encouraging people to join the

war effort. Germany’s most prevalent symbol is the Star of David, a symbol of Judaism.

Unlike the positive connotations America associates with its flag in propaganda, German

propaganda does not use the Star of David as a positive symbol. One would think that the

most used German symbol would be the swastika, as it is the main symbol of the Nazi

party; however, this is not true for the sample. The prominence of the Jewish Star

demonstrates how prevalent the anti-Jewish narrative is within German propaganda, as

the star is often used to identify a person as Jewish in propaganda. Italy’s most used

symbol is the United Kingdom Flag, the Union Jack. An assumption is for the Italian flag

to be Italy’s most used symbol, like how the United States’ most used symbol is its flag.

A possible explanation for this is that the United Kingdom was perhaps the most

significant threat to Italian victory in the eyes of propagandists.

The same analysis that was performed for the data on symbols was done for flags.

Flags and symbols are distinctive, as all flags are symbols, but not all symbols are flags.

The flag data solely looks at the presence of flags, whereas the data for symbols includes

symbols and flags. All four countries have more posters without any flags than with any

flags. Germany has the least number of posters that include flags (seven), followed by the

United States and the United Kingdom (nine), and then Italy, with the most posters that

use flags (fourteen). The overall sample also has more posters with no flags than with

flags. The fact that flags are less prevalent than symbols in the samples suggests that flags

are seen as a less persuasive tool than symbols. This makes sense, as symbols attribute

meaning to an image, whereas flags represent a place or the ideals of a place. It is

 Shugar 77

possible— in considering them as separate entities— that the meaning symbols carry may

be more persuasive than the representation flags provide. The Axis Powers only has three

more posters with flags than the Allied Powers, where one may expect a more

considerable difference. This suggests that flags are equally as important (or unimportant)

to countries from both alliances.

Although the sample does not show high use of flags in propaganda posters, flags

can be essential tools in persuasive, political messaging. The inclusion of flags,

particularly in visual media, can be called “flag waving,” a device used to demonstrate

respect or credibility (Hobbs and McGee 59). Flags are recognizable to citizens from the

country a flag represents, meaning a viewer has immediate context in a piece of

communication. Flag waving can “appeal to action out of a sense of patriotic duty” to the

viewer (Flag-Waving). Despite the lower prominence of flags than other symbols in the

sample, flags are an integral part of propagandist messaging that cannot be ignored.

Of the four countries, Italy has the highest average of flags used on one poster,

followed by the United Kingdom, then the United States, and Germany. These averages

are all below one, showing that flags have much less presence on posters than symbols,

where the averages ranged from 0.8 to 2.1. The mode shows that most posters for each

country use zero flags, supporting the idea that flags are not common elements of

propaganda, which was not hypothesized.

The United States flag is the most used flag by both the United States and

Germany, while the Union Jack, the United Kingdom’s Flag, is the most used flag by

both the United Kingdom and Italy. It would be a logical hypothesis that each country

would use its flag the most; however, this is not wholly true of this study’s sample. The
 Shugar 78

United States and the United Kingdom have their flags as the most used, but not

Germany or Italy. Furthermore, the American Flag and Union Jack are the most used

flags for both alliances. Both flags have more usage by the Axis Powers than the Allied

Powers, meaning the countries the flags represent (the USA and UK), use the flags less

than the enemies do. Overall, the most used flags across the entire sample are the Union

Jack (UK Flag), American Flag, and then the Nazi Flag. These findings could relate to

Germany and Italy using enemy flags more than the United States and the United

Kingdom. The flag findings suggest that the posters produced by the Allied Powers

seemingly emphasize the Allied war efforts, while the posters by the Axis Powers

presumably prioritize highlighting what its enemies are doing. This aligns with the Axis

Powers’ higher use of enemy flags, as they use the United States and United Kingdom’s

flags more than the countries who “own” them. The overall data supports this idea, as the

UK and American Flags are the two most used flags throughout the 120 posters, followed

by the Nazi Flag.

The United Kingdom and Italy use the widest variety of flags in their samples,

with eleven different flags each (Appendix B52). The United States uses five different

flags throughout its thirty posters, having the lowest count. Italy also has the highest total

number of flags used (the data’s sum) in its sample of posters, followed by the United

Kingdom, Germany, and the United States of America. This data suggests that of the four

countries, Italy places the most value in using flags in propaganda posters. The high use

of flags could be a method for Italian propagandists to emphasize their stance in the war.

Flags are a visual to represent a place or ideal and can demonstrate messages to the

viewer with just a glance. The context of the art and text on a poster, combined with the
 Shugar 79

use of flags, particularly of different sizes or conditions, can demonstrate whom to trust

or who is an enemy to a viewer.

6.7: Propaganda Devices

In looking at the presence of any propaganda devices in a poster, the data shows

that the majority of posters have at least one propaganda device employed across all

groups. The publishing of these labeled propaganda tools made them accessible for both

the public and other propagandists. Flag waving is the most used device for each country,

both alliances, and the overall sample. Flag waving is when a “propagandist holds up a

symbol, such a flag, that we recognize” (Hobbs and McGee 59). One potential reason

why this device is so prevalent in the sample is that these flags or visual symbols can be

used in both positive and negative contexts. For example, USA2 uses Flag Waving with

the American Flag and Uncle Sam, using positive symbolism to inspire patriotism. On

the other hand, USA9 uses the Nazi and Japanese flags to Flag Wave. The imagery shows

a tattered, fallen, Nazi flag and the Japanese flag still flying to express that Germany has

fallen, and now the Allies need to defeat Japan. Flag waving, mainly when a nation uses

its own flag, is a repetition method, as it instills the messages associated with the flag in

the reader, such as nationalism or patriotism. When the viewer sees the flag or symbol,

the ideas generated by propaganda will come back to them.

There are a few key differences between the prominence of devices in the Allied

Powers and Axis Powers’ samples. Stacking the Cards is used much more frequently by

the Axis Powers than the Allied Powers and is the Axis Powers’ most used device.

Although Stacking the Cards can be done positively or negatively in the creator’s

perspective, it is mainly used negatively by the Axis Powers, often stilting facts to blame
 Shugar 80

their enemies, like the Jews. In his article on propaganda tools within Germany’s

propaganda, Yourman argues that Stacking the Cards is the most essential part of Nazi

propaganda (Yourman 155). He states that the Nazis used this device “for or against

beliefs or facts which [they] wish either to encourage or to suppress” to taint the truth

(Yourman 155). Knowing the importance of this device in Nazi propaganda makes sense

that Germany’s ally, Italy, would also use this device in their propaganda, as their goals

and ideologies were the same while the countries were allies.

6.8: Appeals

A primary way propaganda mobilizes its readers is by engaging with their

emotions. Halbesleben explains how mood and emotion, “particularly those associated

with wartime, can influence persuasion and memory for a persuasive message

profoundly,” demonstrating the importance of analyzing various emotions’ role in

propaganda. Most of the posters in this sample include at least one appeal, which makes

sense, as “propaganda is…communication designed to manipulate public opinion by

activating strong emotions” (Hobbs 525). At its core, propaganda is intertwined with

emotion, and propaganda creators likely intentionally target the viewer’s emotions to

increase the effectiveness of the message.

In looking at the types of appeals made in the sample, the results showed that the

United States and United Kingdom’s most used appeal is to patriotism, which Rusu and

Herman argue is the most effective type of propaganda (Rusu and Herman 119). Their

article discusses how propaganda that inspires patriotism “infuses generations,

communities and social groups with the values and social norms concluding to the

society in question, thus preserving the national and cultural identity of the sovereign
 Shugar 81

state through continuity” (Rusu and Herman 119). It is possible that other genres of

propaganda appeal less to patriotism than posters did, as patriotic messaging was a

primary function of posters during World War II. In her article on poster propaganda,

Mahaney describes four types of propaganda posters, with those carrying a patriotic

message as the first category (Mahaney 41). The inspiration to act, which often goes

hand-in-hand with patriotism, was also appealed to much more frequently by the Allied

Powers than the Axis Powers. The prevalence of patriotic appeals in the Allied Powers’

sample suggests that inspiring nationalism was a large goal during the war in these

nations, and less of a priority to the Axis Powers.

The Axis Powers had a much higher prominence of blaming or demeaning than

the Allied Powers, with a thirteen and eighteen count difference, respectively. Germany’s

sample has more instances of these appeals than Italy’s, likely due to the Nazi

propaganda narrative against “international Jewry” (Herf 55). Many of Germany’s

posters “sought to undermine support for the war effort in Great Britain, the United

States, and the Soviet Union by presenting World War II as a war waged by and for the

Jews” (Herf 54). A central theme throughout Nazi Germany’s sample was a negative

portrayal of the enemy, particularly the Jews, and Italy’s sample had a few posters that

followed suit. Notably, patriotism was appealed to frequently by Germany and Italy as

well, but less than by the Allied Powers, and the prevalence of negative appeals speaks

more to their goals.

The Axis Powers have more appeals to emotion than the Allies do in this study,

but both groups had a relatively high usage of emotional appeals in their samples.

Seventeen specific emotions were recorded across the 120 posters, and the results are
 Shugar 82

quite interesting, especially in comparing the data from both alliances. One unexpected

result is the higher frequency of guilt appeals made by the Allied Powers in relation to the

Axis Powers. Nazi propaganda is known for blaming Jews for the loss of World War I

and the start of World War II, so, surprisingly, the data for the samples shows that the

Allies evoked guilt more than the Axis Powers. However, guilt can be evoked for many

reasons, not only about the cause of the war. The Allied Powers often appeal to guilt to

get the reader involved in the war or to push the Careless Talk Costs Lives theme. For

example, USA10 may cause female readers to feel guilty by saying, “Women, there’s

work to be done and a war to be won...now! See your U.S. employment service.” UK15

states, “keep it under your hat! Careless talk costs lives,” attempting to make anyone who

may have let information slip out feel guilty.

Each observed emotion was organized into one of three categories, based on the

researcher’s standard of their connotation: positive emotions, negative emotions, and

neutral emotions, as seen in Chart 2. Overall, the emotion most appealed to in the entire

poster sample is guilt, which is labeled as a negative emotion. As previously stated, guilt

is the Allied Powers’ most frequently appealed to emotion, but excitement, a positive

emotion, is the most often used emotion by the Axis Powers’. With the Axis Powers’

propaganda known for its blameful, dark narratives, it is surprising that the most-used

emotion in their sample is one categorized as positive. The posters that evoked

excitement commonly pushed the idea of victory, with messages like “two nations, one

victory” (ITL7) and “front and homeland: the guarantee of victory” (GER20). Fear,

another negative emotion, is the second-most appealed to emotion by both alliances, but

the third most prevalent overall. While fear is associated with Axis propaganda, it is
 Shugar 83

surprising that the Allies so frequently used it as an appeal. This unexpected similarity,

however, is supported by research about propaganda, as fear is a tactic used to mobilize

the reader by capitalizing on their anxieties (Halbesleben 77). Propagandists on both

alliances likely incited fear to encourage the reader to do as the propaganda says.

In looking at the use of each type of emotion by country, the United Kingdom is

an outlier, being the only country to use more positive emotional appeals than negative

ones. This could have been a result of the personality of the Churchill and his parliament.

Of the countries, Germany has the most instances of negative emotions, which follows

their anti-enemy narratives. Both the Axis and Allied Powers have more instances of

negative emotions being appealed to than positive ones, and the overall data has the same

result. This suggests that propaganda creators strategically understood the impact

negative emotions could have on the viewer.

6.9: Calls to Action

Most of the posters from each group have a call to action, an instruction to the

reader (The Importance of Call to Actions). According to Britannica, “for maximum

effect, the symbolic content of propaganda must be active, not passive, in tone. It must

explicitly or implicitly recommend specific actions to be performed” by the viewer

(Propagandists and Their Agents). Calls to action are extremely beneficial to mobilize the

reader. Without one, the point of the message is immensely depleted. Therefore, it aligns

with other research for most posters to include a call to action. Within marketing, calls to

action are usually direct and specific. However, two types of calls to action are seen in

propaganda posters: explicit and implicit (The Importance of Call to Actions).

 Shugar 84

Of the countries studied in this research, the United States is the only nation to

have more instances of explicit calls to action than implicit ones. The United Kingdom,

Germany, and Italy’s posters more frequently used implicit calls to action than explicit

ones. This trend continues for the Allied Powers, Axis Powers, and overall samples, as

the majority of the calls to action for each dataset are implicit. The prevalence of

implicit calls to action over their explicit counterparts suggests that propagandists wanted

viewers to decide what they should do for themselves. A possible explanation for this is

the idea that people dislike being told what to do and that they might be more inclined to

act if they come to the decision on their own. Posters with implicit calls to action give the

reader a general idea of what is needed but do not push for a specific action. For example,

UK10 has two implicit messages; the first is to watch one’s surroundings on the job to

prevent injury, and the second is to watch what one says, as careless talk costs lives. The

poster shows a man with his head being chopped off by a propeller, along with the text,

“watch that prop.... what prop? Careless talk costs lives...” The reader can consider the

text and image and decide for themselves what to do, or in this case, what not to do.

6.10: Overall

The data demonstrates that the propaganda posters from the United States, United

Kingdom, Germany, and Italy are far more similar than dissimilar. Certain qualities are

consistent throughout the entire sample, such as the prevalence of soldiers/people

involved in the war effort as poster subjects, the use of black, white, and red in posters,

the inclusion of display and sans serif typefaces on posters, and the presence of elements

such as symbols, flags, emotional appeals, propaganda devices, and calls to action.

However, there are differences in the specific elements used by the countries and
 Shugar 85

alliances within the walls of overarching similarities. For example, propaganda devices

are prevalent in the samples by all four nations, but the most used device varies for each

country. Specifically, all four countries have more posters with propaganda devices than

without, but the most used device varies by country: the United States’ most prevalent

device is flag waving, the United Kingdoms are flag waving and glittering generalities,

Germany's is stacking the cards, and Italy's is flag waving. The fact that the data shows

posters made by different countries including the same elements demonstrates the

importance of those additions, as they would not be so prevalent if they were not

effective or thought to be effective.

Several narratives emerged from this study; some are limited to one nation's

propaganda posters and others are consistent across multiple or even all four countries

samples. Two narratives seen solely in the United States sample are defeating the Axis

Powers and warning citizens about enemy propaganda. The United Kingdom has one

exclusive narrative to its sample: keeping children safe. Similarly, the narrative mainly

within Nazi Germany’s propaganda was blaming Jews for the war and painting Jews as

the enemy. One Italian poster mentioned Jews as a threat alongside Communists and

Freemasons, but as a theme, this was mainly seen in Germanys sample.

An overarching narrative in the propaganda produced by the United States and the

United Kingdom is the encouragement of tasks to help the war effort while at home (not

enlisted), such as buying war bonds, growing a victory garden, walking instead of taking

public transportation, donating rags, and more. Posters from Germany and Italy’s samples

have a common theme of discussing victory, most commonly through strong language

such as “Front und Heimat, die Garanten des Sieges,” which translates to “Front and
 Shugar 86

Homeland: The Guarantee of Victor.” Three narratives were consistent throughout the

sample. The first of these themes previously discussed is the Careless Talk Costs Lives

narrative. Each country pushes this idea differently, but the narrative is the same

throughout the posters that touch on this theme— people should be careful about what

they say, as one never knows who is listening. The second narrative present within the

posters from all four nations has two parts: encouraging readers to get involved in the war

effort and making them feel guilty for not getting involved. The third and final narrative

in the samples of all four nations demonstrates who a nation's allies and/or enemies are.

The final research question asks about situational factors that possibly impacted

the prevalence and strategy of propaganda posters. The first situational factor relates

solely to Italys sample and is the country's change in alliance and stance during the war,

and the formation of the RSI as a producer. The propaganda produced by Italy while on

the Axis Powers had entirely different strategies and goals than that created while Italy

was with the Allied Powers, as the alliances, and therefore goals and enemies, were

different. Similarly, the USSR also changed alliances during World War II, which is a

second situational factor. Although the USSR was not one of the countries studied in this

research, its switching from the Axis Powers to the Allied Powers in 1941 impacted the

propaganda strategy of the nations studied. Posters from the Axis Powers began painting

the USSR as an enemy in their propaganda after this switch, and alternatively, the Allied

Powers switched to showing the USSR as a friend.

The third situational factor that impacts both the prevalence and strategy of

propaganda posters are events during the war, such as major military battles, nation's
 Shugar 87

surrenders, and massacres. A specific example of this is

Germany's surrender in May 1945, which changed the

focus of Allied propaganda onto defeating Japan in the

Pacific, as seen in USA9. The fourth factor is a possible

increase in espionage during the war, leading to the

influx of posters following the Careless Talk Costs

Lives narrative. Investigating the causes of this

campaign is outside the scope of this research but Figure 12: USA 9

knowing that all four countries have posters with this theme, it is predicted that

something occurred and caused this increase in production. Lastly, the fifth situational

factor that could have impacted the production and strategy of propaganda posters is the

death of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the United States, in 1945. In

office from 1933 to 1945, President Roosevelt oversaw the United States' war efforts

since their declaration of war in 1941. It is possible that American propaganda's

production and strategy changed following Roosevelt’s death.

6.11: Limitations

Despite all efforts for the credibility and integrity of this study, there are naturally

a few limitations discovered along the research process. The most notable limitation of

this project is the absence of a double coder. Many content analyses employ an additional

coder. Double coding allows for comparing the findings, which, if the results are similar,

attributes to the original coder’s reliability and the entire project’s validity. Due to the

large size of the dataset, the prior knowledge of history required to complete the coding,
 Shugar 88

and the timeframe in which a poster could be fully coded, the project did not employ a

double coder. Therefore, all results are derived from the researcher’s coding.

The other challenges, or limitations, of this research are all regarding the coding

process. First, it was difficult to guarantee the production date of posters, as posters can

be used for many years and have a longer shelf life than other media genres. Furthermore,

some posters were dated different years on various websites or databases, making it

sometimes difficult to identify the actual year of production. For example, USA21 was

dated 1942-1945 by the National Archives Catalog, the database in which the poster was

originally collected (National Archives and Records Administration). However, the

Hoover Institution also houses this poster in an archive and dates it to solely 1942

(Digital Collections Hoover Institutions). This example displays the complexity of dating

posters, as a range of years could refer to production and circulation, and many posters

were dated in ranges or are attributed to different years by various sources. The poster's

content often aided the researcher in determining if a poster was from the time range of

the research.

The next challenge in the coding process was identifying unknown symbols and

flags. Although the researcher came into the project with background knowledge of

World War II and propaganda, it would be impossible to identify and understand the

meaning of every symbol used within the posters. Furthermore, the researcher could note

certain elements as symbols but would be unaware of their names. One example of this is

the “Reichsadler/ Parteiadler.” This is a symbol commonly used by Nazi Germany, as it

is a combination of two of the Nazis’ most recognized symbols, the eagle, and the

swastika, in which the eagle seems to be holding a swastika in its talons. Additional
 Shugar 89

research was conducted via the internet to locate this symbol’s official name. This

difficulty in naming or identifying elements of posters, most commonly symbols and

flags, was prevalent throughout the coding process but was navigated through additional

resources to help name the unknown elements. Despite these limitations and constraints,

the structured research method and rigorous observation process helped ensure that the

findings are accurate.

The final limitation is the language barrier encountered by the researcher in

reading and understanding posters created in other languages. The native language of the

researcher is English, and some posters were in German, Italian, Russian, Polish, and

likely other languages. Online translators are objectively less reliable than someone fluent

in the language, so multiple platforms were used to give the researcher the best possible

understanding of the text. Analyzing a poster without including its text would not allow

one to receive the full message.

 Shugar 90

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION

Although this paper looks at propaganda solely in the context of World War II,

propaganda was made long before the war and continues today. Propaganda is reliant on

all its’ individual aspects to communicate an overall message to the audience. Poster

propaganda specifically has many elements that contribute to the overall work, such as

colors, text, symbols, flags, the subject, and more. Even without one of these elements,

the meaning of the poster would change, and likely render the poster less effective. This

study analyzes trends within the use of many elements, specifically stances, subject

matter, colors, text, visual elements, propaganda devices, appeals, and calls to action.

This demonstrates how each piece of a propaganda poster contributes to the overall

meaning and message. The data shows many similarities in the elements and narratives

between World War II propaganda posters from the United States, United Kingdom,

Germany, and Italy.

This project not only takes an in-depth look at propaganda posters made during

World War II to determine trends and investigate their presence, but also provides a

framework for future studies on propaganda. The way the posters were coded, analyzed,

and interpreted was holistic, focusing on multiple aspects of a poster. Future research on

propaganda posters can use this structure of analysis and apply it to various samples,

regardless of whether the posters are connected to World War II. Furthermore, this

framework can be applied to other posters, even ones lacking propaganda-like elements

or war contexts. As highlighted in the literature used to guide this project, propaganda has

a fluid definition, implying what one may call propaganda, another would not.
 Shugar 91

Additionally, it is a given that propaganda is still being made and used today, regardless

of how one may characterize it.

Studying propaganda is increasingly important, especially because its persuasive

power and ability to cross media genres. Propaganda is far from a tool of the past.

Learning about propaganda can help people stay informed on the truth and be aware of

misinformation and disinformation, which thrive on social media today. Furthermore,

being knowledgeable about propaganda can also help people create ethical, persuasive

messages that will be effective for their audiences. In this way, propaganda is instructive,

offering benefits extending beyond its contested name.

 Shugar 92

WORKS CITED (MLA 9)

Aley, Melinda, and Lindsay Hahn. “The Powerful Male Hero: A Content Analysis of
Gender Representation in Posters for Children’s Animated Movies.” Sex Roles,
vol. 83, no. 7-8, 6 Feb. 2020, pp. 499–509. ProQuest,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01127-z. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

Allen, Rodney F. “Posters as Historical Documents: A Resource For The Teaching of

Twentieth-Century History.” The Social Studies, vol. 85, no. 2, 1994, pp. 52–61.
ProQuest,
https://www.proquest.com/docview/274777482/fulltext/56A7658BC2BD4DACP
Q/1?accountid=10730. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

Anievas, Alexander. “Nazism and the Coming of World War II in Europe: Change and
Continuity in German Foreign Policymaking during the Interwar Years.” Capital,
the State, and War: Class Conflict and Geopolitics in the Thirty Years' Crisis,
1914-1945, edited by Patrick Thaddeus Jackson , Univ. of Michigan Press, Ann
Arbor, 2014, pp. 139–184. JSTOR,
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.6487271.10. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

Banerjee, Smita C., and Kathryn Greene. “‘Yo! This Is No Lie, If You Smoke, You Die’:
A Content Analysis of Anti-Smoking Posters Created by Adolescents.” Journal of
Substance Use, vol. 18, no. 2, 2011, pp. 119–128.,
https://doi.org/10.3109/14659891.2011.615883.

Bellamy, Chris. “Soviet Union in World War II.” International Relations, 26 June 2012,
https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199743292-0077.

Chambers, R. “Art and Propaganda in an Age of War: The Role of Posters.” Scientia
Militaria - South African Journal of Military Studies, vol. 13, no. 4, 28 Feb. 2012,
pp. 54–59., https://doi.org/10.5787/13-4-543.

Chapman, Cameron. “A Crash Course in Typography: The Basics of Type.” The Jotform
Blog, https://www.jotform.com/blog/a-crash-course-in-typography-the-basics-of-
type/.

Clark, Nell. “Here's How Propaganda Is Clouding Russians' Understanding of the War in
Ukraine.” NPR, NPR, 15 Mar. 2022,
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/15/1086705796/russian-propaganda-war-in-
ukraine.

“Content Analysis.” Columbia Public Health,

https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/research/population-health-
methods/content-analysis.

Cornelison, Pam, and Ted Yanak. “World War II.” The Great American History Fact-
Finder the WHO, What, Where, When, and Why of American History, vol. 2,
Houghton Mifflin, Boston Mass., 2004,
 Shugar 93

https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/hmgahff/world_war_ii/0?instituti
onId=3606. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

“D-Day: The Allies Invade Europe.” The National WWII Museum New Orleans, The
National World War II Museum, 22 June 2017,
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/d-day-allies-invade-europe.

Dymarczyk, Waldemar. “The War on the Wall. Polish and Soviet War Posters Analysis.”
Qualitative Sociology Review, vol. 10, no. 4, 31 Oct. 2014, pp. 6–31.,
https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.10.4.01.

Engler, Patricia. “The Power of Repetition: Propaganda and Persuasion, Part 3.” Answers
in Genesis, Answers In Genesis, 9 June 2021,
https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/patricia-engler/2021/06/09/power-of-
repetition-propaganda-persuation-3/.

“Espionage and the SOE.” The History Press, https://www.thehistorypress.co.uk/world-

war-ii/espionage-and-the-soe/.

Estel, Alexander. “Old Town Nuremberg.” Walking Tour of Nuremberg's Old Town.
Walking Tour of Nuremberg's Old Town, 3 Jan. 2023, Nuremberg, Germany.

Fellows, Erwin W. “'Propaganda:' History of a Word.” American Speech, vol. 34, no. 3,
Oct. 1959, pp. 182–189. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/454039. Accessed 12
Oct. 2022.

Fox, Jo. “Careless Talk: Tensions within British Domestic Propaganda during the Second
World War.” The Journal of British Studies, vol. 51, no. 4, 2012, pp. 936–966.
JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.1086/666741. Accessed 15 Feb. 2023.

Gaither, Thomas Kenneth. “Public Relations, Propaganda, and Persuasion Theory.”

Building a Nation's Image on the World Wide Web: A Study of the Head of State
Web Sites of Developing Countries, Cambria Press, Youngstown, NY, 2007, pp.
39–54

Halbesleben, Jonathon R. B., et al. ""We Can Do It!" Recruitment and Socialization
Through WWII War Effort Posters in the United States." Journal of Applied
Management and Entrepreneurship, vol. 8, no. 4, 2003, pp. 68-85. ProQuest,
https://elon.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-
journals/we-can-do-recruitment-socialization-through-
wwii/docview/203912716/se-2.

Hayda, Julian, et al. “6 Key Numbers That Reveal the Staggering Impact of Russia's War
in Ukraine.” NPR, NPR, 24 Aug. 2022,
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/24/1119202240/ukraine-russia-war-by-numbers.

Heddlesten, Jim. “Italy, a Nation Divided, 1943 - 1945.” HistoryNet, 10 Mar. 2016,
https://www.historynet.com/italy-a-nation-divided-1943-1945/.
 Shugar 94

Herf, Jeffrey. “The ‘Jewish War’: Goebbels and the Antisemitic Campaigns of the Nazi
Propaganda Ministry.” Holocaust and Genocide Studies, vol. 19, no. 1, 2005, pp.
51–80. Project MUSE, https://doi.org/10.1093/hgs/dci003. Accessed 12 Oct.
2022.

Hobbs, Renee, and Sandra McGee. “Teaching about Propaganda: An Examination of the
Historical Roots of Media Literacy.” Journal of Media Literacy Education, vol. 6,
no. 2, 9 Nov. 2014, pp. 56–67., https://doi.org/10.23860/jmle-2016-06-02-5.

Hobbs, Renee. “Propaganda in an Age of Algorithmic Personalization: Expanding

Literacy Research and Practice.” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 55, no. 3, July
2020, pp. 521–533. EBSCOhost,
https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rrq.301

Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang, and Sarah E. Shannon. “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content

Analysis.” Qualitative Health Research, vol. 15, no. 9, Nov. 2005, pp. 1277–
1288. SAGE Journals, https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687. Accessed 12
Oct. 2022.

Jansen, Derek. “Qualitative Content Analysis 101 (with Clear Examples).” Grad Coach,
30 Sept. 2022, https://gradcoach.com/qualitative-content-analysis/.

Klein, Christopher. “How Did World War II End?” History.com, A&E Television
Networks, 11 Aug. 2020, https://www.history.com/news/world-war-ii-end-events.

Kleynhans, J. “The Use of Colour as a Tool for Propaganda.” Research and Innovation
Unit ETDs, vol. 6, no. 1, 2007, pp. 46–53.,
http://ir.cut.ac.za/bitstream/handle/11462/399/Kleynhans%2c%20J.H..pdf?sequen
ce=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 19 Nov. 2022.

Link, Fabian, and Mark W. Hornburg. “‘He Who Owns the Trifels, Owns the Reich’:
Nazi Medievalism and the Creation of the ‘Volksgemeinschaft’ in the Palatinate.”
Central European History, vol. 49, no. 2, 2016, pp. 208–39. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43965264. Accessed 2 Mar. 2023.

Mahaney, Darlene C. “Propaganda Posters.” OAH Magazine of History, vol. 16, no. 3,
2002, pp. 41–46. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25163525. Accessed 19
Nov. 2022.

McCrann, Grace-Ellen. “Government Wartime Propaganda Posters: Communicators of

Public Policy.” Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, vol. 28, no. 1-2, 2009, pp.
53–73., https://doi.org/10.1080/01639260902862058.

Meaker, Morgan. “How Ukraine Is Winning the Propaganda War.” Wired, Conde Nast,
13 June 2022, https://www.wired.com/story/ukraine-propaganda-war/.

Mike. “The Best Fonts for Posters and Poster Design.” FilterGrade, 15 July 2022,
https://filtergrade.com/best-fonts-for-posters-design/.
 Shugar 95

Moran, Matt. “31 Best Blackletter Fonts for 2023.” Design Bombs, 17 Jan. 2023,
https://www.designbombs.com/best-blackletter-fonts/.

O’Connor, Cliodhna, and Helene Joffe. “Intercoder Reliability in Qualitative Research:

Debates and Practical Guidelines.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods,
vol. 19, 22 Jan. 2020, pp. 1–13. SAGE Journals,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

“Poster Design Principles & Tips: From Font Sizes to Color Contrast.” UC Davis,
https://urc.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/files/dgvnsk3561/files/inline-
files/General%20Poster%20Design%20Principles%20-%20Handout.pdf

Prier, Jarred. “Commanding the Trend.” Information Warfare in the Age of Cyber
Conflict, vol. 11, no. 4, 2020, pp. 50–85.,
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429470509-7.

“Propagandists and Their Agents.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica,

Inc., https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda/Propagandists-and-their-
agents.

“Russia vs Ukraine: The Fog of Propaganda and Disinformation.” YouTube, Al Jazeera

English, 4 June 2022,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=356&v=6YNgvcAEuo4&feature
=emb_logo. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

Rusu, Maria-Lucia, and Ramona Herman. “The Implications of Propaganda as a Social

Influence Strategy.” Scientific Bulletin, vol. 23, no. 2, 1 Dec. 2018, pp. 118–125.
EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.2478/bsaft-2018-0015. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

Sproule, J. Michael. “Authorship and Origins of the Seven Propaganda Devices: A

Research Note.” Rhetoric and Public Affairs, vol. 4, no. 1, 2001, pp. 135–143.
Project MUSE, https://doi.org/10.1353/rap.2001.0014. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

“The Importance of Call to Actions for Digital Marketing.” Cork Tree Creative, 29 Mar.
2022, https://corktreecreative.com/blog/call-to-actions/.

“Ukraine in Maps: Tracking the War with Russia.” BBC News, BBC, 10 Oct. 2022,
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60506682.

U.S. Department of State, 2020, GEC Special Report: Russia’s Pillars of Disinformation
and Propaganda, https://www.state.gov/russias-pillars-of-disinformation-and-
propaganda-report/. Accessed 12 Oct. 2022.

“U5LF SR Italy Timeline.” World History, HCPS,

https://worldhistory.hcps.org/pages/pdf/u5lf_sr_italytimeline.pdf.

Welch, David. World War II Propaganda: Analyzing the Art of Persuasion during
Wartime. ABC-CLIO, an Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2017.
 Shugar 96

Yourman, Julius. “Propaganda Techniques Within Nazi Germany.” The Journal of

Educational Sociology, vol. 13, no. 3, 1939, pp. 148–63. JSTOR,
https://doi.org/10.2307/2262307. Accessed 3 Mar. 2023.
 Shugar 97

Appendix A - Coding Sheet Criteria

 Shugar 98

Appendix B – Additional Tables

Shugar 99
Shugar 100
Shugar 101
Shugar 102
Shugar 103
Shugar 104
Shugar 105
Shugar 106
Shugar 107
Shugar 108
Shugar 109
Shugar 110
Shugar 111
Shugar 112