Analyzing and critiquing Revisiting the Theoretical Foundations of Propaganda by Aaron Hyzen. 

I was given the outline below, and I am not sure how to argue that his argument was strong since the propaganda connection with communication and information, or at least that is what I thought.
b. How did the author(s) argue for the importance of their paper? Do you find the argument valid, invalid, weak, or strong? Why?
5. Theory and Method:
a. Describe the theory and method of analysis/criticism used by the author(s). Is it interpretive or critical? Justify your claim.
b. Which theory or theories do the authors use as frameworks for their analysis?
c. Can you recognize their epistemological or axiological assumptions biases, or positions?

b. What do you think is the contribution of the authors in the article/chapter to theory or research in the specific (rhetorical, critical, or semiotic) field
of study?
d. Can you find any 'holes' in their argument?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 Argument and Importance a How did the authors argue for the importance of their paper Look for the introductory sections where the authors might sta... View the full answer