Ad Code

Is Wasan Marafa a Propaganda Play?

Citation: Adamu Ibrahim MALUMFASHI (2022). Is Wasan Marafa a Propaganda Play?. Yobe Journal of Language, Literature and Culture (YOJOLLAC), Vol. 10, Number 1. Department of African Languages and Linguistics, Yobe State University, Damaturu, Nigeria. ISSN 2449-0660

IS WASAN MARAFA A PROPAGANDA PLAY?

By

Adamu Ibrahim MALUMFASHI

Abstract

This paper is a critique of Aminu’s 1991, opinion on the play Wasan Marafa titled “Enlightenment and propaganda as themes in Wasan Marafa”. The paper is of the view that it is an error to regard the play as propaganda material, based on the criteria for assessing propaganda established by Ross Sheryl Tuttle, a specialist on the subject. This paper started with the major point. It provided various definitions of the term propaganda, its origin, and of course the model for analyzing it. The main body of the paper destroys any argument portraying the play as a propaganda text. The conclusion confirms that Wasan Marafa is a play designed to enlighten the readers on some basic issues on hygiene in particular and cleanliness in general. It is a wake-up call to reject fake and dangerous medicines and their promoters.

Introduction

 Hamilton (1921, p. x) as quoted by Oladimeji (2008, p. 37) described propaganda as: “Inverted patriotism (that) draws nourishment from the sins of the enemy. If there are no sins, invent them; the aim is to make the enemy appear so great a monster that forfeits the right of a human being”.

Also, the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. sees propaganda as (1938, p.4): “An expression of opinion or action by individuals, or deliberately designed to influence the opinions and actions of other individuals or groups with reference to a predetermined end”. on the other hand, Ezento (1940, p. 6-7), calls propaganda as “one form of activated ideology”. He went on to regard it as “total falsehood on the one hand and on the other a totally valid depiction of reality or truth.” Another similar observation comes from Barlett (1940, p. 6) who calls propaganda:

An attempt to influence public opinion and conduct especially social opinion and conduct in such a manner that the persons who adopt the opinions and behaviours do so without themselves making any definite search for reasons.

 Hummel and Huntress’s definition on the other hand is brief and precise which regards propaganda as simply (1945, p. 2) “any attempt to persuade anyone of any belief.” Lee expressed the same sentiment in catchy language when he says (1953, p. 18) that propaganda is “an expression overtly set forth or covertly implied in order to influence the attitudes and through the attitudes the opinions and action of a public.”

 Bentley and others (1991, p. 111) see propaganda as “the extreme instance of didacticism”. But he was quick to admit that “the borderline between the extreme and the non-extreme would be impossible to draw as for that matter would the borderline between the didactic and the non-didactic”. The art he admitted “may be held to teach something” But as to when it is positively “didactic”, the answer will differ. He said on these competent judges will differ.

 Nelson’s definition is slightly different from the opinions expressed above as he calls propaganda: “Communication aimed at influencing the attitude of a community towards some cause…. Primarily in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission)”. Propaganda according to the above definition is meant to influence emotions, attitudes, or opinions, through the controlled transmission of the sided message which may or may not be true.

 But, maybe for the first time, a broader more encompassing look at the term was done when Resto considered propaganda as (2001, p. 5) “mass suggestion” or “influence through the use of symbols and the psychology of the individuals”. He considered the earlier notion that understood propaganda as the dissemination of “biased ideas and opinions often through the use of lies and deception” as faulty and is being discarded by scholars. He said the topic is now being studied in more detail by scholars. And he concluded that many came to realize that “propaganda was not the sole property of evil”. Resto is of the opinion that the aim of modern propagandists is to convince the targeted audience to “voluntarily” accept his position. He is of the opinion that the claim that propaganda is accompanied by distortion of fact and appeal to passion and prejudice is false and misleading.

 Maybe the most appealing definition of the term comes from Ross (2002, p. 10) who sees propaganda as: “An epistemically defective message used with the intention to persuade a socially significant group of people on behalf of a political institution, organization or cause”. Ross, while dismissing earlier definitions that considered propaganda to be the presentation of a biased opinion, says many theorists that have regarded propaganda as dangerous, their definitions of the term do not account for this assessment, that it is associated with lies, appeals to emotional and psychological manipulation. Ross is of the opinion that “we are not manipulated solely by emotional appeals. Yet emotional can be a relevant part of propaganda message”. But she added as Resells observed “the line between emotion and reason is not so sharp as some people think” is in order.

 On the claim that propaganda consists of lies, intent to persuade Ross added that, this is not the same as intent to lie. An intent to lie she says seems to imply that the person persuading believes one thing about a particular state of affairs, yet endeavors to convince others to hold a position contrary to it She concluded by saying there are “true believers who try to persuade others to join the cause” Falsity she observed, cannot fully account for propaganda’s pejorative sense. If a propagandist relies upon falsehood to convey her position one’s credibility is then called to question. She quoted Josef Goebbels who said “lies should be told, only about unverifiable facts” to support her argument.

Origins of Propaganda

The most convincing opinion on the origin of propaganda is the one from Ross and others who see it as a 16th-century coinage, from Latin, to refer to the “Congregation De Propaganda” which was an organization of the Roman Curia that had jurisdiction over missionary territories. But the term was not widely used until the early part of the 20th century. Originally, the word was considered neutral not pejorative in English, and it simply means the dissemination of information in favour of any given cause. Favouritism in this regard is not seen as bad or objectionable. But it is in order to note that words such as ‘misteaching; ‘inducement’ and even warfare’ were some of the words used by Thesaurus (1852, p. 261,297) to classify the term. It was during World War I, that the term acquired certain popular, political meanings or connotations. To some, it is an instrument of the devil. Others see it as a promotion that seeks ‘bad’ ends. Some, on the other hand, believe that propaganda if administered intelligently, will benefit every man, woman, and child. Propaganda achieved importance as an instrument of national policy in the totalitarian states of Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war.

From the way and manner, scholars categorize the term propaganda; one can see that the question of it being neutral is debatable. Resto classified propaganda as follows:

White propaganda comes from an openly identified source and is characterized by gentler methods of persuasion and one-sided presentation of an argument. Black propaganda is identified as being from one source, but is in fact from another, to disguise the true origins of the propaganda. Grey is without any identifiable source or author.

#angogo, according to a reviewer of his book, (2009, p. 38) categorizes propaganda as follows:

There are three forms of propaganda: White propaganda where the source is known and stated; grey propaganda where the source is implied but unstated, and black propaganda which is attributed to false sources in order to mislead.

 If misleading is one of the major functions of propaganda, then the term is anything but neutral. According to Stephens, “an expert on America’s overseas information program” and a key director in the United States Information Agency (USIA), propaganda is central to America’s foreign policy as can be deduced from this quotation attributed to him by Resto.

While the United States has four foreign policy instruments. Diplomatic, military, economic, and physiological, in theory, it is the psychological instrument that advances American national and international interests through the calculated manipulation of power to a considerable extent.

The Wasan Marafa

Wasan Marafa was published during NORLA era, an outfit established during colonial rule in Northern Nigeria in 1953. The playwright Abubakar Tunau Mafara explained that it was a typical school play that was staged at various middle schools i.e. Sakkwato, Talata-Mafara and Gusau before it was finally published. It can be deduced that the text was written as a result of the influence of the playwright’s European teachers. It is an attempt to produce another text in line with Six Hausa Plays, a play written by Dr. R. M. East in 1936, that will also serve as part of teaching materials for drama lessons.

Aminu, 1991 and Wasan Marafa as a Propaganda Play

The first known attempt to analyse the play in detail as propaganda material was done by Haruna Aminu in 1991. Even though even this attempt has its reservation as it viewed the play both as an “enlightenment” and “propaganda” material as can be seen from the title of the paper ‘Enlightenment and propaganda as themes in Wasan Marafa”. It is a play centered on Marafa who had to go to the city in search of a cure.

Boka who despite his claims that he has medicines for all illnesses, could not be of any help to Marafa who is down with guinea-worm infection. This disappointment led Marafa to dismiss Boka and his bundles of medicines. It is this rejection and condemnation that leads Aminu to erroneously assume that the play is nothing but propaganda because after his encounter with Boka he was taken to where he was given the necessary treatment. He was also as stated by Aminu (1991, p. 3) “accompanied home by Dubagari (sanitary inspector) who taught the family members how to obtain clean water through filtration and the ways to keep their house and surroundings clean”.

1Aminu added that (1991, p. 9) “after the Marafa/Boka encounter, the former goes to the hospital and gets treated with the help of western medicine”. He further added that “this is clearly propaganda highlighting the lying incompetence of the traditional medicine and traditional doctors”. The writer justified his stand regarding the play as a propaganda tool with the following observation (1991, p. 7)

Considering the time, the play was published and the types of ideas propagated by some indigenous write-ups at that same time like Ƙaramin Sani Ƙuqumi and Bala da Babiya both written in 1944 and 1950 respectively one will not hesitate to conclude that the play is a propaganda drama systematically designed to influence the audience under colonial domination with psychological fear and had already taken antagonistic stand and hatred against the colonialists and all that is associated with them.

The above generalization did not offer any proof that the above-cited purely educational materials on teaching basic hygiene, can be harmful to the Hausa, let alone be regarded as propaganda. The texts did not contain any “negative” or “dangerous” dosage of propaganda. In fact, there is no basis to include them in the analysis. They are not plays.

The playwright and the colonialists

The writer has reasons to subscribe to the views of his lecturers and you can hardly fault him on this, he found the opinions of Ohwona, a Marxist-inclined lecturer at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria at that time, enough and good justifications for his thinking. Since Ohwona is of the opinion that colonialists needed healthy people in Africa for their selfish ends, therefore any attempt to eradicate diseases among them is for the good of colonialism. Since Marafa was first portrayed as living in destitution and devastated by guinea worm, but later cured of his illness at the colonialists’ hospital, and even became not only healthy but wealthy then this is nothing but propaganda. This is the argument advanced by Ohwona on the matter and accepted hook, line, and sinker by Aminu (1991, p. 9)

The colonial regime was in dire for new materials, cotton, cocoa, rubber, groundnuts, mineral ores, etc. to feed her industries back home in Europe …. to get such healthy men and women to embark on their production, colonial health policy was geared towards the mass eradication of epidemic and endemic diseases.

In order to counter any argument that the playwright is a Hausa man and not one of the colonialists (unlike Malam Dauda Kano, the “author” of Tabarma Kunya who is an American and a peace corps member) as such has nothing to do with colonialism, Aminu relied on Hill’s argument that emphasized that propaganda often relies on fronts (1991, p. 9-10)

Propaganda uses innocent-looking agents or “fronts”, organizations while the propagandist himself remains behind the scenes just to achieve his aim because the agent(s) may seem to the audience to be much more credible or acceptable than the propagandist himself … especially in areas where the propagandist is not very familiar with the language and customs or where cultural, racial, religious or nationalistic attitudes would deny him a favourable hearing, the use of an agent is inescapable.

With arguments from anti-colonial writers, there is little wonder when Aminu concluded that Wasan Marafa is meant to discredit and undermine the African traditional medical system such that (1991, p. 8) “people will lose faith in the efficacy of the indigenous medical system and corresponding gravitation towards western/scientific medicine”.

While not holding brief for colonialism in any way for its callous, destructive, and self-centered antecedents, yet if truth ought to be told, the Marxists’ approach and style of blaming colonialism advanced by Ohwona, Oculli, and Rodney and relied upon by Aminu, is, to say the least, misplaced and unfair. As Hausa saying says “duk laifi na kura ne, amma dai ban da satar waɗari”. The good deeds of the colonialist should not for whatever reason be distorted as something bad. We should have the courage to call spade a spade.

Aminu’s paper can equally be faulted based on its definition of what is propaganda. The writer stated that (1991, p. 2) propaganda “may directly or indirectly have a negative effect on the individual or group”. A question that will readily come to mind is, what is the negative effect of showing or teaching people how to live a healthy and decent lifestyle? Or what is wrong with condemning the Hausa medicines that have no value or any use whatsoever but only “negative effect” as admitted by the writer himself?

Wasan Marafa discredit Hausa traditional medicine

A major weakness of the analysis is the assumption that Wasan Marafa was meant to discredit Hausa traditional medicine and paved the way for the acceptance of its western counterpart. This is a grave mistake and misreading of the play. It is no wonder the paper could not quote in toto the full dialogue between Boka and Marafa where Boka’s medicine was rejected and dismissed as fake.

Wasan Marafa is an attack on quackery and imposters. It has no problem with genuine, pure, and authentic Hausa traditional medicines or their practitioners. The play can rightfully be adjudged as a pacesetter to modern-day organisations that wage war against fake drugs such as NAFDAC in Nigeria. It is an innovation since the 1940s to shame and ridicule pretenders, to cut them to size, and expose them so that everybody can see their evil deeds.

Dialogue between Marafa

It can also be asked when did Boka become the standard yardstick for assessing Hausa traditional medicine practitioners? Does rejecting Boka’s claims amount to rejecting Hausa traditional medicine and therefore “gravitating towards the western medicine”? Will the full dialogue between Marafa and Boka not convince any objective assessor that the play is not in any way an affront to Hausa traditional medicine? The partially quoted speech by Aminu has not done justice to the play. This is what propagandists will call lying by omission. Let us have the full dialogue without any manipulation (2012, p. 6-7)

Marafa: Af ai kuwa ga boka can ban sani ba ko Allah ya sa yana da maganin kurkuna. Bari in kira shi in ji. Kai boka. Kai bokan nan mai magani.

Oh, that is boka over there, I do not know maybe Allah has ordained he has medicine for guinea-worm. Let me call him to hear. Hi boka, hi that boka, the medicine man

Boka:  Na’am! Tsoho me ya same ka haka? Yanzu yanzu sai in warkar da kai. Ni ne xam mai-ganye, jikan Ladi!

Yes! old man what is your problem like this? I can cure you right away. I am xam mai ganye, grandson of Ladi!

Marafa:  Tsaya in zauna tukuna kai kuma ka ajiye kayanka. Ka gani, kurkunu ne ya dame ni, na yi neman magani har na gaji ban samu ba. Ko Allah ya sa kana da shi.

Let me first sit down, while you also put down your consignment. You see I am afflicted by guinea worm. I have searched for medicine to no avail without success. Maybe Allah has given you the medicine.

Boka:  Ayya! Tsoho kurkunu ka keji haka? Kash ai kuwa ba mu fito da maganinsa ba. Yanzu ba mu yawo da irin waxannan qananan magunguna. Sai dai kuma bari mu nuna maka wanda muka fito da shi. (Ya sa hannu burgami ya riqa fitowa da ganyayen itatuwa da saqesaqi iri iri). Ka ga wannan maganin tagomashin ‘yam mata ne. ‘Yar kowa ka ce kana so, shi ke nan ka samu! Shin kana da yaya Tsoho? Ka ga wannan qi-faxi ke nan, ko da wa ka taga kokawa, ko shi ke gungumurqi sarkin qarfin duniyar nan, kana kada shi. Wannan kuwa maganin ciwon baya ne. Kai ga dai magunguna a nan wuri na barkatai. In dai kana da ‘ya’ya ya kamata ka karva musu na kokawar nan da na tagomashin ‘yam mataWannan kuwa maganin mai qari ne wannan kuma na igiyar qasa, ka ga layar zana, kayan kowa ka so xauka sai ka xauka ba za a gan ka ba. Wannan kuwa na cikin ‘yan tsumman nan qunshe shi ne na mutanen voye …

Oh, old man, you are suffering from guinea worm? Oh no we did not come out with its medicine. Nowadays we do not carry with us these miniature medicines. But let me show you the one that we have come out with. (He put his hand in his bag (made of goat—skin) and start bringing out leaves of trees and various roots). You see, this one is to be attractive to girls, who so ever daughters you have an interest in, she is yours. Old man, do you have children? This one is never-fall-down, whosoever you challenge in wrestling if he is a Gungumurqi the strongest man in the world you will defeat him. This one is a cure for backache. Yes, here with me you have all sorts of medicines if you really have children, you better collect the one for wrestling and attracting young girls for them. This one is the antidote for scorpions. This is for snake bites. See the charm that helps you to become invisible. Who so ever properties you want to take (steal) you can do so, you will not be seen. This one that is wrapped and tied in a cloth is for the unseen (jinns) …

The contrast between Marafa and Boka even in their language and tone, not to talk about their dispositions is so obvious. While the former tries to relate and link his recovery from sickness to the will and power of Allah, the latter is too arrogant, pretentious and pompous that he can do the impossible. Where Marafa uses phrases with all humanity and submission to the power of Allah such as “Ko Allah ya sa yana da maganin kurkunu” and “ko Allah ya sa kana da shi”, on the other hand, the boastful Boka who has the cure for all sorts of sickness uses sentences such as “yanzu yanzun nan sai in warkar da kai”. Ironically his only known qualification is because “ni ne ɗam-mai-ganye, jikan Ladi. The son of the medicine man, Ladi’s grandson.

When it dawned on him that he can offer nothing to Marafa in spite of his self-confident and inflated status, he resorted to ridiculing and belittling Marafa’s predicament. Marafa’s sickness is not the kind of diseases that they should carry its medicine with them. It is inconsequential! “Ba mu yawo da irin waxannan qananan magunguna.”

One important point that cannot go unnoticed is the way Boka graded his medicines. While most of them are lumped together in the bag, one particular brand was wrapped separately with a cloth, because it is special and unique. It cannot be treated or handled anyhow like the rest. It is the antidote for the unseen, the jinns: “Wannan kuwa na cikin ‘yan tsumma na qunshe, shi ne na mutanen Þoye” Boka’s major function if not claimed in Hausa traditional medicinal culture is to provide succor for attacks from the unseen, and other assumed mythical creatures.

There is therefore little wonder when Marafa reacted angrily to Boka’s tales. He pushed away the basket containing all the consignments with contempt. The fantasy from Boka not only dashed his hope but he was equally insulted and his pride and pain ridiculed. His statements such as “aikin banza tashi ka ba mutane wuri, mutumin banza mutumin wofi, maqaryaci …” are most appropriate. He challenged Boka with the following statements “tagomashi yai, ka ji ina tsarince ne? ko ka ji ina sata ne.” Boka has no answers to these queries. Finally, the impostor was dismissed by saying “Tafi ka ba ni wuri, maqaryacin banza, ku shigo gari kuna cin kuxin mutane a kan banza”. These words exposed the true identity and role of boka in Hausa medicinal culture. The false claimant was abused by saying “Ɗan tagomashin uwa!” Boka could not deny all these dirty habits levelled against him. He did not deny them, as he knows that they are true. Therefore, there is no more talk. He could only do one thing. Laughed it off. He parked his consignments, beat his drum and dramatizes the whole show by saying “wani ya xauki kurkunu ya faxi”. That is the only thing that he can offer in retaliation. Someone has been affected by guinea-worm and he is down and out.

This dialogue which was not analyzed by Aminu, succeeded in exposing the quacks in Hausa traditional medicine. It separated the grain from the chaff. Maganin layar zana, kokowa or even those of tagomashin ‘yan mata are never taken as serious medicines. In fact, they are not meant to cure any diseases, rather they are meant to boost one’s fame and fortunes. Attacking them does not in any way mean an attack on Hausa medicines. Marafa has said nothing negative about pure, unadulterated Hausa traditional medicine. Therefore, there is no basis to infer that the play is against Hausa medicine and a front for the West. The latter has not been tested let alone be considered as unfit and wanting. It has not failed, let alone the advocacy for its replacement by one that is superior and better. Any argument along that thinking is at best superfluous. The fact that the play shows how Marafa was later taken to a hospital and treated using western medicine and shown how to take care of his drinking water and environment in order to live a disease-free life, does not mean he has rejected the efficacy and power of Hausa medicines. After all, what is western about cleaning the environment, or drinking clean water or even having a regular bath? If you remove the influences of other cultures and civilizations the Islamic inclusive, on western medicine what else will be there to applaud and appreciate? Essa and Ali have this to say on Islamic medicine (2012, p. 14).

In the early 9th century C.E. Baghdad had 860 licensed physicians and many hospitals and schools. An important period in the history of Islamic medicine covered three great physicians, writers of major texts, and philosophers; al-Razi, al-Majusi and Ibn Sina Al-Razi’s work signaled the maturity of Arabian medicine, and his most significant contribution was to distinguish smallpox from measles. He produced over 200 books, half of them on medicine…

On Ibn Sina or Avicenna as the West prefer to call him, this is what the authors said (2012, p. 14)

Abu Ali al-Husain Ibn Sina (Avicenna) was the most highly recognized Muslim scholar and prominent medical philosopher. Muslim medicine reached the pinnacle of achievement with his works and medical talents. Ibn Sina’s eminence in medical history rests on his masterpiece, al-Qanun fi al-Tibb (The Canon of Medicine) known in the west as The Canon, in five volumes

Even the credit for establishing hospitals can be traced to Muslim efforts. The writers explained further that (2012, p. 14-15)

Muslims were noted for their hospitals and were the first to invent the kind of efficient hospital the world knows today. In addition to inventing the pharmacy, Islamic civilization produced pharmaceutical terminology and practices that transferred to European medicine, as methods of medication preparation. Muslim medicine was influential and far-reaching and the Islamic paradigm of knowledge of the medieval period was thorough and comprehensive in its focus.

Therefore, the culture of good sanitation and hygiene that includes using clean drinking water, having a bath periodically, and keeping clothes clean and tidy are nothing new to a typical Hausa man. It is part of his religious obligations and prescriptions. Islamic basic texts are full of data on these matters. Even Hausa customs and superstitions are replete with these issues. One of the superstitions says if you leave dirt by your door steps after sweeping your room, any devilish jinn sent to harm you by your enemy, will find you an easy target. This is just a ploy to teach people the culture of cleanliness. As such an attack on Boka should not be misunderstood as a condemnation of Hausa medicine and by implication given preference to Western medicine. One of the Boka’s kirari “Boka ci kaji” denotes that he only deceives people and gets chickens from them in the name of rituals. No wonder another “karin-magana” about him equally expresses his deceit and lies. “Yau da gobe ƙaryata gobe.” Sooner or later the lies of boka will be exposed.

Conclusion

This analysis in addition to providing the definition of the term propaganda, its origin, and the means and ways of studying and analyzing it, has shown that a proper reading of the play – Wasan Marafa will convince the reader that the playwright is not a propagandist. He is not a front to any authority or organization. The play is an attempt to show the values and importance of cleanliness and the need for any society to rely on pure and unadulterated medicines if the need arises. Promoters of dubious and unreliable medicines like bokaye were exposed and ridiculed.

References

Aminu, H. (1991). Enlightenment and propaganda as themes in Wasan Marafa, Seminar Paper, Department of Nigerian & African Languages, Ahmadu Bello University.

AI-Hilal I.M.J and Khan, M.M. (1996). Interpretation of the meanings of the noble Qur’an in the English language: Riyadh, Darussalam Publishers, and Distributors.

Barnet, S., and others (2001). Types of drama: Plays and contexts, eight editions, Longman.

Hummell, W and Huntess, K. (1949). .The Analysis of propaganda. Rinehart and Winston.

Bentley, E (1998) The playwright as thinker, Applause.

Chomsky, N. C. (1995). Media control: The spectacular achievement of propaganda, Open Magazine Pamphlet Services.

 [angoggo, A. and Kano, D. (1988). Tabarmar kunya, NNPC.

Davies, D.J. (1981). Egyptians one-act plays. Selected and translated. Heinemann.

Ellul, J. (1975). Propaganda, the formation of men’s attitudes. Vintage.

Essa, A. and Ali, O. (2012). Studies in Islamic civilization. The Muslim contribution to the renaissance. The International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT).

Gaudio, R.P. (2009). Allah made us. Sexual outlaws in An Islamic African City. Wiley – Blackwell.

Hawkins, D.M., and Leanda, S. (eds.) International dictionary of the theatre, Chicago: St James.

Hickley, R. (2000). Language Policy of the Roman Catholic Church in Northern Nigeria: 1960 – 1995. In Ajulo, S. B. (ed), Language in education and society festschrift in honour of Contrad Max Benedict Brann. University Press.

Holbrook, W.P. (1985). British propaganda and the mobilization of the Gold Coast war effort 1939 – 1945, Journal of African History, 26.

Jackall, R. (1996). Propaganda. New York University Press.

Malumfashi, A.I. (1984). The development of written Hausa drama: Islam and Ajami as factors, Seminar Paper, Department of Nigerian & African Languages, Ahmadu Bello University.

Malumfashi, A.I. (2014). Folktales, Hausa drama and the ‘Prophecy’ of Dr. R.M. East. In Rasheed, A. A. and Aliyu, S.A., (eds.), The Folktale in Nigeria, 315-330. Ahmadu Bello University Press.

Ross, S.T. (2002). Understanding propaganda. The epistemic merit model and Its application to art. Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 36, No. 1.

Shari’ati, A. translated by Campbell, R. (1980). Marxism and Other Western fallacies. An Islamic critique, Mizan Press.

Marlin, R.R.A (1989). Propaganda and the ethics of persuasion. International Journal of Moral and Social Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1.

Siddiqi, A.H. (1978). Sahih Muslim, Al Jami-Us-Sahih, Nusrat Ali Nasri Darya Ganj.

 Yobe Journal

Post a Comment

0 Comments