Chapter 29 Exercises: Counter-Propaganda, Strategic Communication, and Prebunking

Exercise 29.1 — Play the Game, Analyze the Inoculation

Type: Individual | Estimated time: 60-90 minutes | Deliverable: 500-word reflection

Instructions:

Choose one of the following free online inoculation games:

  • Bad News (getbadnews.com) — Players simulate running a disinformation operation, deploying six techniques: impersonation, emotional manipulation, polarization, conspiracy theories, discrediting experts, and trolling.
  • Go Viral! (goviralgame.com) — Players are introduced to three COVID-19 misinformation techniques: emotional appeals, false experts, and conspiracy thinking. Approximately 5 minutes.
  • Harmony Square (harmonysquare.game) — A prebunking game focused on political disinformation and electoral manipulation techniques.
  • Cranky Uncle (crankyuncle.com) — An inoculation game focused specifically on climate disinformation techniques from the FLICC framework.

After completing your chosen game, write a 500-word reflection addressing the following:

  1. Inoculation technique used: Which specific inoculation technique did the game employ — claim-based or technique-based? How do you know?

  2. Cognitive experience: What did it feel like to be put in the role of the disinformation producer (in Bad News or Harmony Square)? What psychological effect did that perspective-taking have?

  3. Technique recognition: Can you identify a specific moment in the game where you encountered a FLICC technique? Name the technique and describe how the game inoculated against it.

  4. Effectiveness assessment: Based on the inoculation theory from Chapter 29, would you expect the game to produce measurable resistance to the techniques it addresses? What does the research say?

  5. Design critique: What would you improve about the game's inoculation strategy if you were a designer? Apply at least one concept from the chapter (SUCCES framework, truth sandwich, technique-based vs. claim-based inoculation) to your critique.

Exercise 29.2 — Applying the Truth Sandwich

Type: Individual | Estimated time: 30-45 minutes | Deliverable: Written exercise with completed template

Instructions:

Identify a specific false claim currently circulating in your community, your social media feeds, or the broader information environment. This could be a political claim, a health claim, a claim about local government, or any other verifiable false claim that is actively circulating.

Apply the truth sandwich structure to develop a correction for this claim.

Truth Sandwich Template:

Step 1 — Identify the false claim: State the false claim clearly (for your own analysis — not for publication). Where is it circulating? What technique(s) from the FLICC framework does it employ?

Step 2 — Identify the accurate information: What is actually true? What specific evidence supports the accurate claim? What sources are you using, and why are they credible?

Step 3 — Write the truth sandwich correction:

  • Opening (truth first — approximately 2 sentences): State the accurate claim with emotional engagement and concrete specificity. Do not mention the false claim.
  • Middle (false claim — approximately 1 sentence): Acknowledge that a false claim exists, briefly and without prominence. ("Some posts have claimed that..." or "Contrary to what is circulating...")
  • Return (truth restored — approximately 3 sentences): Return to the accurate claim with evidence. Make this the emotionally and cognitively dominant element of the message.

Step 4 — Reflection (approximately 200 words): How different is your truth sandwich from a conventional fact-check (which typically leads with the false claim)? What specific aspects of the illusory truth effect and correction paradox is the truth sandwich designed to address?

Exercise 29.3 — Design a Prebunking Message

Type: Individual (with connection to Progressive Project) | Estimated time: 45-60 minutes | Deliverable: One prebunking message + 300-word design rationale

Instructions:

This exercise connects directly to your Inoculation Campaign (Progressive Project). Select one propaganda technique from the FLICC framework and design a prebunking message targeting that technique for your specific target community.

Part A: FLICC Technique Selection

Choose one of the following: - F (Fake experts): Design a prebunking message that explains how fake expert testimony works and how to recognize it. - L (Logical fallacies): Choose one specific logical fallacy (slippery slope, false equivalence, ad hominem, etc.) and design a prebunking message targeting that specific fallacy. - I (Impossible expectations): Design a prebunking message explaining how demands for impossible certainty are used to manufacture doubt about established evidence. - C (Cherry picking): Design a prebunking message explaining how selective evidence presentation works and what a full evidence landscape looks like in your domain. - C (Conspiracy theories): Design a prebunking message explaining how conspiracy narratives are structured and how to distinguish them from legitimate institutional critique.

Part B: Write the Prebunking Message

Write a prebunking message (maximum 250 words or equivalent for your chosen format — could be a social media post series, a short script, or a flyer) for your specific target community. Apply the SUCCES framework.

Part C: Design Rationale (300 words)

Explain your design choices: - Why did you choose this FLICC technique for this community? - Which SUCCES elements did you prioritize and why? - Did you use the truth sandwich structure? If so, how? If not, why not? - Who is the intended messenger for this message, and why are they credible to your target community? - What specific emotional register did you target, and why?

Exercise 29.4 — Researching Finland's Media Literacy Curriculum

Type: Individual research | Estimated time: 60-90 minutes | Deliverable: 600-word research summary with source documentation

Instructions:

The Finnish media literacy curriculum is the most comprehensive national media literacy education program in the world. This exercise asks you to research its specific content — what is actually taught at each level — and evaluate what makes it effective.

Research Task:

Using the Finnish National Core Curriculum (available in English translation at www.oph.fi/en, the Finnish National Agency for Education website), the Media Literacy Centre Finland (mediakasvatus.fi), and any peer-reviewed academic sources you can locate, research and document:

  1. Primary level (grades 1-6): What specific media literacy competencies are students expected to develop? What are the key learning objectives? What subjects integrate media literacy instruction?

  2. Lower secondary level (grades 7-9): How does the curriculum advance from primary-level competencies? Are there specific information literacy or disinformation-related objectives?

  3. Upper secondary level (grades 10-12): What is the level of sophistication of media literacy instruction at this stage? Is there explicit instruction in propaganda analysis or disinformation recognition?

  4. Teacher training: How are Finnish teachers prepared to teach media literacy? Is there dedicated pre-service training? Ongoing professional development?

  5. Assessment: How is media literacy assessed in Finnish schools? Is it formally assessed or formatively integrated?

Analysis (approximately 200 words of your summary):

Based on your research, which features of the Finnish model do you think are most responsible for its effectiveness? Apply at least one concept from Chapter 29 (inoculation theory, technique-based vs. claim-based, FLICC) to your analysis.

Source documentation: List at least four sources consulted, with enough detail to locate them again.

Exercise 29.5 — Peer Prebunking Session

Type: Group (3-5 students) | Estimated time: 30-45 minutes in class or in a meeting | Deliverable: Individual reflection (300 words) after session

Instructions:

This exercise asks your small group to conduct an actual prebunking session with each other, using the inoculation techniques from Chapter 29. The goal is to experience the technique from both sides: as the inoculator and as the inoculated.

Before the session (individual preparation, 15 minutes):

Each group member should: 1. Select one specific propaganda technique they will inoculate against 2. Prepare a 2-3 minute verbal prebunking "mini-lesson" on that technique, using the structure: (a) brief explanation of the technique; (b) specific example from the course's anchor cases (Nazi Germany, 2016-2020 disinformation, Big Tobacco); (c) how to recognize it in the wild

During the session (30 minutes):

Take turns delivering your prebunking mini-lessons. After each mini-lesson, the group should: - Identify one real-world example of the technique from current events - Discuss: would you have recognized this technique before the mini-lesson? - Identify one modification that would improve the prebunking's effectiveness

After the session — Individual reflection (300 words):

Answer the following:

  1. What was it like to be in the role of the inoculator? What was hardest about delivering the prebunking message effectively?

  2. Which fellow group member's prebunking was most effective, and why? Apply at least one concept from the chapter (SUCCES, inoculation theory, technique-based framing) to your assessment.

  3. The Roozenbeek et al. (2022) study showed that even 90-second inoculation videos produced measurable effects. Based on your experience in this session, do you find that plausible? What would need to be true for a very brief inoculation to have lasting effect?

  4. How would you adapt the prebunking mini-lesson format for use with a non-academic community (e.g., a community organization, a workplace, a religious congregation)?

Notes for Instructors

Exercise 29.1 works best assigned as homework before the class session in which Chapter 29 is discussed, so that students have firsthand experience with inoculation games to draw on during discussion. All four games (Bad News, Go Viral!, Harmony Square, Cranky Uncle) are free and browser-based; no account creation is required for most. Bad News and Harmony Square produce a "score" that students can optionally report in their reflection.

Exercise 29.2 requires access to a currently circulating false claim. Instructors may want to maintain a curated list of current examples from local, national, and global contexts. The false claim should be verifiable (not a matter of opinion) and preferably about a relatively low-stakes topic (not highly personally charged), to keep the exercise focused on communication technique rather than political emotion.

Exercise 29.3 is the most directly connected to the Progressive Project (Inoculation Campaign). Instructors should encourage students to use the same target community for this exercise as for their project, so that the exercise serves as a project development opportunity.

Exercise 29.4 is research-heavy and may be best assigned with library research time or information literacy support from a librarian. The Finnish National Core Curriculum documents are long; instructors may want to provide specific page or section references to help students locate the media literacy objectives efficiently.

Exercise 29.5 works well as an in-class activity. Groups of 3-4 are optimal; groups of 5 or more tend to produce less deep engagement per person. The exercise is most valuable when the group selection of techniques produces variety — assign or encourage diversity of FLICC categories across groups to maximize the coverage of different inoculation content.