Were talking political propaganda. The dems. use TRUE facts as propaganda while the republicans seem to believe that their opinion makes their propaganda TRUE fact. But yes they all use propaganda as a tool. One just should never accept the word of either side without googling it for truth.
Let me challenge this. We have to, I think, differentiate between "propaganda" and other similar terms, like "marketing" or "public relations". If, for example, a company makes a quality product and markets it (BMW, say) describing its products in a good light, the use of "propaganda" to describe what they are doing misses some crucial distinction with the way we normally think of the term.
Or if a government or a political figure or an NGO etc strive to make their good work well known, again, the use of "propaganda" doesn't seem appropriate to me. If we use the term to describe any communication attempting to influence an audience, then the truly important aspects of what I call "propaganda" are lost.
Propaganda surely is better conceived or defined as a purposefully deceptive communications operation. Astro-turf initiatives, for example, where the true forces behind it are hidden and where the pretense of an ad hoc, citizen-generated movement is forwarded. Naming a bill or some such in a manner that disguises what it is about, likewise. Orwell's ministries in 1984 are fine examples, the naming meant to deceive.