Usually companies launch their own websites so that the markets that they want to “invade” can be exposed to the company, building a forum for the rapport to be established between the corporate entities and their potential customers. Or some utilize the internet to espouse a cause or belief that certain people want to share with other groups in a way that would not entail a great amount of time and effort.

Or others, such as the two websites discussed here, tend to be for the “spreading of ideas to help a person” (Merriam Webster, 2008). The two sites, for the United States government and for the European Union (EU), seem to fall into the definition very nicely. Put head to head, the two facilities tend to be about equal in its navigation processes that greatly assist any first-timer to their sites. One thing that seems to give the United States site a bit of an advantage is its FCIC Multi language Gateway (OCSC, 2008).Though the European Union does also have translations of the site in other languages, the United States site reaches out to a more diverse group, rather than the EU site that caters more to the residents of the Union. If the criteria will be strictly based on their effectiveness as propaganda tools, the U.

S. site gains the advantage. As earlier stated, propaganda tools are used to communicate ideas easily to more people. Here, the U.

S. site seems again to win the upper hand, as it comes with a considerable variety of topics for any visitor, student or just a surfer on the internet.Though the EU site does offer more of the same, propaganda does not only include the ability to communicate. It also involves the ease to communicate the idea to the audience.

The ideas or topics must be accessible with a relative degree of ease that will allow faster transmission of the ideas to the intended audience. All in all, both sites are quite adequate tools for propaganda, but the U. S. site has proven to be the more effective tool for disseminating its ideas and topics for the people.