Responses to national reports during October 1984 through May 1985 concerning the state of American higher education are analyzed. Quantitative content analysis and qualitative rehetorical criticism are used to examine responses to national reports. Three national reports are of concern: "Involvement in Learning,""A Nation at Risk," and "Integrity in the College Curriculum." To analyze the progress of propaganda in print media, attention is directed to: (1) the language used to describe the three major reports; (2) the character of assertions made in the media about the major actors, issues, and beliefs that comprise the competing myths; and (3) the rhetoric of response over time. Six categories of assertions for analysis of newspaper content and propaganda are identified, along with rules used to select communications and assertions within them. Consideration is given to: the role and emotive position of faculty in the drama of propaganda changes over time; and attributions of curriculum over time. To illustrate the drama of rhetoric, attention is focused to: negation and denial, purposive misconstruction, ethical judgment and reconstruction, aesthetic judgment and acceptance, and action. Appendices include content analysis guidelines and information on the types of news sources. (SW)