If you're talking about a particular entity and a particular subject over a collection of media, it's entirely reasonable to refer to [entity]'s "published positions on" [subject], assuming that the concept of "published" can apply to the media.
If you are aggregating a variety of subjects that you don't want to list, you may be able to get away with simply [entity]'s "published positions."
If the entity has published positions on a variety of subjects that you don't want to list, but only wish to refer to the subset of those subjects in which they practiced "brainwashing" without specifically calling them out for that, it will be difficult to find a neutral word whose implication all readers will understand. Even if you found such a word, most likely different readers of your message will understand the subset in different ways, which is probably not what you intend.
If the subset is not ambiguous, and it is generally understood that the entity's positions have the characteristics of propaganda, and some people are okay with that and some aren't, you could try something like "controversial positions" as well, even though, to be fair, it may not be the positions themselves that are controversial so much as the way they are being promoted. :-)