Which logical fallacy is set up by attacking an opposing argument that was never put forth?

This logical fallacy is called the straw man.

Explanation:

The straw man is a logical fallacy commonly used in highly emotional or polemical debates. It consists of attacking an argument that the opponent has never put forth. It is done by distorting the opponent's original argument, substituting it for a different one (a straw man) that is easier to attack and defeat. Refuting this new false argument is known as "knocking down the straw man." One way to do it, for instance, would be by quoting your opponent's words out of context, which allows for misinterpretation; one can also exaggerate or oversimplify the original argument. Anyhow, these strategies are considered fallacies because they do not refute the original argument at all, but merely offer an illusion of doing so.

the answer is a hoped this

given the fact that the question is about the detail that best support the idea that oppressive leaders use   propaganda to achieve thir goals,   the first option does not refer to any kind of propaganda, since it only tells about that the milk and the windfall apple should be reserved for the pigs. in the second option, that is, "snowball and napoleon sent out flights of pigeons whose instructions were to mingle with the animals on the neighbouring farms, tell them the story of the rebellion, and teach them the tune of "beasts of england". it can be identified that the oppressors make use of the propaganda, which is represented by the pigeons, and the information they have to tell other animals about what was happening in the farm in order to get their objectives. for that reason, the right answer is the second option, taking into account that the third option do not refer to propaganda since it only talks about that they did not want jones back. and, finally, the last option refers to the result of the given news, but it does not mean about the propaganda they used to achieve their goals.