+- +-


Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.

Login with your social network

Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 48
Latest: watcher
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 16867
Total Topics: 271
Most Online Today: 14
Most Online Ever: 1208
(March 28, 2024, 07:28:27 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 7
Total: 7

Author Topic: Corporate Mendacity and Duplicity  (Read 7760 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36274
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
A Short Course in Clever Propaganda Part 2 (final part)
« on: October 27, 2013, 08:18:16 pm »
A Short Course in Clever Propaganda Part 2   

When it comes to the news, however, thereís another factor at play.

News in internet time

Because the internet is instantaneous, thereís tremendous competitive pressure to get your article published as quickly as technologically possible. So the NSA data mining has no bearing on the decisions to manufacture propaganda or some other mendacious bit of distraction? PRESSURE TO MEET A HEADLINE? I don't think so.

This often happens at the expense of facts, replacing them with rampant and sometimes wild speculation. Speculation that is often presented or interpreted as fact. Yeah sure, facts get "lost" because of "pressure" to meet a headline. LOL!

Confirming facts takes time and resources. DUH!

The immediacy of internet publishing has taken away the luxury of time and budget; other constraints erode the resources required to even do the work. It has?  ??? Truth is now the casualty of headline pressure (time and money) as well as the first casualty of war?

News and other sites that cover current events are often faced with a very simple choice:

Speculate today,

Be correct tomorrow. Leo CONVENIENTLY LEFT OUT that this is precisely the propaganda TOOL disguised as "rushed headline inaccuracy" used by the New York Times and several other "reputable" matrix mouthpieces to push for War as far back as the Spanish American War and as recently as the Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction" FRAUD, Iranian atomic boogeyman Israeli pushed fraud and the false flag terrorist child massacre instantly (and fraudulently) blamed on the Syrian government.

Getting something out today almost always wins. Accuracy be damned. BULLSHIT! When they set out to twist some news to suit a government approved narrative, they deliberately set up a fake fact check or bought and paid for scholar to back up the lies in the article. It takes LONGER to set up the mendacious propaganda than just post the news without filtering it for "acceptable" content. To assume EVERYTHING going out from the allegedly "reputable" web sites isn't thoroughly massaged before it goes out is Santa Claus propaganda by YOU, Leo. The only place I agree with you is when a manufactured headline (used to demonize some ethnic group) deliberately claims large numbers of victims of said ethnic group NOW, only to place a correction" in small print a week or so later.

Why you and I are part of the problem  Yeah, right, WE are the problem...

Satirical news parody site, The Onion, nailed it with an article, Let Me Explain Why Miley Cyrusí VMA Performance Was Our Top Story This Morning.

The article is a fictitious ďexplanationĒ of why a major news site Ė CNN.com Ė highlighted on its home page the antics of the singer at the previous nightís music awards show. 

The only thing fictitious about the article is its attribution. Everything else is frighteningly accurate. Leo wants me to think the consumer of manufactured mendacity and/or truthful but unimportant distractive silliness is there because WE ASKED FOR IT, not because SOMEONE has worked their Orwellian asses off for about a century to keep us from thinking.

News sites are simply giving us what we apparently want  as measured by what weíll click on to read.

Itís all about clicks and page views and time-on-site and advertising revenue and Ö well, you get the idea. Yes, and the Native Americans are a bunch of irresponsible drunkards because we gave them liquor and took their land. And the African Americans are "lazy and prone to thievery" because that's just the "way they are", right Leo? It's ALL OUR FAULT, right Leo? Gee, I think I read that about the financial crisis right after 2008, too. >:( Giving the public guilt trips is such fun... YES. LEO, I think I understand what the IDEA you are pushing is.  ;)

The fact is simple: you and I are much more likely to click stories about the outrageous antics of a pop singer than we are to click stories about what one might consider ďreal news,Ē such as atrocities happening elsewhere in the world.   
 Sure. sure, we are all brainless Pavlovian dogs...We don't care about truth, corruption, pro-war propaganda, fossil fuel piggery and poisons, massive voter disenfranchisement, CEO  fraud and theft, etc...

News sites are simply giving us what we apparently want as measured in clicks. 
At least that is what YOU want us to believe, LEO.

The same is true for the salacious headlines, fact-free articles, and sensational speculation-as-truth thatís littered all over the internet. Ahh! We have arrived at the money quote! You are claiming anything that is hard hitting is equivalent to cheap **** and hysterical fear mongering. Clever, clever, clever.

We donít click on boring, and we donít fact check anything. 
Yeah, you boyz in the mild Santa Claus propaganda mills are a bit upset at the FACT that the populous isn't buying the "everything is just hunky Jake" line you are used to force feeding us. SO you are now claiming we aren't rational. I guess you will leave it to the more strident propagandists to start calling us 'unpatriotic' and 'traitors' too!

I have no solution, butÖ Translation:  It's human nature to be Pavlovian dogs. Take a pill. Relax. Only believe mild, politically correct, everything is "hunky dory" type news and everything will be fine.

Iím not about to change journalism, or human nature.

People will click on what weíre going to click, and website owners are going to respond as they see fit for their business.

As an information consumer, however, I want you to be aware of two exceptionally important things:
Your decisions and actions drive the internet. 

You may believe that itís big (or small) business doing whatever it is they want to make money, but the fact is they canít do that without you. The more that you visit certain sites, the more youíre implicitly endorsing what they do and how they do it. As a result, theyíre going to do more. You left out surreptitious government funded and fossil fuel funded astro-turf and fake popularity, Leo. How come?

Seriously. Thatís exactly how it works.  Only for a small niche, not for non-consumer goods truthful information. People read news a lot more than they shop! The predatory capitalist corporations that run most Western governments are bending, folding and mutilating the news 24/7 but you are pretending WE get that crap because we asked for it. BULLSHIT!

You canít believe everything you read on the internet. 
OR anywhere else, for that matter. Water is wet.  Is this some kind of, 'I'm on your side' type of con? 

This pains me deeply because while almost everyone says this, it seems like no one acts like they understand it. Itís absolutely amazing the wild and wacky stuff that people will believe if itís published online. The fact is even those sites that we consider reputable will fall into the trap of publishing inaccurate and misleading information1 Ė and yet people believe it all without question. Yes Leo, a large percentage of  Homo SAPs have low IQs and are easily led astray. That's blame the victim logic. What about the very intelligent evil bastards with a lot of mainstream credibility that push war, fossil fuels and a host of other horrors destroying the biosphere in general and Homo SAPs in particular? Are you telling me that the silliest. most ignorant among us CONTROL the message on the internet? BULLSHIT! 

And thatís what has to change.
 Boilerplate. What has to change is that people in government and private enterprise engaging in activities that poison the planet and kill people must be FORCED to stop lying about it on the internet.

You must question everything
 Most people do. It's people like you who limit our choices in the media about what is "believable" or not and bore us to death with pop singer topics, ****, or lockstep propaganda day in and day out. The world is a big place but you can tune in any of the main stream media news casts and they are basically running the SAME stories. Can you say, controlled media? And don't tell me that doesn't happen on the internet.

This is where I really believe that internet journalism is really letting us down. This is how the internet has broken journalism. 
I think what is REALLY bugging you is that people don't believe the bought and paid for main stream media 'journalists' any more. That's THEIR fault for lying so much. The INTERNET has destroyed their credibility. GOOD! Tough luck for you, Leo.

You and I, we have to now do the legwork that we could in the past assume that journalists and authors had at least made an attempt to do themselves. Boilerplate. You are setting readers up to be herded into NOT believing the Santa Claus version of history.

Itís horrible. Itís awful. Itís frustrating. It shouldnít have to be this way.

And yet, it is what it is. You and I must (and I do mean must) take everything that we read online with a grain of salt. Nothing can be believed without question. DUH!

You and I must do the job that in the past we might have relied on good journalism to at least begin to do for us: confirm the truth, check sources, clarify statements, and see through the hyperbole. Right... Anytime strong wording is use, it must be hyperbole. A propaganda rag with deep government pockets cannot buy cred and false statements to give some astro-turf pseudo scientific or fake goody two shoes historical narrative the aura of respectability while disparaging a truth teller without government funding... ;)

Of course, the practical reality is that we canít actually do that for every single thing we encounter. As a result, we develop relationships with sources that we trust Ė venues that have proven themselves to be honest, accurate, and at least somewhat diligent about presenting truth as truth, speculation as speculation, and avoiding the temptation to do just about anything for a page view. Ah yes, the RELATIONSHIPS...."sources that we trust Ė venues that have proven themselves to be honest, accurate, etc.". I get it Leo. If DA GOOBERMENT  ain't backing it, it isn't "believable"

Naturally, I hope Ask Leo! is one of those sites. I admit I have gotten a few good tips on computers here but the total absence of perspective about real world conditions is misleading. Leo NEVER exposes any of the many scandals in the computer industry including back doors by Microsoft and others on behalf of the government. I have had to go to other sites to get anything that isn't extremely mild. He does provide pretty good data BUT it is seldom complete and you need to go to less restrained computer geeks to find out the total story. Leo worked for Microsoft for WAY TOO LONG.  ;D

But even for those sites that you trust, you must keep up your guard and do your own due diligence. Accidentally or not, itís very easy to get it wrong. That is the one statement here I agree with. However, in the light of what has already been said, I consider it disengenous. Mixing truths with falsehoods is the bread and butter of successful propaganda.

And if I ever start posting about the antics of half-naked pop-stars, slap me. Hard. As if that was the main problem with the internet. Defense of bullets and bombs is doing much more damage than bulbous boobs ever will.  >:(


Agelbert comment to Leo:

I'm sorry Leo, I must take issue with you on this assumption:
Your decisions and actions drive the internet. You may believe that itís big (or small) business doing whatever it is they want to make money, but the fact is they canít do that without you. The more that you visit certain sites, the more youíre implicitly endorsing what they do and how they do it. As a result, theyíre going to do more.

Seriously. Thatís exactly how it works.

NO, it is definitely NOT how "it works.". I can quote you chapter and verse from the 1950s to the 1990s on how the overwhelmingly high percentage of stories were NOT "when it bleeds, it leads" or simple sensationalism appealing to the lowest common denominator of readership.

I can bring you proof of funding of pro-war, pro-fossil fuel, pro-predatory capitalist practices, active suppression of news about criminal activities by our own government in order to keep the people in the dark about said activity.

Don't tell me they wouldn't be "interested" in reading that and would prefer Hollywood scandals and other mindless entertainment. You are a knowledgeable man. Study Operation Mockingbird.

Follow your own rule (and mine as well!) and CONFIRM all the following statements rather than tossing them aside as mendacity before you responsibly investigate them.

"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991) 

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." -- William Colby, former CIA Director, cited by Dave Mcgowan, Derailing Democracy
"There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don't need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level." -- William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer, briefing members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein

"The Agency's relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy ... to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible." -- The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein

"Senator William Proxmire has pegged the number of employees of the federal intelligence community at 148,000 ... though Proxmire's number is itself a conservative one. The "intelligence community" is officially defined as including only those organizations that are members of the U.S. Intelligence Board (USIB); a dozen other agencies, charged with both foreign and domestic intelligence chores, are not encompassed by the term.... The number of intelligence workers employed by the federal government is not 148,000, but some undetermined multiple of that number." -- Jim Hougan, Spooks

"For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government.... I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations." --former President Harry Truman, 22 December 1963, one month after the JFK assassination, op-ed section of the Washington Post, early edition

As terrible as it is to live in a nation where the press in known to be controlled by the government, at least one has the advantage of knowing the bias is present, and to adjust for it. In the United States of America, we are taught from birth that our press is free from such government meddling. This is an insidious lie about the very nature of the news institution in this country. One that allows the government to lie to us while denying the very fact of the lie itself

Leo, it is cruel joke to believe the many idiotic, prurient and sensationalistic web sites out to keep people distracted and dumbed down on the internet are not every bit as FINANCED with government funds to provide the appearance of popularity as  the main stream media propaganda outlets. Pravda and Izvestia are alive and well in our media. As a matter of fact, those old Russian propaganda rags have probably more truth in them since the Soviet Union collapsed than CNN does.

It costs money to run web sites but you fail to mention that the government funds web sites surreptitiously for the purpose of manufacturing public consent. Noam Chomsky is NOT a "conspiracy theorist".

Sure Leo, we have a small niche where we do the old "compete for popularity" thing. But presenting that niche as "exactly the way it TOTALLY works" is a disservice to your readership.

Operation Mockingbird may have a different name in the internet, but the modus operandi has not changed and if you don't know that, it's time you did.

« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 08:39:22 pm by AGelbert »
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Matt 10:37


+-Recent Topics

Future Earth by AGelbert
March 30, 2022, 12:39:42 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
March 29, 2022, 08:20:56 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
March 28, 2022, 01:12:42 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
March 27, 2022, 02:27:28 pm

Heat Pumps by AGelbert
March 26, 2022, 03:54:43 pm

Defending Wildlife by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 02:04:23 pm

The Koch Brothers Exposed! by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 01:26:11 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
March 25, 2022, 12:46:08 pm

Books and Audio Books that may interest you 🧐 by AGelbert
March 24, 2022, 04:28:56 pm

COVID-19 🏴☠️ Pandemic by AGelbert
March 23, 2022, 12:14:36 pm