"The people will believe what the media tells them they believe."
— George Orwell

"All news is lies and all propaganda is disguised as news."
— Willy Munzenberg, Stalin's propaganda chief

"The media is a Counter-Intelligence organisation. The media backs every war. The role of the media and embedded historians is to surround the truth with a bodyguard of lies. "
— Greg Hallett

"The media tries to put a sad face on these things, painting them up as great human tragedies; but we all know the function of the media has never been to eliminate the evils of the world, no! Their job is to persuade us to accept those evils and get used to living with them. The powers that be want us to be passive observers."
— Burning Man, "Waking Life"
»



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2014 11:03PM by hello.

current status at NY Times, case in point:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-13/orwell-would-be-proud-us-media-admits-divine-right-decide-what-public-needs-know

how do you explain how the different news outlets put a different spin on current events.

For example: Fox News vs. Huffingtonpost vs. Stephen Colbert/John Stewart. If there was one giant conspiracy, why can't they get the story straight?

If there was one giant conspiracy, would "they" necessarily want to "get the story straight"? Perhaps there is greater utility at the current time in having multiple stories, limited hang outs, mass psychological massage, elements of confusion, plausible deniability. After all, we are still evolving toward Orwell's end stage "Big Brother" society. We're not there yet.

If you assume the current strategy is designed to get us all thinking the same way, then your question has more merit. But maybe the purpose is to anesthetize, to neutralize, to bog down and stagnate mass social psychologies, in order to pacify and create apathy. Or to divide and conquer. Or many other seemingly contradictory methods and goals that in the big picture, work to accomplish mass social engineering. Social psychology is very complex and sophisticated, just ask the Stanford Research INstitute. O wait, all their good stuff is "classified".

http://www.federaljack.com/former-kgb-agent-yuri-bezmenov-explains-how-to-brainwash-a-nation/

Here's an interesting vid from 1985 of an interview with an ex-KGB "psych war" agent, discussing the effort and methods employed to move the US towards socialism. The four main methods employed are mentioned, as:

demoralization
destabilization
crisis
normalization

USA is currently in stage 3, crisis.

Do you have a source for the Colby quote?

Good question, no I do not. And apparently (wikipedia) it is found in only one source book, by an author writing an expose. I didn't know Colby personally, and haven't read the book in question. I'll do some more reading, and meanwhile, delete the quote from my post.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2014 11:04PM by hello.

"The nattering nabobs of negativity."
--Spiro Agnew on the press

"I keep reading between the lies."
--Goodman Ace

"News magazines are usually picked up in anticipation and set down in regret."
--donbagley

My parents are quite elderly and my siblings are getting weird. The only object that I would really like to have is my moms spiro agnew wristwatch from.the 70s. He's dressed like Mickey Mouse.

There is a huge secret conspiracy to hide the true facts. Everybody knows about it, because it's on talk radio.

I distinctly remember you hollering about posts like yours needing to be marked sarcasm...

(big smiley face)

I'm a Thomas Jefferson fan, and here's an interesting blast from the past:

"Thomas Jefferson said:

Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day. I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens, who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world.

(Letter to John Norvell, June 14, 1807)"

How do you know that the people you quoted are not the ones telling the lies?

That's a good point, mj. No one can know anything with absolute certainty, I suppose. I read, I listen, I observe, I try to think logically, I draw working hypotheses" and some conclusions. My studies have led me to conclude that the mainstream media is heavily managed by a small group of people with a lot at stake. YMMV.

"I suppose. I read, I listen, I observe, I try to think logically, I draw working hypotheses" and yet you quote Stalin's propagandists, a known liar head of the propaganda department for a country that is fairly well known for having state owned press.

OK, I don't think relying on that one is thinking very logically.

But the reality is, relying on the quotes of people rather than evidence is not particularly logical either since it is well known that people may not be particularly accurate in what they say.

It seems the evidence you have presented is shaky at best.

BTW, even if the media is controlled by a few people, it does not mean all the media is a lie.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2014 09:17PM by MJ.

MJ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I suppose. I read, I listen, I observe, I try to
> think logically, I draw working hypotheses" and
> yet you quote Stalin's propagandists, a known liar
> head of the propaganda department for a country
> that is fairly well known for having state owned
> press.

The quotes are given as evidence, not as the final result of an exhaustive analysis. I can't reproduce on this forum everything I have studied and learned, it's a huge topic. But I offer quotes as food for thought.
>
> OK, I don't think relying on that one is thinking
> very logically.

If this is what the Russians have done, then it may be instructive and germane to the topic. And it may well apply to our current situation vis a vis a controlled press in the US.
>
> But the reality is, relying on the quotes of
> people rather than evidence is not particularly
> logical either since it is well known that people
> may not be particularly accurate in what they
> say.

Yes, I agree completely. Again, the quotes are offered as food for thought.
>
> It seems the evidence you have presented is shaky
> at best.
>
> BTW, even if the media is controlled by a few
> people, it does not mean all the media is a lie.

Of course not, there is always the philosophies of men...mingled with the truth. That's part of the methodology of social engineering.

See the vid of the KGB agent discussing this topic, linked in another post on this thread.

... You got nothing.

Nice fear mongering though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2014 07:57PM by MJ.

Thanks! I love fear! Fear, more Fear, yeah baby yeah! :)

Cool, I'm a fear-monger! yay me.

Whatever. Go back to listing to AM talk radio you can even call in and get the attention you seek.

I'm done now, you can babble about your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories with all the other crackpots.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2014 10:22PM by MJ.

I don't listen to radio, mj.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrFzOwxaZmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh_Kx7UKndI

heh...

BTW, Mormons claim that this forum is fear-mongering about god's true church.

And social engineering and conditioning are legit topics on this forum as well. I think those of us who have seen thru the lies of the conspiracy known as the Mormon Church should also become aware of the dynamics of social engineering and the conspirators who operate them in general terms, and in the wider, non-mormon world. Every corporation is a conspiracy to maximize profit and influence for the corporation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2014 11:18PM by hello.

Quote -- "The press leaves us drowned in the stench of the Pharisee" -- Boris Pasternak.

So... Which race totally owns all the world's publishing houses?

Review the names of their CEOs.

Save your money. Their papers lie.

He's also left the Fundie Roadshow Church of Speaking in Tongues and Rolling Down Aisles. BUT HE REPLACED IT WITH FUCKING CHEMTRAILS AND SHIT.

Gah!

It really doesn't resonate with me.

My sense is totalist governments, high demand, high control, cult tactic groups (whether political, religious, business, self help or other) are Orwellian.

But "free world", "western world" countries are more like Huxley:

http://abetterkuwait.wordpress.com/2011/08/19/1984-vs-brave-new-world/

The majority of American journalists and news organizations are, I agree, deeply disappointing, but the reasons for that to me, are more complicated and overall, different than what you have asserted.

Fair enough. Personally, I don't see much difference between Orwell's or Huxley's fictive societies, in terms of social engineering. We currently just aren't all the way there yet.

Nice quotes.

An example:

View this illustration of the shrinking land once called "Palestine":

http://www.juancole.com/2014/07/palestinian-thwarted-speaking.html

How is such an extraordinary ethnic cleansing allowed to take place in plain sight? This partly illustrates how:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/israelgaza-conflict-the-secret-report-that-helps-israelis-to-hide-facts-9630765.html

A slow moving Holocaust is taking place this very moment, in plain sight, yet nary a N. American is aware, and if aware believes it justified.


Another example:

How is it that the wealthiest 1% of Americans can convince the other 99% to vote for candidates and support policies that ensures the 1% gets richer at the expense of the other 99%?

John Oliver explains (brilliantly and gently):

http://youtu.be/LfgSEwjAeno


Last example, among so many:

If it weren't for whistleblower Edward Snowden the "nothing to see here" crowd would still be talking about tinfoil hats and aliens and Bigfoot and fill-in-your-favourite-cliché. Thank you Edward Snowden.


The "news" is constructed to deflect, deceive and distract. How pointing that out is STILL controversial is as baffling to me as educated Mormons STILL giving away 10% of their income for the pleasure of being told they aren't good enough...yet. Benjamin Franklin augured well: maybe we aren't good enough for Democracy...yet.

Human

And yet, there you are showing examples of news showing the "truth" about what seems to be going on. Maybe there's more to this than the news is controlled and we can't find out what's going on.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> the news is
> controlled


I never said anything about that.

And involking such a cartoon only makes the conversation stop, which is usually the point.

Ok. Tell me how the news articles you pointed out are constructed to deflect, deceive and distract.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok. Tell me how the news articles you pointed out
> are constructed to deflect, deceive and distract.

And how "constructed to deflect, deceive and distract" isn't being controlled.

Yeah, I noticed that as well. Now he is saying the news isn't controlled, ignoring the claim that "The 'news' is constructed to..." Constructing something to do certain things is indeed control of that something.

Hmmm...nope.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2014 06:07AM by Jesse.

NPR is absolutely the best source of ANYTHING out there, wheather news or science. you are being what in Utah is called 'ignernt.'

I disagree about NPR. Although they have some intersting stories like so many other places you still have to filter the bullSHeet decipher various cliams and opinions. That takes time, and life is so busy with other amazing things.

Media is for amusing humans. Few brake free, think, learn and apply that knowledge to really create their own destiny and wealth. Some, of those people just have a better placement in life because they are born into influential rich families while the rest have to start at the bottom and few near the top of never having to worry about a single need with plenty of money to blow.

somnambulist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NPR is absolutely the best source of ANYTHING out
> there...


Nope. NPR was taken over early in the Bush years, unless what you mean by "best source" comes from right-wing think tanks.

Democracy Now is today what NPR use to be.