Official US propaganda coming to TV and Internet

(News & Editorial/ Official US propaganda coming to TV and Internet)

A. Modern Survival Blog: Preparedness In Uncertain Times
1 February 2013,, by: Ken (MSB)
Pasted from;

Preparedness, risk awareness, lifestyle adaptation to disaster or threats.
Many of us have a feeling that something out there in the world (and in our own backyard) is not quite right; in fact, your gut may be telling you that Propoganda1something is very wrong. That looming sense can be strong for those who go out of their way to seek the truth in the news… to investigate beyond the main stream, to discover the sometimes terrible truths about what really is going on out there. It is analogous to taking the red pill (reference: ‘The Matrix’). Your eyes will be opened to more of the real world, likened to an Ostrich taking its head OUT of the sand and looking around… It’s like peeling layers of an onion. For most people, they only see the outside layer – what is presented to them. Once you begin to peel back the layers, you may not necessarily like what you see (or smell).

Most people see and hear just a few minutes of short video clips and sound bites from the main stream media news outlets each day. What they may not realize is that those precious moments have been very carefully crafted and scripted to shape your view and opinion of the world around you. If they look no further than that, then indeed their perception of the world IS the world of the Matrix as though they had taken the ‘blue pill’. Ever heard of the phrase, “You are what you eat”? Well it’s the same thing, but instead your world becomes what you’ve been shown and told on TV news or heard on main stream media outlet news break sound bites.

It really is a form of propaganda when you think about it. How is it that most people take it as truth, the things they see and hear during the 6 o-clock news? Why is there an assumption of trust and truth for the news anchor? Is it their looks, voice, and presentation? Did you know that they are simply reading from a teleprompter? Did you know that they did not write the script? Who is it then who decides what it is that should be important to you of all the thousands of goings on each day in the world? Who is it that chooses the words and the angle of the story being presented? Next time you hear the entry music that immediately precedes the network news, listen to it… it is a deliberate ‘jingle’ that is orchestrated to sound very official, if you know what I mean… Very powerful, yet subliminal.

I believe that the main stream news media is in no way like it was many years ago. They really do not challenge the establishment anymore. They go along, to get along. For the most part, in my opinion, they are linked with the corporate-government enterprise to propel forward the agenda that ‘the powers that be’ need you to accept. Much of your opinion regarding matters outside your daily realm are shaped by the main stream media whether you realize it or not. The government-media complex is a very powerful living breathing thing.

A better way to keep informed of current events and happenings around the nation and world is to expand and diversify your news sources. Do not rely solely on watching 30 minutes of the evening network news from one of the alphabet channels. And it doesn’t count to simply watch more than one of the alphabet channels because they mostly read from the same script and push the same few stories with much of the same slant.

Although you will need to have an open mind, today’s internet is loaded with a tremendous wealth of ‘food for thought’ on countless issues, topics, alternative news, and commentary. Some of it is good, and some of it, not so much. It is up to you to separate the difference. For the most part, it is human nature to recognize the truth, because it has a particular ‘ring’ to it. Your gut will tell you. The thing is to diversify and don’t get trapped in just a few sources of information. Go wide. The more sources at your disposal, the likelier it is that you will get closer to the truth and/or the real issues that may be important to you, or at least a wider perspective of the world around you than that which a main-stream media outlet is telling you.

Bookmark interesting sites, read the articles, comment on articles, build up your internet browser folders with organized bookmarks, subscribe to RSS feeds, check the website you’re visiting for links or a blogroll to other sites. The more sites you visit and read, the more diversified your knowledge will become. It’s easy to get hung up on a few favorites, but once in a while look beyond so as to better round your opinions.

You see, the fact is there are more and more people checking out alternative news on the internet… and the main stream media (and the government-media-complex) knows it. This is why they have been attempting to garner more control over it (the internet). You will likely see more of these attempts in the future (disguised as necessary precautions to save us from cyber threats or terrorism I’m sure…) as they slowly lose their grip of you seeking out sources other than their own willing accomplices at the alphabet channels.


 B.  The Rise of Modern Propaganda
Excerpts taken from:

The Purpose of Propaganda
Propaganda is the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person. The early Greeks and Romans used discourse to clarify a position. This persuasion could come in the form of an argument, debate, or discussion with a goal of trying to discover the truth that would impart wisdom and knowledge to all parties involved. Persuasion in this sense refers to winning or conquering with the use of emotional or logical reasoning. Aristotle recognized that an appeal to emotion was useful in persuasive rhetoric. Rhetoric, as Aristotle noted, is “the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion. The available “means” of persuasion for Aristotle are called: ethos: the perceived trustworthiness, credibility, and reliability of the speaker; pathos: the appeal to the audience’s most basic and deeply held beliefs; logos: the appeal of evidence; finding compelling reason for your audience to accept your argument or solution.

Because people are responding to your message, the role of the responsible rhetor is to create a persona that is persuasive but reliable, trustworthy, and credible to the audience (Lay et al.107). Propagandists misrepresent credibility for their own ends. “Credibility is a condition of persuasion. Before you can make a man do what you say, you must make him believe what you say. A necessary condition for gaining his credence is that you do not permit him to catch you in a lie. Hence the constraint on all propagandists to accurate reporting of matters which are subject to verification by the audience”
(Rhodes 287).

Propagandists try to influence by deliberately manipulating logic to promote their cause. Used appropriately, logical reasoning enhances the effectiveness of an argument and the ethos of the speaker or writer. Errors in argument, or rhetorical fallacies, indicate that your thinking is not well reasoned and entirely trustworthy. Propagandists deliberately use errors in argument to appeal to the emotions of their audience.
One difference between past and present societies is how we view persuasion and rhetoric. Our modern society is untrained in persuasive techniques. In contrast to earlier cultures that were schooled in the principles of rhetoric, our society knows little about the techniques of persuasion and understanding how they work. Modern media constantly assails us with information. “Everyday we are bombarded with one persuasive communication after another. These appeals persuade not through the give-and-take of argument and debate but through the manipulation of symbols and of our most basic human emotions. For better or worse, ours is an age of propaganda” (Pratkanis and Aronson 9).

Modern propaganda is distinguished from other forms of communication by its deliberate and conscious use of false or misleading information to sway public opinion. The invention of the printing press in the fifteenth century gradually made it possible to reach large numbers of people. But it was not until the nineteenth century that state governments began to employ propaganda for political purposes to any wide degree deliberately aimed at influencing the masses. The invention of radio and television in the twentieth century made it possible to reach even more people. The development of modern media, global warfare, and the rise of extremist political parties provided growing importance to the use of propaganda… Adolph Hitler bluntly discussed the use of propaganda in his book, Mein Kampf, in which he shared Machiavelli’s low regard for his audience’s intellectual capabilities:

“All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be.” (qtd. in Smith 38).
……….Adolph Hitler

Another passage, also from Mein Kampf, repeated Hitler’s contempt for the masses:

Its [propaganda’s] effect for the most part must be aimed at the emotions and only to a very limited degree at the so-called intellect. We must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public. The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous.” (qtd. in Pratkanis 250).
……….Adolph Hitler
The Nazi propaganda machine relied heavily on symbolism. The swastika, a very ancient ideogram and which is now permanently associated with the Nazis, was once a positive symbol used in many different cultures. When Adolph Hitler was made chief of propaganda for the National Socialist party he chose this commanding symbol to distinguish the Nazi Party from all other rival political groups. Joseph Goebbels succeeded Hitler to become the master propagandist for the Nazi regime. With great skill Goebbels began building the myth of Aryan supremacy. He always maintained that some element of truth was necessary in propaganda to provide a means of escape if his statements were questioned. In Propaganda. The Art of War,
Rhodes said: “Goebbels openly admitted that propaganda had little to do with the truth. ‘Historical truth may be discovered by a professor of history. We, however, are serving historical necessity. It is not the task of art to be objectively true. The sole aim of propaganda is success” (qtd. in Rhodes 19)…

Three types of propaganda were developed during World War Two and put to effective use on both sides.
•  Black propaganda was designed to tell anything but the truth and was directed against the enemy. Black propaganda was used to disseminate “false information in the enemy camp, military and civilian […] aimed at undermining morale and generally sowing doubt, disquiet, and depression
•  White propaganda was addressed more openly and contained mostly true facts. ” White propaganda “aspires to uplift home morale with eyewitness accounts of military successes […] it is based on truth, even if the truth is twisted a little” (Rhodes 111).
•  Gray propaganda omitted all mentions of its source and was designed to not tell the whole truth.

In order to use propaganda effectively, one has to have great command of language and recognize the power of persuasive speech. George Orwell, the author of the postwar novel, 1984, realized the dangers of propaganda and the power of persuasion. In his essay “Politics and the English language,” Orwell maintained that fighting propaganda meant fighting mental laziness. In “Why I Write,” written in 1946, Orwell commented: “To write in plain vigorous language one has to think fearlessly, and if one thinks fearlessly one cannot be politically orthodox.” One of the themes that run through 1984 is how the State uses language for political control over the people who speak it. Orwell clearly outlined what might happen in a totalitarian state in which everything the state published was propaganda. The government used a complicated doublespeak language to convey contradictory meanings in order to obscure the truth. The population was taught the language of Newspeak where every concept was expressed in only one word in order to hide nuances and prevent the people from thinking discriminately. The political party in power rewrote the past in order to control the present. “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

C.  Obama’s NDAA Legalizes The Use Of Propaganda On The US Public
17 Jan 2013,, by
Pasted from:

Reauthorizing the indefinite detention of US citizens without charge might be the scariest provision in next year’s defense spending bill, but it certainly isn’t the only one worth worrying about.propoganda3

An amendment tagged on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 would allow for the United States government to create and distribute pro-American propaganda within the country’s own borders under the alleged purpose of putting al-Qaeda’s attempts at persuading the world against Western ideals on ice. Former US representatives went out of there way to ensure their citizens that they’d be excluded from government-created media blasts, but two lawmakers currently serving the country are looking to change all that.

Congressmen Mac Thornberry (R-TX) and Adam Smith (D-WA) introduced “The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012” (H.R. 5736) last week during discussions for the NDAA 2013. It was voted on by the US House of Representatives to be included in next year’s defense spending bill, which was then voted on as a whole and approved. The amendment updates the antiquated Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987, essentially clarifying that the US State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors may “prepare, disseminate and use public diplomacy information abroad,” but while also striking down a long-lasting ban on the domestic dissemination in America. For the last several decades, the federal government has been authorized to use such tactics overseas to influence foreign support of America’s wars abroad, but has been barred from such strategies within the US. If next year’s NDAA clears the US Senate and is signed by President Obama with the Thornberry-Smith provision intact, then restrictions on propaganda being force-fed to Americans would be rolled back entirety.

Both Congressmen Thornberry and Smith say that the amendment isn’t being pushed to allow for the domestic distribution of propaganda, but the actual text of the provision outlines that, if approved by the Senate and signed by President Barack Obama, that very well could be the case.

“We continue to face a multitude of threats and we need to be able to counter them in a multitude of ways. Communication is among the most important,” Rep. Thornberry explains in his initial press release on the bill.“This outdated law ties the hands of America’s diplomatic officials, military, and others by inhibiting our ability to effectively communicate in a credible and transparent way. Congress has a responsibility to fix the situation.”

On his part, Rep. Smith says that al-Qaeda is infiltrating the Internet in order to drive anti-American sentiments ablaze. If the amendment he co-sponsors is passed, the US government would be able to fight fire with fire.

“While the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 was developed to counter communism during the Cold War, it is outdated for the conflicts of today,” Rep. Smith says in his official statement. “Effective strategic communication and public diplomacy should be front-and-center as we work to roll back al-Qaeda’s and other violent extremists’ influence among disaffected populations. An essential part of our efforts must be a coordinated, comprehensive, adequately resourced plan to counter their radical messages and undermine their recruitment abilities. To do this, Smith-Mundt must be updated to bolster our strategic communications and public diplomacy capacity on all fronts and mediums – especially online.”

Does that mean that the anti-Nazi and damning communism adverts that were a hallmark of America during the Second World War and the Cold War, respectively, will be updated to outrage Americans against the country’s alleged enemies? It isn’t ruled out, for sure. Both Congressmen Thornberry and Smith have tried to dull the American public’s quickly surmounting outrage by saying that the act won’t be used for brainwashing purposes [Smile. Are you catching the half truths? Mr. Larry], but by letting Uncle Sam’s propaganda-spewing communication machine have free roam on the Web and elsewhere, it would absolutely be allowed.

“Clearly there are ways to modernize for the information age without wiping out the distinction between domestic and foreign audiences,” Michael Shank of the Institute for Economics and Peace in Washington tells Buzzfeed, who broke the news of the amendment. “That Reps Adam Smith and Mac Thornberry want to roll back protections put in place by previously-serving Senators – who, in their wisdom, ensured limits to taxpayer–funded propaganda promulgated by the US government – is disconcerting and dangerous.”


Leave a comment

Filed under News & Editorial

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s