Discussion of Doctored Mass Media

[Cromulent]

The Daily Mail should have colouring in pages and join the dots .

 

[Amnesia]

That isnt the camera guy zooming in, she holds her hair then moves her left hand over to correct her clothing, then that same clip of her holding her hair and correcting her clothing is played again but this time zoomed.
They just made it harder to spot as the audio is continued even though the clip is repeated.

 

[dowie]

No one has mentioned anything conspiratorial here.

Also what is this "your conspiracy" you speak of?

I'll give you a few examples:

So I was just browsing random mass media news sites, as I usually do, not for the purposes of information, but for purposes of studying mind control and propaganda,

[...]
And remember folks, never read news for informational purposes.

Firstly perhaps you can explain, what you mean by 'mind control'?

Facebook is the CIA's principal operation. Of course it's going to be used for mind control/propaganda.

Next what do you mean by the bold statement above? That sounds very much like a 'conspiracy'.

Derren Brown uses basic linguistic programming in every single one of his TV shows and his shows are very successful.
[...]
The most disastrous thing, after the availability of media to masses of braindead people, is the availability of media to children. That just scares me. A few decades ago it was just Disney, the scope has increased by 1000. I mean when they can get prostitutes to be a role model for children, you know something is not right.

In the above you seem to have taken a magician at face value because he seems to be making use of the pseudoscience you appear to have an interest in. Then there is more rhetoric about this conspiracy stuff you seem to have a very keen interest in.

The big media agencies are simply tunnels for NLP. And you are right in saying that they tell you far too much BS you don't need to know. BBC, Sky, Guardian, DM, et al should all be avoided unless you're heavily versed in media psychology and are simply viewing for analysis.

And again... something that seems rather like a 'conspiracy' - what exactly did you mean by the bold statement above and what evidence do you have for it?

 

[asim18]

And here we have it, there were mostly interesting on-topic replies about media and now it's turned into a low level nonsense thread about "me".

Anyway, can you please explain how me saying Derren Brown uses linguistic programming in his shows to fool his audiences, equates to me "taking a magician at face value"? Seriously, that is completely illogical.

I'm the one basically saying Derren Brown bull ***** people and you've understood this as me "taking a magician at face value". If this is your comprehension of my posts about Derren Brown then I'm not surprised you're continuing to deny media psychology even exists, and that ingested media can and does have an effect on people's psyches.

I have made manyposts explaining the techniques used by Derren Brown in several threads relating to Derren Brown shows. You simply cannot say I take Derren Brown at face value lmao.

What's funny is you haven't even acknowledged my explanation of media psychology or the topic of the thread, and you've just gone on a little side rant about me. However because I'm very nice I will explain myself.

Firstly perhaps you can explain, what you mean by 'mind control'?

What I mean by studying mind control is the same as the first paragraph on Wikipedia page for Mind Control.

"Mind control (also known as brainwashing, reeducation, brainsweeping, coercive persuasion, thought control, or thought reform) is a controversial scientific theory that human subjects can be indoctrinated in a way that causes "an impairment of autonomy, an inability to think independently, and a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. In this context, brainwashing refers to the involuntary reeducation of basic beliefs and values"."

But in this context it's a bit like me saying the propagation of religion is mind control.

Next what do you mean by the bold statement above? That sounds very much like a 'conspiracy'.

I'm not talking about any conspiracy here sorry. Facebook is a pretty absolute source of intelligence. And the CIA is an intelligence agency. The CIA operating on or with facebook is a given, as is the case with pretty much ALL other intelligence agencies. The only debatable thing part of that statement is where I say "Primary" that is simply a high probability.

My rationale for mentioning "CIA" when someone mentioned facebook is simply because they have shown great interest in mind control as well as psychological warfare in the past, also because of the fact that Facebook is the ultimate source of psychosocial data. See below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

And again... something that seems rather like a 'conspiracy' - what exactly did you mean by the bold statement above and what evidence do you have for it?

That is again explained by the existence of media psychology. Me saying the media is a tunnel for NLP has got nothing to do with conspiracy. I never said it was being actively done. It's just a blunt sentence.



Crap ingested through media can affect people's psyches even if there isn't any premeditated goal or motivation for "mind control". The result of media ingestion does not automatically assume that that was active motivation which lead to the outcome. It is only you who is assuming I'm saying there is some mastermind hypno-psycho-magicman in control of all the outcomes.

 

[dowie]

I'm not presenting any 'assumptions' and I'm talking about the ideas presented by you.


You've again waffled on without really presenting anything of substance/any falsifiable claim. Just waffle about the media and psychology.

Your previous statements are alluding to a conspiracy yet when pressed for further details none are presented. You mention 'mind control' and you link to a wikipedia article - it still isn't clear at all what you mean by this, seemingly you're referring to a discredited idea with no scientific basis - if not then please clarify and present some evidence.

Your phrase about the CIA has now changed from some conspiraloon sentence to a claim that the CIA makes use of Facebook, I'm sure they do but that is rather different to the statement you made previously.


Re: Derren Brown - you don't seem to understand - he's a magician, you seem to have a slightly delusional belief in NLP and seemingly now 'mind control' too and are under the impression he makes use of it. You don't appear to be aware of misdirection - again he's a magician, he performs magic tricks - the things he says and does shouldn't be taken at face value.

 

[dowie]

That is again explained by the existence of media psychology. Me saying the media is a tunnel for NLP has got nothing to do with conspiracy. I never said it was being actively done. It's just a blunt sentence.



Crap ingested through media can affect people's psyches even if there isn't any premeditated goal or motivation for "mind control". The result of media ingestion does not automatically assume that that was active motivation which lead to the outcome. It is only you who is assuming I'm saying there is some mastermind hypno-psycho-magicman in control of all the outcomes.

It still isn't clear what you're talking about.

If you mean to simple say that people can be influenced by advertising, some people are seemingly influenced by say the right wing tabloid press stirring up hatred towards 'muslims' etc.. then just say so. You'd be stating something rather obvious that not many people would disagree with.

However when you waffle on about 'mind control', 'NLP' - essentially pseudoscience then it just gets silly.

and throw in statements like: 'never read news for informational purposes', 'The big media agencies are simply tunnels for NLP.', 'Facebook is the CIA's principal operation' then you come across as a bit delusional...

 

[asim18]

Argh forum maintenance confusion.

 

[dowie]

Ref Derren Brown - the 'mind control' is the misdirection - 'mind control' doesn't exist, despite people like you seemingly believing in it and NLP... he uses the pretence of mind control to perform magic tricks that often don't rely on any form of manipulation at all.

But anyway - the main issue is you still don't seem to be able to clarify what you're talking about with regards to this media 'mind control'. So far it has been mindless waffle based on some dodgy psychology/pseudo science and a bit of conspiracy. If you can come up with something a bit more concrete - an actual falsifiable claim, perhaps with some evidence then that would perhaps be a bit more credible than the CT-like stuff.

 

[asim18]

It still isn't clear what you're whining about, this thread has a specific point, and you've come in and started whining about conspiracies. First part of your post is just complete nonsense with no discussion value whatsoever. I don't even know what question you're asking or what I can do to help you stop whining. I thought my reply was good, but you've now just switched to an even lower level, I cant go any lower I'm afraid.

Re: Derren Brown - you don't seem to understand - he's a magician, you seem to have a slightly delusional belief in NLP and seemingly now 'mind control' too and are under the impression he makes use of it. You don't appear to be aware of misdirection - again he's a magician, he performs magic tricks - the things he says and does shouldn't be taken at face value.

Face palm honestly.

Magicians rarely talk for goodness sake unless they're telling someone to pick a card or hold something, ever watch the masked magician on Channel 5 10 years ago? Never uttered a word.

In contrast Darren Brown talks ALL throughout his show. His misdirection is the result of language/linguistics for goodness sake. Not physical/visual misdirection like David Blaine. Visual magic is something totally different, David Blaine will never spend 1 hour talking to the camera trying to verbally manipulate people into thinking that he's actually pulling a rabbit out of his arse.


Derren cant do visual misdirection at all lmao. I'm guessing you've forgotten the time he tried guessing the lottery numbers by using a camera trick haha. And all throughout his act he was using words on the viewer to make them believe that a bunch of random people came up with the numbers through some sort of collective telepathy.

Now all you've done is tell me that you cant differentiate between visual misdirection and psychological misdirection. lol.

Please don't try to understand Derren Brown's tricks when you think media psychology is just "waffle".

If you don't want to talk about media psychology why not just step away from the topic instead of bringing your nonsense conspiracies and your frankly poor understanding of "magic"? You cant say two people performing vastly different types of misdirection are both doing the same thing. One is based on linguistics, the instillation of trust, the viewer believing stuff which is false; the other magic is based on pure visual misdirection.

Even disregarding entire fields of academic study as "waffle".

You cant even think deep about magic. You have very low level thought. And when presented with an entire field of academia dedicated to studying the effect of media on people's psyches, you just brush it off as "oh it's just waffle". Haha


Comes into thread about media and psychology. Has a little whine about how everything's a conspiracy. Brings Derren brown into it. Then says media psychology is waffle.

 

[Pixel]

All newspapers lie to their readers, its just that some are more obvious about it than others.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

The current trend for hating on the "main stream media" is hilarious. People peddle this idea of suddenly having discovered that the world is rigged against us all. The OP gives an example of editorial bias and it's nothing new. To be honest, if you need to quote examples from the Daily Mail to make your point, then you're probably struggling.

When it comes to news, "Daily Mail prints utter nonsense" is hardly ground breaking headlines from The New Media.

 

[Turambar]

With all the glaring examples of media manipulation and your self professed claim to be studying the media for examples of 'mind control and propaganda' this is the example you bring to the table? The Daily Mail zoomed in on some breasts and blamed someone else? There's better websites than the Daily Mail for what you appear to be studying.

 

[diamount]

*sigh*
Yes it was. Go look at YouTube, there's a clip there which clearly shows the camera focussing on her boobs where the channel ident logo in the bottom right corner is exactly the same size/position as the rest of the footage.

That's immediately followed by a repeat of the same section which has been zoomed in but the original clip which focusses lower than it should has absolutely, 100% been taken by the cameraman.

I'm not saying someone hasn't emphasised it even more afterwards but there's no doubt in my mind that the cameraman zoomed on her jubblies.

That's a good point, I don't profess to be all that knowledgeable in videography, however for whatever reason there seems to quite a few youtube channels where they zoom onto female celebrity's breasts.

Such a silly topic to enter a discussion about

 

[dowie]

Magicians rarely talk for goodness sake unless they're telling someone to pick a card or hold something, ever watch the masked magician on Channel 5 10 years ago? Never uttered a word.

In contrast Darren Brown talks ALL throughout his show. His misdirection is the result of language/linguistics for goodness sake. Not physical/visual misdirection like David Blaine.

I've not said anything about physical misdirection, why not stick to what has been posted instead of imagining things? You seem to have a belief in NLP and 'mind control' and have cited Derren Brown on occasion - NLP and mind control don't really work - his supposed 'manipulation' is just done as an act, it is simply misdirection.

Even disregarding entire fields of academic study as "waffle".

What mind control and 'NLP'? LOL


I'm still waiting for some clarification of what it is you're talking about re: 'mind control' and what evidence you have for it? You seem to be capable of waffling for a long post but incapable of presenting an idea coherently - instead there is just dubious conspiracy-like statements that, when questioned about, you don't seem to want to discuss any further and instead deflect.

 

[Surfer]

I'm still waiting for some clarification of what it is you're talking about re: 'mind control' and what evidence you have for it? You seem to be capable of waffling for a long post but incapable of presenting an idea coherently - instead there is just dubious conspiracy-like statements that, when questioned about, you don't seem to want to discuss any further and instead deflect.

You don't need to look far at all for evidence of mind control and mass manipulation.

I suggest reading a bit up on Edward Bernays. The kind of organized manipulation of our thoughts that was done back in the 1930s 1940s so imagine the sophistication of social manipulation in these times...

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind (Edward Bernays)

 

[hominid]

Wikipedia has banned editors from quoting the daily mail because of all the fake stories and for not fact checking if at all.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Wikipedia has banned editors from quoting the daily mail because of all the fake stories and for not fact checking if at all.

Not surprising.

If the OP wants to study media manipulation he should be looking at the BBC as it is bound by a charter, and actually claims to be unbiased and credible.

The Daily Mail caters to two types:

1. Those who wish to be in a perpetual state of outrage.
2. Those who wish to be in a perpetual state of masturbation.

Trawling the Daily Mail in an attempt to strengthen and reinforce one's preconceived view of a mass media manipulation is pretty pointless.

 

[Avenged7Fold]

People can slam wiki all they want, its information is usually spot on and neutrally stated, which is more than can be said for many of these papers DM included.

 

[dowie]

You don't need to look far at all for evidence of mind control and mass manipulation.

I suggest reading a bit up on Edward Bernays. The kind of organized manipulation of our thoughts that was done back in the 1930s 1940s so imagine the sophistication of social manipulation in these times...

sight... firstly can you please define what you're talking about re: 'mind control'

secondly can you provide a clear contemporary example of it


I mean do certain publications have biases? Sure. Do advertisers try to influence people? Sure. Do governments try to promote certain policies? Sure. You've mentioned a PR man involved in propaganda - if that is all you're referring to as 'mind control' then there isn't much to discuss. Yes PR firms exist... so what.

But talk of 'mind control' is just getting rather CT-like...

 

[Surfer]

i think you are talking about a different mind control then. But if you only see mind control as this...



then perhaps it is already too late