The Real Reson Behind Fake News Propaganda

[Guest shiloh357]

Here is the first problem with modern political discourse - too many people want to “win” arguments instead of getting to the greater truth of the matter. Discussions become brinkmanship. Opponents launch into immediate attacks instead of simply asking valid questions. They assert immediately that their position is the only valid position without verification. When confronted with rational responses and ample evidence, they dismiss everything instead of pondering what you have handed them. After this line is crossed, there is no point in continuing the debate. It will go on forever.

 

This is one of the great tragedies of the Saul Alinsky method of political confrontation; it has bred entire generations of people who now believe that there is no objective truth. They think everything is relative. Because of this belief, they assume that there is no wrong or right side, no wrong or right goal. Instead, there are only goals that are MORE right than the goals of others. Everything boils down to a “lesser of two evils” mentality, and the ends therefore justify the means. Using dishonest measures to win the fight becomes acceptable.

In the end, ideological combat actually prevents people from learning rather than helping them get to the root of the issue. We live in a world where truth is superfluous to the overall narrative. The only thing that is important is destroying your rivals.

A classic strategy of dishonest debate and disinformation is to use every method possible to avoid confronting your ideological opponents legitimate arguments and to attack him personally. If you can’t beat him on fair ground using reason and evidence, then why not undermine his character so that the public will be influenced to avoid listening to him at all.  This is sometimes called “inoculation.”

At first glance, this is what the entire “fake news” meme supported by the mainstream media seems to be about.

The MSM has proven itself utterly ineffective against the rise of the alternative media. And as I have explained in recent articles, there is a very good and obvious reason for this. The alternative media is the closest thing to a “free market” of ideas that the world has had in a very long time.  Before web media, the public was strictly limited to a handful of corporate outlets that dictated information flow with an iron fist.  If you wanted to learn anything beyond the mainstream narrative, you had to data mine at the library in an infinitely slower fashion, or try to personally seek out people who represented sources and witnesses.

Today, data mining happens at light speed. Facts and evidence are uncovered in real time. Video interviews and transcripts can be achieved as quickly as a phone call. They can be examined and witnesses can be cited without traveling across the country. The prevalence of visual media also makes it difficult for witnesses to lie about their original claims later down the road.

Beyond this, the alternative media offers something the masses have rarely ever had — choice. People can now look at all sides of an issue and all available evidence and decide for themselves what conclusions make the most sense. The mainstream media has only ever offered one side, with highly regulated information and cherry-picked evidence.

The mainstream media’s purpose has never been to convey the unfettered “news.”  Rather, their purpose has always been to manipulate public opinion, and we saw this revealed undeniably during the 2016 election as Wikileaks exposed journalist after journalist using their position of public trust as a weapon to influence the election outcome.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-15/what-real-purpose-behind-fake-news-propaganda

[whatdoIwant2callmyself]

Yep, if you can claim there exists fake news, you can summon a bill that censors the media under the guise of stopping fake news.

Overcome the information outlets people depend on for current events information and take control and you'll control the masses thought processes as pertains to their real world place in that society.

We know what we're told. And the internet can only afford so much access to truth given the government controls access even to that.

 

Hal Lindsay had a great report on this the other day.  "Politically Correct Tyranny"

And Saul Alinsky is a great reference. Remember also Karl Marx Communist Manifesto 10 Planks?

Plank 6?    Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State.

 

Make an issue of fake news, when the government already controls communication, and that leaves the gateway to take further censor control of the news so as to insure the "fake" news isn't disseminated. Which means the government can censor any outlet that is deemed partisan, etc... under the cloak of censoring the fake reporting of false information.

[Running Gator]

4 minutes ago, whatdoIwant2callmyself said:

Yep, if you can claim there exists fake news, you can summon a bill that censors the media under the guise of stopping fake news.

Overcome the information outlets people depend on for current events information and take control and you'll control the masses thought processes as pertains to their real world place in that society.

 

That is something I can see happening under the next Admin.   

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, whatdoIwant2callmyself said:

Make an issue of fake news, when the government already controls communication, and that leaves the gateway to take further censor control of the news so as to insure the "fake" news isn't disseminated. Which means the government can censor any outlet that is deemed partisan, etc... under the cloak of censoring the fake reporting of false information.

"Fake News" is any news that contradicts the mainstream media establishment.  And there is an ongoing to attempt to harass alternative, independent media outlets.

But I think you hit the nail on the head.   It is about censorship. And who gets to decide what constitutes fake news?  Why the state of course.  If we centralize the media into the hands of the government, the government decides what you get to know and don't know.   The media is nothing more than government propaganda.

That is where this is heading.  There is an agenda afoot to create a government run media complex, thus outlawing all independent, alternative, conservative media outlets.

And had Hillary won, that is exactly what she would have done.

[whatdoIwant2callmyself]

2 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

"Fake News" is any news that contradicts the mainstream media establishment.  And there is an ongoing to attempt to harass alternative, independent media outlets.

But I think you hit the nail on the head.   It is about censorship. And who gets to decide what constitutes fake news?  Why the state of course.  If we centralize the media into the hands of the government, the government decides what you get to know and don't know.   The media is nothing more than government propaganda.

That is where this is heading.  There is an agenda afoot to create a government run media complex, thus outlawing all independent, alternative, conservative media outlets.

And had Hillary won, that is exactly what she would have done.

I believe that as well. Remember years ago when she was making her first run for the highest office?  She made remarks about containing the media's freedom of reporting even back then.
And in speeches during her latest bid for highest office while she condemned Trump having access to nuclear codes should he win the election, she's talking about Russia and war!

 

And third party "not-a-chance" Jill Stein, who finished 4th in the election, is pushing for vote recounts as if it means something to her campaign finish, we're suppose to forget what she said about Hillary should she win the office that it appears Jill is hoping she'll take through recount? What was she promised by Hillary pursuing this nonsense so as to make it look like Hillary has not a thing to do with the recount move?

 

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2016 by Steve_S
Removed youtube link. Please post youtube videos in the appropriate video forum.

[whatdoIwant2callmyself]

And remember, the best way to interject laws that oppress a people is to use the vehicle of, 'for their own good/safety/protection', as means.
Remember this?

Video:Senator Hillary Clinton speaking in support of video game censorship (2006)

And,

Article =Hillary Clinton: Then And Now On Internet Freedoms And Censorship

 Excerpt: "... Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton famously gave a speech about the importance of internet freedom, where she stated:

For companies, this issue is about more than claiming the moral high ground. It really comes down to the trust between firms and their customers. Consumers everywhere want to have confidence that the internet companies they rely on will provide comprehensive search results and act as responsible stewards of their own personal information. Firms that earn that confidence of those countries and basically provide that kind of service will prosper in the global marketplace. I really believe that those who lose that confidence of their customers will eventually lose customers. No matter where you live, people want to believe that what they put into the internet is not going to be used against them.

And censorship should not be in any way accepted by any company from anywhere. And in America, American companies need to make a principled stand. This needs to be part of our national brand. I�m confident that consumers worldwide will reward companies that follow those principles. " 

 

(Excerpt)".... And yet when it comes to Wikileaks, suddenly, the federal government doesn't seem so interested in supporting such things any more? Hillary Clinton says that companies should stand up for their principles or lose customers... and yet we've seen Amazon, Paypal, Visa and MasterCard do the exact opposite -- with clear pressure from government officials in doing so. Clinton herself claimed that Wikileaks' release (link)"was an attack on the international community." Apparently she doesn't believe in internet freedoms when it exposes questionable activity on her part. Less than a year ago, she was telling private companies to have a backbone and stand up for internet freedoms on the basis of principle...

Edited December 18, 2016 by whatdoIwant2callmyself
link fix

[OneLight]

Fake News is another word for conspiracy theories as well.  It's time the media polices themselves before the government does step in with heavy hands.  I know many would not think the news could police themselves, but if they don't someone else will.

[whatdoIwant2callmyself]

And yet, people themselves set up fake news sites. It doesn't take a lot to look legitimate. And also, to that end of government controls and censorship, government can also install fake news sites and then use those as cause to censor legitimate news reporting based on the evidence found in fake reporting. Because we're to be controlled in our thought processes and our level of discernment called into question when we're told we can't be trusted to discern for ourselves what is truth or fiction.

And when you're told as a people that you can't be trusted to think, which has already been a method employed in the franchise of political correctness , the next level is to find a solution to what can't be trusted to our own care. And that's the nanny state expansionism or, government censorship of information resources.

[Ezra]

On 12/16/2016 at 11:46 AM, shiloh357 said:

Rather, their purpose has always been to manipulate public opinion...

Exactly.  And they tried so hard to stack the deck for Hillary, but failed miserably.  So now they are making gigantic efforts to create censorship and shut down alternative media by labeling them as purveyors of "fake news".

However, since Bannon and Breitbart [alternative] News are connected, and so are Bannon and Trump, I'm sure Mr. Trump (who is personally disgusted with the MSM) will not allow any censorship and will also ensure that the First Amendment is well protected (along with the rest of the Constitution).

[The_Patriot21]

*reason