So I neglected to metion that another big reason that the “Fake News” craze in the media right now has truth community side eyes reaching record levels is the fact that a few years ago there was a bill that was quietly passed a few years ago that basically made propaganda legal in the U.S. At the time it was making a lot of waves b/c people found the gap between Sandy Hook and this law being passed a bit convenient. Yeah, ‘member Sandy Hook?
So yeah, I probably should have mentioned that. I forgot people didn’t know that.
A definition of “propaganda” goes something like this: information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
So, they made domestic, gov’t run propaganda legal some three years ago, rather secretly. For my slower readers, this basically means that for those that argue that there’s no way that the media could be caught lying so blatantly and why would they, here’s evidence showing that not only would they, but they were doing it years ago, they’ve drawn up a law so that they could resume it with legal impunity. There’s plenty of evidence that they have taken full advantage of this new law several times over the course of those years. And it seemed to be working well for them.
Cut to: the 2016 election. The propaganda machine was firing on all cylinders, and now a lot of people were noticiing. And the candidate they all underestimated noticed it too, and drew much needed attention to it. The propaganda machine refused to play along, which looked to the masses as the high road but in reality was simply rule numero uno of disinformation tactics.
Now thanks to the growing interest in the conspiracy/truth community, many terms started to become mainstream, and once they did the media didn’t hesitate to adopt them for their own advantage. Meanwhile, the elites found themselves on the losing side of an agressively fought for election, not to mention a wikileak to end all wikileaks. What to do? Blame the Russians.
Today I saw a friend of a friend post an article about how “fake news sites” created by Russians were strategically released right before November 8th in order to influence the election and had succeeded in getting the candidate they wanted in office. Never mind that no Trump supporter you know (if you know any) cited articles they read as their reason for voting. Most people get their news from the same places. They watched the debates same as you, but as we hear from voters over and over, it was the perception of the same events that differed among voters, not the information. And never mind that they had already passed a law making “fake news” legal, however secretly, and that going after activities that are already legal is generally considered fascist, especially while [OBVIOUSLY] using those same activities to concoct a Russian threat in the mind of Americans that no one of any intelligence should take seriously.
On the flipside, the fake news articles that are prevalent online seem curiously duplicitous, and not in a Russian way. They actually do admit to being satire, but only after you do some signficant digging. Not too long ago I had to retract an article that I had posted that proved to be fake. It happens. The reality is that clickbait exists and it’s getting harder to detect. Why is that? When I went back to the site, I had to do some pretty extensive digging before I finally found a disclaimer saying the site was “satire.” But it wasn’t satire. It was merely made up facts posing as real ones. It was deception. Likely made to make the reader feel like an idiot, to keep them from trusting their own ability to research, to keep them thinking that finding out the truth is best left to the “professionals.” Whoever creates these sites, while they may be in it for the money, my theory is that they are working for the larger propaganda machine to reinforce its authority in the citizen’s mind and keep disinformation swirling so that no one will trust information not tied to a major news outlet.
I just read an article on trusted media site NPR however, about how some very prominent fake news sites are run by an individual citizen who is a liberal that openly admits he puts up a lot of right wing centered stories and gets a lot of hits. He says in the article that he is “amazed” how his stories are shared millions of times, as many people “fall for it,” and one even made it as far as the state government, and legislation was passed in part because of a fake story he posted about pot.
They did another story about young people’s dismaying ability to tell real and fake news apart. You know, in light of the “fake news crisis.”
So bascially, we got a guy openly admitting to deceiving people with wrong information, making a profit on it, and “amazed” at how well it works, and an article about how troubling it is that young people today believe what they read.
Despite the fact that they clearly want EVERYONE to believe what they read, there’s a psychological term for what is being described here, and it is “gaslighting.”
Based on a suspenseful stage play called Gaslight, it is the deliberate act of changing a persons reality, often little by little, and then denying it in an attempt to make them question their own sanity, memory and perception. It is a common characteristic among people with psychosis, with personality disorders. And any person that had a narcissistic or antisocial loved one should recognize it a mile away. When these celebrities got called on their bluff about moving to other countries after a Trump win, I’m sure chills ran up the spine of many a victim of manipulation, when they insisted that people were too stupid to tell the difference between a joke and a promise.
While I personally feel that yelling “fire” in a crowded theater is still an analogy worth using in these “fake news” cases, publications like The Atlantic say that such comparisons hold no relevance to free speech. Except in this case, I guess?
So I guess what the mainstream media is saying is that, fake news, given by anyone other than them, is a threat. Unless it’s fake news written by liberals but aimed toward conservatives, b/c it’s fun to watch them share lies that they think are the truth b/c it makes liberals laugh. But then when it validates their opinions and causes them to do things contrary to what liberals want them to then it’s bad again. But seeing as how they already took steps to pass legislation years ago to ensure that fake news is okay, I wonder why they are trying to blame all their problems on it after losing the election.
Essentially, the “fake news” focus is well, fake. They are projecting their own creation onto us, throwing it under the bus in order to make us believe that it was not plain ineptitude, corruption and blind unmitigated arrogance that lost them the election, but some sinister foreign diaboloical plot that undermined their honest efforts to provide the country with that which was for its own good: an impossibly corrupt, coporation-owned leader in the throes of death. Simultaneously, they are working to eradicate independent researches and thinkers that were once merely an irritation, and now see them as a legitimate threat. And unfortunately, those who went along with their propaganda, having agreed to it in the first place, now feel themselves integrally linked to the globalists’ loss, and take solace in the consoling lies they disseminate post-election. Those lies in turn are used to reinforce their twisted reality, and marginalize a majority of Americans. And not a “silent” majority btw, just a regular ol’ majority. A majority that stands by and watches as injustice happens is not the same as a majority that votes and just doesn’t discuss their decision with you. So we can stop with that twisted narrative as well. The lies have become so thick you have to walk around with a ping pong paddle.
So I know this thing is long, but as long as the media keeps bringing it up, and as long as people keep re-posting their ridiculous manipulative gaslighting propaganda, I’m going to have to write a doubly long blog about it. Ask yourself which is easier: the idea that half the country are actually Nazis– including the African Americans, Mexicans, Muslims, Christians and other minorities that voted Trump, and that this majority that was large enough to win an election, stealthily goes around painting swastikas and having post-Trump vitory meetings about nothing. Or perhaps is it easier to believe that a majority of people across demographics and geographics voted on a candidate that met a good enough portion of their criteria for voting, one that outweighed the opposers, the on the fencers, the principled non-participators, etc. You know, like the same thing that happens every election? And that the only people who were the most baffled about Trump’s victory were those who live in or are from massive inclusive bubble like metropolises around the country, like the ones every source of media we have broadcasts from?
The media were particuarly un-objective this cycle, could it be b/c Trump so embodied everything that was wrong about life that they had to violate every rule of journalism in order to cover him 24/7? Or was it simply that they were bolstered by the propaganda law that the gov’t slipped through a year after the previous election, no doubt on behalf of the corporate interests that fund them all?
Never leave home with your thinking caps people. Ray Charles could see that Trump was going to take this election. Other than Hillary’s underhanded ways and her endless advantages, she was dead in the water, pretty much as soon as he got the nomination. And yet, your media lied to you again and again. Kanye agrees with me, and now he’s in the hospital. Even if you don’t believe any of that, just from a practical perspective, you should really just stop listening to these clowns. All that money, resources, experience, I mean they had one job! Did they really not know? Was this ever really the carefully reasearched professional findings of experts? Or was it all just propaganda? B/c they knew that above all bravado, it was still in our hands to decide?