Mike Benz – U.S. State Censorship Industry
@MikeBenzCyber Former State Dept Cyber. Author of the unpublishable monstrosity, Weapons Of Mass Deletion.
For relevant history, see: https://statecraft.org/
"The History of the Intelligence State" — an essential 40 min lecture on the origin story of The Blob. Thanks to @Hillsdale for a beautiful event. Timestamps in tweet below pic.twitter.com/GTRrgPpLqt
— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) September 24, 2024
How to present facts that signal a prejudgement
By HOWIE CARR | howard.carr@medianewsgroup.com | Boston HeraldMarch 3, 2019 at 12:39 am
Have you ever noticed how differently Republicans are treated in the media than Democrats?
Every newsroom in the country used to have what was called the “AP Stylebook” to use in writing news stories.
Now you need two AP stylebooks, one for Democrats, about whom seldom is heard a discouraging word, and a second for the GOP, with a hundred different pejoratives.
Two parties, two vocabularies. One positive, one negative — very bad, evil in fact.
Consider the testimony by Michael Cohen last week in front of various Congressional committees.
For example, since he worked for Donald Trump, Cohen was described about a million times as a “fixer.” Democrats, on the other hand, have lawyers.
To prevent the release of embarrassing information, Democrats’ lawyers negotiate NDA’s — nondisclosure agreements. Republican fixers’ NDAs are “hush money,” or “bribes.”
Hillary Clinton paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democrat operatives who then bought or made up false Russian dirt on Trump — that was opposition research. Republicans, on the other hand, “collude!”
Republicans lie, Democrats misspeak.
Democrats plan, Republicans scheme.
Republicans hire lobbyists, Democrats use advocates. Republicans employ operatives or hired guns, Democrats prefer community activists.
If a Democrat changes his or her position on an issue, they have evolved … grown. Republicans “flip-flop.”
Whenever an unfamiliar politician is ensnared in some scandal, you naturally wonder which party he or she is a member of. If the “embattled” pol is a Republican, affiliation is usually noted in the headline, or at the very latest in the first paragraph.
If, however, you reach the third paragraph of the story without his party being identified, you can be absolutely certain you are reading about a Democrat miscreant.
Likewise, accusers are handled differently depending on who exactly they’re accusing. Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court was almost derailed by the not particularly credible “Dr.” Christine Blasey Ford. One of the women who’s accused Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of Virginia of sexual assault likewise has a Ph.D., but how often does the alt-left media refer to “Dr. Vanessa Tyson.” Fairfax, you see, is a Democrat.
Was Jussie Smollett’s fake hate crime ever referred to as “alleged?” Of course not. But all the real, documented, videotaped attacks on conservatives — invariably they are alleged, or “according to police reports.”
A Republican tax cut is a “corporate giveaway” for the rich, a boon to “one percenters” that the government “can’t afford.”
A Democrat-proposed tax increase, though, is an “investment in the future.” It’s for the children.
When there’s bad news about Republicans, Democrats “react.” But Republicans “pounce” or “seize.” Often, in fact, the only way any Democrat woes get mentioned at all in the media is when Republicans seize and pounce, not to mention “weaponize” Democrat scandals.
Let’s talk about legislation. When a Democrat solon finds a way to stop some GOP initiative, it’s because the brilliant parliamentarian (Nancy Pelosi?) has come up with a master stroke.
But when a Republican, say Mitch McConnell, does exactly the same thing, he is invariably called an obstructionist, relying on “arcane” tricks to produce “gridlock” and overturn centuries of “Congressional tradition.”
When Democrats in Congress hold oversight hearings, they are never less than “historic” “explosive,” full of “bombshells.” The Cohen hearings were so explosive, in fact, that I was expecting to see footage Wednesday night of the Capitol in smoking ruins.
Republican-run Congressional hearings are always described as grandstanding, sideshows, overreach and a total waste of taxpayer money.
Finally, the word of the day is “smirk.” Remember January’s first big fake-news hoax — the Covington Catholic high school students at the Lincoln Memorial. The kid in the Make America Great Again hat that day was Nicholas Sandmann, and he’s now suing the Washington Post for $250 million.
Every Social Justice Warrior on Twitter said the 16-year-old had it coming because of the “smirk” on his face. That was the smart word of the day — smirk.
So last week the illegal immigrant from Brazil who assaulted — allegedly — the 23-year-old MAGA-hat- wearing American in the bar in Falmouth was grabbed by ICE for being in the country illegally for 25 years. She got a big-time lawyer and he said, basically, that after getting boozed up, the illegal immigrant went all Third World on the American taxpayer because of his “smirk.”
So now apparently it’s OK to assault anyone wearing a MAGA hat … if they’re “smirking.”
No wonder half of America is beyond smirking at the alt-left media’s agitprop on behalf of the Democrats. The deplorables aren’t smirking anymore, they’re sneering.
Order Howie’s new book “Kennedy Babylon Vol. 2” at howiecarrshow.com.
Boldfaced American propaganda
Speech and ideation control targeting young Americans
Reported by: Discoverthenetworks.org
“Indivisible is an organization that seeks to persuade Americans – particularly young people – to believe that big, centralized government can benefit society in a multitude of ways that the private sector cannot. In short, Indivisible’s objective is to “energiz[e] and infor[m] Americans about government’s potential” to ensure “a safe, healthy, just and prosperous future” for all. Asserting that “too much time is taken up debating big government versus small government,” Indivisible contends that “what we need to be discussing is how our government works well,” and why it is indispensable for “accomplishing big things.”
In an effort to “inspire a cultural shift in how Americans think about the role of government in America,” Indivisible is committed to “disrupting and reframing negative media discourse about government,” “creating a network of champions to change the conversation about government in their communities,” and “training the next generation of civic-minded leaders.” Toward these ends, the organization has created an Indivisible Institute that administers a leadership-development program for young people “who share a passion for reclaiming government as our unique tool for addressing tomorrow’s challenges and opportunities.” These “emerging leaders” are taught how “to help … build a new American culture” wherein “the potential and promise of government” is axiomatic.
One of Indivisible’s major projects is its “Pave the Way” video contest, whose name derives from the notion that government is “literally paving our way with road construction and interstates.” This contest offers cash prizes to young people who produce quality videos of interviews wherein small-business owners tell “how government paved the way for their business’ success” by means of things like the GI Bill, the Affordable Care Act, Small Business Administration loan programs, and infrastructure spending.
Another key initiative of Indivisible is its “I Love My” program, which offers information and talking points designed to highlight the many benefits of government. On the premise that “it’s amazing how much government is doing behind the scenes to make our lives better every day,” Indivisible argues that the media should make a special effort to “show [that] our public systems and structures [are] usually so well run that we don’t notice them at all.” One such structure, says Indivisible, is the U.S. Postal Service, which “makes our businesses better,” “helps our communities function,” “makes our democracy work,” and “is the reason our country works at all.”
Similarly, another section of the “I Love My” program teaches people to how to speak about taxes in a way that emphasizes their usefulness in helping government to serve “the common good,” rather than in a way that casts them in a negative light. “Don’t talk about taxes as a ‘burden‘ or something from which we need ‘relief,’” Indivisible advises. “These [terms] are inherently negative and they cue up the dominant thinking that taxes are bad. Instead, talk about taxes as ‘loads’ to be carried or shared.” Moreover, says Indivisible: “Don’t call people ‘taxpayers‘ – it limits the conversation to only one side of the ledger (costs, not benefits). Instead, talk about people as ‘residents’ or ‘citizens’ or ‘member[s] of our community’ – it highlights that we are all people who both contribute to and benefit from public systems and structures.”
Indivisible’s “My Take” program features interviews where “real people” are asked to articulate “their feelings [about] government” and their various interactions with it. For example, the interviewees are asked: (a) “What is your favorite thing that government does?” (b) “Who is your government hero who is not an elected official?” (c) “What thing that government does do you think would surprise most Americans?”
Indivisible’s “Reality Check” program seeks to “expos[e] the reality behind myths and misunderstandings about government,” which ultimately serves as “our tool to help us solve big problems together.”
Reclaiming Government for America’s Future is an Indivisible research project consisting of reports, videos, and webinars that aim to counter the popular notion that government “is too big, intrusive, untrustworthy, and controlled by powerful elites” who have little interest in using it as “a tool for the common good.” Topos Partnership conducted this research on behalf of Indivisible, Public Works, and a number of partner organizations in Oregon, North Carolina, Nebraska, Michigan, Arkansas, and Colorado. The overarching objective of the project is to spell out ways in which progressives can effectively “shift conversations and begin to change the cultural common sense about government.”
“Triumph of the Will”
Triumph of the Will (1935) | English Subtitle |
The infamous propaganda film of the 1934 Nazi Party rally in Nuremberg, Germany (This is the colorized version of the movie).
Director: Leni Riefenstahl Writers: Leni Riefenstahl, Walter Ruttmann, Eberhard Taubert
Stars: Adolf Hitler, Hermann Göring, Max Amann
Release date: March 28, 1935 (Germany) Country of origin: Germany Language: German Also known as: ?????, Triumph des Willens
Filming locations: Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany
Production companies: Leni Riefenstahl-ProduktionReichspropagandaleitung der NSDAP
Leftist propaganda
Mr. Singh, UK, of Facebook’s “River Entertainment” produced the following propaganda analysis of another Facebook page’s – “NOWTHIS” – video.
America owes him thanks.
militancy without end
![tumblr_nj79yhsGur1s2wio8o1_500[1]](http://elbertcounty.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/tumblr_nj79yhsGur1s2wio8o1_5001.gif)
Leftists and political Muslims share a successful strategy of umbrage politics – “Agree with me or I’ll get upset.” Each day news reports come in about the riots, demonstrations, occupations, marches, boycotts, and class actions underway by upset beneficiaries. You’d think that’s all that ever happened in America.
Leftist reporters saturate the media with reports about the struggles. The struggles never end as the numbers of beneficiaries and Muslims continue to grow. No degree of social justice, religious obedience, or equality can satisfy them, as if these things could even be quantified. No fixed amount of entitlement benefits can sustain an enlarging population. The struggles are designed to be unsatisfiable, unsolvable, unwinnable, and unending.
Liberal politicians keep putting more money on the table and unscrupulous beneficiaries keep lining up to collect. You can’t legitimately call either the politicians or the beneficiaries citizens because citizenship implies duties that neither one cares much about. They are gamers – gaming the system for personal benefit, be it preferential law or public money – and gaming the system for votes.
Who even discusses economic and political theories, reasoning, science, education, or even metaphysical foundations anymore? Why bother with intellectual baggage when numbers in the streets will get favorable laws written, favorable court cases decided, entitlement money allocated, criminal prosecutions foregone, constitutional protections denied, the power of the Leftist state and Muslim Sharia increased, and votes?
Conservatives are chasing their tails with volumes of sound and persuasive analysis about these social pathologies, but the groups who trade in power demographics don’t care about what conquered people have to say, except to the extent it identifies more opportunities to exploit.
Pure democracy is literally devouring America. Leftists and Muslims are leading the short walk to the end of our constitutional society. The tyrannies of the minorities are on the march while liberal vote-buying politicians eagerly fund and enable them.
The overwhelming majority of Americans who provide the real value to America that predatory Leftists and political Muslims feed on, are apparently too busy to stop it.
the community of astroturfers
Sharyl Attkisson, author of Stonewalled, provided a rich paradigm for deconstructing propaganda on her blog yesterday. It wraps up the Elbert County United Front of Leftists – the Prairie Sunny Truthy Plainsy Birdy bunch – in a succinct unified theory that de-cloaks much of their collective bovine scat.
Top 10 Astroturfers
“What’s most successful when it appears to be something it’s not? Astroturf. As in fake grassroots.
The many ways that corporations, special interests and political interests of all stripes exploit media and the Internet to perpetuate astroturf is ever-expanding. Surreptitious astroturf methods are now more important to these interests than traditional lobbying of Congress. There’s an entire PR industry built around it in Washington.
Below are the top ten astroturfers as viewed by respondents in an informal, non-scientific survey.*
TOP 10 ASTROTURFERS
1. Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Everytown
2. Media Matters for America
3. University of California Hastings Professor Dorit Rubenstein Reiss and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s Dr. Paul Offit
4. “Science” Blogs such as: Skeptic.com, Skepchick.org, Scienceblogs.com (Respectful Insolence), Popsci.com and SkepticalRaptors.com
5. Mother Jones
6. Salon.com and Vox.com
7. White House press briefings and press secretary Josh Earnest
8. Daily Kos and The Huffington Post
9. CNN, NBC, New York Times, Politico and Talking Points Memo (TPM)
10. MSNBC, Slate.com, Los Angeles Times and Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times, MSNBC and Jon Stewart.
Astroturfers often disguise themselves and publish blogs, write letters to the editor, produce ads, start non-profits, establish Facebook and Twitter accounts, edit Wikipedia pages or simply post comments online to try to fool you into thinking an independent or grassroots movement is speaking. They use their partners in blogs and in the news media in an attempt to lend an air of legitimacy or impartiality to their efforts.
Astroturf’s biggest accomplishment is when it crosses over into semi-trusted news organizations that unquestioningly cite or copy it.
The whole point of astroturf is to try to convince you there’s widespread support for or against an agenda when there’s not.
The language of astroturfers and propagandists include trademark inflammatory terms such as: anti, nutty, quack, crank, pseudo-science, debunking, conspiracy theory, deniers and junk science. Sometimes astroturfers claim to “debunk myths” that aren’t myths at all. They declare debates over that aren’t over. They claim that “everybody agrees” when everyone doesn’t agree. They aim to make you think you’re an outlier when you’re not.
Astroturfers and propagandists tend to attack and controversialize the news organizations, personalities and people surrounding an issue rather than sticking to the facts. They try to censor and silence topics and speakers rather than engage them. And most of all, they reserve all their expressed skepticism for those who expose wrongdoing rather than the wrongdoers. In other words, instead of questioning authority, they question those who question authority.
Much of this sounds familiar to many Americans. The results of an informal, non-scientific poll identify groups related to Gun Safety Action Fund, Inc. as top Astroturf efforts. These groups include Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, Everytown, Everytown for Gun Safety, Gun Sense, It’s Time for Gun Sense in America, Gun Sense Voter, I’m a Gun Sense Voter, Moms Take the Hill and Stroller Jam.
The groups present themselves as grassroots organizations of “mayors, moms survivors and everyday Americans.” They are spearheaded by former New York Mayor and multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg, and former PR professional and mother Shannon Watts. Last year, they announced a $50 million political campaign to try to counter the efforts of the formidable gun rights lobby.
Second to the gun control groups in being identified as a top disseminator of astroturf and propaganda is the controversial, left wing blog Media Matters for America with the stated goal of waging “guerrilla warfare and sabotage” against FOX News. More broadly, Media Matters acts on behalf of the interests of Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration, sometimes in direct consultation with Obama officials. It was founded by the troubled Democratic political operative David Brock, who formed the super-Political Action Committee (PAC) American Bridge that raised funds to help elect liberal Democrats to Congress. Brock also served on the board of the super-PAC Priorities USA, which announced support for Hillary Clinton’s potential run for president.
A close third is an array of blogs that use words such as “science” and “skeptic” in their titles or propaganda in an attempt to portray an image of neutrality and logic when they are often fighting established science and serving pro-pharmaceutical industry agendas. These include: ScienceBlogs.com (using the pseudonym “Orac”); vaccine inventor Dr. Paul Offit of The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia who earned an undisclosed fortune from Merck pharmaceuticals; and his apparent replacement in trolling blogs Dorit Rubenstein Reiss. She is a law professor at the University of California Hastings and a frequent contributor to SkepticalRaptors.com.
A final category frequently mentioned is quasi-news organizations that sometimes throw readers off the astroturf trail because they publish some legitimate news-type or pop-culture stories, but mix in propaganda or astroturf. These sources tend to be highly-cited by the unquestioning traditional news media either to advance an agenda, or in the media’s attempt to be hip and edgy or “get clicks.”
Sometimes, astroturf is in the eye of the beholder. But no matter how you see it, there is no short supply.”
How it’s done
In may 2011, the Obama White House chooses Schultz, to be paid with your tax dollars, to handle press on Fast and Furious.
Our relationship is courteous enough. As far as I’m concerned, it largely consists of Schultz trying to discredit those who could harm the administration, and advancing story lines and ideas to help his boss. He seems to have a pretty well-organized network of support. For example, Schultz might suggest to his media contacts that they do a story dissecting controversies in Issa’s background. It could be an editorial or blog written by party loyalists, an article penned by a like-minded reporter, or a favorable piece in the left-wing propaganda blog Media Matters. Schultz then circulates the resulting “story” to the rest of us in the media, sprinkled with his commentary. The strategy counts on the tendency of many bloggers and reporters to copy and codify each other’s work. If things go according to plan, the story is regurgitated and excerpted by so many outlets that it appears, to the uninitiated, to be prevailing thought. It’s self-fulfilling and self-legitimizing. Pretty soon, the theme bleeds into real news organizations and the cycle is complete. The message being delivered, of course, is that there’s no real story behind Fast and Furious. Just a Republican vendetta.
. . .
It’s a propaganda campaign to divert from the damaging facts: controversialize critics to try to turn the focus on personalities instead of the evidence.
Sharyl Attkisson, Stonewalled, 2014, pp. 107-108.
To write, publish, blog, or facebook ideas contrary to the zeitgeist of Leftist orthodoxy is to routinely endure all manner of insult and ad hominem from the reverse barometers of truth and justice trying to saturate “prevailing thought” with their politics.
If the people taking down society are against you, however, one has to treat such attacks as compliments.
old timey thumpin’
Paul Krugman: China, Coal, Climate
Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman opines 11-13-14:
“understand the defense in depth that fossil-fuel interests and their loyal servants — nowadays including the entire Republican Party — have erected against any action to save the planet.”
False implication – Republicans want to destroy the planet.
“The first line of defense is denial”
“cabal including thousands of scientists around the world”
“witch hunts against climate scientists”
“crazy conspiracy theory”
“economic scare tactics”
Denial, cabal, witch hunt, crazy conspiracy, scare tactics – a whole string of unsupported ad hominems.
“the right’s usual faith in markets”
“we’re supposed to believe that business can transcend any problem, adapt and innovate around any limits, but would shrivel up and die if policy put a price on carbon.”
“Still, what’s bad for the Koch brothers must be bad for America, right?”
Ridicule. False implication that markets are inefficient. False implication that carbon taxes would not suppress economic activity. “Koch brothers” ad hominem fallacy.
“a “war on coal” as if this were self-evidently an attack on American values, but the reality is that the coal industry employs very few people. The real war on coal, or at least on coal miners, was waged by strip-mining and natural gas, and ended a long time ago. And environmental protection is quite popular with the nation at large.”
Multiple false redefinitions of “war on coal” – first that it’s about coal miners, second that environmental protection means using less coal.
“the last line of defense, claims that America can’t do anything about global warming, because other countries, China in particular, will just keep on spewing out greenhouse gases. “
“climate denialists controlling Congress “
Ad hominem attack against Republican majority.
“Not to mention the possibility that the next president could well be an anti-environmentalist who could reverse anything President Obama does.”
False implication that whatever Obama does helps the environment.
This language rolls off Krugman’s keyboard without a hint of hesitation or thought. It’s a practiced script of leftist memes and mantras – a liturgy that Krugman recites like a high priest. In Elbert County Krugman’s acolytes surround us, parroting their high priest, proud, cocksure owners of the liturgy, thumping their keyboards – “oh the science, the science” – like preachers at a tent revival.
Elbert County is filthy with them.
Thing is, the standard these grubers set for the right doesn’t even rise to the level of a caricature. Instead, we get windows into mean little nobel prize winning minds that would be pitiable if not for all of the malice therein.
blunt talk – essential speech
See the most relevant 40 minutes of television ever produced. The mix of authoritative voices who refused to be intimidated by political correctness gave us a frank factual analysis that everyone must absorb. This is a defining moment for our culture. It’s a rare conversation these days that supersedes politics.
clever propaganda
Consider this.
Mayor de Blasio in New York announced he is closing down several charter schools. These schools are performing better than nearby public schools. Thousands of supporters of the charter schools are rallying this morning to stop the closing of these schools. Fox News ran a segment with video of the thousands of upset, pleading parents, including snippets from some of the speakers.
Then Fox News cut to a panel of two experts for some analysis with the news anchor. Sometimes the experts in these panels sort out for and against the news subject, sometimes they’re both in favor or both against. In this case, they were both critical of de Blasio’s action, both in favor of the charter schools.
Here’s the rub – during the analysis segment when the screen showed head shots of the screen anchor and the two experts, the tag line on the screen underneath the panel read in part, “de Blasio rallies against charter schools.” For the rest of that news subject, the producers did not cut back to video from the rally.
Now, de Blasio wasn’t at the rally they’d just shown pictures from that contained thousands of people who were all in favor of charter schools. The propaganda effect from the tag line’s misrepresentation was to aggrandize de Blasio by falsely assigning the rally images just seen to him, and confuse the impact of the news analysis portion of the segment. Leftists would call this a win/win.
People who came late to the news report, who did not see the video from the rally or hear the sound clips from some of the rally speakers, saw a confused news presentation where the content the panel speakers delivered did not reconcile with the report of a de Blasio rally that never occurred.
Was this some news editor’s attempt to be clever that ended up taking down the impact of the entire segment? Or was this a deliberate misrepresentation intended to undermine the agreement and conclusions of the news panel that were in favor of charter schools and against de Blasio?
Understanding how the Left works, my money is on the latter explanation.
We’re surrounded by this sort of thing in the media. You cannot just absorb program content – audio, visual, or the interplay between the two – without putting it through a critical filter. And Fox News is, sadly, not exempt.
Why you must propagandize
A day without propaganda from the Left is like a day without sunshine.
New-Plains Hypocrites
Obamaganda
Liberal Newspeak
(Every time I read this, it gets more powerful. B_Imperial)
By: Daniel Greenfield
Posted: 10 Dec 2013 08:49 PM PST
Orwell’s mistake in 1984 was assuming that a totalitarian socialist state would maintain the rigid linguistic conventions of bureaucratic totalitarianism. [Read more…]
Help Kickstart World War III!
Left wing vs. Right wing
Assuming that the terms “left wing” and “right wing” are pejorative toward the opposite side, about twice as much left wing propaganda exists as right wing propaganda. Also, “Obama” seems to be a leading indicator for left wing propaganda.
B_Imperial
hyperbolic times
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh
Polite debate is no longer the accepted norm in our society. The liberal left is not tolerating divergent opinions, they want them eliminated. Outrageous labels, personal threats, and even violence have escalated during what used to be polite discourse and disagreements of opinion. [Read more…]