President Obama Legallized Propaganda

I was just browsing around the internet when I googled a question that had popped into my head: Is propaganda legal in the United States of America?

The answer was nothing, but absolutely shocking. Here's the details:

On 12/29/12, President Obama signed HR 4310, the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act. Section 1078 (thomas.loc. gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.4310

of the bill authorizes the use of propaganda inside the US, which had previously been banned since 1948 when the Smith-Mundt Act was passed.

Source

I can't believe that from 1948-2012 propaganda was banned, and Obama legalized it. For what you might ask?

Perhaps you should take a look at his campaigning posters. A simple google images search will show you something;

I can't help, but to question the mental state of someone interested in this sort of "campaigning"

It was illegalized after ww2 for obvious reasons, and now it's legal and used again. I can't imagine what's going to be "legal" in the future.

I can't believe that from 1948-2012 propaganda was banned, and Obama legalized it. For what you might ask?

For something that was supposedly banned so long ago.

American politics has been filled with it for that entire duration.

As the definition says :

. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.

dictionary.reference.com...

Now it's just 'legal'.

a reply to: neo96

Totally agree. Although it was toned down with the late Fairness Doctrine.

Maybe us citizens should start making it to wildly voice out opinions. I mean, it IS a legal thing to do apparently, so why not use their own tactics against them?

a reply to: Vortiki

Jeez I always figured it was legal because it seems like out Government has been doing is since I can remember. Maybe the definition of the word propaganda is different to the Government???

To answer my own question:

NDAA and Overturning of Smith-Mundt Act The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (NDAA) allows for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be released within U.S. borders and strikes down a long-time ban on the dissemination of such material in the country.[14][15][16]

Apparently only government departments can create and distribute propaganda.

Wiki

a reply to: Vortiki

WRONG

Supreme court did that a while ago.

They ruled that the media had NO obligation to tell you the TRUTH. That was legalizing propaganda.

One Particular Story About That.

~Tenth

a reply to: Vortiki

There is no other way to promote his agenda.

What's funny is that you won't see the progressives scream about this until there's a republican in the White House using the same tactics and abuses as Obama.

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ
a reply to: Vortiki

Jeez I always figured it was legal because it seems like out Government has been doing is since I can remember. Maybe the definition of the word propaganda is different to the Government???

Apparently the government views propaganda as things promoting their wars. Like the Cold War, WW1, War on Drugs, ect. Anything that benefits them becomes legal; Anything that benefits the citizens, becomes illegal.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Vortiki

WRONG

Supreme court did that a while ago.

They ruled that the media had NO obligation to tell you the TRUTH. That was legalizing propaganda.

One Particular Story About That.

~Tenth

Did you read your own cited article?

In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a “law, rule, or regulation,” it was simply a “policy.” Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Vortiki

There is no other way to promote his agenda.

What's funny is that you won't see the progressives scream about this until there's a republican in the White House using the same tactics and abuses as Obama.

I guess I'm kind of progressive, I'm screaming about this now lol. For whatever grain of sand it's worth.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

They ruled that the media had NO obligation to tell you the TRUTH.

Guess that explains why the media carries the water for the current administration instead of holding it accountable.

Save one lone voice in the sea of Faux News !

Pun intended.

a reply to: Vortiki

I said one particular story, not the actual ruling, and what you wrote, doesn't actually dispute what I said.

It's up the to the STATION to determine whether or not they WANT to report HONESTLY.

That means, by definition, it is legal for them to lie.

~Tenth

" President Obama Legallized Propaganda "

Directly by the "Government".

Now they do it directly *AND* still use the bought off "private" media like before.

Obama needs both. He believes in all paths to glory.

And he wants all opposition squashed at the same time (IRS)

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Vortiki

I said one particular story, not the actual ruling, and what you wrote, doesn't actually dispute what I said.

It's up the to the STATION to determine whether or not they WANT to report HONESTLY.

That means, by definition, it is legal for them to lie.

~Tenth

Yeah, but this thread is about the legalization of propaganda, declared in black and white. I think there is a difference between propaganda and disinformation.

Big difference between the MSM and something like a poster that states "Salvage the Scrap, Bomb the Japs" Which was an actual poster used in ww2 before the ban on propaganda that can bee seen Here Which will also show the history of American propaganda usage.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Vortiki

There is no other way to promote his agenda.

What's funny is that you won't see the progressives scream about this until there's a republican in the White House using the same tactics and abuses as Obama.

And therein lies the problem They'll be screaming then and the right will be all OK with it then. It never ends. C'mon. Think of the children. No, not the ones on the border.

People need to accept this one fundamental truth in American politics.

There is no truth. That is the only truth anyone will ever find.

As Tsun Tzu said,' All warfare is based on deception' , and that has never rang more true when it comes to American politics.

A war of ideology reigns supreme in this country. Two wolves fighting over the sheep deciding which one gets to eat it.

What the people are is 'collateral damage' in a centuries old game of chess.

The people are the pawns.

Those shills on capitol hill are the knights,rooks,bishops.

The king, and queen is the Potus, and government.

Make no mistake the king, and queen is the alpha, and omega.

The knights,rooks,bishops, and pawns are just that sacrificial pieces in the game of political chess.

Where propaganda fits in to the story is it is politics best weapon of mass destruction.

The pawns come, and go, but the game never ends.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Vortiki

There is no other way to promote his agenda.

What's funny is that you won't see the progressives scream about this until there's a republican in the White House using the same tactics and abuses as Obama.

And therein lies the problem They'll be screaming then and the right will be all OK with it then. It never ends. C'mon. Think of the children. No, not the ones on the border.

I couldn't agree more about the bi-partisanship on capitol hill. It's really aggravating with the whole left-side vs right-side mess slowing down actual progress to mere crawl. (If you can call that progress)

If anyone is actually interested in reading the text. Search for "1078.Dissemination abroad of information about the United States"

Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1986 and 1987
Section 208 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1986 and 1987 (22 U.S.C. 1461–1a) is amended to read as follows:

208.Clarification on domestic distribution of program material
(a)In general
No funds authorized to be appropriated to the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall be used to influence public opinion in the United States. This section shall apply only to programs carried out pursuant to the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.), the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994 (22 U.S.C. 6201 et seq.), the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act (22 U.S.C. 1465 et seq.), and the Television Broadcasting to Cuba Act (22 U.S.C. 1465aa et seq.). This section shall not prohibit or delay the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors from providing information about its operations, policies, programs, or program material, or making such available, to the media, public, or Congress, in accordance with other applicable law.

(b)Rule of construction
Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors from engaging in any medium or form of communication, either directly or indirectly, because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to program material, or based on a presumption of such exposure. Such material may be made available within the United States and disseminated, when appropriate, pursuant to sections 502 and 1005 of the United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (22 U.S.C. 1462 and 1437), except that nothing in this section may be construed to authorize the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors to disseminate within the United States any program material prepared for dissemination abroad on or before the effective date of section 1078 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.

(c)Application
The provisions of this section shall apply only to the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors and to no other department or agency of the Federal Government.

source

It reads as though it's intended to facilitate funding and production of propaganda for foreign dissemination. Looking at what they changed, some of this language seems to have previously allowed for the possibility that propaganda may inadvertently (wink wink) be viewed by a domestic audience prior to the 2013 NDAA.

a reply to: theantediluvian

So I assume that the new "legalization" only means that now the government is legally allowed to appropriate funds specifically for swaying public opinion.