How to spot propaganda

After watching this educational video you will find it easier to spot propaganda.


Incidentally, here is a gallery of the 50 intelligence officials that signed off on the Hunter Biden laptop "conspiracy" as Russian propaganda.

a reply to: 19Bones79

Good post , love feces , put names with them , , even better.

I'm going to go through and come back on who looks like what ,
In s in the eyes generally but you have to exclude some variables like if they were having a bad day .
Most of themselves got an American double chin. You don't get that much in Afghani faces oddly enough.

a reply to: 19Bones79
"How to spot propaganda"

Turn on radio and TV, open any newspaper, listen to any politician and/or "expert".

a reply to: 19Bones79

I was going to start with who'd kill their target adverserary , but its most of them !
The most dangerous looking ones are Tullius , Ledgett and Pfeiffer.

Priess is getting bullied at work. Or maybe at home as well.
Hepburn wears makeup.

Wood , would if you know I mean . She is driven by deep and strange desire.

Panetta has had to make some very hard decisions in life, like to keep secrets against his better judgement.

Is Davis a plant Why's he in black and white ? Looks like someone from a different era, 60s even ?

My instinct says Brandmaier and Bash are police background grown up bods , Brandmayer has a lot of power and she knows a lot about the pizza delivery persons .That's a person you might call a brutalist , people are scared of her.
Bash is someone who does what he's told, but in an aggressive way. He respects people who cause his own fears and joins in. Because he's trusted he's got more on everyone than they might like to countenance, and that goes for most people. He knows he could be scorched by Brandmaier. Brandmair has extra power that s in her name and personifiles the role , somehow related to brutalist authority .

There's some hunches bones
They're all liars of sorts ? That's par for course. Get a better zoomed picture into an eyeball and I'll see who's what usually

a reply to: 19Bones79

Background colors, there are certain colors which are supposed to illicit an emotional response. Of course, once you realize that these colors are present, wait for bull s##t to follow. The background of the January 6th committee was red.

Red is used to bring about emotional anger, when I saw their red… well, I saw red too, but their use of this color only keyed me in, early on, that this thing was probably the farce that it was. Red of course can also mean power, as in wearing a power tie, which is red, or love (but in this case, I doubt love played very much into it); however, when this color red is seen behind an insane group of people, whose only intention is to “Get Trump!” it is being used to get you angry, and see them as a powerful group of people; when in actuality they were a joke.

Classic propaganda film about anti-propaganda. Fighting fire with fire. Reminds me of Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” Speech when atomic reactors were actually created for nuclear bomb fuel.

a reply to: DerBeobachter

... Read the mud pit

Many press conferences are propaganda:

LIVE: Hakeem Jeffries holds weekly press conference | NBC News

(start @25:20)😀

"Propaganda" is one of the most abused topics in the history of topics.

Generally speaking, presentations about propaganda are filled with examples that give the impression that all propaganda is "enemy" propaganda. It's almost ironic... except it's relatively unfunny.

I can give you the first threshold of the phenomenon of propaganda, the question who's answer can almost invariably point to the true possibility...

(No matter the message/communication: )

"Did someone/anyone expend resources (pay) to make the message "reach you?"
If the answer is "Yes" ... "Propaganda" alert...

originally posted by: Maxmars
"Propaganda" is one of the most abused topics in the history of topics.

Generally speaking, presentations about propaganda are filled with examples that give the impression that all propaganda is "enemy" propaganda. It's almost ironic... except it's relatively unfunny.

I can give you the first threshold of the phenomenon of propaganda, the question who's answer can almost invariably point to the true possibility...

(No matter the message/communication: )

"Did someone/anyone expend resources (pay) to make the message "reach you?"
If the answer is "Yes" ... "Propaganda" alert...

The idea for that question is great, but perhaps it could be refined ?

Refined to exclude the newerish breed of independent journalists, that must produce their own shows, buy their own equipment, pay for platforms, etc...

But that field is ripe to be totally invaded, and taken-over by Controlled-Opposition™, if it isn't already somewhat Infiltrated™.

Also include the newerish breed of " Online-Personalities™ ", that may not present themselves as journalists.
We would all be wise to not fall for words that are sweet to our ears.

As far as Social-Media™ Influencers™ go : throw them out with the trash, and warn the garbage-man of toxic-waste...

originally posted by: Nothin

Thank you so much for your reply.

It occurred to me that perhaps the more or less laconic phrasing "Propaganda" alert" might be misunderstood as a direct implication that the message actually is propaganda (information with 'intent'). What I had intended was to say it is the first indicator that it could be. To expand, I am referring to the authoring of the information, not the amplifier personality... or the casual relaying of the ideas.

People who collect and convey information might never recognize that their information is actually a propagandists' product.

An excellent example exists in the promulgation of certain medical "positions" recently manifesting themselves into our social order. Some may simply 'accept' the ideas so prominently amplified in our respective information-spheres at 'face value.' Some may amplify the information themselves, convinced that it is 'benign' at best, or 'common wisdom' at worst. But from a certain point of view, it is still propaganda.

"Consensus Science" is another propaganda tumor on the face of society today. Science is NOT consensus... it NEVER was.

As you go on to list some sources, it becomes clear to me, their 'intent' may only 'piggy back' on propaganda. And it is sort of 'up for grabs' how each of us wants to subjectively internalize that information; as well as whether it was 'injected' into the conversation knowing it was untrue or misleading. Or very damned 'convenient' to the stated or unstated purposes of the conveyor of information.

Most of us use propaganda very frequently... mostly for entertainment... memery comes to mind. Sometimes we embrace propaganda... eagerly accepting it and denying it's nature... because it allows us to agree... and feel the warm fuzzy comfort of mutual acceptance.

Propaganda has uses, but mostly applies to 'control.' "Good guys finish last" - that one comes to mind. It instructs "good guys" (or people wanting to be 'good guys') not to compete (not even to try) ... there's no point, they can't win.

"People are suckers." "People are sheep." Those are all examples of propaganda no one ever unpacks... imagine that?

Thanks again, for allowing me to explore these ideas with you.

originally posted by: Maxmars
"Propaganda" is one of the most abused topics in the history of topics.

Generally speaking, presentations about propaganda are filled with examples that give the impression that all propaganda is "enemy" propaganda. It's almost ironic... except it's relatively unfunny.

I can give you the first threshold of the phenomenon of propaganda, the question who's answer can almost invariably point to the true possibility...

(No matter the message/communication: )

"Did someone/anyone expend resources (pay) to make the message "reach you?"
If the answer is "Yes" ... "Propaganda" alert...

Medical studies
Court documents
Opposing arguments
History


BoRiNg!!!!!

a reply to: 19Bones79

Hey19 (God, I still love that song!)...usually a way to spread propoganda, is by starting a thread about how to spot it! Think about it...👍✌️😎

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Well one can argue that forcefully trying to convince someone of your viewpoint is in and of itself a form of propaganda.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

And so begins my introduction to Steely Dan and Boz Scaggs.

a reply to: 19Bones79

Give a shout out back here to member Bodisvata! Theres your next Steely Dan tune!

PS:WARNING! Colorful adult terms ahead!................."Steely Dan" was the name given to a chrome shiny dildo.

Wow, that was kinda hard even for me!!!!!

originally posted by: Maxmars
originally posted by: Nothin

Thank you so much for your reply.

It occurred to me that perhaps the more or less laconic phrasing "Propaganda" alert" might be misunderstood as a direct implication that the message actually is propaganda (information with 'intent'). What I had intended was to say it is the first indicator that it could be. To expand, I am referring to the authoring of the information, not the amplifier personality... or the casual relaying of the ideas.

People who collect and convey information might never recognize that their information is actually a propagandists' product.

An excellent example exists in the promulgation of certain medical "positions" recently manifesting themselves into our social order. Some may simply 'accept' the ideas so prominently amplified in our respective information-spheres at 'face value.' Some may amplify the information themselves, convinced that it is 'benign' at best, or 'common wisdom' at worst. But from a certain point of view, it is still propaganda.

"Consensus Science" is another propaganda tumor on the face of society today. Science is NOT consensus... it NEVER was.

As you go on to list some sources, it becomes clear to me, their 'intent' may only 'piggy back' on propaganda. And it is sort of 'up for grabs' how each of us wants to subjectively internalize that information; as well as whether it was 'injected' into the conversation knowing it was untrue or misleading. Or very damned 'convenient' to the stated or unstated purposes of the conveyor of information.

Most of us use propaganda very frequently... mostly for entertainment... memery comes to mind. Sometimes we embrace propaganda... eagerly accepting it and denying it's nature... because it allows us to agree... and feel the warm fuzzy comfort of mutual acceptance.

Propaganda has uses, but mostly applies to 'control.' "Good guys finish last" - that one comes to mind. It instructs "good guys" (or people wanting to be 'good guys') not to compete (not even to try) ... there's no point, they can't win.

"People are suckers." "People are sheep." Those are all examples of propaganda no one ever unpacks... imagine that?

Thanks again, for allowing me to explore these ideas with you.

Thanks for your reply.
When receiving a longer reply like that, sometimes it freezes me up, and don't know what to reply.

We get used to quick quippy replies, simple ideas, and forget how to hold larger concepts, sometimes.
( Didn't know if "quippy" was a real word, but it passed my spell-checker ! LoL ! )

Agreed that Propaganda™ can reach us, at different times, in different ways.
There are various types of Producers™ of Propaganda™, as well as various Distributors™, along with some, or many unsuspecting distributors.

Have done it myself, most likely not on purpose.
Maybe occasionally on purpose, to make a point.

Agreed that science was never about consensus, but now : apparently : Science™ is.
We had many many threads here, during the beginning of the Covid™ nonsense, with multiple purveyors of Official-Government-Information™.

No matter what we offered them, they were acting in fear, and distress, and could never get our points and views.
Some of them were a bit arrogant, but we must understand the power of the Psyop™ that hit us all.

We are gonna need to give-up our grudges at some point, and help-out those that are still paralyzed, or Vax-Damaged™.

Agreed that if we learn to recognize it even just a bit : we start to see it more often.
After a while : we see it almost everywhere.

Our communities, have become Societies™ built on so many of those little false stories that you mentioned.

It may be interesting to investigate many of those limited-beliefs that we have been force-fed, and see from whence they originated.

There was a thread exploring those kinds of ideas recently, by AOX..., about how they got us at Gen-X, or something like that.

Do you have any favorite tools, of filters, for spotting Propaganda™ ?

a reply to: 19Bones79

" How to spot propaganda "

Give Attention to ANY MSM Media News ?