Hoax to Gauge Public Reaction.

Just read this recent thread and started to think about this question, possibility or reality...

Creating a HOAX as a method of determining public sentiment, reactions and perceptions to be used by government, military, educational organizations, think tanks and other research organizations.

It seems to me that this would be a amazing "tool" in which to garner these otherwise difficult to obtain (secretly) data. The hoax could be perpetrated by any anonymous person, of course unaffiliated to any official organizations, with a full cover story, full text and timeline of event s to proceed with in the hoax.

A guideline would also be generated, similar to an experimental procedure, to address any questions that are posed to the hoaxer and rendering believable answers addressing any concerns, yet continuing with the hoax line.

Any number of topics can be studied as well, ranging from:

UFO existence, hostility to, benevolence to the people of Earth

Alien disclosure effects on the populace

Terrorist future events, magnitude of event & reactions

Chemical, nuclear, biological attacks reactions

Future asteroid impact imminence and the reactions

Psychic predictions, earthquake, floods, fires, etc

Time travel, other advanced technology, propulsion etc

Advanced military methods, equipment, weapons etc.

What do you think? Is it possible that some of the more elaborate hoaxes would be perpetrated by these orgs for the above purposes? I think it would be some "cheap" research and possibly MORE accurate than any other methods, also its REAL WORLD. These hoaxes can be started in different locations, the US, UK, CHINA etc as well as in different internet locations, ATS, more mainstream sites, yahoo, youtube etc.



[edit on 6/22/2007 by greatlakes]

I think there is some validity in what you have said. There are certainly lots of hoaxes out there.

I would also like to point out the possibility of using hoaxes to cover other unknown (to us) projects by seeding skepticism of stories and diverting attention from the real and/or secret cases. Hiding a needle in a haystack so to speak.

How do we know who's who on ATS

I am always rather wary of new members posting amazing information. These "startling" revelations can come from people who keep their anonymity and give little or nothing away, except enough relevant information to get the keyboards buzzing.

There's not much in the way of startling finds on places like YouTube these days and I would rather trust something from a more respectable source.

That said, there are plenty of opportunities for the "powers that be" to use legitimate looking fake sites for the purposes you have suggested. Even a ".com" can be used to fool people who don't realise it's ".org".

Take the National UFO Reporting Centre for instance (nuforc.org), there is something in the back of my mind that tells me there's more going on behind the scenes than they're letting on.

How can a non-profitmaking organisation afford, or even get to move to new premesis.....a de-commissioned intercontinental ballistic missile base

Well, chances are they're just renting and not the owners, BUT, after being contacted a few years ago by high level officials working for the government requesting information on reports and future co-operation from nuforc (even though "they" admit there is no such thing as "ET"), it all seems very suspicious to me. I wonder who the owners are?
I can't remember where I found the source for this info, can anyone help? I'd like to know more.

So yes, I think there are some very dubious sources behind some of the "hoax" stories we get to find out about here. I must admit, there is a certain satisfaction when they are "debunked". Also, a "hoax" is only a hoax if it is "debunked". How many other reports never get to that conclusion?

Good thread greatlakes and I'm flagging it and will return.

[edit on 24/6/2007 by nerbot]

Yes I believe its possible that some of the slicker hoaxes out there to have either some involvement by official sources, or a complete origination by these organizations. Theres even a theory that Google and Google video (now youtube as well) was setup to monitor and gather all videos from many facets of population for the reasons to control, monitor and disseminate the information.

Well, part of the trouble is if there is a UFO Hoax, for example, who sees or hears about it?
99.9% of the population don't, that's for sure.
UFO Sightings are really only noticed by the small group of people that are interested in such things. Quite a fringe group.

So it's a rather biased (one way or the other), small sample to use to make any judgments about the public's reaction.

I think you will find that most folk will be entertained momentarily when they see some Psychic making a prediction, then it just gets forgotten by the next amusement they see on the TV. The TV makes us willing to listen to anything, no matter who outlandish, and also discard most of it.

Originally posted by emjoi
Well, part of the trouble is if there is a UFO Hoax, for example, who sees or hears about it?
99.9% of the population don't, that's for sure.
UFO Sightings are really only noticed by the small group of people that are interested in such things. Quite a fringe group.

So it's a rather biased (one way or the other), small sample to use to make any judgments about the public's reaction.

True, but it is sometimes the fringe people that actually make the waves in the pond. Boston tea party, French revolution, Vietnam war protest...many others? Also sometimes it just take a few people to make a HUGE difference in history, ie: Watergate>2 reporters and a whistleblower>Nixon resigns>History changed in a big way.

if market researchers are willing to pay $50 - $100 to get your opinion on the taste of new ice cream, you think similar folk won't come here for a free ride?

It's a good point Greatlakes, sometimes there's more to a hoax than someone getting their kicks.

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
if market researchers are willing to pay $50 - $100 to get your opinion on the taste of new ice cream, you think similar folk won't come here for a free ride?

Good view on that, when I wrote this it was mainly from an official standpoint, mil/gov and the like, but now I can see extending it to other areas as well. Like students interested in free research to fill out their papers, experimenters, human condition researchers etc. I wish I could see what the admins of this site have access to, the ip addresses of some of the posters, as well as the IP address hits by official .mil .gov .org and .edu sites...sigh.

I got this link from the August false flagging thread - Yes, you are probably correct- If they want the infromation about our views, this would be the place to find them, for sure. I did give the OP my information though, why? Because its obviously needed by someone who is willing to put forth the effort and enegy to generate response- Who wants the answers, that I dont know. Someone on the other thread referenced a new movie coming out that covers a similar scene. Is it something simple and stupid like this? That would be sad for sure, but lets take into account that the data could still be used in a 'ET time of need'.
So, does the government deserve the information? Sure, especially if the point of the thread would lead us to believe that there should be 'no fear' of these beings. Is that harmful? - no sarcasm intended... Is it harmful to believe this?
Sorry, maybe I should have posted this in the other thread...

Well if the "false flag" thread is sponsored by our gov't, what do we think their consensus opinion would be concerning disclosure, potential panic of the public, reactions, religion etc? Also why do we think something was put on like this by the gov/mil, thinking about nearterm disclosure, or is it longterm, or is it beyond the control of them, and just trying to gauge the reactions to better cope with an event?

Greatlakes-
Thats just it, why? Thats why I gave any relevant info. I had. If there are ET, then the whole concept must be uncontrolable for the government. If not then ET discussion, sightings, ect. would be mainstream by now, dont you think? Why the needed concensus? Someone wants the information, someone, but for what purpose, we dont know.

There is rumor that the gov negotiated a timeline for disclosure after already having a meeting with these beings. But of course, only a consp. theory, rumor etc.

Originally posted by greatlakes
Creating a HOAX as a method of determining public sentiment, reactions and perceptions to be used by government, military, educational organizations, think tanks and other research organizations.

I like your thought GreatLakes.

Creating the hoax would allow one to analyze the responses from a controlled standpoint at a given moment, but as much can be learned by the hoaxes that others hold.

Part of the reluctance with the U.S. government's EBE disclosure may be due to the reaction of the people during Orson Welles "War of the Worlds" broadcast.

Here is a link on the study and what they found on public reaction to an alien invasion.

Many people missed or ignored the opening credits of the program, and in the atmosphere of growing tension and anxiety in the days leading up to World War II, took it to be a news broadcast. Contemporary newspapers reported that panic ensued, with people fleeing the area, and others thinking they could smell the poison gas or could see the flashes of the lightning in the distance.

Professor Richard J. Hand cites studies by unnamed historians who "calculate[d] that some six million heard the Columbia Broadcasting System broadcast; 1.7 million believed it to be true, and 1.2 million were 'genuinely frightened'". (Hand, 7) While Welles and company were heard by a comparatively small audience (Bergen's audience was an estimated 30 million), the uproar that followed was anything but minute: within a month, there were about 12,500 newspaper articles about the broadcast or its impact (Hand, 7), while Adolf Hitler cited the panic, as Hand writes, as "evidence of the decadence and corrupt condition of democracy." (Hand, 7)

Later studies suggested this "panic" was far less widespread than newspaper accounts suggested. However, it remains clear that many people were caught up, to one degree or another, in the confusion that followed.

Robert Bartholomew and Hilary Evans suggest in Panic Attacks that hundreds of thousands of thousands of people were frightened in some way, but note that evidence of people taking action based on this fear is "scant" and "anecdotal." Indeed, contemporary news articles indicate that police were swamped with hundreds of calls in numerous locations, but stories of people doing anything more than calling up the authorities typically involve groups of ones or tens and were often reported by people who were panicking, themselves.

Later studies also indicated that many listeners missed the repeated notices that the broadcast was entirely fictional.....

Some people called CBS, newspapers or the police in confusion over the realism of the simulated news bulletins. There were instances of panic scattered throughout the US as a result of the broadcast, especially in New York and New Jersey.

Lots of people research lots of things. I know that if I were in charge of gathering data for the government on public reaction to disclosure, I would be enjoying my job. What a blast it would be. If given the choice though, I want the job in being one of the few that decides whether the public ever gets to learn the truth that way.

I don't think that it will be able to stay under wraps much longer. The decision makers know that as well. But the tough part is, how do you choose to present it to the public. Do you use it to unite the nations of the world like Ronald Reagan spoke of, or do you use it to your own advantage to steer and control the public? Decisions, decisions.......

I imagine that some sort of computerized non-biased software and systems would be in place to help in such an experiment, if it were going on...

on the False Flag aspect I don't think it's ever been 'called' before the event historically speaking has it? As these are pretext casus belli type plans I would imagine the cloak of silence around them is pretty 'terminal'

Nope always after the fact, if ever found out at all of course. But these sociological experiments that I'm proposing to be happening would be more of a test reaction of the populace than actual false flag operations.

Perhaps done to help in the planning of certain aspects of the operation(s), dealing with the public, media manipulation, which of the right buttons to push etc. in current and future covert operations, or manipulation programs.



[edit on 6/26/2007 by greatlakes]

OK, along these same lines, for the government to let out a 'secret', and not let it spread so fast that it became panic, how would you do it?

A hoax on a site such as this would give some indication of how fast the word would spread to non - believers. So you would need to sponsor a number of hoaxes, each more believable than the last. This way, you could predict what the truth would do.

And who better, from the governments viewpoint, to "break" such a story? Because of our position as nutcases, we would have to have some real good proof, and then need to shove it down the main stream's throat one sentence at a time.

Talk about a controlled flow for information>

But could this be the reason for "sponsored" hoaxing?

its possible but difficult to judge public opinion through chat rooms and message boards when it comes to topics that goverment regard as classified due to the message board being an inaccurate reflection of society in terms the small number people they represent.
A wider cross section of people get all thier info from mainstream media
so the best place to test public opinion is through the mainstream media plus they will report peoples reaction. so its two for the price of one.
most pepole think the mainstream media are so credible, so some people take thier word to be absolute, when its far from it.

yes I don't think it's an exercise in gauging public opinion, like GR's job of predicting the small town response in Michigan, it's too far out. What about the family of gung-ho texans who live in the corner house? Impossible. Too many wildcards.

It's more to do with speed of message, speed with which the item moves through the net to other sites and other media. Rather like a criminal testing police response time with a fake play before the crime actual. 'If this breaks how long have we got?' kinda thing.

There's also an argument for testing the strength of the message. 'If the nutjobs on ATS can bring it down in X days, we better go back to the script and start over. Lose the guys in suits maybe?' etc

Just as much as we perform a free service for spooks, Hollywood script writers could come and hone their stories in the same way. Or from my own rebel base, games designers.

Viral internet memes and real time social contagion are both hot and non-exclusive items at the moment. Not just for branding but for media manipulation. The net is still something 'they' don't have by the tail and they're seeking the grail still. Good luck with that I say.



[edit on 26-6-2007 by kickoutthejams]

I think the thing to do that would be in the best interest of both ATS and ATS Members would be to set a "Stage" where if someone like GhostRaven wanted to come forward with some "Information" for the public awareness.

-Stage 01) They would first need to show something that will prove to the Mods/Admins of ATS that they have some kind of proof that could verify the Information they want to reveal.

-Stage 02) Once the informer has been Verified, he would then be able to tell his info/story, other wise the Informer should not be taken seriously.

In a way don't we kinda already have that? ATS is the stage, anyone can step up member or non-member alike and tell their story. Initially I believe we're all receptive or we wouldn't be here. The T&Cs keep things fairly on key and civil and the poster gets their chance to say their piece, present whatever they have either directly or through a respected third party such as a mod.

Then...

Open Season!

No but seriously I think any poster garners a respectful audience if they in turn treat the rest of us with respect. A wooly, flakey tale with nothing to back it up remains a wooly, flakey tale.