Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Fourteen Propaganda Techniques Fox "News" Uses to Brainwash Americans

There is nothing more sacred to the maintenance of democracy than a free press. Access to comprehensive, accurate and quality information is essential to the manifestation of Socratic citizenship - the society characterized by a civically engaged, well-informed and socially invested populace. Thus, to the degree that access to quality information is willfully or unintentionally obstructed, democracy itself is degraded.

It is ironic that in the era of 24-hour cable news networks and "reality" programming, the news-to-fluff ratio and overall veracity of information has declined precipitously. Take the fact Americans now spend on average about 50 hours a week using various forms of media, while at the same time cultural literacy levels hover just above the gutter. Not only does mainstream media now tolerate gross misrepresentations of fact and history by public figures (highlighted most recently by Sarah Palin's ludicrous depiction of Paul Revere's ride), but many media actually legitimize these displays. Pause for a moment and ask yourself what it means that the world's largest, most profitable and most popular news channel passes off as fact every whim, impulse and outrageously incompetent analysis of its so-called reporters. How did we get here? Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn't real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn't born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job. All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?

My curiosity about this question compelled me to sit down and document the most oft-used methods by which willful ignorance has been turned into dogma by Fox News and other propagandists disguised as media. The techniques I identify here also help to explain the simultaneously powerful identification the Fox media audience has with the network, as well as their ardent, reflexive defenses of it.

The good news is that the more conscious you are of these techniques, the less likely they are to work on you. The bad news is that those reading this article are probably the least in need in of it.

(see link for the list of 14 things)

by Anonymousreply 7205/09/2013

why don't you copy/paste them, you lazy bitch?

by Anonymousreply 105/27/2012

You don't get to call me a 'lazy bitch' if you're too lazy to click the link provided.

And the reason I didn't copy/paste the entier thing is that it wouldn't have fix in the post... it would have gotten cut off.

So there.

by Anonymousreply 205/27/2012

[quote]You don't get to call me a 'lazy bitch' if you're too lazy to click the link provided.

I clicked the link; OP is a lazy bitch.

by Anonymousreply 305/27/2012

Good find, OP; thanks!

by Anonymousreply 405/27/2012

Let's face it, we're all lazy bitches here.

by Anonymousreply 505/27/2012

[bold]1. Panic Mongering.[/bold]

This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren't activated, you aren't alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don't think rationally. And when they can't think rationally, they'll believe anything.

by Anonymousreply 605/27/2012

[bold]2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. [/bold]

Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person's credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. "liberals," "hippies," "progressives" etc. This form of argument - if it can be called that - leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass.

by Anonymousreply 705/27/2012

[bold]3. Projection/Flipping. [/bold]

This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you're using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first. We see this frequently in the immigration discussion, where anti-racists are accused of racism, or in the climate change debate, where those who argue for human causes of the phenomenon are accused of not having science or facts on their side. It's often called upon when the media host finds themselves on the ropes in the debate.

by Anonymousreply 805/27/2012

[bold]4. Rewriting History. [/bold]

This is another way of saying that propagandists make the facts fit their worldview. The Downing Street Memos on the Iraq war were a classic example of this on a massive scale, but it happens daily and over smaller issues as well. A recent case in point is Palin's mangling of the Paul Revere ride, which Fox reporters have bent over backward to validate. Why lie about the historical facts, even when they can be demonstrated to be false? Well, because dogmatic minds actually find it easier to reject reality than to update their viewpoints. They will literally rewrite history if it serves their interests. And they'll often speak with such authority that the casual viewer will be tempted to question what they knew as fact.

by Anonymousreply 905/27/2012

[bold]5. Scapegoating/Othering. [/bold]

This works best when people feel insecure or scared. It's technically a form of both fear mongering and diversion, but it is so pervasive that it deserves its own category. The simple idea is that if you can find a group to blame for social or economic problems, you can then go on to a) justify violence/dehumanization of them, and b) subvert responsibility for any harm that may befall them as a result.

by Anonymousreply 1005/27/2012

[bold]6. Conflating Violence With Power and Opposition to Violence With Weakness. [/bold]

This is more of what I'd call a "meta-frame" (a deeply held belief) than a media technique, but it is manifested in the ways news is reported constantly. For example, terms like "show of strength" are often used to describe acts of repression, such as those by the Iranian regime against the protesters in the summer of 2009. There are several concerning consequences of this form of conflation. First, it has the potential to make people feel falsely emboldened by shows of force - it can turn wars into sporting events. Secondly, especially in the context of American politics, displays of violence - whether manifested in war or debates about the Second Amendment - are seen as noble and (in an especially surreal irony) moral. Violence become synonymous with power, patriotism and piety.

by Anonymousreply 1105/27/2012

[bold]7. Bullying. [/bold]

This is a favorite technique of several Fox commentators. That it continues to be employed demonstrates that it seems to have some efficacy. Bullying and yelling works best on people who come to the conversation with a lack of confidence, either in themselves or their grasp of the subject being discussed. The bully exploits this lack of confidence by berating the guest into submission or compliance. Often, less self-possessed people will feel shame and anxiety when being berated and the quickest way to end the immediate discomfort is to cede authority to the bully. The bully is then able to interpret that as a "win."

by Anonymousreply 1205/27/2012

[bold]8. Confusion. [/bold]

As with the preceding technique, this one works best on an audience that is less confident and self-possessed. The idea is to deliberately confuse the argument, but insist that the logic is airtight and imply that anyone who disagrees is either too dumb or too fanatical to follow along. Less independent minds will interpret the confusion technique as a form of sophisticated thinking, thereby giving the user's claims veracity in the viewer's mind.

by Anonymousreply 1305/27/2012

[bold]9. Populism. [/bold]

This is especially popular in election years. The speakers identifies themselves as one of "the people" and the target of their ire as an enemy of the people. The opponent is always "elitist" or a "bureaucrat" or a "government insider" or some other category that is not the people. The idea is to make the opponent harder to relate to and harder to empathize with. It often goes hand in hand with scapegoating. A common logical fallacy with populism bias when used by the right is that accused "elitists" are almost always liberals - a category of political actors who, by definition, advocate for non-elite groups.

by Anonymousreply 1405/27/2012

[bold]10. Invoking the Christian God. [/bold]

This is similar to othering and populism. With morality politics, the idea is to declare yourself and your allies as patriots, Christians and "real Americans" (those are inseparable categories in this line of thinking) and anyone who challenges them as not. Basically, God loves Fox and Republicans and America. And hates taxes and anyone who doesn't love those other three things. Because the speaker has been benedicted by God to speak on behalf of all Americans, any challenge is perceived as immoral. It's a cheap and easy technique used by all totalitarian entities from states to cults.

by Anonymousreply 1505/27/2012

[bold]11. Saturation. [/bold]

There are three components to effective saturation: being repetitive, being ubiquitous and being consistent. The message must be repeated cover and over, it must be everywhere and it must be shared across commentators: e.g. "Saddam has WMD." Veracity and hard data have no relationship to the efficacy of saturation. There is a psychological effect of being exposed to the same message over and over, regardless of whether it's true or if it even makes sense, e.g., "Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States." If something is said enough times, by enough people, many will come to accept it as truth. Another example is Fox's own slogan of "Fair and Balanced."

by Anonymousreply 1605/27/2012

[bold]12. Disparaging Education. [/bold]

There is an emerging and disturbing lack of reverence for education and intellectualism in many mainstream media discourses. In fact, in some circles (e.g. Fox), higher education is often disparaged as elitist. Having a university credential is perceived by these folks as not a sign of credibility, but of a lack of it. In fact, among some commentators, evidence of intellectual prowess is treated snidely and as anti-American. Education and other evidence of being trained in critical thinking are direct threats to a hive-mind mentality, which is why they are so viscerally demeaned.

by Anonymousreply 1705/27/2012

[bold]13. Guilt by Association. [/bold]

This is a favorite of Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart, both of whom have used it to decimate the careers and lives of many good people. Here's how it works: if your cousin's college roommate's uncle's ex-wife attended a dinner party back in 1984 with Gorbachev's niece's ex-boyfriend's sister, then you, by extension are a communist set on destroying America. Period.

by Anonymousreply 1805/27/2012

[bold]14. Diversion. [/bold]

This is where, when on the ropes, the media commentator suddenly takes the debate in a weird but predictable direction to avoid accountability. This is the point in the discussion where most Fox anchors start comparing the opponent to Saul Alinsky or invoking ACORN or Media Matters, in a desperate attempt to win through guilt by association. Or they'll talk about wanting to focus on "moving forward," as though by analyzing the current state of things or God forbid, how we got to this state of things, you have no regard for the future. Any attempt to bring the discussion back to the issue at hand will likely be called deflection, an ironic use of the technique of projection/flipping.

by Anonymousreply 1905/27/2012

... happy now?

by Anonymousreply 2005/27/2012

Yes, OP, we are indeed happy now.

Thank you for c&p'ing them.

by Anonymousreply 2105/27/2012

So what I don't get is that it doesn't take half a brain (or an article) to realize that this is what they're doing; how stupid do you have to be to not see it? It's been blatantly obvious to me since they signed on the air that this was their game. I fault the rest of the "mainstream" media for allowing the lies and distortions to take hold as part of the general conversation by not loudly and vociferously denouncing the lies for what they are when they occur.

by Anonymousreply 2205/27/2012

It's always stunning to me the otherwise intelligent people who think FOX News is the only "honest" and "truthful" news source.

by Anonymousreply 2305/27/2012

And people still wonder how Hitler could happen?

It's happening again, but when you live within the system it's more difficult to see.

by Anonymousreply 2405/27/2012


Thank you for taking the time. This is a valuable resource and not just for calling out Fox News. We also see these techniques on datalounge.

Fox News viewers show up now and again, and not just viewers. One Murdoch/Gingrich associate makes a habit of calling out other posters as "Looney Liberals," (Number 2 from the list) and telling posters to "Die in a Grease Fire," (Number 7).

Now we know where such posters got their training, and we have a handy list for rebuttal.

A tip of the hat also to Truthout, an organization that should get more recognition.

by Anonymousreply 2505/28/2012

Oh OK...MSNBC gives both sides ofan issue? OP can't stand the fact that FOX ratings are beating the shit out of all the other cable news outlets. This is the funniest thread yet.

by Anonymousreply 2605/28/2012

Ahh, sorry r26 but the truth doesn't have two "sides" no matter what the MSM has told you. Did you bother to read the article? I doubt you're much into reading if you came here to defend Fox News.

by Anonymousreply 2705/28/2012

Didn't take long for the Fox News apologists to show up, did it?

Now's a good time to use the list as an aide in analysis. Let's see what R26 is up to.

The topic of the thread is propaganda tactics at Fox News. Bringing in MSNBC ratings is an irrelevant issue.

He has nothing he can say to rebut the fact that Fox twists the news using these tactics, so he wants to change the subject -- talk about something else -- ratings. We have a clear example of Number 8 -- Confusion.

We don't even need to reach the issue that news in a democracy is not supposed to be sold to an audience like a commercial selling a bar of soap with an eye towards ratings.

News is not something to be marketed, not in a democracy in which we are supposed to have an informed electorate, who know have a background in the issues and in the facts, not an electorate that gets sold a position with an eye towards rating success and catch phrases developed in focus groups.

There is also more than a hint of Number 7, bullying with the pointless asides about "beating the shit" and "funniest." Those words are not language of discourse but language of the truncheon and the fire hose.

by Anonymousreply 2805/28/2012

What a bunch of clueless sheep.

by Anonymousreply 2905/28/2012

Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

America has NEVER, repeat, NEVER, had respect for knowledge.

by Anonymousreply 3005/28/2012

FOX has been dumb like a.....

The entire point of their propaganda push hasn't been to fool the public; it has been to destroy the public's faith in ALL news outlets.

Then the government is seen as the only trusted source.

Sic semper tyrannis.

by Anonymousreply 3105/28/2012

boring and it doesn't explain. You have explain why people are fooled by it.

by Anonymousreply 3205/28/2012


That's a good point.

Fox has no particular allegiance to facts or history because they don't see conveying information on an issue as part of their job. Their mission is to shape opinion not inform.

In any case, when people call them on their lies, Fox News doesn't care. They use the occasion to claim that all news is slanted which diverts attention (Diversion -- Number 14) from themselves and sells the line: "Why bother? All media lie, Why think about things?"

If people aren't thinking or if they are thinking but starting from the wrong facts, then how can they challenge the people in power?

Which of course is the real goal of Fox News -- keep people from organizing resistance.


It is not so much, or not only, that people don't respect knowledge, it is that the knowledge that we have available to assimilate and use to accomplish our goals important to us is stunted.

Every high school and college in the United States offers courses in which you can learn how to run a business, read a balance sheet and how to do double-entry accounting with a spreadsheet.

This is knowledge that helps the rich who own the corporations and the staff that serves them.

How many schools offer courses in organizing unions? How many schools teach people how to use OSHA to get into the workplace and make it safer? How many schools teach courses in tactics of civil disobedience useful to fight oil exploration, the war machine, or discrimination on the basis of race, sexual orientation, or immigration status?

If the rest of us had courses in these areas, we would have a lot more respect for knowledge, because then we would knowledge would give us skills that we could use to make our lives better and to protect the gains once we won them.

When the lessons we learn don't help us, we don't honor the teachers or the process.

by Anonymousreply 3305/28/2012

Don't forget the little technique Fox uses to try and push an untruth that was revealed in Robert Greenwald's documentary "Outfoxed". It's beginning a thought or question with ..."Some people say..."

by Anonymousreply 3405/28/2012

All of this, of course, requires a dumbed down audience that is easy to manipulate.

(Thank reality TV for that)

by Anonymousreply 3505/28/2012

Op...there is a great documentary from 2004 called Outfoxed. It covers how Murdoch bastardized journalism and includes interviews old school and upstanding journalists like Cronkite. It is onNetflix streaming. Very facinating and well worth the watch.

by Anonymousreply 3605/28/2012

Sorry... Should be includes interviews WITH old school".

by Anonymousreply 3705/28/2012

r33, thank you. Excellent point about the standard courses in "business" yet none in labor.

Back in 1966, my high school made us seniors learn all about union history, Samuel Gompers, and so on. The more that teachers' unions/professional associations are broken, the less labor history will be taught.

When I eventually taught, I made sure my classes heard all about how the British helped workers with child-labor laws (as one example).

I've been retired a decade, so I have no clue anymore what gives in our high schools.

by Anonymousreply 3805/28/2012

NPR covered a similar topic that explored just one point, which was not covered in the article provided by Op. NPR contended that people will hold onto their false beliefs out of a fear of being wrong, even when presented with facts to the contrary. I think there was a piece on TED that also covered this point.

by Anonymousreply 3905/28/2012

I remember that study... even intelligent people will cling to a belief regardless of facts presented.

This is why beliefs are bad, are dangerous. It's hard to change them.

This is one thing the movie "Dogma" got right.

by Anonymousreply 4005/28/2012

[quote]NPR contended that people will hold onto their false beliefs out of a fear of being wrong, even when presented with facts to the contrary.

I sensed many refused to change their opinion out of mistrust -- they were not sure of the agenda behind the process.

by Anonymousreply 4105/28/2012

Dogma (movie) is excellent. That is my belief no matter what other people say.

by Anonymousreply 4205/28/2012

ALL media outlets use these techniques.

And of course they would label you a "kooky conspiracy theorist" for saying so.

The physical laws of motion as laid down by Isaac Newton disprove the official story of 9/11 but most of you are trained to believe that only a "tinhat" could think that.

by Anonymousreply 4305/28/2012

R41 -- here is a link to a Boston Globe story on the study. I am to lazy to look for the NPR piece that I referenced.

by Anonymousreply 4405/28/2012

[quote]The entire point of their propaganda push hasn't been to fool the public; it has been to destroy the public's faith in ALL news outlets.

Very true.

by Anonymousreply 4505/28/2012

If you erode people's confidence in their own ability to gather facts and make reasonable decisions about issues that affect them, then it is easier to make decisions for them.

"All science is a matter of opinion, a theory is just a theory not facts, some people say evolution is right, some disagree, why not teach both?"

One reason you don't do that is that it teaches young people the wrong lessons how to gather evidence, reach a conclusion, and test the conclusion.

There is a poster here who likes to brag about ratings as an indicator of how well a media outlet is doing its job.

If NPR put on a documentary about Darwin and Fox put on a show about the opening of a creation museum, then we are to suppose Fox is the better news outlet if Fox gets better ratings for showing God making the world 6000 years ago?

No, we should draw the reasonable conclusion that Fox wants to make the public distrust science.

If young people think science is a matter of opinion and personal belief, then they can be led to war on the basis of yellow cake forgeries and weapons of mass destruction. They can be taught that trickle down works and unions don't help.

by Anonymousreply 4605/29/2012

[quote]ALL media outlets use these techniques.

That's the point. There is no real News as we knew it anymore. The last of the real News Men was Dan Rather who was fired for reporting the truth about Bush being a Draft Dodger. By being honest he hurt the Republican President in turn hurting his employer The CBS Corporation.

by Anonymousreply 4705/29/2012

I read someone that Fox News has about 2 million viewers. It is on at my gym, so sometimes I can't help but glance at it. The model is genius, take a bunch of pretty girls and have them read the news, then get a bunch of older white guys to give opinion and spout republican talking points. But have you ever noticed the commercials? Those commercials are targeting a geriatric crowd. So my guess is, the core audience of Fox News will be dead soon.

by Anonymousreply 4805/29/2012

[quote]I read someone that Fox News has about 2 million viewers. It is on at my gym

Yes, at it highest, which is primetime, around 2 million viewers, from 310 million Americans. It was also determined that a lot are seniors who put the channel on and leave it there all day.

by Anonymousreply 4905/29/2012

They fear monger so much.

Almost every hours it's a (gong) Fox News Alert!

Iran is doing something deadly!

Obama is doing something deadly!

Farmers are doing something deadly to the food!

Diabetes is doing something deadly to your body!

by Anonymousreply 5005/29/2012

3. Projection/Flipping.

This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you're using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first. We see this frequently in the immigration discussion, where anti-racists are accused of racism, or in the climate change debate, where those who argue for human causes of the phenomenon are accused of not having science or facts on their side. It's often called upon when the media host finds themselves on the ropes in the debate. ============================================= I see this one all the time on blogs. They project everything they themselves are guilty of onto others debating them. They frequently call everyone else hate filled yet they do nothing except spew insults and make personal attacks.

by Anonymousreply 5105/29/2012

Exactly, R51.

It's almost pathological among ALL conservatives and Republicans these days.

If you want to know what they're doing, just listen to what they're accusing others of. And you'll know exactly what they're doing.

Because they only accuse others of what they themselves are actually guilty of.

by Anonymousreply 5205/29/2012

My father has FOX News on 24/7 and I agree with everyone of the points. On morning I heard a commentator use the phase "it made me toss my cookies" about 20 minutes later I heard the same phase by another commentator in the same context. Both commentator had obviously been given a talking point to repeat.

What I really cannot stand is the talking over each other and the interrupting (Bullying). Even when you have a group that holds basically the same point of view (5 at 50), they treat each other the same way.

I also love how they ask "Have you stopped beating your wife" questions and then bully the other person to answer yes or no.

by Anonymousreply 5305/29/2012

There is some naivete here. Back when we only had the three networks, the CIA ran those networks. It wasn't as harmful, not because of the "fairness" doctrine but because there was no conservative consensus among the management. Have we ever had "real news" in this country? I think so. A hundred years ago there were so many daily papers that to some extent they were a check on each other and things were reported about local government that would never be reported today. But that was a LONG time ago.

by Anonymousreply 5405/30/2012

Corporate Media has little cred with anyone 18-40 today and a growing number of those over 40 who are smartening up.

Unfortunately the 8-12 year old girls are soaking up the Justin Beiber infused Corporate crap, at about 100% and the male birth rates are collapsing, so things may stop moving forward again, in the future.

by Anonymousreply 5505/31/2012

The media does come under a lot of control, more today than fifty or a hundred years ago, but there has always been control, the invisible hand of economic pressure.

Media has to sell ads to survive, and that was true 100 years ago and it is true now. The organizations that have money to spend on advertising and that benefit from large advertising budgets are of a special type with certain goals to accomplish, and those goals are not necessarily aligned with what the public needs.

Take a hypothetical. Imagine a community whose transportation infrastructure needs to be either re-built or re-designed. Two solutions present themselves, re-build the infrastructure for auto traffic, or re-design transportation to make it suitable for mass transit.

These two solutions are put out to the public for consideration. People are to chose politicians to work with one solution or the other, and the media are going to pick sides.

The oil and auto industries are going to have much more influence on the position the local media take because they buy ads all the time. Public transportation authorities don't.

That economic presence in the media of the oil and auto industry is going to shove the media towards accepting solutions that favor oil and auto industries.

by Anonymousreply 5605/31/2012

My father used to be a democrat who voted for Bill Clinton in the 90's.. then 9/11 happened and he started to watch FOX news..he's now completely brainwash..the things that comes out of his mouth is ridiculous..

by Anonymousreply 5705/31/2012

OP, my sincerest "thank you" to you for posting.

We were at the parents place this weekend, and I could not **stand** to get the fuck out of there.

The ignorance is truly amazing. The brother (in the 1%) is just plain brainwashed. It breaks my heart.

The kids are told to "BE Republicans!" and when I talk about the gay agenda the remarks are "we all love you and know you are gay (you and your friend), so you don't need to always bring up "gay topics" (and there were 2 other gays at the table so it wasn't like it was a forced conversation).

And the old man watches Fox. Listens to Rush. Respects O'Reilly and Trump. Ditto the rich brother who is even more into "no taxes no matter the outcome, I don't give handouts" and yet the folks are poor.

It's a sad day in America, and, sadly, the world.

New World Order is being accomplished through the media folks.

And we've accepted it. The reason, why when I forward the link, none of these loved ones will read it? It's too long. Not enough time. Please just feed me snippets I can quickly absorb, etc. etc.

It's a sad world. Will 2012 enlighten anyone?

by Anonymousreply 5805/31/2012

There was a time when radio and television news made of point of being unbiased, or if they were, didn't show it. Now anchors and reporters who should be neutral in their delivery smirk when reporting information they don't agree with.

by Anonymousreply 5905/31/2012

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NY Times also use these techniques. Fox is by far, the worst.

Americans are highly manipulated, against their own interests, by the Corporate media today. Stop reading the Corporate spin.

by Anonymousreply 6005/31/2012


The indoctrination goes far beyond the mass media.

For years the Koch brothers especially have been devoting millions to subvert the tradition of independent scholarly research in the universities, funding faculty members who then generate right-wing slanted research for their students and for the media.

The Koch brothers give universities grant money through puppet organizations, so their role in the warping of academic research remains hidden. Their donations come with provisions that direct the university to hire professors with a right-wing agenda who are to teach certain courses with predetermined content.

While we expect professors to abide by principles of academic honesty and seek truth through research, that is not what we get. The professors provide slanted opinions based on twisted statistics. The media, liberal, middle of the road, and certainly on the right pick up this research as though it presented an honest analysis of evidence.

When you hear Fox News claim that: "Researchers at Florida State have shown that . . . ," they are parroting bullshit research that favors the Koch Brothers and corporate ideology.

Then they can ask politicians for their take on the recent "research," creating the concept for the public that what is being discussed has merit. It doesn't.

The "New York Daily News" has gotten particularly bad about printing op-ed articles from faculty members at places like George Mason, an institution that seems to have gotten a lot of conservative money because you see their faculty members supporting the corporate agenda frequently.

I am not picking on these two universities. Robert Greenwald in "The Koch Brothers Exposed," has done a lot of work on the Koch brothers, and he has found upwards of many examples of right-wing corporate money funding ersatz faculty chairs. It is hard to tell because they fund this crap through shadow organizations.

Whenever you hear an academic on a talk show or in the mass media, of any political stripe, who talks about global warming, the effect of the union movement on job security and wages, charter schools, or the faux financial emergency facing Social Security, these people are almost always going to be long-term moles planted in colleges who work for the agenda of the rich and the corporations that they own.

Years ago many of us on the left objected when the universities, especially public universities, allowed an integration of corporate activity into university research.

It was clear what would happen. Universities never have enough money and if they get money from corporations, they are going to shift what they do to favor corporations. Corporations, rather obviously, don't have an agenda to serve the public. They have their own, ever-increasing profits.

The more public funding is cut, see California, the more private corporations can take over -- one reason the right wants to end public education once and for all.

It is also why they want to break the teachers' unions, because the faculty, the honest ones, oppose this shift and effective opposition requires an organization.

by Anonymousreply 6106/02/2012

Fox News doesn't brainwash people, it just tells people what they want to hear.

Confronting ignorance with facts does nothing, I've given up on it - people believe what they want to believe and the ignorant are ignorant by choice. There's nothing you can do about it.

by Anonymousreply 6206/02/2012

What you say is true. A lot of it is inertia, the way people think about the stable things in their lives.

We all have ego invested in our jobs, or communities, our house or apartment, and our political beliefs. We want to think these things are successful because then we are successful.

But that can change very rapidly, and it doesn't have to involve a majority of the people or result in a majority vote for a new direction or a different leader.

When enough people get so pissed off that they conclude that they are not to blame for conditions they now perceive to be disastrous for themselves, then they learn who is too blame.

When they understand that many other people just like them are in the same boat and that common solutions are possible if they act together, that's when they begin to question what the media has fed them, the narrative of the news.

Then they do their own research, produce their own leaders, and work out their own solutions. It doesn't take a majority. All it takes is enough to make the way the society functions intolerable for the majority.

The problem is that we don't know when or where the next upsurge will occur. The onset of these events follow their own mysterious rules.

Will it be Athens? Madrid? Chicago was heard from when NATO as in town, with thousands of demonstrators took to the streets.

Montreal is doing a pretty good job of fighting back right now. Who would have thought students in Canada(!) would threaten the ruling regime? Last week the government, which wants to end pubic education (sound familiar?), made demonstrations illegal.

The response: People by the hundreds of thousands, young old, not just students, gathered in the streets and said: "Fuck you, here we are. Arrest us!"

What did the government say? "Well, they aren't obeying us. Can we talk, please?"

What we do know is that when a society is under stress for long enough things start happening and one thing that can happen is that the rulers lose control of the narrative. People come to understand that to survive, to have a decent life, they have to reexamine everything. That's when things get interesting.

In the meantime? Keep up our spirits and keep agitating, even if sometimes it is like pushing a rope.

by Anonymousreply 6306/02/2012

[quote]Fox News doesn't brainwash people, it just tells people what they want to hear.

It's actually both. They work hard to confirm people's biases... but they also work hard to brain-wash people with lies and spin and propaganda, repeating it endlessly until their viewers just repeat it to others out of habit.

by Anonymousreply 6406/02/2012

If you really listen to what Right Wing Nut Jobs and Republicans whine about, you'll realize they hate themselves.

Poor things... Good thing they aren't self aware.

by Anonymousreply 6506/02/2012

R62 Something can be done about it, push the reset button for the planet, just like happened 65M years ago.

by Anonymousreply 6606/02/2012


by Anonymousreply 6709/24/2012

somebody should start a thread on how the British and Australian media have absolutely ruined the American media landscape.

Any journalist stumped for a piece subject? Well there ya go. Here's a good starter:

Fox news is owned by an Australian, who has continuously shatted upon the U.S. since he began doing business here over 30 years ago.

First his companies stalked and harassed celebrities in LA and NY. Then he starts up Fox news to finish the job of ruining journalism in this country.

And to think, a certain pair of diabolical brothers are about to get their hands of several top 10 newspapers. You should just prepare to have all of your ignorant family members to become brainwashed right-wing zombies.

by Anonymousreply 6805/09/2013

They didn't ruin American media they just ran it like a business. They all run it like a business, the Australians and Brits just run it with a particularly vulgar edge.

The only time journalism was worth a damn was when it was run as small one owner publications - and even then you'd be influenced by the bias of the owner. Now you've got bias and the quarterly numbers. It's hopeless. The internet hasn't made it any better... as r62 observed, people now seek out only what they want to hear. The dialogue is polarized and isolated.

98% of the time media is useless. They still provide a rallying point to scare politicians when the narrative randomly gels but that's not very often any longer.

by Anonymousreply 6905/09/2013

well at least you cared enough to reply so thank you.

but we must remember that child-sex trafficking is run like a business too. In fact, it is a business. It creates jobs.

Does that mean we should excuse it?

by Anonymousreply 7005/09/2013

Hardly comparable in any respect and I'm too tired at this hour to toy with or indulge the feeble minded.

by Anonymousreply 7105/09/2013

ahmm ..Somebody just got to Chapter 6 in PolySci 221.

by Anonymousreply 7205/09/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!