Fake News and the War on Freedom and Truth

[TargeT]

[Valerie Villars]

They forgot to add cleavage.

[TargeT]

CNN doesn't script town hall meetings... Never!

[norman]

Google/Youtube sent an 'idiot' to answer questions from a parliamentary committee in London today Tuesday March 13th.

The committee questions are almost more depressing than the answers.

It sounds to me like they are relying very heavily on algorithms, and that this person knows almost nothing about the targeting or the politics.

MP3
https://app.box.com/s/obhmamxdifjflv8iy09a688d40jyx27g

[TargeT]

Probably a repost.. if it's not it needs to be here....

TV is BS

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

[Ba-ba-Ra]

From Health Ranger, Mike Adams:

YouTube bans pandemic preparedness video that teaches people how to survive a deadly outbreak.

According to YouTube, teaching people how to survive a pandemic and remain calm “violates our guidelines” and gets banned.

The video is on this website: https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-...-outbreak.html

[Tintin]

Posted by TargeT (here)
Probably a repost.. if it's not it needs to be here....

TV is BS

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jH8dejYGa5A

Mike Adams' quick capsule review of Paul Joseph Watson's recent compilation here as well. I nearly started a new thread but no need as this sits quite tidily here I think.

It would be funny - well, it kind of is anyway - were it not so terrible.

Stunning video reveals how local news TV journalists are nothing but human puppets (presstitutes) reading propaganda scripts

Sunday, April 01, 2018 by: Mike Adams

A stunning video posted by Paul Joseph Watson reveals the extent to which local TV journalists are presstitute puppets who deliver the exact same lines read from scripts.

This video exposes just how fake the legacy media really is, and adding to the irony, this stunning demonstration of coordinated fake news was intended to be an attack against fake news. (h/t to Gateway Pundit)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=4zve_TXOXz8

[Foxie Loxie]

Has anyone watched the old movie, "Citizen Kane"? At one point, Kane says, "The people will believe what I tell them to believe"!(newspaper) Think WWII era, didn't most people believe what their governments told them, fight & die for it?!

It is encouraging that at this point in time so many have become aware of The Hidden Hand so we can unmask what is REALLY going on!

[TargeT]

Social media colludes to bash false news, with the exact same words over hundreds of stations.... this is a great clip... haha

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=cabD_0h5mcA

[Ivy23]

Posted by TargeT (here)
Social media colludes to bash false news, with the exact same words over hundreds of stations.... this is a great clip... haha

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=cabD_0h5mcA

Folks, don’t forget.... this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. Excellent clip!

[Tintin]

Posted by Ivy23 (here)

Posted by TargeT (here)
Social media colludes to bash false news, with the exact same words over hundreds of stations.... this is a great clip... haha

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=cabD_0h5mcA

Folks, don’t forget.... this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. Excellent clip!

This is the same Paul Joseph Watson video posted here, isn't it? https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1217959

[Tintin]

Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
Has anyone watched the old movie, "Citizen Kane"? At one point, Kane says, "The people will believe what I tell them to believe"!(newspaper) Think WWII era, didn't most people believe what their governments told them, fight & die for it?!

It is encouraging that at this point in time so many have become aware of The Hidden Hand so we can unmask what is REALLY going on!

I have Foxie and it truly is a masterpiece.

It has definitely been shared here before - well, at least references to, I know I have - but the movie 'Network' from 1976 and a particular scene in that (where the character Howard Beale is metaphorically mown down by the 'Corporaion' spiel, somewhere towards the end) kinda sums things up too.

In the meantime enjoy one of these

[Tintin]

@Foxie Loxie:

Here's the memorable narrative from 'Network' that I mentioned in a very recent post here. I think you'd agree - a remarkable piece of scripting, and still so continually relevant over forty years later.

Arthur Jensen: You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it! Is that clear? You think you've merely stopped a business deal. That is not the case! The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations. There are no peoples. There are no Russians. There are no Arabs. There are no third worlds. There is no West. There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multivariate, multinational dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels.

It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today! And YOU have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and YOU... WILL... ATONE! Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM, and ITT, and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state, Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale.

The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that... perfect world... in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock. All necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel.

Howard Beale: Why me?
Arthur Jensen: Because you're on television, dummy. Sixty million people watch you every night of the week, Monday through Friday.
Howard Beale: I have seen the face of God.
Arthur Jensen: You just might be right, Mr. Beale.

[Foxie Loxie]

Thanks, Tintin!

[Tintin]

Ahead of another terrifically salient and poignant reminder blog post from Jon Rappoport I am going to take the liberty of continuing a brief 'Network' (1976) theme and lead off this post with a scene from this absolute titanic classic of a movie.

IMDb information on the film can be found here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/?ref_=ttqt_qt_tt

The script sparkles, and the performances from the whole ensemble in this movie are really quite something. I absolutely recommend that any reader or guest here watch it as it will provide searing insight and may help cement relevant commentary.

The character Howard Beale is a one-time news anchor for a 'fictional' tv network who has a Damascean moment one night and becomes a somewhat messianic champion of freedom of thought and individualism.

Here's another classic scene, one which you may well have come across before:

Howard Beale: [laughing to himself]

But, man, you're never going to get any truth from us. We'll tell you anything you want to hear; we lie like hell. We'll tell you that, uh, Kojak always gets the killer, or that nobody ever gets cancer at Archie Bunker's house, and no matter how much trouble the hero is in, don't worry, just look at your watch; at the end of the hour he's going to win. We'll tell you any **** you want to hear. We deal in *illusions*, man! None of it is true! But you people sit there, day after day, night after night, all ages, colors, creeds... We're all you know. You're beginning to believe the illusions we're spinning here. You're beginning to think that the tube is reality, and that your own lives are unreal.

You do whatever the tube tells you! You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube, you even *think* like the tube!

This is mass madness, you maniacs!

In God's name, you people are the real thing! *WE* are the illusion! So turn off your television sets. Turn them off now. Turn them off right now. Turn them off and leave them off! Turn them off right in the middle of the sentence I'm speaking to you now! TURN THEM OFF...

[collapses in a prophetic swoon as the audience erupts in thunderous applause]

Now, back to Jon Rappoport (Tintin Q]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fake news, staged reality, no context, and the programmed viewer
By Jon Rappoport

Every television newscast: staged reality.

The news is all about manipulating the context of stories. The thinner the context, the thinner the mind must become to accept it.

If you want to visualize this, imagine a rectangular solid. The news covers the top surface. Therefore, the viewer's mind is trained to work in only two dimensions. Then it can't fathom depth, and it certainly can't appreciate the fact that the whole rectangular solid moves through time, the fourth dimension.

Focus on the network evening news. This is where the staging is done well---until recently.

First, we have the studio image itself, the colors in foreground and background, the blend of restful and charged hues. The anchor and his/her smooth style.

Then we have the shifting of venue from the studio to reporters in the field, demonstrating the reach of coverage: the planet. As if this equals authenticity.

Actually, those reporters in the field rarely dig up information on location. A correspondent standing on a rooftop in Cairo could just as well be positioned in a bathroom in a Las Vegas McDonald's. His report would be identical. (my emphasis - TQ)

The managing editor, usually the elite news anchor, chooses the stories to cover and has the final word on their sequence.

The anchor goes on the air: "Our top story tonight, more signs of gridlock today on Capitol Hill, as legislators walked out of a session on federal budget negotiations..."

The viewer fills in the context for the story: "Oh yes, the government. Gridlock is bad. Just like traffic on the I-5. A bad thing. We want the government to get something done, but they aren't. These people are always arguing with each other. They don't agree. They're in conflict. Yes, conflict, just like on the cop shows."

The anchor: "The Chinese government reports the new flu epidemic has spread to three provinces. Forty-two people have already died, and nearly a hundred are hospitalized..."

The viewer again supplies context, such as it is: "Flu. Dangerous. Epidemic. Could it arrive here? Get my flu shot."

The anchor: "A new university study states that gun owners often stock up on weapons and ammunition..."

The viewer: "People with guns. Why do they need a dozen weapons? I don't need a gun. The police have guns. Could I kill somebody if he broke into the house?"

The anchor: "Doctors at Yale University have made a discovery that could lead to new treatments in the battle against autism..."

Viewer: "That would be good. More research. Laboratory. The brain."

If, at the end of the newscast, the viewer bothered to review the stories and his own reactions to them, he would realize he'd learned nothing. But reflection is not the game.

In fact, the flow of the news stories has washed over him and created very little except a sense of (false) continuity.

Therefore, every story on the news broadcast achieves the goal of keeping the context thin---night after night, year after year. The overall effect of this staging is: small viewer's mind, small viewer's understanding.

Next we come to words and pictures. More and more, news broadcasts are using the rudimentary film technique of a voice narrating what the viewer is seeing on the screen.

People are shouting and running and falling in a street. The anchor or a field reporter says: "The country is in turmoil. Parliament has suspended sessions for the third day in a row, as the government decides what to do about uprisings aimed at forcing democratic elections..."

Well, the voice must be right, because we're seeing the pictures. If the voice said the riots were due to garbage-pickup cancellations, the viewer would believe that, too.

We see Building #7 of the WTC collapse. Must have been the result of a fire. The anchor tells us so. Words give meaning to pictures.

Staged news.

It mirrors what the human mind, in an infantile state, is always doing: looking at the world and seeking a brief summary to explain what that world is, at any given moment.

Since the dawn of time, untold billions of people have been urging a "television anchor" to "explain the pictures."

The news gives them that precise solution, every night.

"Well, Mr. Jones," the doctor says, as he pins X-rays to a screen in his office. "See this? Right here? We'll need to start chemo immediately, and then we may have to remove most of your brain, and as a follow-up, take out one eye."

Sure, why not? The patient saw the pictures and the anchor explained them.

Eventually, people get the idea and do it for themselves. They see things, they invent one-liners to explain them.

They're their own anchors. They short-cut and undermine their own experience with vapid summaries of what it all means.

And then, of course, when the news cuts to commercial, the fake products take over:

"Well, every night they're showing the same brand names, so those brands must be better than the unnamed alternatives."

Which devolves into: "I like this commercial better than that commercial. This is a great commercial. Let's have a contest and vote on the best commercial."

For "intelligent" viewers, there is another sober mainstream choice in America, a safety valve: PBS. That newscast tends to show more pictures from foreign lands.

"Yes, I watch PBS because they understand the planet is interconnected. It isn't just about America. That's good."

Sure it's good, if you want the same thin-context or false-context reports on events in other countries. Instead of the two minutes NBC might give you about momentous happenings in Syria, PBS will give you four minutes.

PBS' experts seem kinder and gentler. "They're nice and they're more relaxed. I like that."

Yes, the PBS experts are taking Valium, and they're not drinking as much coffee as the CBS experts.

There are various forms of mind control. The one I'm describing here---the thinning of context---is universal. It confounds the mind by pretending depth doesn't exist and is merely a fantasy.

The mind, before it is trained away from it, is always interested in depth.

Another way of putting it: the mind naturally wants more space, not less. Only constant conditioning can change this.

Eventually, when you say "mind," people think you're referring to the brain, or they don't know what you're talking about at all.

Mind control by eradicating the concept of mind.

That's quite a trick.

But now, on the national evening news, something has changed. The quality of the elite anchors has plummeted. These mind-control pros are less and less capable of delivering: the voice of authority.

In the old days, you had Water Cronkite, Harry Reasoner, Chet Huntley, Tom Brokaw, and (before he crashed and burned) Dan Rather. Big-time fakers.

Eventually, this devolved into a B-team of bench players: Dianne Sawyer, Brian Williams, Scott Pelley. Less believable---but still fairly effective.

However, now, at the three major networks, it's androids on parade. Two pretty boys, David Muir and Jeff Glor, and the NBC cadaver, Lester Holt.

The ship is sinking.

Instead of trying to label their competition Fake News, the networks should look to themselves and try to figure out why they can't find father figures to deliver their no-context broadcasts.

The audience is wising up. The correct notes on the scale of mind control aren't being struck.

The system is falling apart.

When I named this site No More Fake News 17 years ago, I could see a fatigue factor setting in---not only in the mainstream news audience, but in the networks themselves. They were playing out the string, hoping to coast on their prior reputations. They weren't just putting their viewers to sleep (their covert goal), they were slowly falling asleep themselves.

In the following years, the situation grew worse. The networks were moving on auto-pilot.

And now, they're reaching the end of the line. They're focusing on the only story that can deliver them ratings: Trump.

They fear him, they hate him---and they love him, because he gives them the numbers that justify their advertising rates.

It's always problematical when the only thing maintaining your survival is your enemy. Especially an enemy whose whole method of attack is to accuse you of subverting your basic mission.

Since the dawn of time on this planet, news has been controlled, for good reason. The people who own the news are able to paint an overall surface of reality for the masses. Which has been their intent.

In a last-ditch attempt to save themselves now, the major networks are enlisting the help of big social media, in order to censor independent media. But even here, there is a problem. Millions and millions of people know where independent news sites are. They don't have to go through Facebook and Twitter and You Tube (or Google) to find them.

Efforts at censorship strengthen the rebellion against major news outlets.

There are signs that social media are reaching the point of exhaustion. Their users are becoming fed up with the debilitating effects of playing the game. Accumulating followers and likes hasn't turned out to be the key to happiness.

If these behemoths fall, what is left?

Two options: stay asleep and keep crawling over the fake surface mainstream news creates;

Or wake up.

[Hervé]

Big surprise: Politicians and corporations hire actors to signal support that doesn't actually exist

John Vibes The Free Thought Project
Fri, 11 May 2018 16:03 UTC

In an age where most politicians have very little support for their campaigns and causes, they have been known to resort to desperate measures to improve their public image. While this practice is disregarded by some as a "conspiracy theory," many politicians have been caught hiring actors to fill the crowds of their campaign speeches - corporations too.

In fact, just this week in Ontario, Progressive Conservative Leader Doug Ford's campaign was forced to admit that they hired actors for at least one of their events. Ford's staff acted like this was not authorized by them, but instead blamed a local candidate for arranging their actors. Campaign officials for Toronto Centre Tory candidate Meredith Cartwright reportedly hired the actors to support Ford at a rally in Dundas Square.

"We were very confused by this situation because we are getting record numbers of supporters to every event across Ontario. This was done by a local candidate and it won't be continuing," Ford's spokeswoman, Melissa Lantsman, said in an email to the Toronto Star.

A number of these actors reached out to the press about the event to blow the whistle, including artist and performer Devanshu Narang.

Narang told The Star that he was offered $75 to appear at the rally between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m. wearing the candidate's t-shirt, but he turned down the gig.

"I was shocked to see this happen in Canada, in Toronto. I find it offensive even to the Canadian democracy. The main thing was that, you know, the moment I saw that I kind of felt odd about it. You know, politicians hiring actors to play supporters is like the way it works in the Third World," Narang said.

Ford's campaign is insisting that this is an accident and that it won't happen again, and that they have "no need" for these types of services because their candidates are so popular.

"We don't need to pay anyone. When we have events, we're packed, we don't need that," Ford said at a press conference.

It is interesting to note that Doug Ford is the brother of late Rob Ford, the former Toronto mayor who was famous for smoking crack on video. Doug Ford promised in his brother's eulogy that "Ford nation will continue." When Rob Ford was alive, the brothers famously got into a screaming match with the public at a city council meeting.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=kcRFrXmQyus

The practice of hiring actors to astroturf campaigns is more common than most people would expect. Even current US President Donald Trump was found to be hiring actors to cheer him on at early campaign events. Although the Trump Administration initially denied these reports, FEC documents released in 2017 revealed that a casting agency was paid to send supporters to the event. During the same campaign, Hillary Clinton was accused of paying a child actor to ask a scripted question during a town hall event.

This trick is not limited to political campaigns either, earlier this month it was reported that at least 50 actors were hired by an energy company to support the construction of a new power plant at a town hall meeting.

"They paid us to sit through the meeting and clap every time someone said something against wind and solar power. I'm not political, I needed the money for a hotel room at that point," said Keith Keough, who was one of the actors hired.

The actors were even asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, which prohibited them from speaking to the media or telling anyone that they were paid to support the power plant. The company still denies any accusations that it hired any actors to support them at the meeting.

It is also common for war propaganda to be carried out with actors since it is now fairly easy to stage a war scene and get away with it.

[Hervé]

Have the White Helmets just been caught staging a False Flag?

By Joaquin Flores On Jun 28, 2018

The White Helmets, what amounts to the media and PR wing of ISIS, have been discovered by the residents of Idlib, preparing to ‘be there just in time’ for an upcoming surprise chemical attack from the ‘Assad Regime’ which somehow they know about, and are getting ready to stage a real horror show to underscore. Tass covered the story today, what’s a very good sign is that this is being called out before hand, before things can happen. Hopefully this alone will mean that such a plan is foiled, dead on arrival.

Apparently the long and short of it is that these White Helmet boys have been caught red handed preparing a provocation, where they’d naturally have some inconveniently Israeli or European chemical substances on standby, ready to create a huge scene in Idlib. The Chief of the Russian Center for Reconciliation of the Opposing sides, let this be known yesterday.

This part is particularly interesting, because it has been Russia – there on the ground – who has for some time been outing, on an increasingly official level, these White Helmet sorts. It’s been well proven that a White Helmet is just another job for an FSA or ISIS fighter. Pay rate’s about the same, risks to life a bit lower. Not a bad gig overall.

What the Russians have officially reported through their various media vehicles, as saying, is that based on a phone call from local residence in the province, White Helmets were spotted with a convoy of six cars, which all had the White Helmets logo on them. There also was reportedly a truck that had been loaded with protective gear, containers for liquid, seven rockets, and video equipment. If true, pretty damning evidence.

Despite this, no one captured any photos. Should the claim be believed? The main point, probably should be believed. How the Russians came about their intel, probably has nothing to do with local reports from those in the area by Maaret al-Numan, within Idlib. For sure we would have seen a photo of this had this scene been seen by a real resident.

This is the greatest sign that perhaps it was someone working inside who leaked this to the Syrians or the Russians. We have to keep in mind that in the last week, there have been other areas were FSA units had surrendered, then others fight side by side allied with the Syrian Arab Army, against ISIS formations. A pretty bizarre scenario, but it would have been just one of many scenarios in which a friendly enough FSA type with some authority on the ground-level organization, would have had the opportunity to have let this one out.

[Valerie Villars]

"I NEVER SAID THAT!

Hi-tech deception of 'deepfake' videos

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hey, did my congressman really say that? Is that really President Donald Trump on that video, or am I being duped?

New technology on the internet lets anyone make videos of real people appearing to say things they’ve never said. Republicans and Democrats predict this high-tech way of putting words in someone’s mouth will become the latest weapon in disinformation wars against the United States and other Western democracies.

We’re not talking about lip-syncing videos. This technology uses facial mapping and artificial intelligence to produce videos that appear so genuine it’s hard to spot the phonies. Lawmakers and intelligence officials worry that the bogus videos — called deepfakes — could be used to threaten national security or interfere in elections.

So far, that hasn’t happened, but experts say it’s not a question of if, but when.

“I expect that here in the United States we will start to see this content in the upcoming midterms and national election two years from now,” said Hany Farid, a digital forensics expert at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire. “The technology, of course, knows no borders, so I expect the impact to ripple around the globe.”

When an average person can create a realistic fake video of the president saying anything they want, Farid said, “we have entered a new world where it is going to be difficult to know how to believe what we see.” The reverse is a concern, too. People may dismiss as fake genuine footage, say of a real atrocity, to score political points.

Realizing the implications of the technology, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is already two years into a four-year program to develop technologies that can detect fake images and videos. Right now, it takes extensive analysis to identify phony videos. It’s unclear if new ways to authenticate images or detect fakes will keep pace with deepfake technology.

Deepfakes are so named because they utilize deep learning, a form of artificial intelligence. They are made by feeding a computer an algorithm, or set of instructions, lots of images and audio of a certain person. The computer program learns how to mimic the person’s facial expressions, mannerisms, voice and inflections. If you have enough video and audio of someone, you can combine a fake video of the person with a fake audio and get them to say anything you want.

So far, deepfakes have mostly been used to smear celebrities or as gags, but it’s easy to foresee a nation state using them for nefarious activities against the U.S., said Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., one of several members of the Senate intelligence committee who are expressing concern about deepfakes.

A foreign intelligence agency could use the technology to produce a fake video of an American politician using a racial epithet or taking a bribe, Rubio says. They could use a fake video of a U.S. soldier massacring civilians overseas, or one of a U.S. official supposedly admitting a secret plan to carry out a conspiracy. Imagine a fake video of a U.S. leader — or an official from North Korea or Iran — warning the United States of an impending disaster.

“It’s a weapon that could be used — timed appropriately and placed appropriately — in the same way fake news is used, except in a video form, which could create real chaos and instability on the eve of an election or a major decision of any sort,” Rubio told The Associated Press.

Deepfake technology still has a few hitches. For instance, people’s blinking in fake videos may appear unnatural. But the technology is improving.

“Within a year or two, it’s going to be really hard for a person to distinguish between a real video and a fake video,” said Andrew Grotto, an international security fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University in California.

“This technology, I think, will be irresistible for nation states to use in disinformation campaigns to manipulate public opinion, deceive populations and undermine confidence in our institutions,” Grotto said. He called for government leaders and politicians to clearly say it has no place in civilized political debate.

Crude videos have been used for malicious political purposes for years, so there’s no reason to believe the higher-tech ones, which are more realistic, won’t become tools in future disinformation campaigns.

Rubio noted that in 2009, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow complained to the Russian Foreign Ministry about a fake sex video it said was made to damage the reputation of a U.S. diplomat. The video showed the married diplomat, who was a liaison to Russian religious and human rights groups, making telephone calls on a dark street. The video then showed the diplomat in his hotel room, scenes that apparently were shot with a hidden camera. Later, the video appeared to show a man and a woman having sex in the same room with the lights off, although it was not at all clear that the man was the diplomat.

John Beyrle, who was the U.S. ambassador in Moscow at the time, blamed the Russian government for the video, which he said was clearly fabricated.

Michael McFaul, who was American ambassador in Russia between 2012 and 2014, said Russia has engaged in disinformation videos against various political actors for years and that he too had been a target. He has said that Russian state propaganda inserted his face into photographs and “spliced my speeches to make me say things I never uttered and even accused me of pedophilia.”

____

Associated Press video journalists Padmananda Rama in Washington, D.C., and Terry Chea in Palo Alto, California, contributed to this report.


http://apnews.com/.../I-never-said-that!-High-tech-deception-of-'deepfake'-videos

[Tintin]

".....it's all a cartoon. On both sides. Broadcasters and audience. You may not like it that I take a hard line on the audience, but too bad. The audience is faking it just as much as the newscasters. You have to admit there are levels to the mind." | Ellis Medavoy being interviewed by Jon Rappoport

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In an excerpt from Jon's recent "The Matrix Revealed" series he shares a most interesting interview with a 'whistleblower' --Ellis Medavoy-- and there are here some really thought provoking statements, which provide, amongst many others, a doorway into the psychology of those involved in the mainstream news circus.

As he (Ellis) states in this exchange:

"Why do you think all this research on the brain is being done? To home in on the best frequencies for the insertion of information. That's what we're discussing here. But good newspeople already understand the frequency game. Intuitively. They understand it better than the brain researchers. "

There really is, as most of you reading this may already be well aware, a LOT of thought and research that goes into the hypnosis --it's very very cleverly crafted and presented; it is an art form.

(Linking back to this earlier post here for some flow of continuity.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Theatrical dance: the fake news mainstream reporter and his audience -
And the deeper implications behind it


By Jon Rappoport, May 2012

by Jon Rappoport

May 2012

Q & A with Ellis Medavoy:

It's rare, these days, for me to get messages from retired propaganda master, Ellis Medavoy. He's always been a difficult man. Now, he's even tougher to coax out of his cave.

Nevertheless, because I'm persistent, I interview Ellis 28 times (290 pages) in my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. The quality of his information on the nuts and bolts of The Matrix is priceless.

Q (Jon): So the job of the propagandist is to make fiction look and feel like fact.

A (Ellis): Propagandists know who they're feeding, and they know what morsel will be snapped up by these newspeople. They know how to shape the morsel and color it and flavor it so that it becomes a drug.

Q: The memories of these newspeople...

A: Are data banks. Their memories are all data all the time. The memories form their reality. INTERRUPTION of reality is the primary sin. It can't be tolerated.

Q: What do you mean by interruption?

A: A place in the mind where a corrosive question or doubt is inserted about the nature or character of a fact. For the regular human, this can be dealt with, at least to some degree. For the newsman, this is like a hammer blowing time to pieces. The flow is interrupted. It would be like one of those old stock brokers, when he followed the second-to-second transmission of stock prices by looking at a narrow piece of paper tape. He'd hold the tape in his hands and read it as it came through, yards and yards of it. But suppose the tape came out of the machine blank for a few minutes. This is why some people can't meditate. They're instinctively afraid they might come upon a silent moment where thought stops.

Q: So to ask your own question back to you, where DO these newspeople come from?

A: They, at an early age, see power as the capacity to know "what's going on." They plug into that kind of power.

Q: It's strange.

A: It's superficial. It's all about surface flow of information. They stick to the surface. What they're looking at, what they're fascinated by is a kind of theater. They're looking at theater. I've known that for a long time. It was part of my job to know it, because then I could present stories that would get through to reporters in a form that would have that theatrical feel.

Q: The players know their roles.

A: The reporters know, their editors know, their reliable sources know, and people like me, who feed those reliable sources, are like directors. It's hard to describe this, but there is a certain pulse and pace and feel to the way you should supply stories to sources or reporters or editors. You know when to go fast and when to go slow. You know how to plug into their sense of theater. Their need for theater.

Q: So the addiction of these newspeople has a theatrical dimension to it.

A: Have you ever seen a junkie operate? A great deal of his action and talk is theater. He presents theater and he wants theater back. The newsman confuses theater with facts. It's all rolled up into a big space. I've sold stories to reporters based purely on the theatricality of my presentation. See, let me tell you something. When I talk to a reporter, I know I'm walking into a theater where the play is ALREADY underway. It never stops for a reporter. So I hit the ground running. I enter the scene mid-stream. I don't think, "Now, I'm starting to pitch my lines, now the scene is beginning." No. I'm intuiting and seeing where he [the reporter] is right now, in the middle of one of his scenes, so to speak, and I plug directly into that place, that moment. Do you understand? This is the subtlety of the art.

Q: You understand his psychology.

A: Yes, and I understand his flow. I read the signals. Oh, this is Death of a Salesman or Streetcar Named Desire, or Hamlet, and they just shoved me out on the stage, and I have to know how to match the emotions of the moment, where the scene has already been going on for five minutes. It sounds a little odd, but that's how you play the game if you want to win. It could be a very quiet moment in the scene, and then I need to talk in a whisper. It could be the peak of the scene, where the emotions are running high, and I have to drive right in and be there for it, with my feelings turned on high, too.

Q: But behind that, you were doing something quite different.

A: Of course. I had my marching orders and my agenda.

Q: You know, it's almost like you're talking about frequencies.

A: I am. Propaganda runs on carrier waves. What are you using to transmit messages? What wave? I knew my targets: reporters and editors and their reliable sources. So I had to understand and tune into the frequencies they would accept. If you watch the best television news anchors, you see they're adopting several tight emotional frequencies, and they use them to transmit, with their voices and demeanor, the news to the public. They use a nearly perfect imitation of several things: concern, objectivity, dignity, intelligence, with a bit of a rosy glow of sincerity and humanity. That's the recipe.

Q: Imitation, you say.

A: Yes. They're a cartoon. They create a cartoon persona. A very well crafted one. And the audience is a cartoon, too.

Q: Why is the audience a cartoon?

A: Because, underneath it all, they know they're being conned. At some level, they realize it's a show. So they pretend, and they do it well. They pretend they're very involved.

Q: You can see that?

A: See it? I lived by it for many years. I staked my reputation on all of this, on everything I'm talking about here. It wasn't just theory. I went into the trenches with my understanding, and I made it succeed.

Q: You're talking about using your skills on people who report the news, who tell the public what's going on.

A: As I just said, it's all a cartoon. On both sides. Broadcasters and audience. You may not like it that I take a hard line on the audience, but too bad. The audience is faking it just as much as the newscasters. You have to admit there are levels to the mind.

Q: Meaning?

A: On one level, the audience appears to accept what the mainstream news is telling them. But on another level, as I'm saying for the third time, the audience knows it's a fake. And why don't they admit it? Why don't they say, 'I'm sitting here at night buying what I know is fake. I'm watching the screen and the anchor is giving me the news and I know it's cooked.' Why don't people do that? Because they refuse to look at their own little drama of stimulation, in which they are titillated by what the newspeople are giving them. They don't want that professionally produced titillation to go away.

Q: You may have heard of something called the Internet. It's changing things.

A: Sounds vaguely familiar. Yes. The ground is splitting beneath the audience's feet. I'm not a praying man, but I do something close to that every day, as regards The New York Times and NBC. I ask for them to go bankrupt. The Times is on the road to perdition and insolvency. If they go, it will make an interesting sound.

Q: Is your blood pressure okay? You're a retired senior citizen.

A: I think I can hold my own.

Q: If you need to take a break, we can do that.

A: (laughs) Everybody needs to take his medicine.

Q: I can think of two or three meanings for that sentence.

A: See, I'm a little sick of people saying that the great unwashed masses of very fine people are being fooled and duped by the big bad controllers. It's a mutual dance. I knew that thirty years ago. Everybody has to own up to his part in the cartoon, in the theatrical presentation. I know the difference between real victims and fake victims.

Q: What is that difference?

A: The real victims, in certain countries, are being taken out by massive corporations with their assisting government troops and all sorts of other support. The fake victims are sitting in front of television sets eating sugar and tuning right into the frequencies of the presentation of the news. They're frequency addicts, and I'm very serious about that. This is exactly what they're hooked on. Why do you think all this research on the brain is being done? To home in on the best frequencies for the insertion of information.

That's what we're discussing here. But good newspeople already understand the frequency game. Intuitively. They understand it better than the brain researchers. [My emphasis - Tintin]

And the audience needs that human face and voice to transmit the addicting frequencies to them. It isn't just the old flicker rate of the TV or the frames per second or the illuminated screen. It's the person delivering the news. He's the prime force. He's addicted to the frequencies he's using! He's addicted, too, and he's transmitting and sharing his addiction with the audience.

Q: And what's the cure for this addiction?

A: The world is resonating every day with what humans want. Here is what they want: they want to ingratiate themselves with each other. Ingratiation. Acceptance. Those are the frequencies. That's the theme of the play. Those are the resonating frequencies. That's how information is built and fabricated to invoke belief and faith. That's the carrier wave, the resonance.

Q: When did you realize this?

A: When I was nine. But that's a whole other story. Realizing it pushed me into the work I did. It also rescued me from continuing to do that work. I got out. You know what getting out means? It means I don't any longer accept what I was doing, AND I refuse to accept the conditions that made it possible to do that work. I didn't just get out part way. I got out all the way. I don't buy the basic theme of the play or the ingratiating resonance anymore. I offloaded the whole thing.

You know what? Tomorrow, if I wanted to, I could start a new religion. And it wouldn't really involve any of the factual deceptions I used to use in my work. I could start a non-denominational religion based, say, entirely on charity. That's all.

And it would look like a very good thing. But I WOULD be using my ability to put out my messages on frequencies and resonances that would attract people. See? That's how I'd build my audience. And I won't do that. I know how to do it very, very well, but I won't do that. That's what getting out all the way means.

Q: You know---

A: I know a few solid truths. You can get people to sleepwalk from "bad things" to "good things" and they're still sleepwalking. And that's the real problem. That's one element of The Matrix.

Q: Scientists tend to believe in operant conditioning. They believe people think and act according to one type of operant conditioning or another, and there are no other choices.

A: That's right. That's the problem.

[Smell the Roses]

Most people are very happy with the charade. This is a key point. It took me a while to realize this. I used to try to convince people, to use logic or other means to try to allow them to see that this or that thing was a total deception or injustice. All that does is make the person dislike or hate you, the messenger. They don't want you taking away their candy.

The Rappoport interview above illustrates this idea of the media Stockhom syndrome beautifully.

The frequencies of ingratiation and acceptance that Medavoy mentions relate perfectly to the thoughts I have been having lately. All humans want to be made to feel special, and in a way they are each special. However, the problem comes in that they are all looking for an outward confirmation of their own unique DNA stamp. Media has indeed in a scientific way been able to appease this need to a large extent.

There are two problems with finding the outward confirmation in that artificial way of media stimulation. One is that the media purveyor can steer the participant in a direction of the choosing of the media corporation and its partners. The other is that the target audience rarely learns how to find confirmation from within, which is the only lasting advancement of the human condition.