Social media as a control mechanism -as deep as humanity itself (study)

[Carmody]

To be as a fine filter, between all people. Compartmentalized into individual boxes, with controlled input and output, for each individual.

Tailoring the feeds. Google is accused of doing this. for good reasons. They are. Same for Facebook.

I was aware of it as a coming problem, with the advent of the BBS systems back in the late 80's and the early 90's, where I was a contributor to the genesis of all of that pre-internet build up.

I pondered that... in the future, we would find ourselves being drip fed and given our own tailored data. As the data pathway enlarged, as the pipe became faster, bigger..as the technology advanced..this was the inevitable end point. This would happen as a control mechanism, a filter, a sculpting of sorts, as a minimum -- simply due to the capacity being inherent in the situation, the situation that was looking to unfold.

It was obvious as this is what we were individually seeking out in that pre-internet. We were extending ourselves, our reach, our feedback..we tailored it all. To frame it (in time)..a year or so after those more defined realizations and 'filling in the blanks'...I had received a pre-release copy for programmers, of Windows Chicago (win 95) -- a full 18 months before it was available to the public.

The subject at hand, is this study showing how apes that view together, they bond. They bond together.

Not at all surprising. In hindsight, for some.

The great takeaway, is the separation, the divide and conquer that happens via social media. How social media is killing the functional fabric of human society and culture.

Social media is NOT your friend. it is the opposite. We yearn for connection, but the social media actually gives us less.

This is writ large across the core of this very real study.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Great apes found to bond when watching videos together

A pair of researchers affiliated with Duke University and the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology has found that great apes tend to bond with one another when they watch a video together. In their paper published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Wouter Wolf and Michael Tomasello describe their work involving studying chimpanzees and bonobos as they watched videos together and how they behaved afterward.

Most people have experienced the feeling of bonding with another person, or even several people, when watching a movie or TV show together. Until now, behavioral scientists have believed such feelings were restricted to humans. In this new effort, Wolf and Tomasello have shown that great apes have similar experiences.

The experiments involved seating pairs of chimps together in front of a television so that they could watch a video, and the researchers took measurements of bonding-type behavior after the video was over. They then compared the behavior they observed with a control group. They report that chimps that watched the videos together engaged in more bonding-type behaviors.

The videos watched by the chimps were of other chimps engaging in various activities—prior research had shown it was their favorite subject. And the chimps were encouraged to remain in place watching the video by feeding them grape juice. Bonding-type interactions were described as touching, how long they stayed in proximity with one another and how much they paid attention to one another. The researchers also used eye-tracking systems to show that the chimps were actually watching the videos. The researchers also paired up bonobos in the same fashion, and also human-chimp pairs. They report that in all instances, increased bonding was observed for those participating in the shared social events.

The researchers suggest their results show that great apes are capable of social bonding when participating in shared events. They suggest that such types of social bonding have deeper evolutionary roots than has been realized. They also suggest that their findings hint at what is lost as humans cease participating in shared social events, preferring instead to engage privately in social media.

[rgray222]

There certainly are some upsides of using social media "today' but they seem insignificant when compared to the downsides. People are losing their ability to actually socialize in person, anxiety and depression are at an all-time high, fake and misleading information is everywhere, twitter has become a cesspool for hate, the list just goes on and on. That said I believe it will take some time before we will eventually work this through. After all, people were afraid of books, trains, telegraph, telephone, television, computers, wi-fi and more.

One of the many problems with social media is that these platforms have found a way for us to aggressively participate in our own dumbing down. At the present time, it truly is diminishing our ability to actually socialize. It will take years and possibly decades for us to understand what this constant flow of information (good and bad) really means to society. I don't even think that television technology has worked its way through society yet.

The problems with social media will arise when the Federal Government intervenes and regulates these companies under the auspices of helping society. Most people think that Google is a search engine controlling the flow of information. The truth is they are nothing more than an advertising firm. They found a way to control information to sell advertising. More than 70% of its revenue are generated through advertising.

The freedom of speech in the United States is regarded as one of fundamental human rights and freedoms. In accordance with the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the freedom of speech shall not be restricted (“Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”).

However, the courts ruled that freedom of advertising, which constitutes a part of freedom of speech, can be regulated more strictly than any other form of expression. Thus, state authorities are entitled to control the distribution of false or misleading advertising, advertising of illegal goods or services, and truthful advertising, if public interests are in question.

The government has a pathway it can follow to control search engines and social media developers. If the federal government steps in to regulates these entities as utilities I am afraid the damage will be considerable and longlasting. Social media and the flow of information will work its way through society if the control and regulations are kept to a minimum. Of course, there will be a considerable amount of damage along the way but the end result to be better for everyone.

[Cara]

James Corbett seems to be addressing a similar concern with his latest article, although he might be speaking of a wider phenomenon:

Information Overload is a Weapon of Control
Corbett 07/21/2019

Do you feel confused? Listless? Overwhelmed? Have you ever found yourself scrolling through news feeds and flicking mindlessly through social media posts with a strange mixture of outrage, dread, and boredom? Is your disgust at the thought of going online consistently overwhelmed by your compulsion to pick up your fondleslab?

Don’t worry. You’re not alone. More and more people are finding it harder and harder to put their devices down, even though it leaves them feeling restless, angry or empty. As a result, some are seeking ways to disconnect and unplug from the 24/7 siren song of never-ending news feeds, instant messaging and social media distractions, whether by ditching their smartphone in favor of a “dumb” phone or taking device-free holidays.

Yes, we all succumb to information overload, and yes, we all need a break from the online maelstrom every now and then.

But what if this state of information overload—the malaise we experience when we find ourselves paralyzed by a ceaseless stream of noise and nonsense—is not a mere byproduct of this vaunted “Information Age” but the actual point of it? Has it ever occurred to you that these devices have been weaponized against us? Or that the confusion and exhaustion we feel after spending an hour mindlessly scrolling on our smartphone is the effect that this weaponized technology has on our psyche?

And, more to the point, what can we do to protect ourselves from these daggers of digital distraction?
....

From here: https://www.corbettreport.com/inform...on-of-control/
Or here: https://www.minds.com/CorbettReport/...67832663445504

[Sue (Ayt)]

Posted by Cara (here)
James Corbett seems to be addressing a similar concern with his latest article, although he might be speaking of a wider phenomenon:

Information Overload is a Weapon of Control
Corbett 07/21/2019


....

From here: https://www.corbettreport.com/inform...on-of-control/
Or here: https://www.minds.com/CorbettReport/...67832663445504

Brought to mind an old song I remember pondering when it first came out, concurrent for me with newly discovering the internet and the www. I was awed at the time with the implications of the vast information and connections newly opening to everyone, interactively and freely even! I found this all too amazing - comparing it almost to a newly expanded type of brain/neuron system opening to humanity; perhaps even the first, more crude, physical manifestation of our next step in human evolution, which will be our acquisition of truly telepathic communications. (like the sci-fi writers and futurists foresaw in most all of their higher intelligence depictions)

But I didn't immediately consider the darker sides of the phenom, and I pondered on this song which came out in 1993, as at that time, I just couldn't get enough information:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fbl7hwCgETU

But luckily, I did get the insight within a few years about my own key need for Balance. When things started getting a little too "wacky", I clearly got the message to "Turn It Off", and I rather found it comical at how simple this solution actually is. Like "Doh!" Slap to the head... Turn it off.
Balance - my keyword since then.

[onawah]

Fact-Checking the Facebook “Fact-Checkers"
June 13, 2020
https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/fact-...fact-checkers/



By Brian S. Hooker, CHD Board Member, and Science Advisor, Focus for Health
Children’s Health Defense

"On May 27, 2020, the paper “Analysis of Health Outcomes of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children: Developmental Delays, Asthma, Ear Infections and Gastrointestinal Disorders” that I coauthored with Neil Z. Miller was published in the journal SAGE Open Medicine. By June 2, 2020, Facebook “fact-checkers” declared the paper “unsupported” and flagged Children’s Health Defense’s references to the study on the social media platform.

Instead of following the link to the peer-reviewed study, Facebook now directed the reader to a critique completed by Healthfeedback.org, an organization that is a part of the World Health Organization’s Vaccine Safety Net with ties to the Gates Foundation.

To view the original paper, one would have to bypass the “fact-check” to be directed to the SAGE Open Medicine website.

Playing fast and loose with the facts
Unfortunately for the public, the so-called “fact-checkers” at Healthfeedback.org play fast and loose with the facts.

First, prior to considering the study at hand, the “fact-checkers” label my previous Hooker 2014 study “fraudulent,” a most serious and reputation-harming charge.

“Fraudulent” is a legal term of art which means “the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of their money, property or a legal right.”

The fact of the matter is that Translational Neurodegeneration, where my 2014 study was published, did retract the article under enormous pressure from the Vaccine Industry.

But, in so doing, that Journal never cited “fraud,” “deception,” or “dishonesty” as a basis for the retraction. Rather, that Journal retracted the article because of a purportedly undisclosed conflict of interest, but without any finding that the non-disclosure was intentional or material.

Indeed, that study has since been republished in an expanded form (Hooker 2018).

Using a convenience sample
The primary criticism of the Hooker and Miller 2020 study was the use of a convenience sample which refers to the cohort of 2047 children, from 3 separate pediatric practices in the United States, that formed the basis for our study.

Convenience samples are used routinely in epidemiology and also form the basis for the FDA approval of drugs and biologics.

Within the piece, Dr. David Gorski, a pro-pharma blogger states,

“Basically, no matter how you analyze a convenience sample, you can’t generalize it to the larger population.”

FALSE. The U.S. Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) own studies, many that are cited in the “fact-checking” piece, are almost exclusively based on convenience samples.

The study presented by Destefano et al. 2004 in the journal Pediatrics on the timing of the MMR vaccine and autism was completed using a convenience sample of approximately 2400 children in public school districts in Metropolitan Atlanta.

This was not a representative sample of the U.S. population as the percentage of African American children in the study was 35.4% compared to that of the U.S. at the time at 16%.

Yet this study is the CDC’s basis for denying a causal link between the MMR vaccine and autism in the U.S.

The “fact-checkers” cite Andrews et al. 2004 (Pediatrics) which is also based on a convenience sample of children in the United Kingdom despite the fact that the CDC cites it as “proof” that thimerosal-containing vaccines in the United States do not cause autism.

Also, the “fact-checkers” cite four studies (regarding both thimerosal-containing vaccines and the MMR vaccine) on children in Denmark as proof that vaccines don’t cause autism in U.S. children despite many distinctions between the two populations of children.

Finally, the “fact-checkers” cite five studies that are based on the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink, a computerized database of the records from nine Health Maintenance Organizations in the U.S.

This could also be considered a convenience sample” as it excludes children who are on Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plans as well as those on Medicaid and focuses only on the HMO demographic.

The necessary meaningful statistics
Evidently, the “fact-checkers’” big beef with the use of a convenience sample is the fact that 30.9% of the cohort was unvaccinated by their first birthday.

This number makes sense in a study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children as a significant number of unvaccinated children would be necessary to derive any meaningful statistics whatsoever.

“Fact-checkers” accuse the co-investigators of not controlling for differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated children but seem to ignore the fact that we selected and evaluated differences in the control diagnosis of head injury, a diagnosis that has nothing to do with vaccination.

When the “fact-checkers” do acknowledge the control diagnosis, they point out a single, marginally significant relationship between vaccination status and head injury reported in Hooker and Miller, 2020 but neglect to point out that for all of the rest of the analyses (11 total), no relationship between vaccination and head injury was observed.

Hooker and Miller discuss differences in healthcare seeking behavior between vaccinated and unvaccinated children as a potential limitation of the paper and cite Glanz et al. 2013 which showed that under-vaccinated children were less likely to see medical practitioners for outpatient visits, with an incidence risk ratio of 0.89.

However, it is clear that effect estimates above 2.0 cannot be explained away simply by stating that unvaccinated children are not going to their healthcare provider as much.

The 2004 Pediatrics study (Andrews et al. 2004) cited by the “fact-checkers” showing “no association between vaccines and developmental delay” was completed on thimerosal-containing vaccines with a control group of thimerosal-free vaccines.

The “fact-checkers” deceptively couch this as “vaccinated versus unvaccinated study” but there were no unvaccinated children considered in the analysis. The “fact-checkers” also deceptively state that over 20 studies show that vaccines are not associated with autism.

It’s unclear why the “fact-checkers” discuss autism when “fact-checking” our paper since we never analyzed autism. Again, the studies listed focus on thimerosal-containing vaccines and the MMR vaccine considered separately and did not consider unvaccinated children.

The only study focused on the vaccination schedule (Destefano et al. 2013) is fraught with methodological errors, including overmatching of cases and controls, to the point that it is scientifically invalid, not to mention that there were no unvaccinated children in the study.

“Fact-checkers” also cited studies claiming better cognitive performance in vaccinated children. However, these studies considered no unvaccinated children but instead looked at minor delays in the vaccination schedule (Smith and Woods 2010) or the presence/absence of measles vaccination in children who received the BCG and polio vaccine (Nandi et al. 2019).

Facebook’s censorship of the paper I coauthored with Neil Miller is pedestrian. Looking beyond the veneer of the write-up of the “fact-checkers,” one sees an attempt to deceive, not educate the reader.

I welcome everyone to receive our work with an open mind. Our recommendation from the study is clear: “A thorough evaluation of vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations is essential to understanding the full spectrum of health effects associated with specific vaccines and the childhood vaccine schedule in totality.”

In addition, Children’s Health Defensehas an exhaustive compilation of studies where vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are compared."

Read the full article at ChildrensHealthDefense.org: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/n...fact-checkers/

[palehorse]

What make me wonder, why people still using Facebook and Google? Ignorance?
really, no excuses like I have to talk with friends and family or sell my crap online, please if you hate it, delete it now! Use something decentralized, there is plenty of good options out there.

[shaberon]

In having watched the same process of internet development, I was told "you'll get tons of garbage with no peer review".

That's basically it. Everyone has an opinion and a show. The difference intended by the academic statement is that something considered fit for publication has been criticized, if not attacked, to get there.

When this is crossed with constant use, it is pretty ape-like.

I like the pc and the net, but, what that means is, unless I go to it, it's not really there. I can easily spend time with other things, which, to me, is much more motivational. So I, personally, remain fairly unaffected by the software platforms or the associated devices, and don't really like it. Bunch of chatter that seems best ignored.

[AutumnW]

There are many problems inherent in curtailing free speech, but just as many in allowing the appearance of free speech if the opinion mill is based around a very confined mainstream media, like Fox, CNN, and the other electronic 'hot' networks.

Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg should be tarred and feathered along with Google. They capitalize on this bonding mechanism to feed back your own opinions to you, over and over and over. They are essentially creating cults based on belief alone. Is Zuckerberg allowing free speech, or is he allowing echo chambers to form that could lead to massive social unrest. I guess we'll see

[onawah]

Zach McElroy - Facebook Insider - Tells All
6/25/20
From Ty and Charlene Bollinger's email update:

"A couple of months ago, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before Congress that Facebook is a “politically neutral” platform.

Charlene just did a breaking news interview with Facebook Insider Zach McElroy that sheds serious doubts on Zuckerberg’s honesty.

While at Facebook, McElroy recorded Facebook content moderators bragging about deleting posts and comments that supported President Donald Trump and conservative causes. One comment moderator actually admitted that Facebook is “very anti-MAGA.”

Another content moderator was asked if she deleted every Republican item that came up on her queue, she said: “Yes! I don’t give no f*cks, I’ll delete it.” The same moderator said she does not take down anti-Trump content, even if it does violate policy.

This is vastly different than what Zuckerberg told Congress.

You see, if Zuckerberg lied to Congress, not only is HE in hot water, but Facebook itself is also in hot water! Social media platforms (like Facebook) are protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, because unlike traditional publishers they are not meant to actively edit content.

However, if Facebook is actively editing content (which they CLEARLY ARE), then they are not protected! "
************************
The Truth About Vaccines
65.8K subscribers
BREAKING: Charlene interviews Zach McElroy about his "insider" knowledge of blatant censorship that is going on at Facebook.

Because of Zach, we now have proof that Facebook is anti-MAGA and is using their platform to influence our elections! What can we do about this? Join Zach and Charlene and learn more!

You can follow Zach on Twitter (@ZachMcE)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VxeT-lAHDAw

[Eva2]

The video by Sasha Baron Cohen from 2019 is also a good fit for many of the current threads. This astute statement about manipulation came from Onawah's astrology thread - 'It is becoming more dangerous than ever to just follow our heart. When Facebook, Amazon, Google or the government knows exactly how to pull the strings of our heart and press the buttons of our brain, it will become impossible for the average person to tell the difference between their individual decisions and those of clever marketing agents.' This comment is backed up by the following video:

https://youtu.be/W6VI0RH2A90

[sunwings]

The Social Dilemma | Official Trailer | Netflix

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uaaC57tcci0

We tweet, we like, and we share— but what are the consequences of our growing dependence on social media? As digital platforms increasingly become a lifeline to stay connected, Silicon Valley insiders reveal how social media is reprogramming civilization by exposing what’s hiding on the other side of your screen.

Currently at the top of Netflix watch list! It´s barely over an hour long but soon after watching it I Deleted 3 social media apps (TikTok, Instagram and Facebook.) I will keep the accounts live but not so close as on my smart phone. Boredom plays large part of why people are obsessed with social media. The documentary really brings home how passive we really are, and I include Project Avalon in that! We turn up looking to be entertained but without any active intention allowing us to be manipulated beyond comprehension!

[Richter]

Posted by sunwings (here)
The Social Dilemma | Official Trailer | Netflix

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uaaC57tcci0

Currently at the top of Netflix watch list! It´s barely over an hour long but soon after watching it I Deleted 3 social media apps (TikTok, Instagram and Facebook.) I will keep the accounts live but not so close as on my smart phone. Boredom plays large part of why people are obsessed with social media. The documentary really brings home how passive we really are, and I include Project Avalon in that! We turn up looking to be entertained but without any active intention allowing us to be manipulated beyond comprehension!

Indeed a Must Watch

The Social Dilemma - Opening Scenes (11:34)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VB8cl580KSk

[Johan (Keyholder)]

I have seen it too, and it is definitely a "must see".
Glad to see that others value it too.

[Sarah Rainsong]

Any chance we can watch this somewhere besides Netflix.... cuz, you know, Cuties = #cancelNetfilx

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

My question exactly. The other day I had half a mind to subscribe to Netflix, just so that I could cancel Netflix.

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by Sarah Rainsong (here)
Any chance we can watch this somewhere besides Netflix.... cuz, you know, Cuties = #cancelNetfilx

Here, in the Avalon Library:

• http://avalonlibrary.net/The_Social_Dilemma_(2020).mp4 (838 Mb)

[EarthGirl]

Video from 23 Oct 2020 ...

She watched 'The Social Dilemma' and realised what exactly it was all about...

Covid 19 is a catalyst for 'The Great Reset' 'The Fourth Industrial Revolution' it's no conspiracy and Klaus Swabb is the first one to say it...

This is from Cory Morningstar, someone who I was unfamiliar with until a couple of weeks ago. She been studying this so called 'conspiracy stuff' for over 10 years, and goes to great lengths to look deeper into the companies that 'profit' from their nefarious agendas. there are so many connections between them all that once you've 'cottoned' on to this it gets easier to see what they are all upto and make your own connections and assumptions.

Cory has done many pieces on NGO's (Non Profit Govermental Organisations) and how they get the public to perceive them for their 'face value' but actually their hidden agendas are nothing of the sort... Cory sites WWF and Greenpeace as just some examples...

Did you know at this very moment they are currently putting a cable around the whole of Africa, just so they can be connected to Facebook ! As she says if you really cared about these people then surely sanitation, fresh water and making sure they had enough to eat would be their priority... But no (sigh) making sure they can connect to Facebook is far more important.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_CVpccOS8cE

Cory's website is here

https://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/202...of-the-social/

Cory's articles are long as she wants to make sure that what she writes is traceable and anyone can see where she got the information from

[ExomatrixTV]

• Johnathan Haidt STRONGLY believes Social Media Is Destroying this Generation:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jwaRCOGf1Nc

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Posted by Carmody (here)
The great takeaway, is the separation, the divide and conquer that happens via social media. How social media is killing the functional fabric of human society and culture.

Social media is NOT your friend. it is the opposite. We yearn for connection, but the social media actually gives us less.

This new Tiktok video has gone viral in the last couple of days. As usual, it's a cultural attack on traditional western values, portraying marriage and family as pointless and empty and not worth pursuing. But there's more to the story.

The video has Chinese fingerprints all over it.

3 mins

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZP5qB4qyUSI

[norman]

The TikTok story is more complicated than it's being talked about.

This guy has done his own dig into TikTok and found that it's no more Chinese than it's part of the same international corporate power ring as many others like Apple and google etc. If TikTok is a 'security' threat then so are all the others. I probably didn't have to say that, you already know it really.

He's got a rough way of talking, including swearing etc so maybe not everyone's cup of tea, but he delivers the goods ok.

Dangerous World Podcast - 416 - Who Owns TikTok?
1 hour - Posted Aug 7, 2023

SHOW NOTES
Thanks for listening to another episode of DWP!

I went down the rabbit hole of the ownership of TikTok and it was pretty wild.