FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

free e-books and longer documents.
To help reduce some of the confusion/clutter in other areas we are going to try having this section for the longer document posts.

Note: Anyone can read this forum, only registered users may post or reply to messages.
snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:16 am

This is a post from back in 2011 but it seems to apply just as much today as it did then.

Especially these days when there is so much spin and agenda related news stories presented to people all over the world.



This article is copied from:

https://sheeppee.wordpress.com/2011/06/ ... u-can-use/

posted June 1, 2011

FACT OR FICTION?
TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!
By Vicki Robison

Part I: Introduction (Questioning the mainstream media)
Part II: Truth Begets Truth (Investigating “official” stories)
Part III: Cui Bono? (Who benefits?)
Part IV: Propaganda (An introduction to Propaganda)
Part V: Recognizing Propaganda (The “top ten” propaganda strategies)
Part VI: Analyzing Propaganda (Using propaganda strategies to analyze the news)

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:18 am

PART I: INTRODUCTION

It seems that in this post-9/11 world, questioning the government or any “official story” ends with much criticism. Our mainstream media dutifully reports one side of the story — the “official” side — and most of us accept that side as truth. Anyone who then questions or doubts what has been reported as the truth, is criticized by friends and family– and if he is a notable figure and doubts publicly, he is also discredited by TV and radio talk show hosts, the media and other notable people, which is how the media convinces the majority of people to believe their version and to discredit all other versions — regardless of the truth.

The most popular ways to deal with those who doubt is to categorize them all as silly, stupid, one-sided, etc. Another way is to attempt to tear them apart by questioning their character. Sarcasm is another popular tactic, but those who want to twist a knife in the back of the doubter will use name-calling as a tactic — using names which we have been trained to associate as both powerful and demeaning, such as un-American, anti-government, anarchist, traitor, and other such words. There are also words and terms which have been created or re-defined (such as “right-wing”, “left-wing”, “neo-con”, “Truther”, “Birther” and “Conspiracy Theorist”, just to name a few) so that most people automatically generalize such people as crack-pots, or even as dangerous individuals. These words and terms are very powerful, and are intended to not only label the doubter, but also to discredit and to put the doubter in his place. The doubter is considered to be misguided and uninformed — or in other words, an idiot.

Even the words “patriot” and “Constitutionalist”, which were once quite honorable titles, are sometimes redefined to mean “trouble-maker” and even “potential terrorist.” Of course, it depends on to whom one is referring, as to which definition applies. If the media uses such titles to refer to President Obama or former President Bush, it’s a good thing! Why? Because the titles don’t fit! They are just glory words to convince a nation of sheep that they are “good guys”. When defined properly, Obama and Bush are nothing like patriots and instead of preserving the Constitution (which they took an oath of office to do) they have raped and ignored it by giving us the “Patriot Act” and by bestowing dictatorial powers upon themselves. But when the words are used to refer to advocates of liberty, who have adopted the patriotic and Constitutional views of the founders — and who believe in small government, the principles of self-ownership, that all men were created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights — the mainstream media presents them as potentially dangerous and misguided individuals, often “spinning” the story by offering examples of dangerous, self-proclaimed patriots who are even rejected by the majority of those within the patriot/freedom movement, or by deleting portions of stories and interviews which causes the viewer to unknowingly take the story out of context.

In other words, when the words “patriot” and “Constitutionalist” are used to describe bad guys, it’s a good thing. When these words are used to describe good guys, it’s a bad thing. (Also known as “doublethink”.)

Often the doubter is accused of being on a “bandwagon.” However, the bandwagon concept is generally defined as those who follow the beliefs of the majority, or a fairly large group, rather than a minority. For instance, if Mike believes that there is a cover-up regarding the assassination of John F. Kennedy, but all of his friends and family believe the official story, who is riding the bandwagon? Mike could be accused of riding the bandwagon if many of those with whom he associates believe similarly, but not when he is in a very small minority, or even alone on the issue. The bandwagon concept is based on conformity, not independent thinking or unpopular opinions. Some might define the bandwagon concept as the “herd instinct” or “group think.”

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:20 am

Part II: Truth Begets Truth

YouTube Video
Most doubters who have investigated both sides of a story and reject the official version based on their research, are often ridiculed by their peers. They often become the butt of jokes and are often considered to be somewhat flaky, odd, or just plain crazy. Although there may be some people who enjoy ruffling feathers by voicing their unpopular opinions, I tend to believe that most people do not enjoy being ridiculed by those whom he considers to be his intimates. It’s actually quite a lonely position for the doubter to be in. Nobody wants to feel that he’s alone.

So why would one express such opinions, and expose stories of government corruption, knowing that he will be criticized? It is my belief that most simply want to educate and inform — especially if they have hard evidence to substantiate their claims. Most doubters, or so-called “conspiracy theorists” often have a better understanding of both sides of the story than those who simply rely on mainstream media for their news, because they have heard the mainstream story and have turned elsewhere for further investigation. So who is more informed? The individual who relies on the media source which merely echoes the “official” story, or those who listen to the mainstream, corporate-owned media version and investigate the issue further?

In actuality, those who investigate a story, are often led in a multitude of directions and find themselves receiving an education in many different areas — sometimes requiring them to devote dozens, or even hundreds of hours to painstaking research. For instance, one who investigates the events of the JFK assassination, will often branch out into studying bullet trajectory and the inplausibility of the “magic bullet theory”, the political scene in the late 50s and early 60s, the biographical history of Oswald and Ruby, the enemies of John F. Kennedy, Kennedy’s writings and speeches, what he was attempting to accomplish during his presidency, why the secret service were directed to “stand down” while following Kennedy’s car in Dallas, eyewitness statements that challenge the official story, and so on. All of these things bring up other names, incidents and government organizations which one must research, in order to understand the bigger picture.

Likewise, those who investigate 9/11, will often start by reading an article, watching a video or talking to somebody who challenges the official story. Then the individual finds himself researching such topics as physics, architecture, politics, power, psychology of power, the history of false flag (or staged) incidents, science, past examples of skyscraper fires, past examples of planes which have crashed into buildings, organizations such as CFR (the Counsel on Foreign Relations) and PNAC (Project for a New American Century), eye-witness statements, the statements of politicians, architects, scientists, physicists, and other experts, who also disbelieve the official story, etc., etc., etc…..

It’s easy to think that a claim sounds ridiculous when you have only heard one view. When an unwillingness to believe anything but the official story (because the government and the media would never lie to us), or an unwillingness to stand alone, or an unwillingness to investigate the matter in order to become educated on opposing views — are one’s only arguments against an opposing opinion or idea — one really doesn’t have a leg on which to stand. If you know little or nothing about the opposing side of a story, how can you debate or deny the opposition’s view? Simply because it doesn’t seem plausible? Because it sounds far-fetched? Because the mainstream media denounces the opposition and would have told us the truth? Having only one side of the story does not benefit you — not when the other individual is knowledgable of the official story as well as the inconsistencies. Although you may feel that you have won an argument simply because you are able to echo what the mainstream media has told you, or what Popular Mechanics has printed, or what the Warren Commission or the 9/11 Commision concluded — in actuality, you are simply acting as a parrot. The same can be said for those who have simply memorized the arguments of the opposing view (without researching the arguments) as well.

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:22 am

PART III: CUI BONO?

“Cui bono?” Translation: “to whom is it for a benefit?”, or more simply “Who benefits?”

“‘Cui bono?’ is the well-known test of Cassius Longinus (Consul, B.C. 127) for discovering the author of a secret crime…” (Horae Latinae: Studies in Synonyms and Syntax”, by Robert Ogilive & Joseph Ogilive, 1901 – Page 76)

When weighing claims that “smell fishy”, are conspiratorial in nature, or could be conspiratorial in nature, one must ask the question, “Who benefits?” This is an important tool to use when digesting the news and any “official” report. But one cannot come to a conclusion based on this tool alone. When a husband or wife is murdered, for instance, it is standard procedure to first question the surviving spouse. This does not mean that the spouse was guilty of the murder, but they must be considered a suspect until they can be eliminated–especially when there is something to gain by the death, such as an insurance policy pay-off or a large estate. So is the case with much of the crime that happens within big government and big business. (Remember: Power tends to corrupt! Absolute power corrupts absolutely!)

“Doubt is only too often looked upon as an evil, but it is not, and as Tennyson sang, ‘There is more faith in honest doubt, believe me, than in half the creeds.’ Doubt to be of use, must be honest, fearless, patient. St. Paul tells us plainly to prove all things. An old Turkish proverb runs “Who questions, learns.” We should fear doubt less than a too-easy faith.” “Cui Bono? or ‘What Shall it Profit?’: A Gentle Philosophy for Those Who Doubt”, by Harwood Hunttington, 1912 (Page 22)

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:23 am

PART IV: PROPAGANDA

Propaganda is not merely a tool used in war, it is an everyday reality used by businesses in advertising, in order to convince the consumer that the product or service is needed or that it would benefit the consumer in some way. It is used by non-profit groups in order to promote safe-sex, healthy eating, tolerance, etc. It’s used by religious sects, schools, employers, and other groups who want to convince you that their way of thinking is the way you should be thinking too. In other words, propaganda isn’t always a bad thing. It’s simply a tool which is used in an attempt to implant ideas, sway opinions, open minds, close minds, buy products, etc. — whether for good, evil or greed. Propaganda is also used by government and media to sway the spectator into a particular way of thinking. The use of propaganda is a reality in our world, but one can easily spot it when one knows what to look for.

However, free thought is a near impossbility when government propaganda abounds and the citizens have been deprived of an education regarding the techniques of propaganda. In his 1922 book, Free Thought and Official Propaganda, Bertrand Russell said, “There are two quite different evils about propaganda as now practised. On the one hand, its appeal is generally to irrational causes of belief rather than to serious the argument; on the other hand, it gives an unfair advantage to those who can obtain most publicity, whether through wealth or through power.”

In 1941, a Harvard University professor — Dr. Kirkly Mather — warned: “Mankind today is passing from an age of individualism into an age of collectivism.” He further stated that “education is the method employed by the democracies, while propaganda is the method employed by the totalitarian states.” Dr. Mather explained that one cannot judge a democracy by whether or not it has a constitution, because the soviet union also had a constitution…..nor could one judge a democracy by whether or not elections were held, because Germany had held an election, and Hitler won! “Self discipline,” he said, “is necessary to the operation of a democracy. If self-discipline is not practiced, then totalitarian slavery will succeed it.”

It is my opinion that part of this self-discipline should come in the form of self-education. All of us, regardless of our individual ages, have grown up in a nation of propaganda and deception. This statement may alarm the well-indoctrinated individual, which is the intention of those who perform the indoctrination.

For one to be accused of being “anti-government”, based on their negative views of government isn’t quite fair, because it is the nature of government to lie and deceive in an effort to gain more and more power. Unfortunately, everyone can’t have the power. In order for a government to gain more power, the People must have less. If “We, the People” had the power that was intended by the founders, the government would have very little. They must take ours (or we must forfeit it) in order for the government to grow in power. Our founding fathers were well aware of this fact. This is the reason that three separate branches of government were created — so that there would be a system of checks and balances. This is the reason that our founding fathers wrote a Constitution and founded a Republic, rather than another form of government. In a Republic, the individual has rights that no majority vote can take away. Unfortunately, the founders could not have fathomed that almost every politician in Washington could have been corrupted at the same time, leaving an “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” mentality, instead of a system of checks and balances. The founders loathed the thought of a democracy, because a democracy can be defined as “mob rule” — or as described in the Aug. 29, 1992 edition of the Los Angeles Times:

“Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote. Those rights are spelled out in the Bill of Rights and in our California Constitution. Voters and politicians alike would do well to take a look at the rights we each hold, which must never be chipped away by the whim of the majority.”

And as Bertrand Russell stated in his aforementioned book, “…there are some people who think that a democratic State is scarcely distinguished from the people. This, however, is a delusion. The State is a collection of officials, different for different purposes, drawing comfortable incomes so long as the status quo is preserved. The only alteration they are likely to desire in the status quo is an increase of bureaucracy and the power of bureaucrats. It is, therefore, natural that they should take advantage of such opportunities as war-excitement to acquire inquisitorial powers over their employees, involving the right to inflict starvation upon any subordinate who opposes them.”

The founders considered Americans to be the sovereigns of this nation — “sovereigns without subjects” — and the government to be the servant of the individual sovereigns. The People (or sovereigns) have unalienable rights, as well as civil rights, and the government, by consent of the People, were granted powers in order to protect the rights of the People. But for over 150 years we have been sold a bill of goods called “democracy”, and we have been taught that it is a good thing! Public schools teach us this from the time we enter our first social studies course in elementary school, and between public schools and government, we are taught this for the rest of our lives.

Don’t confuse the form of government called a “democracy” with “democratic elections.” Democratic elections are not a bad thing when the public is informed and willing to investigate the politicians who are running for office, rather than to just believe what they are told by the mainstream media and in campaign ads! An informed public is necessary for democratic elections to attract honorable candidates. However, an uninformed public who vote according to their whims rather than on an understanding of American ideals, and their rights, are only likely to vote for power-hungry and corrupt (or corruptable) people — because those who study the art of propaganda and know how to use it to their advantage, will say almost anything the public wants to hear. On the other hand, when the public is just as knowledgable in the art of propaganda, and knows how to spot the tricks, those tricky politicians aren’t nearly as successful. When accurate history and critical thinking skills are not taught to children (and adults), and when those parts of history that empower the individual and weaken the government are totally removed from government schools, the public becomes ignorant. And unfortunately, almost every public school in the country is a government school…..which is where we are first indoctrinated with propaganda!

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:25 am

Glittering Generalities: “This technique uses important-sounding “glad words” that have little or no real meaning. These words are used in general statements that cannot be proved or disproved. Words like “good,” “honest,” “fair,” and “best” are examples of “glad” words.”

Although I used Obama as an example, the “glittering generality” technique can be applied to almost any campaign in our history — political or otherwise! Barack Obama stood for “Hope and Change”. One of George Bush Jr‘s was “Real Plans for Real People.” Bill Clinton: “Putting People First” and “Building a Bridge to the 21st Century.” Ronald Reagan: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” and “It’s morning again in America.” Gerald Ford: “He’s making us proud again!” Richard Nixon: “For the Future” (And the list goes on and on!)

I must admit that my favorite campaign slogans date back to 1884 — Grover Cleveland vs. James Blaine. Blaine’s slogan was: ” Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha, Ha, Ha” Cleveland’s comeback? “Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, The Continental Liar from the State of Maine” (Do you smell the propaganda?)

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:26 am

Transfer: “In this technique, an attempt is made to transfer the prestige of a positive symbol to a person or an idea. For example, using the American flag as a backdrop for a political event makes the implication that the event is patriotic in the best interest of the U.S.”

Although our modern era of “political correctness” has trained us not to talk about God too much, not to pray in school, not to have Bibles in the court room, to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas”, etc., the fact is that most Americans consider themselves to be Christians. So although it may be politically incorrect to discuss the subject of religion — especially in politics — the capturing on film of a politician (especially a president) attending church, or sitting in front of a mural of Jesus, is an ideal photo-op which uses the “Transfer” technique to promote the idea that the politician is “a good Christian.”

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:27 am

False Analogy (a.k.a. “Imperfect analogy): “In this technique, two things that may or may not really be similar are portrayed as being similar. When examining the comparison, you must ask yourself how similar the items are. In most false analogies, there is simply not enough evidence available to support the comparison.”

I used this example (right) simply because it’s so easy to pick apart. Although President Roosevelt stated a fact by using the old cliché “blood is thicker than water,” the fact is that the circumstances (the presentation of a $240,000 check for the infantile paralysis fund) did not prove the expression to be true. It was not incorrect or improper for Roosevelt to have used this expression, as we all use such expressions to make a point, but often such expressions are not actual proof — and are deceptive when used in actual/intentional propaganda. Such advertising slogans as “It’ll make you feel younger too” and “It’s like a breath of fresh air” are other such examples where the product has little or nothing to do with the cliché being used, along with the “Could switching to Geico save you 15% or more” commercials that use such examples as the piggy who cried “Wee, wee, wee” all the way home, the buck stops here, how much wood can a woodchuck chuck, etc.

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:28 am

Testimonial: “This technique is easy to understand. It is when ‘big name’ personalities are used to endorse a product. Whenever you see someone famous endorsing a product, ask yourself how much that person knows about the product, and what he or she stands to gain by promoting it.”

Many people believe that Obama would not have won the 2008 election if it had not been for Oprah. Before appearing on Oprah for the first time, few Americans had ever heard of Barack Obama. After the last of his pre-election Oprah appearances, everybody knew who he was. So whether you’re selling a pair of shoes, the latest & greatest widget ever invented, or a president, the “testimonial” technique of propaganda is a big seller! Another example would be to parade celebrities around on the talk-show circuit and have them publicly endorse the war — because if they are for the war, so should you be! Or to have a celebrity appear in a pro-vaccination PSA, is yet another example. Not much can be said for the individual’s ability to think for himself when he is so easily sold on a product or idea simply because it was endorsed by a well-known person, but it works! This is why celebrities are given multi-million dollar contracts to sell chips, soda, shoes, perfume and clothing lines. It’s also why “product placement” works so well. The candy, Reeces Pieces, increased its sales by 65% after the movie “E.T.” came out in 1982. (Source: Time Magazine) Texaco and Pepsi were both featured in “Back to the Future”, although Shell Oil and Coca-Cola had also made bids. (Source: Wikia) And modern television shows are packed with product placements, because if your favorite characters drink Dubbly-Bubbly Cola or eat Crunchy Cardboard Crinkles, you’re going to want them too!!!

snafu
Posts: 365
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:04 am

Re: FACT OR FICTION? TRUTH-DECTECTING TOOLS YOU CAN USE TO DECIPHER THE NEWS!

Post by snafu » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:28 am

Plain Folks: “This technique uses a folksy approach to convince us to support someone or something. These ads depict people with ordinary looks doing ordinary activities.”

Anybody who remembers the 2008 presidential election should remember good ‘ol “Joe the Plumber.” After meeting and questioning Obama about his tax plan, both Obama and McCain jumped on the Joe the Plumber bandwagon, both of them doing their best to work his name into their rhetoric. Joe the Plumber is your “average Joe”, a perfect representation of the “Plain Folks” type of propaganda. It wasn’t coincidence that both candidates used him to their advantage, because every professional politician is well-versed in the art (and power) of propaganda.

Post Reply