my quip regarding atheism is that i believe in just one less god than a monotheist

that usually gets them thinking. then i say to them that they are atheists - about loki, zues, the australian aboriginal dream time rainbow serpent and every other god of the thousands on godchecker that aren't their specific one.

atheism has had a profound effect on my life. Let me provide a brief autobiography (this is /r/IAMA after all!) I was born into the belief in Sai Baba, even though I grew up in Australia. Hence my mentioning him in the OP. All of my life until i was 17 my family believed in him. i wasn't keen, but i went along with it because i was a member of the family. then one afternoon Dad came into my room and said he'd just read an article that Sai Baba was a paedophile. I was pretty surprised, but I think he was the one who was the most shocked. Because he had spent half of his life believing this god man was God on Earth. Obviously the Indian Rationalists still have a long way to go and if you're looking for a REAL charity to support rather than the Xians at World Vision, send some cash to them. They run critical thinking workshops in outback villages of India, showing the locals the sleight of hand tricks the godmen, such as Sai Baba, use.

so obviously i very promptly lost the skerrick of belief in sai baba that had managed to survive until that point. but it didn't make me an atheist. that took until the third(!) year of my psych degree, a good 5-6 years later, when all of my critical thinking, research methods and general analytical training finally sank in. you have to understand that it wasn't just sai baba. i had layers and layers. i was also born into one of the biggest cults in australia, the universal brotherhood (vaguely recent documentary, shorter youtube). my father was one of the founding members. the break up of that cult seriously fucked with our family, but i think the experience had the greatest impact on my Dad and my step brother, who came along with his/our mother to the cult, where she met Dad. In the Compass documentary they talk of things such as 'silent time', where if you did something wrong you were excluded from the group for a long period via distance and having to keep silent. Dad was victimised in this way sometimes, although he's reluctant to talk about a lot of it and is very keen only to talk of the good things. I half wonder if it's to save us kids. Regarding my step brother, he had serious issues and needed a child psychologist from what i have gathered. but because it was a cult they couldn't endorse the outside world by turning to a child psych within it, so they tried to deal with his problems their own way. based on prior descriptions, you can imagine what that was.

so that was that bit, but then the family promptly moved interstate to be with what they thought was the best school in Australia, a waldorf school. This was a movement started by rudolf steiner. just to keep up the cultishness. you may have heard lots of good things about this type of school, but that's only superficial. these schools do not prepare children for the mainstream and i emerged after 12 years with a profound belief in my superiority and purity over regular people, swine, from 'outside'. I spent the first three years of university getting over myself and beginning to trust normal people. I have since reversed my original position, believing now that people from everyday schools are smarter, better and stronger. Waldorf schools also don't make you smart. They don't teach critical thinking, in fact, one of the classes in YEAR TWELVE involved teaching astronomy AND ASTROLOGY in the same lesson. This class was taken by the math teacher.

Pretty much sums it up.

Hence I had a hell of a lot of catching up to do when I hit the real world. But I wasn't quite out of the woods when I finished Waldorf, second top of the class mind you. I still went on to complete a Wholistic Psychology Certificate IV - which was basically a $AU3-4000 course in all the alt psych/self help/pop psychology hogwash written about so eloquantly by Salerno. But there was more! I also completed a number of pranic healing courses. Basically this involves waving your hands around and letting coloured energy come out of them to cure people of stuff. Curiously, the leader had an early death, aged 54 of the quite unremarkable illness, pneumonia! All of this extra study I was doing concurrently with my psych degree, so I was certainly displaying some cognitive processing power but no sign of putting it to good use yet! By the way I wrote a funny article comparing these courses and my psych degree which fits here too.

Anyway I can’t remember what finally tipped me over but I think it was a combination of LiveJournal’s atheism forum and Richard Dawkins/Sam Harris etc who were beginning to reach prominence then. Although I do remember debating the existence of god with my cousin many times at our grandparents’ house when we were about 6 or 7, so it’s not like I’ve been a one eyed believer. He still believes though. He’s gotten more fundamental whilst I’ve gone antitheist. Part of my finally making it over the line was even to join the Atheist Foundation of Australia for a year, but then I stopped as it just seemed a bit of an amateurish organisation.

So I started off by saying my life has been radically improved by atheism. This is because I’ve stopped spending all this money on new age therapies and courses like pranic healing and wholistic psychology, for instance. A recent example though, is my mother having cancer and I have been able to use my knowledge of critical thinking to help other family members understand why conventional rather than alternative treatments have more efficacy. I never realised just how far apart in terms of thinking we have become. In terms of actual atheism, the main way in which it has improved my life is via my being able to appreciate the quote to end all quotes:

"Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. And the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics. You are all stardust. You couldn't be here if stars hadn't exploded. Because the elements, the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution weren't created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars. And the only way they could get into your body is if the stars were kind enough to explode. So forget Jesus. The stars died so you could be here today." Lawrence Krauss
Getting back to an earlier point that atheism allows us to appreciate things as being good simply because that’s the way they are, not because of divine endorsement, I think this quote is a supreme example of the hazard of seeking such supernatural origins. You miss the true mindsplitting grandeur of our existence. Often I heard new age people and god believers say that spiritual practices put you in touch with the world around you, to really feel the energy. Well due to my strong agreement with this general motivation, I’ll take atheism and the worldview of Krauss’ quote, as it achieves that unity to a far greater, more spectacular and edifying degree than any religious text ever written or spiritual inspiration ever ecstatically received.

> It was in the 1960s and it was done in an attempt to stifle cable providers and protect the existing broadcast networks.

Sorry no it was so the cable companies had to carry all the local channels. Also so they did not get free content. They have to pay for the content. no free rides.

Regulations opened up the telephone polls to the cable companies. The phone companies did not want them on their polls so they fought to keep them off. Regulations stopped that.

So no free stuff and they got access to the telephone polls. All regulations.

> But the cause of these companies becoming so huge today is largely from their interactions with local govts.

An example of bad regulations and laws. Yes those are out there like I have stated. It's called regulatory capture.

> But whats even cheaper than acquiring a competitor is getting in bed with the govt.

For Comcast to do that they have to get the government to agree to let them buy their competition. The US government use to stop many mergers from happening because it get too much market to very few companies. Until recently they stopped doing that.

> reducing competition in their industry through burdensome regulations that they design

Again you think all regulations are regulatory capture. They are not.

> I'm not saying that private companies aren't bad actors sometimes.

"Any company is going to want to be the biggest and control the most market share. Its not a bad thing to want to be the biggest and best in a competition." - you from an earlier comment.

So being the biggest is not being a bad actor? It's nice you put in the best in a competition but to be the real best one needs no competition. See the best is the company that makes the highest profits. It's not about customers. That's not what the free market is. It's about higher and higher profits. It's called the profit motive. It's not called the be the best motive. It's the profit motive. Removing competition does that.

The phone companies tried to do it to the cable companies by keeping them off their telephone polls and the cable companies try to do it by size. No new player can come in. If they do the cable companies just drop their price in that one area and unless that company can spend billions and take a loss most of that time they will lose.

Google is the one exception and that's because they are also content and they have to do it. If they do not and the cable companies are allowed to be unregulated they will also lose large amount of money to fast / slow lane. The cable companies will squeeze all content providers because they can. Don't like it consumer? Who cares. Go else where. Oh wait there is no real other choices.

Google knows that that's why they are rolling out their own cable.

AT&T stopped rolling out FIOS. It stopped about 2 years ago. Why? They where still making a profit but the cost was cutting into their profit. Profits where not high enough.

Here's a really good book on the subject.
"Captive Audience" It's by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_P._Crawford

She talks about the good and the bad. So she does cover regulatory capture but also rent seeking and monopoly.

http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AMYGFXK/ref=oh_aui_d_detailpage_o01_?ie=UTF8&psc=1

> People have a right to spend their money any way they wish. If a corporation spends money on politics, it better be in a way that benefits the shareholders or they're going to lose investors.

Ever heard of the term Maximizing Shareholder Value?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/11/28/maximizing-shareholder-value-the-dumbest-idea-in-the-world/

To do that companies need to minimize every other stakeholder. That means suppliers, the government (taxes), and the employees. I suspect you have a job where you get a pay check. Maximizing shareholder value says you are making too much money. Why? Money going into your pocket is money not going to the shareholders.

Also the customers need to be minimized they too are a stakeholder. monopolies can and do minimize customers because they can.

The value you get from the company cannot be maximized because that would not allow the shareholders value to be maximized.

I really hope you are a millionaire or better because otherwise you are not a shareholder. You are an employee. And you are screwing yourself.

I had to lure him in private to get him to hire me to consult his business. Kidding. Some of the people I've helped in the past are a little more reluctant to share information openly here so it's easier to get to the meat of the questions privately. That's just been my experience, though.

Here's the info that I shared with coinhut92 without any of his personal details in here. Some of this is generalities and will vary from client to client:

• If you have no experience in publishing, this is the book I used to teach my magazine publishing class at my old uni: http://www.amazon.com/Starting-Running-Successful-Newsletter-Magazine/dp/1413305237

It will give you a great rundown of all the questions you need to answer before you even consider starting a magazine or newsletter. The author revises the book every so often so the information tends to be fairly current and at the core, a lot of it hasn't changed.

• Printing. Shop around for quotes. Your print quantity will determine what kind of printer to get quotes from. For quantities over 10,000 (10m, thousands is abbreviated to "m" in the printing business), web presses will usually be your best bet. For cost effectiveness, stay with a standard size (check with your printer for their standard size). Custom sizes cost more.

• Advertising to Editorial ratios. 50:50 is the max I would recommend and always lean towards more editorial. At 50:50, you can easily figure out your costs (one page of ads essentially pays for one page of editorial, easy enough).

• Ad Pricing. I wrote a little more about this ages ago for someone on my blog about pricing.

• Publishing print content online. There's no one method of how to make your magazine content work online the same way. Many people publishing digital versions of their magazines but this has not been highly effective as a way to sell additional ads. Taking content from your magazine and posting it online is fine, but the two are different beasts and will not always translate well. The best method is to treat the website as a website, not a magazine, and work it accordingly to drive people to purchase your magazine or ancillary products.

• Know your niche. Just like blogging, defining your niche is key. Print has the advantage of geotargeting more effectively than a blog. Use it to your advantage. Choose either a topic or an audience and build from there. If it's a topic, i.e. health and wellness, know the demographic you're targeting as well as the location. If it's a demographic you've chosen, i.e. affluent older white women, what topics will interest them most and what advertisers in your area will be looking to serve them?

But seriously, I do consult and I'm happy to help if I can.

This is a really big topic, and I won't be able to list everything, but I'll try to hit the highlights.

• I do the best I can to be professional. I write the best book I can, and hire editors to help me make it as good as possible. This also involves pushing myself to be the best writer I can, and to be ambitious about the topics I address.
  
• I do the best I can to appear professional. I invest time and money in cover design, book formatting, and website design and content, so that it looks good to other people.
  
• My core audience are people who are intimately involved in technology and the future of technology: programmers, CTOs, venture capitalists. So instead of sending my book out to science fiction book reviewers, who are probably inundated with books to review, I send out review copies to programmers, tech startups, CTOs, etc. For The Last Firewall, I used Tech Crunch to find 50 fast-growing startups, and sent a physical copy of my book to each of their CTOs.
  
• Early on, when I didn't have any audience, I used Facebook ads, and carefully targeted people who were fans of particular books that had a lot of overlap with my book. I had a $5 daily budget, and ran the ad for about three months. This helped me get the first few hundred readers, and eventually word of mouth started to take over.
  
  I've also written a book about the topic: http://www.amazon.com/Indie-Small-Press-Book-Marketing-ebook/dp/B00AOOXZ9K
  
  I've seen a lot of authors do it a lot of different ways, and there's no one path that's right. It's just what works for you. Conduct lots of little experiments, and see what works.
  
  

The problem is that click-bait is the only way to keep the lights on for most of these sites. They just don't make that much money.

Consider how this translates to employee pay and, in turn, the incentive for these employees to pursue virtuous journalistic careers and invest the time required to keep things on the straight and narrow.

As a result, we don't get journalism - we get op-ed and clickbait. We get toxicity.

This is part of a vicious cycle. Toxicity and clickbait are more profitable.

It is in human nature for us to have our interest piqued by negative headlines and bad news. Our brains work by recognizing patterns and relationships between facts and situations. We've evolved to be more interested in the facts that jut out and are potentially more threatening to our survival.

So, bad news and negativity gets clicks. Weird-ass headlines gets clicks. Misinformation drives clicks. Toxicity drives traffic. Clickbait drives traffic.

Go look at the headlines and "hot" articles on top gaming blogs. You'll see tons of negative articles or headlines that stir toxicity.

• The more people get upset, feel that they're getting taken advantage of, or feel threatened, the more likely they are to click.
  
  
• The more inflammatory the article, the more likely people are to comment.
  
  
• The more likely they are to comment, the more likely they are to return to the article.
  
  
• The more likely people are to return to an article, the more page views the blog gets.
  
  
• The more page views the blog gets, the more they make.
  
  So, if you're the editor for a gaming blog site, what do you do? Even if you're not intending to run toxic content, you might unconsciously start becoming conditioned to run toxic content through the positive feedback you get through page stats.
  
  In systems like Forbes where anyone can submit and the most popular articles get featured, it's easy to see how the most divisive and potentially toxic content gets featured.
  
  Consider this. Here's a fictional made-up quote we can use for the sake of argument.
  
  > "In the new game, the brothers go to Africa. It's a fascinating place," said Jim Drawerson, artist on Super Plumber Brothers 2. "It was hard to capture all of the culture and ethnic diversity, but I think we did a good job."
  
  Which of these three headlines do you think will get the most clicks and comments?
  
  > 1. Super Plumber Brothers 2 artist interview
  
  > 2. Super Plumber Brothers 2 artist talk about setting game in Africa
  
  > 3. Super Plumber Brothers 2 artist slammed for racist comments
  
  For the third headline, all you have to do is find a few people on Twitter who were offended (someone is always offended about something), screenshot their comments, and paste them into your article.
  
  The third headline will drive clicks, even if it's not accurate. But who's going to hold the gaming bloggers accountable?
  
  Gaming blogs are largely not accountable to anyone except the stats that keep the doors open. I'm not going to name names or sites, but I can tell you that, having worked in the industry, there are a handful of very popular sites that do not fact check and do not run corrections. It should come as no surprise that these sites also make most of their revenue on click bait.
  
  So what can we do?
  
  
• Do not click on clickbait. Look at the headline of an article and ask yourself - Is this going to help me understand or know more about gaming?
  
  
• Do not comment on inflammatory articles. This only gives toxic clickbait more views.
  
  
• Question sources. What are the facts that the author is asserting? Where did they get these facts? Did they talk to the developer/publisher?
  
  
• Question credentials. Who wrote this article? What is their qualification? What kind of articles do they typically write? Have they contacted the publisher/developer to get the facts?
  
  
• Question authority. Who is writing this? Do they have special knowledge? Do they have special access?
  
  
• Tell authors and editors when you see clickbait and you don't like it. Do this through Twitter - not through the site. Do not contribute to toxic comments sections.
  
  
• If you find a factual error in an article, tell the author. Do this for Twitter. They will probably censor you in the comments section.
  
  
• Comment on articles that are well-written and contain facts and thank the author.
  
  It's a huge effort, but a lot of the toxicity in the gaming community comes from ignorance. And that ignorance is driven, willfully or not, by clickbait.
  
  
  At the end of the day, there's just not that much gaming news. So someone has to stir up drama to fill columns and drive clicks.
  
  EDIT -- This is a great book that covers some of this subject matter. Very quick read.
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285
  
  To be clear, I am not affiliated with this book and am not using Amazon affiliate to make money on clicks/purchases of this book. I think it's a great resource for people who would like to know more about this topic.

I completely agree re the NBC/Comcast merger. For what it's worth, Susan Crawford (author of the FT article) has a great book on Comcast, which discusses the NBC merger at length: Captive Audience. The writing is a bit clunky, but the substance is super important.

>The AT&T/T-Mobile merger feels like a comparable anti-trust issue. The #1 and #4 telecom carriers weren't allowed to merge. Here you have Comcast (#1) and Time Warner Cable (#2 cable provider in the US) in a similar market dynamic. Why is this any different?

I think the companies would argue (with a degree of accuracy) that AT&T and T-Mobile were clearly direct competitors -- in nearly all parts of the United States, consumers could choose between those two companies (and others, like Verizon). If those companies merged, there would be fewer competitors, and less direct competition, in the mobile telecommunications market.

The situation is a little different with cable, because Comcast and TWC don't directly compete in many markets. Rather, they have regional monopolies. The logic is that since they don't compete head-to-head as it is, the merger won't reduce competition.

The problem with that is that Comcast and TWC have allocated territories and customers (itself an antitrust violation), and have most likely agreed (tacitly if not expressly) not to encroach on each other's markets. In other words, the reason they do not currently compete head-to-head owes at least in part to prior anticompetitive agreements.

Your best bet to cover your own arse from any defamation is to actually read the law on libel/defamation.

This is the most common legal problem you will face with publishing interviews, but is unlikely to be a problem with what you are doing unless they say something particularly bad or you make them out to be a douchebag. It's a complicated law and I really recommend you look it up and seriously read into it if you are going to be publishing a lot of interviews.

I'd recommend you record the interviews, as well as ask them to state the spelling of their name into the microphone when you start so A) you get the spelling of their name correct and B) when you listen back it's clear which recording it is.

If you happen to know teeline or any kind of legitimate shorthand then it is important you date and sign the notepad at the front, as well as date the top of pages at the beginning of each interview.

It's important for your quotes that you have fully identified the person being quoted too, so don't start with "Stuart said". It needs to be formatted as something like "Stuart Freebridge, Head of Transportantion at Lincoln County Council said:" This only needs to be done the first time they are quoted, afterwards you can shorten it to Mr Freebridge etc.

I am by no means a qualified journalist! I have done some work experience but nothing paid and I'm only a second year journalism student. The law is extremely important and I really recommend you get something like McNae's.

That book is a handy reference and it is vital you read some of it if you are going to be publishing a fair few interviews on a variety of subjects.

A lengthy post, so sorry about that and I hope this helps! If you want any interview tips I have some I give out to the freshers when they work on my publication, but this post is long enough!

TL;DR : LEARN THE LAW ON DEFAMATION AND LIBEL.

Have you read Best Seller Code? They used machine learning trained on best sellers to find patterns. Very enlightening stuff. Even if the AI isn't writing it completely, it could act as "tools" for writers. I think the cyborg relationships might work best? Future will be interesting. That's for sure. I wonder about the virtual worlds too. Will they all be scripted to perfection like West World, thereby needing human writers?

Yeah, I don't trust 538 outright but I trust them a lot more than a paper that is basically dedicated to 20-somethings clickbait.

"political slant of Washington Post," third result:

>In spite of its owner's political leanings, The Washington Post is generally considered a center-left publication.

Link 1 was Wikipedia. and link 2 was The Post itself. The Washington Post is a Liberal paper.

>and polls from major media organizations aren't really in the business of editorializing via their polling data

Yes they are. Washington Post's business model is to post sensational headlines for clicks. Trust Me, I'm Lying is a great book about it. News websites have very little incentive to care about their reputation.

Depends if it's the kind of thing that (1) you are looking to find people or (2) where you want people to find you.

1. For example, you created a product that solves a problem: Talk to bloggers and journalists and try to get them to write about you. Comment on blogs. Post on reddit. Ryan Holiday's book Trust Me, I'm Lying is great for this.
   
   
2. For example, you run a mold removal business and need people looking for your service to find you. I've found Search Engine Optimization to be the best technique for this. People are looking on Google. You want to show up on Google results. The easy way: pay for Adwords. The hard way: build links and optimize your site. Nick's Traffic Tips is full of good info on this.
   
   Good luck with your business!

The Newton dictionary will give you some basic definitions. For a bit more depth, you can try the Irwin Handbook. These are good things to know, but frankly, E1/T1 PRIs are quickly being replaced with SIP trunks - and virtualized SIP trunks which emulate PRI signaling. EDI varies a great deal by industry and has never reached it's real promise - due to variations between processes and requirements across vendors. The importance of these things vary a great deal, depending upon the area you are looking to move into, eg. provisioning, management, design, etc.

You are asking good questions. I appreciate your openness and I hope I can add something here. I hope we are not divided as it feels sometimes. Also, you might find it comforting that our country has survived division of similar if not greater magnitude before.

" why can’t you adults do the same "- I hope you will find that some of us can. Can you think of a marketing strategy for us? How many clicks/views would this headline get: "Nobody slams anybody- two dudes who disagree have an amicable conversation and agree to keep the dialog open despite disagreement" Are you familiar with the phrase "If it bleeds, it leads" ?

Also, I will note that nuanced argument takes more time and effort than the sort of shit in the two links below:

​

Here is an anti-Trump post relying on an emotional appeal. How much of the Republican party do you think this picture accurately represents? Does it matter what the opposition looks like?

https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalHumor/comments/ceca5l/a_gentle_reminder/

Here is an anti-liberal post based on a straw man argument. (IE- they are dunking on an imaginary liberal, they didn't find a person- let alone a majority of people- who espouse this view)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/cbiydd/the_thought_process_of_the_left/

​

For more on the financial incentives involved in sensational headlines I like this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

http://www.princeton.edu/~kahneman/docs/Publications/prospect_theory.pdf

A little technical, but a good introduction to modern decision making theory.

Light and fluffy, with some significance flaws, but very readable for non technical folks:

http://www.amazon.com/Nudge-Improving-Decisions-Health-Happiness/dp/014311526X

Not directly related to math side of my research, but an interesting history of the refinement of marketing:

http://www.amazon.com/PR-Social-History-Stuart-Ewen/dp/0465061680/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=

Another very readable book with the usual "I'm writing a book I only include evidence I like" sort of bias, but still worth it:

http://www.amazon.com/Risk-Things-Shouldnt-Ourselves-Greater/dp/0771032595

Good luck.

Do you not agree that there are a whole load of really immature books about game design that are sold more on the fact that "its a book about games" than its inherent content ?

Even within the space of magazines I think it would be fair to call Nintendo power immature and something like EDGE , Games TM or Develop magazine Mature.

for someone starting from scratch you would get allot more by reading these books than by watching EC ( obviously can do both and EC is a nice starting pion for someone totally new to games)

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0465067107?ie=UTF8&tag=alwaysblack01-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=0465067107

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0273693646?ie=UTF8&tag=alwaysblack01-21&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=0273693646

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Game-Design-book-lenses/dp/0123694965

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Theory-Game-Design-Raph-Koster/dp/1932111972

allso over view books on Game theory , the history of the microchip and computing , evolution and basic biology can be incredibly good in helping think about games as an art and the limitations in the development of software.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Fun-Games-Text-Game-Theory/dp/0669246034/ref=cm_lmf_tit_12

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0321193679/zx81orguk00

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0932633439/zx81orguk00

http://www.amazon.com/Computer-History-Information-Machine-Technology/dp/0465029906


I realise EC is just easily consumable general information and that's fine just wish they did it without the pretence , like I said in other comments I'm glad they make it even though it personally annoys the hell out of me its beneficial for games as a whole as there is a general lack of even moderately intelligent talk about games.

This is actually the central premise of the book, Trust Me I'm Lying:

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

Essentially, now that most media is online, and advertising sales are driven by clicks, clicks become the all important goal of most articles. And this is ushering in a new era of yellow journalism.

What drives clicks are anger / outrage/ fear / hate/ humor / sex - things that produce 'emotional valences.'

So take two headlines examples.

1. "Trumps election due to democrats's failure address the economic concerns of middle america, research shows."
   
2. "10 reasons why debate is pointless, and flyover state conservatards need to be put in re-education camps."
   
   Article 1 could be a wonderfully written, deeply researched article with a nuanced world view and actionable advice for winning in 2020. Yet, its not an exciting headline, and certainly does not spike a readers emotions. It gets 12,000 clicks.
   
   Article 2 could be raging drivel; an emotional , opinion based listicle with 250 words and 10 memes stolen from Reddit. But that headline is pure click gold. Those who are angry/hateful about trumps win will click, while trump supporters angry/afraid about the prospect of being put in political re-education camp will also click. Further, both sides will share this article with their 'sides' of the aisle online. Result, 1.2 million clicks.
   
   While article 1 is much better quality, article 2 is far more profitable for attracting advertising. As such, writers and editors will pursue more 'stories' like article 2.

This isn't a short and sweet answer by any means, but if you're interested in understanding what it is about modern-day journalism that makes it so intrinsically difficult for honest journalism to flourish, I highly suggest you read Trust Me, I'm Lying by Ryan Holiday. I jut got done reading it a few weeks ago and found it fascinating.

> Hygo Inc., a company focused on search-engine optimization and creating viral social media marketing, according to its website. Zhang's personal logo appears throughout the video.

AKA Media Manipulation; It's incredibly easy to sway blogs & other internet outlets nowadays without them even knowing it. I highly recommend Ryan Holiday's "Trust Me I'm Lying" if you're interested in reading on it further.

Manufacturing Consent was good for it's time. Politically I consider it Chomskey's best and most important work.

The modern version is "Trust me, I'm Lying" by Ryan Holiday.

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1491383790&sr=8-1&keywords=trust+me+I%27m+lying

For social media you should check out different company blogs. Those are really helpful. I like the Buffer and Hootsuite blogs a lot.

But books are way better than online websites

For marketing you should read Traction by Gabriel Weinberg

Ryan Holiday's Growth Hacker Marketing and Trust Me, I'm Lying are insanely informative and fun to read.

You should read Trust me I’m Lying by Ryan Holiday. It brilliantly digs into the media ecosystem and explains exactly why you are right.

https://www.amazon.ca/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285/ref=asc_df_1591846285_nodl/?tag=googlemobshop-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=292905515425&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=2803731859655008491&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9061024&hvtargid=pla-406163954633&psc=1

Spoiler: media went through this in the early 1900s when newspapers were sold individually. Subscriptions to papers is what Bred modern journalism as a virtuous pursuit like we understand it.

If you want to ensure it, take a note from the book Trust me, I'm lying [1] and use the new news cycle to your advantage. News trickles up, so share the "story", such as it is, with your favorite small time blog. That blogs desire for clicks on a big bit of click bate can result in more news channels picking it up as it appears to be an interesting story.

[1] Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator https://www.amazon.com/dp/1591846285/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_obtUBbSH5NWBX

I have definitely done this with great results. Just make sure you target the right blogs, be VERY personable and SHORT in your email... have one or two lines that makes you better/interesting to try and hook them. These two lines or so should be the only copy/paste you do on every email.

• If they sense any copy/paste format, you will be in their trash.
  
• Be very short, if you can't hook them on your greatest feature/differentiator, a full paragraph/story won't do it or be read.
  
  Seriously consider reading [this book: Trust me, I'm lying to you] (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1591846285).
  
  It will teach you how blog posts go "up the chain" of media broadcasting, what it takes to set that off, how to find which blogs the high traffic sites pull articles from, and overall is an interesting read for marketing. You may be able to find the info for free, he is a blogger/writer... so trying Googling: Ryan Holiday up the chain
  
  Again... seriously get this info. I read it in a few hours or day or so.

As I said below, this isn't really a story - It's cotton candy web content. I'm using a press release because It's a formal medium to get someone to share my pictures. In the Book "trust me, I'm Lying: confessions of a media manipulator" he talks about how most people who run blogs, or websites always need fresh content and if you can give that to them, they'll gladly share it.

Now, the author used that to do shady things with that. But the principle remains the same, You serve them some content that will get clicks, and they'll happily share it because it benefits them.

A cruised around looking for some books to help ya. This book and this book come highly recommended from Amazon

Also, I'm not sure how music licensing works anymore, or for commercial stations, but at the college station, record companies would send us CDs with the latest singles on them for free so we'd play them on air. It didn't happen as much when we got less popular, however

The suggestions here are good. In addition I recommend , 'Trust Me, I'm Lying': https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

This book gives you a good idea about the consequences of Postmodernism - at least, the toxic method of simply deconstructing anything to the point that nobody knows what is 'true' or even that some things might be more 'true' than other things.

Spot on. They shouldn't have it both ways. Unfortunately, America has a history of insufficient legislation, regulation, and consumer protections when it comes to major industries.

I see so many parallels between the new frontier of internet companies and the railroad / telephone / cable industries of past and present. They want to define themselves as "common carriers" (beholden to different rules as a platform where commerce takes place, supposedly agnostic, and often receiving subsidies their contributions to the public). Invariably, of course, they are never truly neutral because there's a lot more money to be made when companies start showing favoritism to who's goods they carry and charging exuberant rates to others. And then you close the loop because money equals influence over legislation, which in the form of deregulation, erodes enforcement and gives companies more favorable conditions to make money.

Hooray.

Edit: Recommended reading: Captive Audience by Susan Crawford

Sounds kinda like some the work of Ryan Holiday, (former?) marketing head for American Apparel.

His book is pretty good: http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

You should also hit up your library (or Amazon I suppose) for "Smartbomb: The Quest for Art, Entertainment, and Big Bucks in the Videogame Revolution". The title is weird, but I recall enjoying the read.

Read them within not too much time of each other, though probably over 6 years ago now easy.

> For the agent provocateur, I am just pointing out that we do not know the details.The agent could either be from a law enforcement group or possibly a media outlet who wants a story. The book www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285 talks about how he went and slapped sexist posters around town and then took pictures of them to create a story.

Of course you'll never know the details. That is why you have to use your brain. What were the outcome for those involved ? Where those outcome predictable ? You can then probably assume that the predictable outcomes where the goals of the perpretretors and infer their motives / identity.

Have those threads resulted in a crackdown on videogame misogyny ? Have they helped the target or harmed/destroyed their (professional) life ?

>Personally I would say the elites have shifted from supporting the right wing to supporting the left wing since they see them as less of a threat.

The elite support both right-wing and left wings on social issues (gay marriage), so as to pretend that we have a healty democracy, laughing all the way to the bank.

Yes this

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mammoth-Book-Journalism-Books/dp/184119686X this

100 of the best newspaper articles -goes from Charles Dickens reporting on the French revolution all the way to the Iraq and Afghan wars of this and the last decade and covers a good portion of the writers worth reading and the events worth reading about in between.

Should be required reading for journalism students.

For fiction books - Michael Frayn's 'toward the end of the morning' (satire about 1970s British newspaper staff) and Evelyn Waugh's 'Scoop' 1938 satire of journalism.

I'm reading Indie & Small Press Book Marketing by /u/hertling. It's great information for me as a first time author. You seem to be in a different boat however so it might not be as enlightening as i have found it.

Also /u/michaeljsullivan post in /r/write2publish called Author's Guide to Self Promotion is a great resource.

There's also Confessions of an Advertising Man and Kenneth Roman's biography of Ogilvy, The King of Madison Avenue.

Here in Canada, Terry O'Reilly is highly respected. His book The Age of Persuasion: How Marketing Ate Our Culture is a great read.

>I wonder whether online work changed things because there are few occasions for people to have conversations that socialize them into the ethical expectations of the profession.

Journalism didn't have ethical expectations a hundred years ago, because every story was sold on 'hot sheets', cheap 2-page papers sold by newsies. The most sensational headlines made the most money and there was zero accountability.

Then for 50+ years, journalists became dependent on monthly newspaper subscriptions and reputation and audience trust became paramount. Suddenly, ethics were necessary to do the job.

Now, news is all click-driven and we're back to zero accountability. Trust Me, I'm Lying is a great book about our current era of news and how it can be manipulated.

I've heard it also kind of bashes on Image Comics a lot, and if there's one thing that annoys me about criticism of comics it's the relentless bashing of the folks in Image like Rob Liefeld(Especially since in recent years he's become pretty outspoken against bigots to the point where alt-right website Bounding Into Comics whined about him, so he can't be all bad if those bigots hate him) so i'm a bit concerned about that going in. Not saying Image didn't have it's faults(yes Liefeld's artwork can get silly at times, but i'll be damned if it does not have a cheesy appeal to it) but it does at least deserve a lot of credit for paving the way for many acclaimed independent comics artists and writers of today(including Robert Kirkman as Image was the only publisher willing to take a chance on him, so Walking Dead basically wouldn't exist without them) by proving you didn't have to be employed by Marvel or DC to be succesful or make a name for yourself(many famous writers like Frank Miller, Neil Gaiman and Alan Moore ended up writing comics for Image as they strongly believed in their "Creator first" message).

So still going to read the book, but i'm a bit leary about that aspect going in.

Looks like Comic Wars finally came out on Kindle if that interests you:https://www.amazon.com/Comic-Wars-Marvels-Battle-Survival-ebook/dp/B008HJX38W/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=comic+wars+battle+marvel%27s+survival&qid=1566183325&s=books&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1591846285/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1394117464&sr=8-1

On mobile so can't make the link pretty, deals with guerilla marketing tactics and taking advantage of how blogging networks operate to manufacture press. Very interesting stuff.

Your example with Chernobyl is absurd. It would require that every single news organization follow the same policy, and "sell the news" to you via subscription. That could never happen in the free market. In the free market, some news sites run ads to gain revenue, some will sell subscriptions, some will push agendas for money and so on and so forth.

I still don't see why charging for a monthly subscription is such a "disgusting" business practice. Your argument with Chernobyl was a simple reduction to absurdity. If a site puts out quality content that people deem worthy to pay for, let them. I think that relying on clickbaiting, manipulation and sensationalism is much more disgusting and harmful. That's the real problem with news today, not those few subscription-based sites, who are at least honest with their business practice.

You also pay for your newspaper. In this sense, "selling news," as you put it, is very much standard practice, and it always has been throughout history. You also take issue with that?

By the way, Trust me, I'm lying is an insightful and thought-provoking book on the subject, even more topical today than when it was originally released, I highly recommend it.

>The original article that claimed they didn't care was misleading clickbait

Welcome to the world of iterative journalism in the link economy! Strap in for a wild ride where tips are lies, the facts are made up, and the corrections are unread.

Trust Me I'm Lying is a great book about this very subject.

There's a book about self-help books that really helped me: SHAM: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless. It's a skeptical investigation of the Self-Help and Actualization Movement (or SHAM) that will help you identify which books not to waste your money on.

That said, if you are looking for a cognitive behavioral therapy book, Feeling Good seems to be legitimate. I haven't read the latest edition, but early editions were free of woo and it describes practices that represent the current thinking on cognitive-behavioral therapy among medical professionals. I tend to look down on self-help books with scorn, but this one appealed to my sense of logic and reasoning.

Absolutely should. Many people don't necessarily like seeing how the sausage is made, but Ryan Holiday's book is a great start.

Overall I think this is a great first step to start to shake the cable companies. For too long they have directed what we watch, how we watch it, and how much it costs. This has resulted in windfall profits, while not creating simple customer service. The current regulatory environment doesn't leave any room for innovation. Innovation will drive cost down by creating competition. I hate that even though I don't watch any sports, a large portion of my cable bill goes to subsidize ESPN.

For an interesting, albeit dry, read check out Captive Audience.

Engaging in two-way conversations (not just one-way pitches) and send ideas that are relevant and make their jobs easier.
You should check out, if you haven't already, Ryan Holiday's book "Trust me, I'm lying" (http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285).
It's about media manipulation, and he talks specifically how to get bloggers to write about you (trickling up the pole).
It's a great read and, holy crap, a lot scary. Use with caution and great responsibility.

I <3 American Apparel.

Plus their head of marketing wrote an amazing book exposing how careless and shameless modern broadcast and internet news/blogs are and how the PR machine manipulates and tricks them to get free publicity so more people will buy their crap. It's a great read if you care about being an informed consumer.

The Image by Daniel J. Boorstin. It was written in 1962 and very perfectly predicts the current state of affairs in the US, particularly with respect to news media and entertainment, actually pretty depressing but a major eye opener.

As much as I wanna say this guy is a douchebag/idiot and karma will come back around... that’s not how the internet works. We’re all giving him free press right now.

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

Actually theres loads of research that proves bad press is easy to make good;

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2019/10/they-re-doing-badly-purpose-why-tories-latest-online-ads-look-so-ugly

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

I think you need to look at it this way. Tesla have got their truck on the front page of just about every major news outlet, would it be there without the broken windows? Unlikely. Is something the windows breaking actually something buyers would care about? No. A single press release from them saying 'we now have stronger windows' would settle anything people were actually worried about.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01B1MWKIU/

It doesn't contain nearly as much information as the blurb seems to suggest it does. It definitely isn't a how to guide on writing a bestseller. Still, some of the insights are really interesting and fly in the face of common beliefs.

The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America by Daniel Boorstin. It's about how many events in American life, particularly regarding the fame of individuals, are created by public relations and advertising. It was written in the early 60s, but the ideas are very relevant to today's world. I had never heard of it before grad school, and it made a huge impact on me.

Hey, welcome to the subreddit.

I don't post here much these days because although I'm fairly outraged at the things I see here, I don't have a ton of energy for activism since building positive things in my own life consumes much of my energy. I can tell you that I'm engaged, in a relationship with inverted gender roles, and that my fiancée and I are helped vastly more by what we've learned here (and what we learned in our neuroscience and other courses) than what I learned in my WS studies. I consider myself an egalitarian, and I consider the current egalitarian move to be a backing of the Men's Rights Movement.

In the spirit of giving you a higher order of discourse than you find in SJW circles, as has been my experience here, I can highly recommend a book on this topic that I think you'll find enlightening. Trust Me, I'm Lying by Ryan Holiday. For example, he was the former press guy for American Apparel and planted many, many of the stories you now associate with Dov Charney. The SJW machine came up with more, and now the man's out of a job. Is he probably a sleazeball? Sure. Would I want him to date my daughter? Definitely not. Does he belong on a sex offender registry for the rest of his life? I seriously doubt it.

The book contains more than just his personal stories, as Holiday has done his homework on journalistic history and business and so on. But from what I can tell from his book and my observations elsewhere, the answer to your question appears to be a solid yes.

I heartily recommend you stick around here. There's a lot of anger and pain, sure, but you will learn a fuck ton of useful shit.

Definitely gonna recommend Trust Me, I'm Lying by Ryan Holiday.

What with the recent elections and the supreme rise of clickbait articles, this book will redpill you /hard/ on how the media operates and who's behind them

>Why isn't this a bigger deal for people? GMA just got scammed and no one is making a fuss about.

Well, it happens literally all the time. Ryan Holiday wrote a book about it and how stupidly easy it is back in 2013. "Whenever you see a malicious online rumor costs a company millions, politically motivated fake news driving elections, a product or celebrity zooming from total obscurity to viral sensation, or anonymously sourced articles becoming national conversation, someone is behind it. Often someone like Ryan Holiday." But, nobody cares. Or not enough to matter, anyway.

And even if people did, care... who's going to report on it? The media? You think they're gonna let you know how stupid and easy to manipulate and constantly wrong they are?

Indeed. She's certainly not the only one. While not specifically about the "professional wrestling" aspect of the news media, I highly recommend Daniel Boorstin's "The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America"... written in 1961.

I could only find a bootleg PDF which looks weird and unintelligible. Bootleg pdf: http://www.agmiw.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/GekaufteJournalisten-UdoUlfkotte.pdf

The only official version I can find is the German book on Amazon but it's twenty dollars. https://www.amazon.com/Gekaufte-Journalisten/dp/3864451434/ref=pd_sim_14_1/135-6879697-5879016?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=3864451434&pd_rd_r=baa083fb-8892-4434-8ef6-8e49892b1f4c&pd_rd_w=IY1d6&pd_rd_wg=e1Wih&pf_rd_p=04d27813-a1f2-4e7b-a32b-b5ab374ce3f9&pf_rd_r=4BRBSJD9CKQJ9GBBANFQ&psc=1&refRID=4BRBSJD9CKQJ9GBBANFQ

Last month it seems a very small independent publisher seems to have copied the original book in English and published it under a different title which is sold here at a very expensive 30 dollars: https://www.amazon.com/Presstitutes-Embedded-Pay-CIA-Confession/dp/1615770178/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_0/135-6879697-5879016?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1615770178&pd_rd_r=3e0a83df-f0f1-4ab1-bde6-298b65c9a020&pd_rd_w=QdjMV&pd_rd_wg=8EyBK&pf_rd_p=5cfcfe89-300f-47d2-b1ad-a4e27203a02a&pf_rd_r=7SD24B75M7DGK0K7P3VD&psc=1&refRID=7SD24B75M7DGK0K7P3VD

It seems this is the English translation, it just took ages to be published. I do agree that his political stance is more than a bit concerning, but it still might be a worthwhile read.

Sounds like a good read. Thanks!

Link for anyone else interested.

On a side note, anybody else get frustrated when the hard copy costs less than the e-book?

Et dans ce cas il tourne la réthorique selon comme quoi EM utilise la justice (corrompu) pour entérer la vérité.

Au final quoi qu'il arrive ils consolideront leur base électorale.
Cet article explique assez bien cette stratégie :
http://observer.com/2017/02/i-helped-create-the-milo-trolling-playbook-you-should-stop-playing-right-into-it/

Et y'a même un livre :
https://www.amazon.fr/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285/?tag=ryanholidayfr-21

Here's the book, feel free to get this "forbidden knowledge" for only 35 dollarydoos. https://www.amazon.com/Presstitutes-Embedded-Pay-CIA-Confession/dp/1615770178/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=presstitutes&qid=1573810601&sr=8-1

This is a very good book I'm reading...

> but most people do

Actually the guy who literally wrote the book on this type of marketing, Ryan Holiday, certainly says otherwise and that it is exactly as I said

It's not just gaming journalism, it's all modern journalism.

Ryan Holiday - Read his books.

https://www.amazon.com/Growth-Hacker-Marketing-Primer-Advertising/dp/1591847389?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

I just finished reading Trust Me, I'm Lying, which has plenty of good examples of how easily the author (and others) have leaked bullshit into the news. This very much applies to serious stuff as well.

Highly recommend the book!

It depends on what "we" care about in the future.

I think his legacy will be mixed, as all (or most) presidents' legacies are mixed. Presidential favorably is quite fluid. Ronald Reagan (hailed as a god by conservatives) is not as fondly looked at these days. Warren Harding was one of the most popular presidents when he died. Only months later when scandals came out did his popularity plummet. He's viewed as incompetent today. People like Andrew Jackson are still pissing people off on both sides. Even Lincoln, FDR, and Washington made decisions that were and still are very controversial.

He will get a lot of credit for the economic recovery. However, that recovery only really happened for the wealthy. It's also confusing, as fiscal policy was a game of chicken from 2010-2016. Congress and the president often did things that hampered the recovery by introducing massive uncertainty to markets.

I think "we" will judge our presidents based on the theories laid out in Boorstin's The Image. Psuedo-events will dominate our news and political culture over actual policy, data and governance. We will continue to judge and talk about press conferences, interesting quotes, moments and actions. We won't judge people on strategy, consequences or lasting effects of policy. This will favor Obama over the next several years, as his cerebral, confident, restrained image will be used to contrast DJT's bombastic, controversial, shoot from the hip image.

One major uncertainty of Obama is that he's really young and could still remain a force in public policy and government. Similar to Carter, Hoover, and others who lived long tenures after their presidency. He might go full Taft and go for a court spot. He's a constitutional lawyer after all. His "legacy" may be not complete at all. Who knows really.

As far as I am concerned. both Obama and Trump are presidents that greatly understand psuedo-events and the bully pulpit, and have used them highly effectively to paint pictures of themselves, their political causes and political enemies.

We'll see if history sees them kindly for it. I get a feeling that a lot of people think it's dishonest. I tend to agree with that.

Book is called "It's Not News It's Fark". Good read. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000V5075M/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

Which doesn't match the headline. Another news aggregator's founder made a whole book out of this. It's actually a good read even though I don't go there anymore.

There is an interesting book on the subject.
Basically, today's form of journalism is more focused on being first than being correct.

For anyone who is interested in this sort of phenomena I would recommend reading:
Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator
and So You've Been Publicly Shamed. They both give great insight into different ways modern media is broken.

Read "Trust Me, I'm Lying" if you're interested in this kind of thing.

Since we're talking about Lawrence Lessig, people might be interested in Susan Crawford, was was TA for Lessig while at Stanford. I got to know Susan, when she was a Law Professor at the University of Michigan and I was on the Cable Commission as an elected member of Ann Arbor City Council. Anyone concerned about the Internet and Net Neutrality should read Susan's book: Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age https://www.amazon.com/Captive-Audience-Telecom-Industry-Monopoly/dp/1491528745

Currently reading: http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

What do you recommend?

read The Image by Daniel Boorstin. It's been like this for quite a while...

I guess Dennis Prager read this book-

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

The "cancelled event" is a publicity stunt. Im sure this whole thing will be a part of Pragers doc. He cant go around screaming "Im a fag!!" for attention so he has to get it somehow.

Pretty sure that's already a thing. Currently reading "Trust Me I'm Lying" by Ryan Holiday

Anyone who is doing any form of journalism should own a copy of McNae's Essential Law. The law is complicated and very important.

Familiarise yourself with defamation and privacy law.

I was foolishly mistaken before that dsl necessarily meant some kind of upgrade over dial up, I guess that it doesn't tie up your phone line is supposed to count... but that is all it has got going for it where I live. After hearing about this being discussed, I have to agree that a lot of local ISPs are done laying out/improving networks and just want to sit back and farm what is already there.

It's called Trust Me, I'm Lying. I'm actually reading it for a class I'm taking on Communication Ethics. I'm not super well-versed on the subject so I don't have any other recs for you. This book was a quick read and the info was presented in an interesting way.

Uh, duh. This is not new information. Ryan Holiday wrote a book exposing this in 2013.

That's part of it...which they're really only able to do because of their economic power and localized monopoly status. (See Susan Crawford's book on this.) Anti-trust law is so unenforced in this space that Comcast and TWC volunteered that they had agreements not to compete anyway as a reason why their merger should have been allowed.

But fundamentally, NN is about non-discrimination. Hence, "neutrality." What you're saying would not have had Al Franken calling it the "First Amendment issue of our time." What you're discussing is a standard price gouging concern that is a collateral consequence of lacking NN, but I don't think it's at the core.

you're spot on. people actually do this sort of thing for a living. Reddit's been manipulated like this in sometimes positive ways. But a lot of the time, it's pretty nefarious.

Check out Trust Me, I'm Lying by Ryan Holiday. This guy did similar campaigns for other people/business entities. One was for the movie I hope they serve beer in hell. He was able to manipulate the blogworld (which includes these "news" outlets like The Atlantic and the LA Times) into getting women's rights groups to actually stage protests. He faked profiles. None of the editors for these outlets ever checked. Or cared. The whole incentive system set up for these blogs is this: more views = more cash. and with the need to deliver news 24/7 in order to stay competitive, sources just need to be provocative instead of reliable.

In the end, Ryan Holiday gave a lot of heated exposure to that movie. it flopped, but it got nationwide exposure (and is now a DVD cult classic).

he eventually gave up on manipulating the internet, and now works as an exec for marketing for American Apparel. it's a shocking read

I highly suggest Trust Me, I'm lying if you have not read it yet.

http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

Queria partilhar depois em tópico próprio para criar alguma discussão. Se calhar o melhor é lançar o desafio de ler, e meter a malta a ler o livro e só depois discutir, né?

É este. Se quiserem alguém quiser ebook envie PM.

EDIT: Tópico próprio

Archives for the links in comments:

• By finalremix (loc.gov): http://archive.fo/E1qFX
  
• By The-Rotting-Word (amazon.com): http://archive.fo/UkEbV
  
• By hga_another (amazon.com): http://archive.fo/nFfxI
  
  
• By hga_another (amazon.com): http://archive.fo/71ta6
  
  ----
  I am Mnemosyne 2.1, Watch out for moon rocks! ^^^^/r/botsrights ^^^^Contribute ^^^^message ^^^^me ^^^^suggestions ^^^^at ^^^^any ^^^^time ^^^^Opt ^^^^out ^^^^of ^^^^tracking ^^^^by ^^^^messaging ^^^^me ^^^^"Opt ^^^^Out" ^^^^at ^^^^any ^^^^time

This is a must read for anyone who works, or who has worked in radio. It's a hoot.

http://www.amazon.com/Original-Sex-Broadcasting-Handbook-Community/dp/0917320018

Reminds me of Trust Me, I'm Lying

I suggest starting off with Ryan Holiday's book.

this is legit. the article is from over a year ago. he wrote a book about it

One of your above links also cites https://www.amazon.com/Image-Guide-Pseudo-Events-America/dp/0679741801

which was published in 1962 ..... Almost 60 years ago, and yet here we are, driving headlong further down that rabbit hole.

Do we learn nothing? *smh*

Read this book

http://www.amazon.com/Its-Not-News-Fark-Media-ebook/dp/B000V5075M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1421809710&sr=8-1&keywords=fark

i've got an audible account, so i'll just listen to it when i'm done with this.

Read this ...

http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377087001&sr=8-1&keywords=trust+me+i%27m+lying

It's been reprinted under a new title.

http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/159184553X

Read this and you'll fully understand: http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285/

> The book is now translated to English by a small publisher and under a different title
>
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1615770178/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

The book is now translated to English by a small publisher and under a different title

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1615770178/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1

I'm going to leave this book here.

Anyone who thinks that this wasn't planned is deluding themselves.

You should read Trust Me I'm Lying if you want to know exactly how easily online media can be deceived.

It's ridiculous and I've used some of the tips in it to get stuff I've made into some fairly prominent magazines.

TL;DR in case you don't want to read the book:
They don't give a shit if it's not reliable, they get the page views (and hence advert hits) regardless of if it is legit. The edit isn't retroactively sent to everyone who previously read it. Plus they can even get a double dip of hits when they write the article about how they were tricked.

Right now I'm reading Trust me, I'm lying. It's pretty much ruined the internet for me, and I couldn't recommend it more if I tried.

You can buy it under a different name...

Presstitutes Embedded in the Pay of the CIA

​

https://www.amazon.com/Presstitutes-Embedded-Pay-CIA-Confession/dp/1615770178

Eh? Things are way worse than what you described already. Read Manufacturing Consent by Chomsky. The CIA is involved as well. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1615770178/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1#customerReviews

https://www.amazon.com/Presstitutes-Embedded-Pay-CIA-Confession/dp/1615770178

Edit: Did some research and apparently there's an English translated version with a different title. Not sure how legit it is so don't take my word for it!

I always though a lot of the recycled and trumped up bad press was a product of subversive tactics by Lyft, who would look like the good guy rideshare company in comparison.

(They're just as bad, BTW. They just do a better job of hiding it and marketing their image.)

Worth pointing out as I haven't seen this book mentioned here so far.
Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator

I have been reading the book and the first edition is a little disjointed but still gets the point across.

The media.

The DNC leaks proved that the Media was acting 100% as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton throughout the primaries and the general election. The problem is, the media lies.

They do not do reporting any more. They do opinion pieces, editorials and propaganda for their special interests. They dabble with identity politics and do hate-baiting outrage click bait pieces for money. They cannot be trusted.

I could write a book about this, but I don't really have to because it's been written already - Trust me, I'm lying

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

link for the lazy

I'm reading this, so you can imagine how badly I just want to remove every blog that's ever posted in this subreddit

Już nie chciałem wnikać w szczegóły bo kolega padlina by mnie zlinczował , ale ja tak naprawdę to głównie słucham książek. Do tego słucham sporo tzw pop science , ale z ostatnich ciekawych pozycji to mogę polecić :

Trust me, I'm Lying - Ryan Holiday

Never Split the Difference - Chris Voss

Influence - Robert Cialdini

Thinking fast and slow - Daniel Kahneman

Daj znać jeśli coś z tego Cię zainteresuje.

Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator

I am reading it currently. It's so beautiful and eye-opening.

You should read Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator which explains the complete absence of fact-checking in online media - and increasingly on the mainstream media which uses it as a source. These days, if its not The Guardian or BBC News, I assume its anywhere from 50% - 100% fake/lies/spin/manipulated/Alt-News

Read this book: [Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator] (https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285)

How would you know that /u/mandrsn1 is right? Read up on the number of controversies that we've seen. Is Tucker Max still making headlines?

The way PR and marketing works with these bottom-feeding websites which churn out garbage-tier "content" to feed the click-farms, is that they MUST keep it churning. Churning, churning, controversy, clicks, anger. etc.

This is just a taste. Clickety-click.

These books came quickly to my mind:

The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers by Ben Horowitz

Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator by Ryan Holiday Some priceless marketing lessons here.

A ton of post-it notes.

I've been saying this since the last election.

"Sex sells" is dead. We've successful removed any and all shock value on that one.

Now it's "Outrage Sells". And they even write books about how to use it.

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

They're all derivative of the same kind of stupid at this point.

Sleeping Giants probably Boston Massacred the actual number of non-wordpress-caliber-websites (which MIGHT be in the teens) up to 2600, and every website that's fishing for instant content ran with it as fact because no one in media fact checks their sources anymore, especially when they operate with a confirmation bias. I don't care what Sleeping Giants puts on their leader's personal Google Doc. None of their shit is vetted any more than the average extremist blog.

I don't support Breitbart, and I do believe there's an alt-right brigade in this subreddit, but there's also a rabid and hostile left wing brigade here as well, it's just as out of control, and I consider you part of it.

How do you respond to the negative reviews for your book on amazon, which claim that the real reviews are made up? I'm a bit confused.

http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/product-reviews/159184553X/ref=cm_cr_dp_qt_hist_one?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar

If were posting long shit rather then defending our position ourselves heres a book on why you should ignore the news http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

You're using the wrong acronym. This is part of the Self Help and Actualization Movement - so you should call it SHAM.

Sham: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless
Review of the book

For the agent provocateur, I am just pointing out that we do not know the details. The agent could either be from a law enforcement group or possibly a media outlet who wants a story.

The book www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285 talks about how he went and slapped sexist posters around town and then took pictures of them to create a story.

> Well done ! Now just keep that in mind (i.e. the far bigger risk caused by right wing groups when it comes to violence) and think again about the death threats from reactionary men. Hint : violence/death threats, right wing/reactionary.

Since the 1970s leftist groups have pretty much stopped violence/death threats etc. They now resort to media stunts and these sorts of things. Meanwhile among the right wing groups the opposite appears to be the case.

Personally I would say the elites have shifted from supporting the right wing to supporting the left wing since they see them as less of a threat.

https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

One of the first things he talked about was promoting a shitty book by a guy named Tucker Max who makes up fake stories. And he went out, defaced the billboard for the book, then wrote in an anonymous message with the picture of the defaced billboard. And put up fliers for a protest for the book then sent that in for people.

And he just emailed writers at HuffPo and Breitbart and other such sites, he didn't even post it to Digg (this was before Reddit). Nowadays he could probably just post the stuff on Reddit and people would give it thousands of upvotes without a thought or clue.

Edit: Good fragrance, 60+ upvotes: https://np.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/4v5yke/s_a_u_s_a_g_e/d5vsglq

Bad fragrance, downvoted immediately (-2): https://np.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/4v5yke/s_a_u_s_a_g_e/d5w6999

Someone's monitoring the thread...

Someone that starts a business. Thats it. Everything else is someone selling you bullshit.

oh

Look

At

all

These

people

Making

Money

Telling you how to be an entrepreneur

Oh that last one shows you how and why bullshit sells.

This is a little bit off-topic but there is Flat Earth News by Nick Davies for general media bias which touches on state censure and propaganda, there's also Trust me I'm lying by Ryan Holiday which is mainly about PR.

>but logically dismantle his arguments instead?

Nobody started to listen Milo because his arguments were logical, nobody stops listening because counterarguments are logical.

>The problem is liberals so easily fall into the traps Mil

Typical liberal problem is to think that logical arguments work. It's all about repetition and rationalization of emotions. People should not protest him, just ignore him. He would create his own protests and controversies against him as is described in the article I linked, but that's different story. Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator is the bible for Milo and others like him.

I totally agree with you. Fake news is a new phenomenon that is basically the end result of years of blog-journalism that is driven by clicks instead of reputation. It's almost viral in that, given the envoirnment and incentives we've created on the web, it is sure to happen. Ryan Holiday has been talking about this for years https://www.amazon.com/Trust-Me-Lying-Confessions-Manipulator/dp/1591846285

The problem with using the fact that what the guardian did isn't fake news to dismiss this article is that the guardian itself has been calling partisan media "fake news" and riding the wave. To retreat now would be the classic motte-and-bailey tactic we see with "racism", "sexism" etc.

A group puts out a definition of a wrong such as "fake news" and defines it as "the two teenagers in Macedonia who created fake newspaper web pages for newspapers they made up and then hosted stories like "FBI agent investigating Clinton E-mail found dead" which were entirely made up. Created because click-based advertising made them thousands of dollars when the stories went viral on social media." and nobody has an issue with it.

Then the group says that say Brietbart is "fake news" because they indulge in massive spin, selective reporting and bullshit articles.

Then when the group is challenged about the fact that they do the exact same as Brietbart et al they say "oh that isn't really fake news, like those teenagers in Macedonia".

Point being they can accuse the other side of one thing and then pretend they never meant it THAT WAY, but the damage is already done. It's been one of the biggest rhetorical tactics of the left for years.

Here's another example:
http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/07/social-justice-and-words-words-words/