#242 in Business & money books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
Sentiment score: 7
Reddit mentions: 109
We found 109 Reddit mentions of Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Here are the top ones.
or
- Pantheon Books
Features:
Specs:
| Color | White |
| Height | 9.25 Inches |
| Length | 6.22 Inches |
| Number of items | 1 |
| Release date | January 2002 |
| Weight | 1.42 Pounds |
| Width | 1.28 Inches |
In a nutshell, the classic steering mechanism for public opinion used to be Manufacturing Consent (Chomsky) or Engineering Consent (Bernays) which generates propaganda to achieve more of a public consensus whereas Adam Curtis' HyperNormalisation looks at the shift from that to neutralizing the pubilc into inaction by polarizing them with conflicting information or misinformation (patently false information) so that NO consensus can be reached. Both achieve the same goal of allowing the power elite to carry out the policies they wish while reducing the influence of an ostensibly democratic public which, in conjunction with more and more police state-like authoritarian measures making them more compliant, can no longer tell what is truth and what is misinformation. The public descends into arguing amongst themselves as opposed to those in power.
Edit. I would highjly recommend watching Adam Curtis' famous documentary The Century of the Self which looks at Edward Bernays (Sigmund Freud's nephew) and the origins of the consumer society, public relations and propaganda.
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
Public attitudes are shaped and driven by the media. If the public doesn't care, it's because we've spent years conditioning them not to care. If the public in general can't name many middle eastern cultures beyond "Muslim", that is very much the fault of the media.
If prominent newspapers started giving front page headlines to the plight of the Kurds, you'd certainly see a considerable public reaction, but right now the cycle is dominated by the anti-communist Hong-Kong protest coverage because it serves an agenda for the United States. Kurds being killed because the American government made the decision to abandon them? That's a bad look on America and the media won't give it nearly as much attention. See Manufacturing Consent on this dynamic.
>What the fuck happened to America?
Reasoning and the human brain doesn't work the way we thought it did:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
Manufacturing consent
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Most have no clue what's really going on in the world... the elites are afraid of political awakening.
This (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttv6n7PFniY
Brezinski at a press conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kmUS--QCYY
The real news:
http://therealnews.com/t2/
http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed-Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X/
http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Government-Surveillance-Security-Single-Superpower/dp/1608463656/r
http://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446/
Look at the following graphs:
IMGUR link - http://imgur.com/a/FShfb
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
And then...
WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap
http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnkNKipiiiM
Free markets?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349
http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Illusion-Literacy-Triumph-Spectacle/dp/1568586132/
"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.
In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."
Important history:
http://williamblum.org/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcA1v2n7WW4
because the heads of media feel dependent on the good will of politicians "to ensure access" and other such shit. supposing this was pitched to some news network, they would reject it by saying, "no other politician would ever speak to us again."
journalists - especially the powerful ones - also have a tendency to view politicians as immune from wrongdoing. as just one recent example, joe klein defending the extremely illegal warrantless wiretapping program: http://www.salon.com/2007/10/11/klein_fisa/ . you can also check out the reactions of famous journalists to the pardoning of watergate criminals, the refusal to investigate torture in the bush 2 administration, the politically motivated firing of government attorneys, etc...
for a whole lot more on this, i'd recommend reading the intro of noam chomsky's "manufacturing consent," which is available on the internet and does an incredible job of showing how and why the media has become largely a mouthpiece for the government (at least in america). read it for free here: http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499. "with liberty and justice for some" is also a really good book on this topic.
Well yes. The Iraq war started in 2003, and waterboarding quickly became infamous as an official US policy of "enhanced interrogation".
Some people began calling it torture, but the press didn't. The war began and the press immediately stopped calling it torture because the press generally tows the line drawn by the government.
If you're interested in this sort of thing, have a read through Noam Chomsky's and Ed Herman's Manufacturing Consent. Without being too melodramatic, it may change your life.
Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky.
Read the book or watch the documentary
Manufacturing Consent
Old, but (unfortunately) still relevant.
Prof. Chomsky literally co-wrote the book on how the media is used by the ruling class to get the public to buy into the establishment narrative.
Give this book a read.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
"manufacturing consent" should be required reading
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Have you read "Manufacturing Consent"? Possibly Chomsky's most important works.
> CNN is starting to look an awful lot like the official news agency of the US government.
"Starting to look"? CNN, NYT and much else of mainstream is a major government and elites propaganda feature since, well, pretty much always. Try this clip then this book.
First, our brains are much worse at reality and thinking than thought. AKA we can be manipulated to believe things against our interest. Science on reasoning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
Manufacturing consent (book)
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/
Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349
Manufacturing consent(vids)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwU56Rv0OXM
https://vimeo.com/39566117
Testing theories of representative government
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
Democracy Inc
http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed-Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X/
http://www.therealnews.com
Manufacturing Consent
He puts forward the idea that news media companies succeed when they value profit over fidelity to the truth, and fail when it's vice versa.
>Is there any politician out there willing to fight for Canadians? Is that too much to ask?
Sorry to tell you the government doesn't work for you.
These links will take a while to digest, but if you want to understand what's going on in the world, you owe it to yourself to become informed about the true state of the world.
Our brains are much worse at reality and thinking than thought. Science on reasoning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
Rd wolf on economics
http://www.rdwolff.com/
"Intended as an internal document. Good reading to understand the nature of rich democracies and the fact that the common people are not allowed to play a role."
Crisis of democracy
http://trilateral.org/download/doc/crisis_of_democracy.pdf
http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-Democracy-Governability-Democracies-Trilateral/dp/0814713653/
Education as ignorance
https://chomsky.info/warfare02/
Overthrowing other peoples governments
http://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
Wikileaks on TTIP/TPP/ETC
https://youtu.be/ABDiHspTJww?t=17
Energy subsidies
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/NEW070215A.htm
Interference in other states when the rich/corporations dont get their way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxp_wgFWQo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLKR2GeygdHomOZeVKx3P0fqH58T3VghOj&t=724
Manufacturing consent (book)
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/
Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349
Manufacturing consent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwU56Rv0OXM
https://vimeo.com/39566117
Testing theories of representative government
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
Democracy Inc
http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed- Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X
From war is a racket:
"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil intersts in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."[p. 10]
"War is a racket. ...It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." [p. 23]
"The general public shoulders the bill [for war]. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations." [p. 24]
General Butler is especially trenchant when he looks at post-war casualties. He writes with great emotion about the thousands of tramautized soldiers, many of who lose their minds and are penned like animals until they die, and he notes that in his time, returning veterans are three times more likely to die prematurely than those who stayed home.
http://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Antiwar-Americas-Decorated/dp/0922915865/
Blum:
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/137
US distribution of wealth
https://imgur.com/a/FShfb
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
The Centre for Investigative Journalism
http://www.tcij.org/
Some history on US imperialism by us corporations.
https://kurukshetra1.wordpress.com/2015/09/27/a-brief-history-of-imperialism-and-state-violence-in-colombia/
The real news
http://www.therealnews.com
here's the book Manufacturing consent.
Ehh.
The error comes from focusing on the wrong filters. The "liberal media" is a thing (in two ways, really, but let's focus on the one people generally refer to) when you look at rhetoric. This can be determined through linguistic data analysis, which Seth Stephens-Davidowitz did in his book Everybody Lies. One of the interesting things he shows there is that the rhetorical bias varies not by ownership, for instance, but mostly through the dominant political leaning of the area in which the paper (which was the focus of the study) is sold. That is, a news outlet's rhetorical bias depends on its audience, not its owners.
This analysis is useful, but there is a glaring problem with it: In focusing on rhetoric, it ignores actual policy advocacy and, importantly, publication bias. And that's where the owners have influence. As long as the policy advocated agrees with the owners (and the media's inherent structural biases, re: the Herman-Chomsky Propaganda Model), how it is presented (the rhetoric) only matters to the extent that it influences revenue. And anything that is counter to these interests, will be ignored.
So, yes, there is a "liberal media" (and they're actually fairly dominant). Problem is, they are liberal in rhetoric only (and sometimes in actual policy, depending on what you mean by 'liberal'). What the media doesn't tell you is usually much more important than what it does.
I don't know if you can attribute it entirely to apathy. Lots of Americans are kept too busy -- worrying about their jobs and other immediate needs -- to the point where they can't pay attention to politics beyond what they get on the evening news.
And as long as stories like this don't make it onto the evening news, they'll continue thinking society as a whole is alright and they're just unluckier than most.
Check out Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent": http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499 -- it may be 25 years old already, but it's still dead on.
If you actually studied propaganda systems you would know that the West's media, especially UK's, and USA's are by far the most unified, most biased, and most selective of topics to cover in the world. It's a lot harder to ban the publication of certain articles or views than to make it in the media's interests to publish them - in this case they will do it themselves. And most of these media-owning corporations are interested in the American corporate power and increasing it. Also, even though, in America there seems to be a lot of different media organizations, almost all of the media consumed comes out of a few corporations. As a Canadian who has studied in Moscow I can say that there is a lot more political 'dissent' and debate in Russia than in the West, sure there are some obviously biased media organizations like RT, but these are few and there are a lot of objective and highly Putin-critical media organization in Russia. There are also many more political and social factions in Russia than in US or Canada that regularly appear in the media, in both bad and good lights.
Sources:
Corporations owning the media:
http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6
Presentation and analysis of Western propaganda systems:
http://www.amazon.ca/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Article describing the bias of the western media in the context of the current Ukraine crisis:
http://zcomm.org/zmagazine/outrage/
Let's be honest your entire perception of Russian media as being monolithic and pro-Russian gov is based on what you've heard from Western media.
let me remind you that corporate media is the spear of the U.S. propagandistic machine, just watch for entertainment
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1453832685&sr=8-4&keywords=noam+chomsky
> I can't keep writing about for ever...
Sad but true. Once or twice, okay, we'll throw you a bone. But more than that, you must be obsessed, paranoid, or delusional -- aka one of those wacko nutjobs.
I'm curious if you, as a member of the press corps, have ever read Noam Chomsky's book "Manufacturing Consent" and what your perception might be as an industry insider.
I understand your reaction, but there is some serious critique against the media in the West as well. True, people can get more sources than in Nord Korea and I think nobody will ever argue our media is even close to being on the same level as the media in Nord Korea. That would be crazy. However, our media is still very prone to bias.
The thing is, there is no huge conspiracy to push the media certain ways. It is just the result of different actors behaving in certain way. If you are interested in how the media is affected by this I would advise you to read Manufacturing consent by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky.
Yes you are right, we have a lot of different sources to our possession, [regarding your comment below] however, what you should always take into account is that the position being taken by the bulk of media will outweigh the positions being taken by subculture media. This means that for most of the people the access to the media they actually have is the access to the position of the bulk media. So in this case it doesn't really matter what the potential media access to these people is, because they will never reach the potential (nobody ever will).
Than another thing is the fact that the bulk media is always seen as more objective than subculture media. While they both, arguably, have huge bias. Now this is understandable; you'll have subculture media on every stupid idea around, while the bulk media at least adheres to some sort of journalistic standard. There are, however, good subculture media around, which are arguably better than the bulk media. But these are often very specialized media, reporting only on 1 issue.
Conclusively, media is biased and there is no way around this. By having a lot of different media sources you'll have all biases and you could arguably collect the least biased view. However, the bulk of the media are all relatively in the same category and appear to have the same bias. Meaning that this bias will not be resolved in the biggest proportion of society. In addition even if people search for sub-sources of media a lot of them will only be eluded by some shitty left or right wing conspiracy media site.
All in all; people are unable to estimate the objectivity of media and this goes for all people [only by looking back in time can people sometimes see whether media was objective of not]. The reason why people can't judge the media is because it does not reference their sources. One possible solution people are talking about is by creating new journalistic standards in which all information should have a source and be referenced to, in the same way this is done in scientific papers. Additionally the media can become peer reviewed and this can serve as its validation. Us normal people can then trust in the peer-reviewed process or look at their references and the other data and articles and form our own conclusions (if we have knowledge about the subject).
But right now we don't have such a media and so the best position you can take about the media is that [1] it is biased and [2] this is not the result of some crazy conspiracy.
I kinda made this up, I don't have a good word for it at the moment.
I believe it is called "9-11".
I would also recommend these:
The Responsibility of Intellectuals
Manufacturing Consent (the book)
Manufacturing Consent (the documentary)
He has written like 100 books so there is a lot. Those are probably good starting points. There is an anthology book called "The Essential Chomsky" that is a nice collection too.
In my opinion, his most important work is his propoganda model and writings on the mass media.
Manufacturing Consent
The "news" media has operated as a propaganda apparatus and has not simply "reported the news" for literally decades.
You only feel to the contrary, and that this is a new thing, precisely because they are so good at their brainwashing. This famous book can explain more:
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Well the easy answer is when they ran articles suggesting that Saddam had or was very close to getting WMDs, or that AQ had connections to Iraq which helped Bush drive the US into the Iraq War. If you've read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, they focus on the NYT and show a clear bias towards their corporate sponsors, as well as with the military industrial complex. The things you see and more importantly the things you don't see, are bought and paid for in all major news publications.
There's actually a wiki article about NYT controversies.
It's always been like this. If you're interested check out:
Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times by R. McChesney
Necessary Illusions : Thought Control in Democratic Societies by N.Chomsky
Our Unfree Press: 100 Years of Radical Media Criticism by R.McChesney
Beyond Hypocrisy: Decoding the News in an Age of Propaganda by E.Herman
Inventing Reality: The Politics of News Media by M.Parenti
Dollarocracy: How the Money and Media Election Complex is Destroying America by R.McChesney
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media by E.Herman and N.Chomsky
Constructing Public Opinion by J.Lewis
The More You Watch the Less You Know by D.Schecter
The Political Economy of Media: Enduring Issues, Emerging Dilemmas by R.McChesney
Gender, Race, and Class in Media: A Critical Reader by Dines and Humez
Beyond Consumer Capitalism: Media and the Limits to Imagination by J.Lewis
Propaganda by E.Bernays
Make-Believe Media: The Politics of Entertainment by M.Parenti
When News Lies by D.Schecter
Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda by N.Chomsky
Will the Revolution Be Televised?: A Marxist Analysis of the Media by J.Molenyeux
All these guys have youtube lectures if you aren't much of a reader. Alternatively check out the following documentaries:
Manufacturing Consent
The Myth of the Liberal Media
The Power of Nightmares
Psywar
Class Dismissed: how TV frames the working class
The Power Principle
Project Censored: Is the Press Really Free?
Or you could even do a course in media literacy and watch Sut Jhally's lecture series on Media, Public Relations and Propaganda.
It's a good thing smart people have been talking about this for years. Here, have a documentary. There's a book too!
From the top gilded comment on the original thread:
​
"In a nutshell, the classic steering mechanism for public opinion used to be Manufacturing Consent(Chomsky) or Engineering Consent (Bernays) which generates propaganda to achieve more of a public consensus whereas Adam Curtis' HyperNormalisation looks at the shift from that to neutralizing the pubilc into inaction by polarizing them with conflicting information or misinformation (patently false information) so that NO consensus can be reached. Both achieve the same goal of allowing the power elite to carry out the policies they wish while reducing the influence of an ostensibly democratic public which, in conjunction with more and more police state-like authoritarian measures making them more compliant, can no longer tell what is truth and what is misinformation. The public descends into arguing amongst themselves as opposed to those in power.
Edit. I would highjly recommend watching Adam Curtis' famous documentary The Century of the Self which looks at Edward Bernays (Sigmund Freud's nephew) and the origins of the consumer society, public relations and propaganda."
​
The referenced material above:
Noam Chomsky has been talking about this since before most of us were even born.
Some links
Yes, Chomsky offers some great insights that amaze one. In our routine lives we never stop to think of things from different perspectives to really figure things out.
That quote came out of his book "The Common Good" but my favorite is his text "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media".
For greater detail, check out Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent"
Summary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTBWfkE7BXU
Full Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHa6NflkW3Y
Book:
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Manufacturing Consent
Yup, these are the same people who will gladly condemn Saudi Arabia and praise Iran when it suits their causes. Noam Chomsky's - Manufacturing Consent has a lot to say on this subjeect.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
You can both sides this:
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=manufacturing+consent&qid=1565983676&s=gateway&sprefix=manufacturing+con&sr=8-1
Force is less effective than using more subtle means to control the narrative. See Manufacturing Consent
Might as well get this one out of the way --> Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
Political works by Chomsky:
The Responsibility of Intellectuals (1967),
At War With Asia: Essays on Indochina (1969),
Government in the Future (1970),
The Fateful Triangle (1983, 2015),
The Chomsky Reader (1987, 2010),
Manufacturing Consent (1988, 2002),
Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1992, 2015),
Understanding Power: The Indispensible Chomsky (2002),
Hegemony or Survival (2003),
Failed States (2006).
Works on Chomsky:
Noam Chomsky: A personal bibliography, 1951-1986 (1986),
Noam Chomsky: A Life of Dissent (1998),
Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals ( 1999, 2002, 2016),
The Cambridge Companion to Chomsky (2005, 2017),
The Social and Political Thought of Noam Chomsky (2000, 2002, 2004),
The Chomsky Effect: A Radical Works Beyond the Ivory Tower (2007), Noam Chomsky (2015)
Also this, this, this and this.
Following up on this, do yourself a favor and read Chomksy's Manufacturing Consent. There's also a youtube documentary/movie with excerpts from his lectures to help give you a feel for his ideas.
Lastly, I'm currently in the middle of reading Jason Stanley's book "How Propaganda Works." I like it so far; I'm about 1/2 way through it.
Manufacturing Consent:The Political Economy of the Mass Media by Edward S. Herman & Noam Chomsky
This book provides a model for how the news media is used (and has been used) as propaganda for the political elite. The model is presented with multiple case studies. Very eye opening.
Your every welcome, feel free to ask any more if you wish. As far as Rand Paul goes he's got a few good takes but he does this weird thing where he puts nonsense into a hat shakes it up and pulls it out into a convincing sentience. For a comprehensive analysis of how this gets done in the media by not just Rand Paul and other conservatives but everyone I would suggest the book (or documentary) Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky & Edward Herman. It was published in 1988 but the core of their argument is still open relevant today. Here's the Amazon link: Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media https://www.amazon.com/dp/0375714499/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_M-dHDb9W0NBBH
Here's the YouTube link to the 1992 documentary: https://youtu.be/AnrBQEAM3rE
And here's a short intro to it produced by Al Jazeera with voice over by Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!:
https://youtu.be/34LGPIXvU5M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
https://www.amazon.ca/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Thank you for your response! I am glad at least one person read the link.
If you want to watch the documentary, here's a link. Its a bit old (1992), and Chomsky is sometime difficult to keep focused on with his style.
If you want to go all out, here is a link to the book on Amazon.
Članek: http://www.openculture.com/2017/03/an-animated-introduction-to-noam-chomskys-manufacturing-consent.html
An Animated Introduction to Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent and How the Media Creates the Illusion of Democracy
in Media, Politics | March 13th, 2017 3 Comments
9.3kSHARESFacebookTwitterRedditAdvertisement
For nearly as many years as he’s occupied the public eye, famed linguist and anarchist philosopher Noam Chomsky has made claims that might have discredited other academics. Perhaps his many books, articles, lectures, interviews, etc. carry such weight because of his “famed linguist” status and his longtime tenure at MIT. But there’s more to his longevity as a respected critic of U.S. state power. His voice also carries significant authority because he substantiates his arguments with erudite, granular analyses of economic theory, history, and political philosophy.
We’ve seen him do exactly this in his fierce opposition to the Vietnam War at the beginning of his activist career, and in his critiques of proxy wars, imperialistic repression, and corporate resource grabs in Latin America and Southeast Asia in decades since.
​
When it comes to the U.S. domestic scene, one of Chomsky’s most pointed and continually relevant critiques addresses the way in which we’re led to believe the country’s actions overseas justify themselves, as well as its actions upon its own citizens. We might debate whether the U.S. is a democracy or a republic, but according to Chomsky, both notions may well be illusory.
Instead, Chomsky argues in Manufacturing Consent—his 1988 critique of “the political economy of the mass media" with Edward S. Herman—that the mass media sells us the idea that we have political agency. Their “primary function… in the United States is to mobilize support for the special interests that dominate the government and the private sector.” Those interests may have changed or evolved quite a bit since 1988, but the mechanisms of what Chomsky and Herman identify as “effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function” might work in the age of Twitter just as they did in one dominated by network and cable news.
Those mechanisms largely divide into what the authors called the “Five Filters.” The video at the top of the post, produced by Marcela Pizarro and narrated by Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman, provides a quick introduction to them, in a jarring animated sequence that’s part Monty Python, part Residents video. See the five filters listed below in brief, with excerpts from Goodman’s commentary:
>1. *Media Ownership**—The endgame of all mass media orgs is profit. “It is in their interest to push for whatever guarantees that profit.”
2.* *Advertising**—Media costs more than consumers will pay: Advertisers fill the gap. What do advertisers pay for? Access to audiences. “It isn’t just that the media is selling you a product. They’re also selling advertisers a product: you.”
3.* *Media Elite**—“Journalism cannot be a check on power, because the very system encourages complicity. Governments, corporations, and big institutions know how to influence the media. They feed it scoops and interviews with supposed experts. They make themselves crucial to the process of journalism. If you want to challenge power, you’ll be pushed to the margins…. You won’t be getting in. You’ll have lost your access.”
4.* *Flack**—“When the story is inconvenient for the powers that be, you’ll see the flack machine in action: discrediting sources, trashing stories, and diverting the conversation.”
5.* *The Common Enemy**—“To manufacture consent, you need an enemy, a target: Communism, terrorists, immigrants… a boogeyman to fear helps corral public opinion.”
Chomsky and Herman’s book offers a surgical analysis of the ways corporate mass media "manufactures consent” for a status quo the majority of people do not actually want. Yet for all of the recent agonizing over mass media failure and complicity, we don't often hear references to [Manufacturing Consent](http://amzn.to/2mZ49rH) these days. This may have something to do with the book’s dated examples, or it may testify to Chomsky’s marginalization in mainstream political discourse, though he would be the first to note that his voice has not been suppressed.
It may also be the case that media theory and criticism like Chomsky's, or the work of Marshall McLuhan, Theodor Adorno, or Jean Baudrillard (all very different kinds of thinkers), has fallen out of favor in a 140-character world. In the late-80s and 90s, however, such theory received a good deal of attention, and Chomsky appeared in the many venues you’ll see in the short video above, excerpted from an almost 3-hour 1992 documentary called [Manufacturing Consent*](http://amzn.to/2mYRSDj), a film made by “die-hard fans,” wrote Colin Marshall in an earlier post, that “curates instances of Chomsky going from interview to interview, debate to debate, forum to forum, making sharp-sounding points about the relationship between business elites and the media.”
Our desire for instant reward and settled opinion may have overtaken our ability to subject the entire phenomenon of mass media to critical analysis, as we leap from cliffhanger to cliffhanger and crisis to crisis. But should we take the time to watch this film and, preferably also, read Chomsky’s book, we may find ourselves somewhat better equipped to evaluate the onslaught of propaganda to which we’re subjected on what seems like an hourly basis.
I'm not exactly an Anarchist, per say, though I am a strong ally, so I'll offer up my 2 cents here.
As far as general radicalizing, accessible texts by Anarchists go? Gotta be Chomsky, dude.
Requiem, Manufacturing Consent and Who Rules the World? are excellent introductions to deconstructing mainstream hegemony- step 1 towards radicalization.
(edit: and Requiem for the American Dream even has a documentary based on it, so that makes it even more accessible if your friend doesn't feel like diving into a massive swathe of books right away. You can even watch it for free online!)
Now general anti-capitalist work? That's more my speed. Here's a reading list I made a while back of books that I've enjoyed which are both socially radical and operate within a Marxist (or at least socialist) framework. Some on specific social issues, others addressing Capitalism directly.
Manufacturing Consent by Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky.
It's basically arguing that the profit motive of capitalism has caused the "free press" to act as state propagandists. It sounds crazy, but they go into a lot of detail proving their point.
It's not specifically about capitalism vs socialism, but I think anyone who reads it would come out a little bit more skeptical of the narratives about capitalism we've grown up with.
I'd personally start with a few videos, then work your way into literature. The literature I suggest below is intentionally easy to read.
Literature by Marx and Engels:
I guess somewhere around here you can start reading Marx and Engel's other works, with Capital being your priority. Where you go after that is up to you.
Some interesting literature:
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=pd_sim_b_3
Pretty smart guy actually, you'll probably dig him.
If you suspect that you're not getting the whole story from television, I'd suggest picking up Noam Chomsky. He literally wrote the book, Manufacturing Consent, on the propaganda model for analyzing the media. Maybe start with The Common Good or What Uncle Sam Really Wants. That last one was one of the catalysts that started my own ideological transformation around your age that led me to becoming a conscientious objector and leaving the USMC.
Admittedly, Chomsky is a leftist intellectual, a self described supporter of anarcho syndicalism and libertarian socialism, but then, a lot of thinking people gravitate to leftism. Einstein wrote a letter entitled, Why I am a Socialist-
>'The oligarchy of private capital cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organised political society. The members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties financed or influenced by private capitalists. Moreover, private capitalists control the main sources of information (press, radio, education).'
The majority of scientists, who are generally analytically gifted people, and whose daily job is essentially to understand and describe the nature of reality, are also political leftists. So maybe there is something to this very wide body of thought.
At any rate, I think that you'll be hard pressed to make yourself more informed by watching TV. I second the notion others have proposed of reading up on history, and offer Howard Zinn's [A People's History of the United States] (http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States-P-S/dp/0061965588/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1342240464&sr=1-1&keywords=a+people%27s+history+of+the+united+states) as a counterbalance to some sanitized versions of history.
Anyways good luck! Happy to answer any questions you might have!
Odd, this story is coming from a news outlet owned by Newscorp, but fails to parrot the corporate narrative that Russians are once again the bad guys.
Remember when we used to call the bad guys Terrorists? And before that, we called them Russians?
Broke: Manufacturing Dissent
Woke: Manufacturing Consent
Just like in Asimov's Foundation series, psychohistory relies on large groups acting on instinct and existing without any knowledge of psychology or sociology. By acquainting yourself with the tools of persuasion from rhetoric and oratory to propaganda and public relations, you inoculate yourself against them.
The following is necessary to understand the politics of the modern world. These links will take a while to digest, but if you want to understand what's going on in the world, you owe it to yourself to become informed about the true state of the world.
Our brains are much worse at reality and thinking than thought. Science on reasoning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
Education as ignorance
https://chomsky.info/warfare02/
Overthrowing other peoples governments
http://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
Wikileaks on TTIP/TPP/ETC
https://youtu.be/ABDiHspTJww?t=17
Energy subsidies
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2015/NEW070215A.htm
Interference in other states when the rich/corporations dont get their way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxp_wgFWQo&feature=youtu.be&list=PLKR2GeygdHomOZeVKx3P0fqH58T3VghOj&t=724
Manufacturing consent (book)
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/
Protectionism for the rich and big business by state intervention, radical market interference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349
Manufacturing consent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwU56Rv0OXM
https://vimeo.com/39566117
Testing theories of representative government
https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf
Democracy Inc
http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed-Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X
From war is a racket:
"I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil intersts in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."[p. 10]
"War is a racket. ...It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." [p. 23]
"The general public shoulders the bill [for war]. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations." [p. 24]
General Butler is especially trenchant when he looks at post-war casualties. He writes with great emotion about the thousands of traumatized soldiers, many of who lose their minds and are penned like animals until they die, and he notes that in his time, returning veterans are three times more likely to die prematurely than those who stayed home.
http://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Antiwar-Americas-Decorated/dp/0922915865/
Blum:
http://williamblum.org/aer/read/137
US distribution of wealth
https://imgur.com/a/FShfb
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
The Centre for Investigative Journalism
http://www.tcij.org/
Some history on US imperialism by us corporations.
https://kurukshetra1.wordpress.com/2015/09/27/a-brief-history-of-imperialism-and-state-violence-in-colombia/
The real news
http://www.therealnews.com
You need to go to the library and read up on the structure and history of the mainstream news media. I would start with this book, and then move on to this one.
And then rethink how the media works and where whistleblowers fit into all of this. I guarantee your views will change.
See what you are failing to understand, or ignoring is that the mainstream media is a complex topic and saying things like, "it's corporate media, it's there to disperse propaganda and control what Americans think" is to miss so much of what has been written about all aspects of the workings of the media industry.
Sure, the mainstream news media disseminates propaganda. But my guess is that you have a default position whereby quite literally everything is propaganda designed to control what people think, as opposed to informing people on current affairs.
Yeah no problem. While Blum's work shows the effect of anti-communist efforts and policies by US, it's not really a guide on ideology; it's an account of what happened and why. If you are interested in leftist ideology i would recommend the ABCs of socialism which provides laymen's terms answers to questions of socialist government structure (e.g. how authoritarianism can find it's way into the fray) and economics.
Also, anything by Noam Chomsky, Mike Davis, or Naomi Klein are usually very insightful for modern day analyses of power, politics, and economics. I've got a long list if you want anymore suggestions, mostly from the perspective of critiquing power (from the right or the left) and it's effects on societies
edit: also check out the Chapo Trap House podcast for cathartic sessions of shitting on asshole politicians across the spectrum and highlights of funny/bizarre political takes
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media https://www.amazon.com/dp/0375714499
edit: the above is a New York Times bestseller, and considered by many to be an Important Book.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Manufacturing Consent also has some good stuff on Guatemala, along with Nicaragua and El Salvador, in the 70's and 80's. It's mostly geared toward how the media portrayal of these situations effected the opinion of the public and members of government. Of course, the Guatemala situation is the origin of the term 'Banana Republic.'
On a semi-related note, it was kind of surreal eating here:
http://www.costaverde.com/avion01.htm
First, let me compliment you on a fascinating list. There are some truly great books in there. I'm both impressed and delighted. Based on your choices, I would recommend the following.
Catch-22 by Joseph Hellar. Even more so than Slaughterhouse-Five, this is the quintessential anti-war novel. A hugely influential 20th century masterpiece. And laugh-out-loud funny in parts too!
The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes is a deserved winner of the Pulitzer Prize. Engrossing, erudite, insightful and educational narrative history of this hugely important event in 20th century history - reads like a novel. Covers not only the Allies, but also the German and (very often overlooked) Japanese side to the story.
Sacred Games by Vikram Chandra, just because of its sweeping scope. Very entertaining modern novel set in India. Touches upon topics and themes as diverse as modern Indian organized crime, international terrorism, Bollywood, the 1948 Partition, Maoist rebels, the caste system, corruption in Indian film, police and government... the list goes on and on. Great fun, and eye-opening.
A Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Marcia Marquez. Whilst not the original "magic realism" novel (despite what Marquez himself my imply), this is the first one to gain international acclaim and is a very influential work. Entertaining in so many ways. Follow the history of the fictional town of Maconda for a hundred years and the lives (the crazy, multifaceted lives) of its inhabitants.
Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett. This is a play, not a novel, and one translated from the French at that. Don't let that put you off. Existentialism has never been so interesting...
The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. His latest tour-de-force.
Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky. Dare I say that this expose on how Government and Big Business control public debate and the media is so important, was more influential than Chomsky's review of Skinner's verbal behaviour? Perhaps not. But a very important work none-the-less.
It seems that privately owned medias might convey the vision of their owners. Who'd have known?
It's call indoctrination and unfortunately it can be found everywhere in our current society. "Manufacturing Content" is a great read on this topic.
Google video version or YouTube version (only in US though I think).
> Nevermind their job is basically to uncover those things and report them.
Here's the thing - what the peasants are told how things are supposed to work, and how they actually work, are some times very, very different.
Here's Chomsky on how our media actually works.
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
And you're right he lacks charisma on TV, but he does have rock-star status among part of the hard core Conservative constituency, and despite being middle-pack, he isn't treated even as a middle-pack candidate.
So, do not defend or rely on the MSM. Always remember they're very much part of the problem. If Ron Paul people claim the MSM is sabotaging them, then it probably is.
No, I want proof that there has ever been any substance behind any of the scandals. There's no way to deny that she's been embroiled in scandal after scandal, that's pretty obvious. But she's never been convicted of shit; which makes me doubt whether or not she's actually done anything wrong, or if, like a human being, she's done the best she can with imperfect and ever-evolving information. Hard to prove what's a lie and what isn't without knowing what information was available and known to her at all times. And if we're going by Politifact, she "lied" significantly, significantly less than the other candidate in this election, so it seems a little precious to call her a scandalized liar so vociferously given the alternative.
My honest opinion, and I'm offering it freely to you to consider without any expectation of it changing your mind, is that the American public got a glimpse through the wikileaks of political sausage-making, and they didn't like it. To make things worse, I'd wager that an insanely tiny percentage of the population both read all of those emails and had the experience and knowledge to make heads or tails of it, so most people got their opinions about the emails through the grapevine, so to speak; secondary sources with agendas telling them what to think about it. But nevertheless, we got a glimpse at the strategy and wheeling and dealing that every politician engages in, and just because we "stuck it to Hillary" and punished her for things that either didn't even happen (e.g. Podesta drinking blood) or weren't even that bad (e.g. strategizing about how to beat Bernie... like duh they were trying to beat him), doesn't mean that they aren't still happening in the realm of politics. And no amount of "swamp-draining" is going to change that.
So either we as a population are intentionally blind to a lot worse things and a lot more blatant lies going on each and every day because of some bias rattling around in our brains (not sure what it is, tbh), or we're being fed extremely biased information by echo chambers, and fake news/clickbait which very much shapes the way we perceive the world.
So, I guess if the President-Elect holds true to his campaign promise of hiring a special prosecutor (doubt it) to indict Hillary, we'll finally get to the bottom of it. Until then, to me it's mostly just hearsay or baloney.
Welcome! Here are some resources I recommend:
Books
Films
Short videos
Subreddits
Other
Access. Read this book
Obligatory mention of "Manufacturing Consent"
Everyone needs to read Manufacturing Consent
Instead he stopped working for me to read Manufacturing Consent?.
well shane gillis did say chink, but more likely is that his Jewish producer pressured/encouraged/influenced him to try out an "edgy" comedy routine involving asian people. Shane is just a pawn for the media company.
also check out the book by Noam Chomsky: "Manufacturing Consent" - how the media companies have pretty much gotten it down to a science of how to influence the thoughts in people's heads. that is why i don't blame people for having negative views on asian people since they are being hypnotized all day by MSM.
Most people are not self aware to realize all the subtle micro suggestions from the media to influence our everyday actions. i know u are being facetious but i am confident you will see the truth soon :)
Read this book
http://www.amazon.com/How-Watch-News-Neil-Postman/dp/0786110627
Or this one
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0375714499/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1419778761&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SY200_QL40
That should just be called, how to suck the government cock no matter what they say.
> Never appeared before the 1960s?
Lie # 1. This is how they do it. It was popularlized in order to discredit people who didn't tow the line. They go out and find one time in the English language these 2 words were used together and debunked the entire claim.
All part of the plan.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-d-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=0375714499
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
You can probably find the pdf somewhere for free
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent
mind control instruction manual
people will have their problems with these but they are good additions or jumping off points for further research.
A People's History of the World
A People's History of the US - I don't remember if this book talks about Latin American relations specifically but it would be hard to tell this story without at least talking about it tangentially.
(i thought there was one for latin america but I'm not finding one in that series but if there is one, pick that up)
and of course pretty much anything by Chomsky, especially:
Manufacturing Consent
Caution: this is not only a long book but a DENSE one as well. Noam is not known as a storyteller. This book is no different. Every sentence is packed with gravity. It's looking specifically at the media's relationship with the US's relationship with Latin America but that's a good lens to go at that field of study.
In most of his work he focuses a lot on the Monroe Doctrine and its aftermath so you can pick up almost any of his work and you'll get some of it. Especially the earlier stuff.
You make it sound so easy. Unless a movement has gathered enough people to threaten the government or to threaten non-reelection then a change will occur. In order to gather that many people, most people must agree with the idea being presented. Unless its something obvious like abortions or that a great many people already do, like smoke weed, have fun changing policy.
Media plays a huge role in determining what 'grass roots organizations' fight for. And the media appartus is controlled by a few individuals with ties to Congress.
I suggest you read this book by Noam Chomsky. It will change how you view your government and 'grassroots organization' and all that other crap.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500902046&sr=8-1&keywords=manufacturing+consent
Also check out Requiem of the American dream. Also by Noam Chomsky. You will realize that all that 'democracy' talk is just hocus pocus.
https://www.amazon.com/Requiem-American-Dream-Principles-Concentration/dp/1609807367/ref=pd_bxgy_14_img_2?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1609807367&pd_rd_r=C87PGHVDK9SF618CCB7X&pd_rd_w=0b4Kj&pd_rd_wg=Nr5ur&psc=1&refRID=C87PGHVDK9SF618CCB7X
EDIT: I agree you won't be arrested and you can organize, but like I said earlier, it makes people feel important and that they can change something (when most of the time they can't). Its a non-obvious method of control and does not make martyrs of those who protest. Its the same as letting a 5 year old have his way on non-important matters so that he behaves himself vs cracking down on the 5 year old over non-important issues and making him feel resentful and act out.
I think Chomsky would probably start with the debates from the Constitutional Convention and how, from the beginning, the state was designed to protect "the opulence of the minority". He's done this in a lot of speeches/interviews, but for your purposes you might want to start with "Manufacturing Consent", a documentary based on a book of a similar title written by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman. The documentary/book's main focus is how mass media in liberal democracies uses propaganda to a) set the limits of what is acceptable to talk about in public sphere debate in order to b) promote the interest of a ruling elite class.
(Edited for clarity.)
Colbert is very likely the platonic love child of Noam Chomsky and George Carlin...Seriously, it would be unfair to compare Colbert with the father of modern linguistics.
Chomsky's book on manfactured consent defines what Colbert is fighting against every day, strapped in that Bill O'Reilly straightjacket.
Manufacturing Consent. Start there, here is a video break down, but read the book.
I think you need to fucking educate yourself
edit: you cunt
I would love to take part in this. Here are a few that I've been wanting to read lately:
I have a list, but that should do for now. I have none of these books, but would be happy to check them out from the library, or buy them. I'd also be happy to read another selected book. This sounds like a fun subreddit.
I think you got lost on the way to r/bandwagon and ended up in r/skeptic.
Putting links up from a site whose only purpose is to further the alarmist position makes you at the least, unable to criticize sources. But then again, really skeptical thinking, rationally, went out the window a long time ago as soon as this became a religion..
I refer you to this fantastic article about the subject...
--"The United Nations’ then-top climate scientist, Rajendra Pachauri, acknowledged...the faith-based nature of climate-change rhetoric when he resigned amid scandal in February. In a farewell letter, he said that “the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.”--
"nstead of letting political ideology or climate “religion” guide government policy, we should focus on good science. The facts alone should determine what climate policy options the U.S. considers. That is what the scientific method calls for: inquiry based on measurable evidence. Unfortunately this administration’s climate plans ignore good science and seek only to advance a political agenda."
"Climate reports from the U.N.—which the Obama administration consistently embraces—are designed to provide scientific cover for a preordained policy. This is not good science. Christiana Figueres, the official leading the U.N.’s effort to forge a new international climate treaty later this year in Paris, told reporters in February that the real goal is “to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years.” In other words, a central objective of these negotiations is the redistribution of wealth among nations. "
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-climate-change-religion-1429832149
If you truly believe that in order for there to be systematic problems at the top that can lead to gross examples of implementation there must be a "global scientific cabal" then you literally have not been paying attention at all while you have been alive. I suggest this book.
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
as a good starting point.
So, IDF-Shill... now it's time to do some math...
I got this from Mike Rosen:
All greenhouse gases account for only 2% of the total atmosphere; 3.62% of greenhouse gases are CO2; 3.4% of CO2 is caused by human activity; 22% of world CO2 emissions come from the US; Cap & Trade would reduce US man-made CO2 output by 15%.
Source: National Center for Policy Analysis
So, do the math: 0.020.0360.034*0.22 = 0.0000053856 or about five ten thousandths of 1%. That’s the US human-activity contribution to worldwide CO2 levels.
Next, if you multiply that by the effect of US Cap & Trade policies, worldwide CO2 emissions would be reduced by: 0.020.0360.0340.220.15 = 0.000000807840 or about eight-one-hundred thousandths of one percent.
This example puts in perspective the contribution of CO2 caused by US human activity to the worldwide level of CO2 in the atmosphere, and then the impact of a US Cap and Trade policies on worldwide CO2 levels:
A 200 pound man is made up of about 130 lbs, or 15.6 gallons of water.
Those 15.6 gallons of water represent the entire atmosphere.
Of those 15.6 gallons of atmosphere, 2%, or 0.3 gallons, represents the greenhouse gas portion of the atmosphere.
Of that one third gallon of greenhouse gases, 3.6%, or 2.9 tablespoons, represents the CO2 portion of the greenhouse gases worldwide.
Of those 2.9 tablespoons of CO2, 3.4%, or 0.3 teaspoon, represents the portion of the CO2 attributable to worldwide human activity.
Of that one third teaspoon of worldwide CO2 contribution, 22%, or 0.3 gram, is attributable to American activity.
Of that one third gram of American CO2 contribution, 15%, or 0.05 gram, might be eliminated by cap and trade and other governmental mandates.
This is approximately equal to a single drop of water from an eyedropper.
You are no skeptic.
That one time the Brits did not immediately go to war (that even Obama seriously did not want, and which he probably was very glad was averted thanks to Putin's chemical weapons discarding initiative) does not show anything. The USA doesn't have absolute control over every political decision of NATO members, but it still pressures them hard to toe the line. Opposing Russia is NATO's raison d'etre, it's insane to believe NATO members would be inclined to be friends with Russia, because then they wouldn't need NATO. If you research this old scandal for a bit you might finally realise how much the USA pressures its client states, if things such as TPP etc aren't obvious enough for you - and in geopolitical matters this pressure is only larger.
> The USSR is not even remotely comparable to NATO or the EU.
It is comparable, but it's different, of course. Warsaw Pact would be comparable with NATO and COMECON would be comparable with the EU; the USSR's analogue is the USA.
> Everyone who had a different one "disappeared". To a gulag.
That only ever happened under Stalin, for a fraction of the USSR's total existence, but the Western narrative is different, of course.
> Finally, I'll leave you with a link to a lecture by a Russian on the techniques used to indoctrinate people into the "fortress russia" mentality.
Allow me to make a much more worthwhile recommendation to you - an entire book written by someone with an actual name - http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499 .
>. If you research this old scandal for a bit you might finally realise how much the USA pressures its client states, if things such as TPP etc aren't obvious enough for you - and in geopolitical matters this pressure is only larger.
What, that some Polish politicians don't like the balance of power between the US and Poland? You also don't have any understanding of what a client state is.
>That only ever happened under Stalin, for a fraction of the USSR's total existence, but the Western narrative is different, of course.
While it declined after Stalin, documents released under Glasnost show silencing of dissent continued after his death. No western narrative, just russian documents.
>Allow me to make a much more worthwhile recommendation to you - an entire book written by someone with an actual name - http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499 .
And ignoring the argument/evidence. Evidently Dartmouth isn't a name. I mean, if we're linking books, you can try this one
If you are going to report shit like this, at least give us something useful as a replacement:
> Supporting and reporting information told by a government with less than reliable information isn't showing support for the war
Shutting out any information that was contrary is!
>I'm sorry but go read a book
Try this one:
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Then maybe you will understand what is happening in this country.
>Now piss off fool.
You are helping to start another Civil War, and I'm the fool?
Only because I haven't fled the country... yet.
Good place to start, Manufacturing Consent.
This is not a new concept, private owned media will not deviate too much from the status quo that created them in the first place, and much of what Trump does is to the benefit of this status quo. [1]
Media can't be objective in criticising the military industrial complex if 2 minutes later they run Boeing and Lockheed Martin ads. That's how you get MSNBC jerking themselves over the beauty of airstrikes in Syria. [2]
I am an example of someone who could be working for a much higher income but chooses to help people and minimize my income to maximize helping those in need.
>Assume that you aren't a healthy individual.
I am though. Hypothetically? I would listen to people who write books like this and this and this.
You may be interested in this book. Manufacturing Consent
The same news paper who essentially denies climate change.
For more details, read this book.
That is understandable. No one wants to believe they are being manipulated. While hundreds of billions of dollars spent every year in PR and advertising prove otherwise.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0375714499/
Noam Chomsky did this spectacularly well in 1988 without being sensationalist.
Now that I'm not at work let me generate a list of links for you because my irate ass ain't going to convince you, I know that.
The podcast Citations Needed
The irreplaceable podcast "The Dig" by Daniel Denver
Richard Wolff's latest lecture on Capitalism's decay
Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing Consent'
Rosa Luxemburg's 'Reform or Revolution'
Albert Einstein's 'Why Socialism?'
V. Lenin's 'State and Revolution'
Jacobin, The Magazine
Now here's articles about police on jacobin:
Here
Here
Here
Here
Now here's some about our insane empire:
Here
Here
Here
The United States is in decay, and you are young. The 21st century is moving fast and eventually you will wonder why this country is the way it is. It's because of the mixture of nice people, loving people like your family, living in a hegemonic capitalistic hellscape, not mobilizing to put the check needed on our government.
An entire field of study would disagree with your statement that there is no such thing as "the media." Here is a good book. And another. Not to mention you can simply Google the term "the media" and see it in use by literally everyone except apparently you.
True but for every post like yours, there is also Manufacturing Consent
So, you know, the media does have a lot of problems, and does generally follow the government's lead.
No, I mean that the US government actively manipulates and outright censors various subjects, individuals, and news organizations.
There are many examples, but here are a few to whet your appetite.
1.) Showing the coffins of dead US soldiers was made illegal in 2003. The reasoning was that it was damaging to the nations morale, ie seeing the costs of war makes the public stop supporting war.
2.) Retired military commanders and advisers appearing on FOX news, presented as neutral or independent analysts. This is one of the "revolving doors" that retired military officials go through, alongside working for defense contractors or intelligence organizations.
3.) Noam Chomsky is a linguists professor of world renown who writes extensively on the use of propaganda in American media. Chomsky describes specific terms the government uses to make warfare more palatable to the American public, including 'collateral damage', 'overseas', 'hearts and minds', 'the peace process', etc.
4.) CNN is increasingly operating as the primary medium for government-sponsored pro-war propaganda.
It is important for people to realize that "propaganda" doesn't always mean a giant poster of a stoic face above some authoritarian statement. Effective propaganda isn't obvious, it's subtle. It is intended to manipulate the way you think, to implant particular values and priorities.
Do yourself a favor and buy [this book.] (https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499). This is the basics kids, they are far more sophisticated, OP just posted a recent example.
Don't worry Obama had a handful of "imperial sins": Libya, Syria "red-lines", targeted assassinations, torture ...
>There is still a congress and people who won't let a president do everything, even if it is the right thing to do.
Are you kidding me ? Both easily bought and/or distracted. Has been this way for over a century.
Yes it is hypocrite of him to call out other nations on their crimes.
>I find it hard to take your (Corbynites') qualms with the media seriously.
2 studies have shown that we have been overwhelmingly misrepresented in the media. The media legitimately hates and misrepresents the left
http://i.imgur.com/UZlDEuP.jpg
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-labour-mainstream-press-lse-study-misrepresentation-we-cant-ignore-bias-a7144381.html
https://theconversation.com/media-bias-against-jeremy-corbyn-shows-how-politicised-reporting-has-become-71593
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/07/jeremy-corbyn-media-coup-bbc-labour/
>I don't suppose you caught any of Steve Bannon (Trump aide and ex-Breitbart chair) ranting about the media at the CPAC (conservative conference) in the USA this week?
No. But actually the Trump administration is basically saying the truth when it says the Mainstream media is full of complete and utter shit and has been lying and manipulating the general public for years. It has. A broken clock is right twice a day.
Personally I you know whats more depressing that watching Trump stumble his way through his coke fuelled press conferences? The terrible reaction from the media, instead of questioning him on the Libya raid, instead of questioning him on all this horrific shit he's said and done, they just try live fact check him and defend their media insitutions like whining children. It shows how completely out of touch with actual Journalism the MSM has become. It's like, they are legitimately shocked to be stuck in an advisoral role with a Politician when normally Politicians will sell their soul for media access.
>You guys sound a lot like that, i.e. nuts.
If you legitimately believe the mainstream media is an unbiased source of information and not just a mouthpiece of the establishment that gives a shit about access above all else. I don't know really what to tell you.
https://www.amazon.com/Propaganda-Edward-Bernays/dp/0970312598
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outfoxed
Actually some of it does make sense because the food does already change our genes. Take Candida Albicans, a fungi that can take root in our gut and out-compete our micro-flora and then starts to create enzymes that alter our genes so that we crave more sugar, what it craves / needs for fast replication, ultimately making us into a symbiont, and we usually end up with diabetes and cancer in short order unless we rid ourselves of it.
This sounds out of this world but it is actual fact.
Also, 'Food Inc' and 'The World According to Monsanto' are very accurate, care to point out where they aren't? Understanding biology? Care to rebut the fact that glyphosate is extremely carcinogenic?
Sounds like another GMO / Sodium Fluoride / mercury and aluminum vaccine cheerleader with no actual science on their side. God damn there are a lot of you on reddit! Are you a paid commenter or just deluded?
Vandana Shiva "profits" off of alarmism?! Wasn't your camp saying the same thing about the climate crisis 10 years ago and how everyone on the left was trying to blow it out of proportion "for profit"? LFMAO.
"Lay of information involving RT!"
LOL, why because they are "Russian propagandists"?!
Dude, you have no clue, not a single one, it's a sad state of affairs when media consolidation is so bad in this country that we have to rely on RT for accurate information. That's a fact. Care to say anything bad about Chris Hedges? Prepare to get laughed out of the sub-reddit. Youre deluded dude. Big time.
No shortage of ignorance in this world.
Manufacturing Consent
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2CQOGUIU8IP64&keywords=manufacturing+consent&qid=1568734646&s=gateway&sprefix=xbone+one%2Caps%2C203&sr=8-1
Let me tell you about a little book called Manufacturing Consent
Fox news is shit but it isn't a government funded government run news source
You might be interested in recent U.S History :
http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
This books present a really interesting case on how the media system is organized. You should have a look at it, please get back to with a private message if you read it at the local library, I would love to hear your opinion about it.
https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
Very eye opening book I would recommend :)