Communications 101

I’m putting three blogs on Communications here together on one page for easier reference —

Communications 101

You know, I would have loved to gone on to get my Masters and PhD in Communications and taught at the college level…but alas…

Here’s the next best thing, however —

Three really good videos illustrating Communication techniques.

First we have Crow’s very good primer on one of the persuasion principles: belief.  The other is: values.  If you value material things, they have a much easier time of manipulating and motivating you.  People will kill another human being to gain possession of their material things.

Next, we have George W. Bush weaseling out of the responsibility of the White House to inform the public they are watching Video News Releases (VNR):

Note how Bush says the Bush Justice Dept.(that tried to fire all U.S. Attorneys) okayed the Bush Administration VNR’s so long as they are factual…according to the Bush Military Industrial Complex.  And when Ken Herman pushes him on requiring that the media disclose it is a VNR, Bush sidesteps responsibility.

Finally, we have computer generated imagery (CGI) used to deceive viewers.  In the first clip, the man and woman both have characteristic black lines indicating they were put into a scene.  They were probably in a studio in front of what they call a “green screen” that allows a computer to add background scenery later.

They don’t explain a lot in the 9/11 scene, only that they refer to it as a “movie”.  Do they mean that footage was shot,  then was altered, and then given to the media to air later?  I’ll put another video up that explains the media’s role in creating the lie of the planes bringing down the WTC towers.

Robbie Parker is clearly acting.  What a fake.  He’s smiling like he has no cares, and then goes into acting mode.  Good Lord.

When she says “when they rendered it” — she is talking about when they take the raw tape and put it into video editing software.  She says that they just didn’t want to take the time to refine the quality of the video to sharpen the video subjects, which is good for us, I guess, making it easier to spot.

The next one is quite obvious a green screen.  It’s almost laughable how they are trying to pass this off as live reporting in front of the U.S. ship.  So…is this a VNR from the Military Industrial Complex?

Communications 101, Class 2

Here is another good video on spotting fake nooz.  CNN and MSNBC are so bad now that it’s hard not to laugh at the hysteria they are trying to create.  If it weren’t so serious, I would be laughing…but, alas…

They touch on Ebola, the time in which this tape appears to have been made.  At the time, it was alarming to me how cavalier the medical professionals involved were acting — now I understand why.  It never occurred to me that they would fake a medical event like this.  Vaccine hysteria I could see, but I gave them waaaay to much credit for ethics in that they would *never* fake a medical emergency.  It is too important, I thought.  But as they analyze it, I start to think about the nurse that refused to stay quarantined and how the nurse who contracted Ebola at the Presbyterian hospital did so because protocols were not followed or were inadequate.  Were they trying to stop an epidemic or create one…?

This thought seems like it’s *out there*…but when you consider news reports of people actually getting measles and whooping cough from others who were vaccinated…it doesn’t seem so far out.

I don’t understand the bit on when Bin Laden died.  If there weren’t any planes, and it was a controlled demolition, then everyone they have claimed to have taken part was innocent.  Which means we hunted down and killed an innocent man.

Then at 37:00, they talk about President Obama with “devil horns” superimposed on his image, post speech.  You might recall how the actor in Mark Burnett/Roma Downey production of The Bible and how the actor portraying Satan was made up to look identical to Obama.

My guess is that the neocons/evangelicals would like to have people believe Barack Obama is the AntiChrist.  Remember, they are trying to blame all that is wrong in the country on that Black Guy in the White House.  While I don’t agree with many things Obama has done…I do know this:  he does have a good heart.  It boggles the mind when at times he does not seem to follow his heart.  But there are powerful forces at work that I am only beginning to understand, and I don’t think the President has nearly as much power as people like to give him.

Further in the video, they talk about all these false flag hysteria events and that they would like to sue the government to get them stopped.  They don’t say who they would sue, but my guess is the Military Industrial Complex, and specifically DHS.  DHS is just the Civil Defense on steroids.  The Civil Defense was disbanded in the 70s because of abuse of power and the very actions we see now.

Here is a broadcast message from that era that seems more designed to scare the bejeebers out of people:

This was all nonsense because by the time a nuke bomb was dropped and the public was warned, it was too late.  Radiation travels too quickly for these warnings to be of any use.  As one commenter stated, we used to joke about bending over and kissing your arse good-bye.  I felt the same way when Bush was trying to terrorize the nation after 9/11 — and FEMA was telling folks to buy duct tape and plastic wrap…give me a freaking break.

Here’s another one:

Way to scare young children!  And it’s a lie that we could protect ourselves against it.

People were building bomb shelters in the 1950s because of this — and then they figured out that they couldn’t fit their entire family into one shelter; nor their dear friends; nor their neighbors…and it suddenly dawned on them that they didn’t want to live in a world where their family, friends, and community were horribly fried to death.

Note at 7:00 — the announcer says “we must obey the Civil Defense worker”.  First, the Civil Defense worker is going to be running away, not helping others, and secondly, nobody is going to care more about your health and safety than you, and you may know a better way/alternative than what you are being told.  As we know the government is heavily influenced by corporations, and they are going to tell you what the corporations want them to.

And they even take what should be a relaxing, enjoyable day with a picnic and terrorize people into being “always alert”…that is, always afraid…and a newspaper to protect you?  Shameless.

Back to the first video — they talk about  a class action lawsuit and getting a hundred thousand signatures.  Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but we had over a hundred thousand signatures on the NO FORCED VACCINATIONS petition…which was completely ignored by the White House, with Big Pharma getting yet another chance to misinform the public.

There is one more comical Civil Defense film that I can’t resist putting up:

I mean, seriously, the puppet just makes it too comical to be taken seriously.  Kind of like the “zombie” films of the DHS.  And again, it was all a lie — if your livestock survived the blast, the resulting radiation would poison the food in the fields.  No feed for the livestock and no food for you beyond two weeks.  Even now, those that live within a twenty mile radius of nuclear power plants are likely to have thyroid disease and/or cancer.  Why weren’t they worried about that?  Why were films like The China Syndrome seen as anti-government, when the Civil Defense was telling people they needed to worry about nuclear radiation fallout?  It was clear that it wasn’t about nuclear bombs at all, but instead instilling continual fear into people in order to control them.

Three Mile Island, which nearly had a meltdown like the China Syndrome, happened not too long after the premier of the movie.  Note how the plant operators fled after the accident.

——————

What the Thompsons say they found out during their time inside TMI suggests radiation releases from the plant were hundreds if not thousands of times higher than the government and industry have acknowledged — high enough to cause the acute health effects documented in people living near the plant but that have been dismissed by the industry and the government as impossible given official radiation dose estimates. 

The Thompsons tried to draw attention to their findings and provide health information for people living near the plant, but what they say happened next reads like a John Grisham thriller.

——————————

It includes the story of Jean Trimmer, a farmer who lived in Lisburn, Pa. about 10 miles west of TMI. On the evening of March 30, 1979, Trimmer stepped outside on her front porch to fetch her cat when she was hit with a blast of heat and rain. Soon after, her skin became red and itchy as if badly sunburned, a condition known as erythema. About three weeks later, her hair turned white and began falling out. Not long after, she reported, her left kidney “just dried up and disappeared” — an occurrence so strange that her case was presented to a symposium of doctors at the nearby Hershey Medical Center. All of those symptoms are consistent with high-dose radiation exposure

There was also Bill Peters, an auto-body shop owner and a former justice of the peace who lived just a few miles west of the plant in Etters, Pa. The day after the disaster, he and his son — who like most area residents were unaware of what was unfolding nearby — were working in their garage with the doors open when they developed what they first thought was a bad sunburn. They also experienced burning in their throats and tasted what seemed to be metal in the air. That same metallic taste was reported by many local residents and is another symptom of radiation exposure, commonly reported in cancer patients receiving radiation therapy.

—————————-

[…]

Wing reanalyzed the Columbia scientists’ data, looking at cancer rates before the TMI disaster to control for other possible risk factors in the 10-mile area. His peer-reviewed results, published in 1997, found positive relationships between accident dose estimates and rates of leukemia, lung cancer and all cancers. Where the Columbia study found a 30 percent average increase in lung cancer risk among one group of residents, for example, Wing found an 85 percent increase. And while the Columbia researchers found little or no increase in adult leukemias and a statistically unreliable increase in childhood cases, Wing found that people downwind during the most intense releases were eight to 10 times more likely on average than their neighbors to develop leukemia.

——————————-

In the vocabulary section below the story is this:

Strontium—a highly reactive chemical element whose radioactive isotope, strontium-90, is produced by nuclear fission. It takes the place of calcium in bones and can lead to bone disorders including cancer.

Ai,yi,yi — if you recall, Strontium is in chemtrails/geoengineering trails.  Gets even scarier, doesn’t it?

Finally, I leave you with another time and place when the media created panic:  This was on the radio when it was the only form of communication.  There weren’t any TV’s.  No internet. Certainly no cell phones.  And even with those forms of communication — whomever owns the station — be it defense contractor or Big Pharma — will control the message.

 

Communications 101, Class 3

The radio station owned by the neocon keeps airing Jackie Walorsky’s Military Industrial Complex Cheerleading with talk of the situation in Syria and creating the sense of urgency for the United States to go in there to fix it.  Somehow, the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have somehow escaped Walorsky’s notice.  And, I ask again, since when did we become the world’s police??

The radio station is doing its part to keep us involved, therefore adding to the war profiteers’ bank accounts by repeating the comments.  One of the principles of Communications is to keep repeating a message until a) people believe it; or b) you get the result you seek.

The folks in the videos on false flags hold the belief that ISIS is just Al Queda and all of it is staged.  I noted in the nooz that “jihadi john” is now dead.  Convenient, isn’t it??  I wonder if that means that the crisis actor who stood in front of a green screen pretending to behead someone is now dead so that he cannot speak out?

You can tell this is a neocon radio station because while airing these pro-war, pro-military industrial complex statements from Jackie Walorsky, there is no one speaking out with a different point of view.  The station will tell you that they air different viewpoints….with Joe Donnelly, a DINO (Democrat in Name Only).

Bwahahahahaha  *snort*   bwahahahahaha.

Joe Donnelly will tell you the exact same thing that Walorsky tells you.  He will tell you that our nation’s security depends on us going into yet another country.  He’ll tell you that while ignoring how much our influence has destabilized the Middle East.  And he will ignore all the innocent people killed.

The radio station won’t air someone who questions the military industrial complex and the aggressive actions taken.

And they don’t have to — Reagan made sure of that by taking away the Fairness Doctrine, which required the media to air opposing views at the same time as the others, with as many minutes, without interference.

A really good piece on the fairness doctrine here.

**FAIR disagrees with my statement above:

…it did not require that each program be internally balanced, nor did it mandate equal time for opposing points of view. And it didn’t require that the balance of a station’s program lineup be anything like 50/50.

[…]

The Fairness Doctrine simply prohibited stations from broadcasting from a single perspective, day after day, without presenting opposing views.

[…]

When the Sinclair Broadcast Group retreated from pre-election plans to force its 62 television stations to preempt prime-time programming in favor of airing the blatantly anti-John Kerry documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal, the reversal wasn’t triggered by a concern for fairness: Sinclair back-pedaled because its stock was tanking. The staunchly conservative broadcaster’s plan had provoked calls for sponsor boycotts, and Wall Street saw a company that was putting politics ahead of profits. Sinclair’s stock declined by nearly 17 percent before the company announced it would air a somewhat more balanced news program in place of the documentary (Baltimore Sun, 10/24/04).

But if fairness mattered little to Sinclair, the news that a corporation that controlled more TV licenses than any other could put the publicly owned airwaves to partisan use sparked discussion of fairness across the board, from media democracy activists to television industry executives.

—————————-

Together, they are part of a growing trend that sees movement conservatives and Republican partisans using the publicly owned airwaves as a political megaphone—one that goes largely unanswered by any regular opposing perspective. It’s an imbalance that begs for a remedy.

———————————-

American thought and American politics will be largely at the mercy of those who operate these stations, for publicity is the most powerful weapon that can be wielded in a republic. And when such a weapon is placed in the hands of one person, or a single selfish group is permitted to either tacitly or otherwise acquire ownership or dominate these broadcasting stations throughout the country, then woe be to those who dare to differ with them. It will be impossible to compete with them in reaching the ears of the American people.

— Rep. Luther Johnson (D.-Texas), in the debate that preceded the Radio Act of 1927 (KPFA, 1/16/03)

————————————————-

It is the purpose of the First Amendment to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail, rather than to countenance monopolization of that market, whether it be by the government itself or a private licensee. It is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, aesthetic, moral and other ideas and experiences which is crucial here. That right may not constitutionally be abridged either by Congress or by the FCC.

— U.S. Supreme Court, Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 1969.

——————————————-

[Mark Fowler] and his like-minded commissioners, a majority of whom had been appointed by President Ronald Reagan, argued that the doctrine violated broadcasters’ First Amendment free speech rights by giving government a measure of editorial control over stations.

—————-

See…you twist it around to be the exact opposite of what it is — that is, taking freedom of speech away from opposing views is…violating the Freedom of Speech of the station owners…yep.

—————

Wrote [Justice Robert ]Bork: “We do not believe that language adopted in 1959 made the Fairness Doctrine a binding statutory obligation,” because, he said, the doctrine was imposed “under,” not “by” the Communications Act of 1934 (California Lawyer, 8/88). Bork held that the 1959 amendment established that the FCC could apply the doctrine, but was not obliged to do so—that keeping the rule or scuttling it was simply a matter of FCC discretion.

—————————–

A written law is not a law…(if we don’t agree with its purpose of presenting views opposite our own ideology)…see?

All you see on the nooz now is rightwing views.  Big Energy views.  Big Pharma views.

I briefly watched John Kerry speak at the Institute for Peace.  What a joke.  He was advocating TPP as a way for peace.  Seriously.  He was seriously asserting that subjugating our Constitution, our own autonomy, and our ability to make enough money to provide for ourselves…is a way to peace.  No…it’s a way to control every one and every thing so that no one can speak out against unfairness and injustice.

And he asserted that we need to go to Syria.  We need to go kill some people in order to save them.

I was reminded of a quote from the 60s:

“We seem bent on saving the Vietnamese from Ho Chi Minh,

even if we have to kill them and demolish their country to do it.”

~George McGovern

—————–

My feeling is that entering Syria will be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

COMMUNICATIONS 101, CLASS 5

I’m  listening to the Weather Channel.  The program is describing Detroit and the deteriorating buildings.

My Communications ear perked up with the words being used by the narrator (who incidentally sounds like a popular fast food place’s spokesperson).

He describes the growing vegetation as a “war” with the building “battling” the trees which are “forcing” their way through, to “destroy” the buildings that formerly housed Packard Car company.

Water’s multi-pronged “attack”.

“Nature has reduced this factory to rubble.”

The terms were constantly using words of war, battle, nature’s destruction, relentless power…and the narrative clearly was trying to portray nature and trees as destructive forces at war with…man.  Yep.

Instead of seeing this as a positive, it was clearly using terminology to influence the viewer to have a negative perception of nature.

I see it as a positive force.  Nature takes back the decaying rubble, and it gives us: trees that provide oxygen while removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere; trees that provide shelter for birds; vegetation that provides food to humans and animals.  It’s the life-death-life cycle.  Nature was here first, then they built the factories, then nature comes back to reclaim and rebuild what humans have destroyed.

Instead of seeing this as a negative, it should be celebrated that new life has sprung out of death and decay.

COMMUNICATIONS 101, CLASS 6

 

 

COMMUNICATIONS 101, CLASS 7

Corbett Report does a good job of exposing Bill Gates for his piracy, but it also does a good job of encouraging active viewing of media — know who is paying for the nooz you are viewing.  ABC and Lehrer do not come out in obvious fashion to tell the viewer their reports are being funded by Gates.  I wanted to throw up at the “superhero” segment by ABC News.  Gag me.

Without further ado~

The one thing Corbett leaves out is the underhanded way that Microsoft cornered the PC market — they forced companies to sign exclusive agreements where they would use only Microsoft technology.  Computer geeks are of the opinion that Linux was a far better operating system that was more reliable than Windows…but they were not the cheaters that Microsoft was…and they lost out.  The public lost out, because this goes against the true value of capitalism — where the best product won.

Next, we have Jim Fetzer recap with some new material on false flags.

About these ads

Occasionally, some of your visitors may see an advertisement here