Other items on Exposing the Media:


Introduction

The Meaning of "Official"

Repeaters Reading from Script

Mindless Media Parrots | Brainwash Update

Conan Fully Exposes Mainstream Media

David Icke - Repeaters

SEE Station Makes Error, Reads 4 Wrong Names

USING CATCH PHRASES TO MINIMIZE A TOPIC AND TO LEAD THE AUDIENCE

Chemtrail Reporting Forced on Mainstream Media

Arizona Chemtrail Hearing Coverage: Good, Bad, and Ugly

How Disinformation Works

11 Tactics Used by the Mainstream Media to

Wall Street Whistleblower Reveals Subliminals Added to TV

CNN Caught Flashing Subliminal too fast for eye to see during a news cast

Obama's Speechwriter confesses Brainwashing Tactic

Analysis of Obama's Hypnosis Techniques

Understanding PSYOPS – NLP in the Media

Caught Using Computer Graphics in video editing

Subliminal Messages Exposed: Infowars Nightly News 

Media Brainwashing "Operation Paul Revere Infowars.com Contest

Mass Mind Control Through TV

Selling Out to Large Corporation(s)

CIA Admits Using MSM To Manipulate The USA

CNN Reporter Admits that the Obama Administration pays for CNN Content

CNN Exposed, Emmy Winning Former CNN Journalist, Amber Lyon Blows The Whistle

George Bush Admits to Fake News

PERFECT ILLUSTRATION OF MSM PARTNERSHIP W/ CRIMINAL GOV'T(Video)

CNN Fake Newscast

Beware, The Green Screen Deception

Nancy Grace and Ashleigh Banfield Hold Split-Screen

Whistleblower Dr. Udo Ulfkotte, journalist on RT

Fox News Brainwashing/Chemtrail Subliminal Messages

BBC announced collapse of Building 7 before it happened...

BBC Guilty of Further Subliminal Advertising of Chemtrails at Wimbledon...

Operation Earnest Voice (Pro-Government Propaganda)

More Showing of Complicity

"Mystery surrounds bent plane trail photographed over Southsea"

Mystery after plane's unusual flight path leaves strange vapour trail in the sky

Was it avoiding a UFO or did the pilot sneeze?': Mysterious photo of plane's bizarre flight path

OMISSIONS - Keeping information from the public

Tons of GMO Crops Torched in America - Media Blackout

PUTIN'S RUSSIA GIVES AMERICA A BEAUTIFUL GIFT TO COMMEMORATE 5TH ANNIVERSARY

Media Blackout as U.S. Sponsors Genocide in Southeastern Ukraine

EX-CBS REPORTER SPEAKS OUT RE: MSM PROPAGANDA

Ex-CBS Reporter: Obama Takes Lack Of Transparency...

TV=Mind Control

Television - Mass Hypnotic Indoctrination

A BBC Mind Blower

Media ADMIT latest ISIS Video Fake... Again

Illuminati Black Magick Television Tricks REVEALED!

How to Control a Nation (Image)

9/11 Truthers ATTACKED on CNN! 911 Memorial A&Efor9/11Truth Pamphlets (Video)

Why Is The Obama Administration Putting Government Monitors In Newsrooms?

CIA Agent says "Never Watch Television

Media Now Openly Admitting the Government Controls the News

Start Living Again - Here's How You're Being Brainwashed & How to Stop It

Two Prime Ministers, One Speech

TV Anchor Finally Reveals What Happened When She Questioned...

Corporate Media Helping to Hide Climate Engineering

How Mainstream Media Fakes the News - Behind the...

Weather Woman Forced to Talk About Chemtrails

Propaganda 101: Operation Mockingbird Continues

CNN Journalist "Governments Pay Us to do Fake Stories...

Media Hoaxes Exposed! Naomi Wolf Reveals How...

The NDAA Legalizes the Use of Propaganda on the...

Fake News!! CNN & BBC Busted!! ISIS Is A Fake Threat!! 2014 (Video)

CIA Illuminati Busted!! Television Mind Control Exposed!! 2015 (Video)

TV news Anchor makes slip of the tongue

 

 

Tools of Their Trade - Gatekeepers

 

I recently read an article in the TheDailyBeast today entitled, “A Kardashian Stumbles Upon a Chemtrail”, by Olivia Nuzzi. Olivia writes of Jenner's tweet about chemtrails. While doing so, she (Olivia) uses four (of many) tactics that are commonly used by mainstream media writers.

 

These tactics are as follows:

  1. Stating an assumption as if it were a fact to mislead 
  2. Omitting many facts
  3. Ridicule
  4. Use of loaded and overly-used words and phrases to create negative associations in order to destroy the person's credibility.

 
My commentary of her quotes will follow hers and be in red and  italics.

1.) Stating an assumption as if it were fact : “Jenner has unknowingly stumbled into the chemtrail conspiracy theory, which dates back to August 1996, when the United States Air Force’s university,  published a paper (PDF) titled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 . Some members of society who are disturbed by and reject the reality that the world is a disorganized, leaderless hellhole took the paper to mean that the government wanted to control the weather. A conspiracy was born. “

How many chemtrail-aware people came to know about them only, if at all, from just the military's "Owning the Weather" document? Many of us have seen the jets spraying with our own eyes, or heard about them from someone else, or seen other military and/or government documents that talk of aerosol programs. Examples of just a few: The Space Preservation Act of 2001, weather modification documents, patents, policies, and others. By claiming that everyone believes something for the same reason implies  they are all of one hive mind who cannot think for themselves.  By the way, I once saw that same claim on Contrail Science. Could Olivia have just been parroting them?


You can find almost 200 hundred pieces of chemtrail and geoengineering evidence from universities, scientists, meteorologists and other sources at http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/Chemtrail_Research.htm and over 200 military and government documents at:http://www.chemtrailplanet.com/CPgov.htm.  There are plenty of other resources regarding chemtrails/geoengineering which can be found with a simple internet search. This makes me question whether Olivia did any research at all, other than the two sites she mentions in her article--one being the Wikipedia which is almost always the very first link that comes up. 

By stating her assumption as fact, Olivia pretty much  closes the subject of chemtrails and intentionally or unintentionally leads the audience to dismiss the topic  as having already been covered and after all, all the believers were only misunderstanding a theoretical document.  

 

2.) Omitting many facts: Examples of this are the documents mentioned above. Also omitted is the hundreds of lab tests on rain water and soil samples, whistleblowers, weather derivatives, University and government documents, videos of jets spraying, ect. Anyone can find these things by doing a simple search--something Olivia Nuzzi apparently did not do.  Instead she comes across as trying to make it appear as if the only thing that created chemtrail knowers was a misunderstanding of one document.

 

3.) Ridicule and use of loaded and overly-used words and phrases to create negative associations : Olivia ridicules Jenner not only in tone, but with her words. Here are a few examples from Olivia's article: “There is a lot to unpack in Jenner’s grammatically disastrous meme, but seeing as 9 million people have been exposed to it in less than 24 hours, it’s now irresponsible not to try.”

O'h no, danger, danger, Jenner did something bad and irresponsible, we've got to fix the damage—can you say “damage control?” 

 “Then Jenner descends quickly into full-on paranoia: “Is something being exterminated here? Is that something me?”

Descends?  Good choice of word.  Definitely indicates going downhill.  Full-on paranoia? Isn't the word “paranoid” usually coupled with the phrase “conspiracy theorist? and shouldn't only a psychiatrist be the one to diagnose for that?)

 “The next stage of Jenner’s meltdown is wild speculation: ...”

Meltdown?, hmmm, I guess that means Jenner has gone crazy, whacky  for noticing all the jets spraying and writing about it. Speculation? What about Olivia's own speculation that people believe in chemtrails because of one pdf by the military?, or to even make any kind of claim at all to know what anyone thinks or why?  Is this lady  a mind reader if so,  I'll stand corrected). Her own assumptions were totally  baseless and writing them was totally irresponsible. 

 
I have never read TheDailyBeast before and don't know whether it is a teen publication, but judging by the commonality and obviousness of the propaganda tactics that were employed, I would almost bet my life that it is a mainstream publication or at least is influenced by mainstream articles.   I also think that whoever came up with the name of the publication was correct in calling themselves a beast.

 

 

More Examples of Opinion-Persuasion Tactics

 

Originally, I wanted to find a specific article that inspired me to address propaganda tactics. The writer said that conspiracy theorists were a concern. This was a statement telling people what to think about the issue of there being conspiracy theorists. I could not find it, but found instead how that now all the links that come up on the first page of a google search for chemtrails are debunking and/or gatekeeping sites. This gives so much material for this page and I will critique a few of them below. Like in above article, first I'll write quote made by publication and then put my commentary underneath in red. I'll put the links to the listed publications at bottom of this page.

 

The RationalWiki (choice words, name calling/labeling, and use of omission)- "According to some conspiracy theorists, some of these are actually chemtrails, a form of aerial dispersal of chemicals by The Powers That Be for some vague but definitely nefarious purpose. This is one of the youngest among the established conspiracy theories, having been first discussed around 1996, and it is still going strong despite any evidence for it being laughably lacking."

Ah hmmm (cough). "Conspiracy theorists". Really, they can't just say "people". They have to give them a title, a label? Calling people who believe "theorists" automatically implies there is no evidence and all of it is theory. Good one Rationalwiki--and you were quite clever in your phrasing when you said "...any evidence" instead of "no evidence". You used omission of facts well here by omitting evidence that DOES exist.

The use of the words "actually" and "vague". I think we all know the implication when someone says "they actually believe", "he actually did it". It implies a disbelief. Choosing to use the word "vague", makes the whole idea of chemtrails seem vague. Good choices of words to create desired feeling in reader.

Back to the statement, "...despite any evidence for it being laughably lacking"? Why do you say "laughably". Do you want people to just laugh it off as many do just from hearing the phrase "conspiracy theory" alone? And to say evidence is lacking is either a complete lie or total ignorance. There is tons of evidence in the form of scientific journals, University papers, government and military documents, in videos, photos and in lab tests.

 

Wikipedia - "These arguments have been dismissed by the scientific community: such trails are normal water-based contrails (condensation trails) that are routinely left by high-flying aircraft under certain atmospheric conditions.[4] Although proponents have attempted to prove that the claimed chemical spraying does take place, their analyses have been flawed or based on misconceptions"

Again, use of choice words to give a desired impression. The use of the word "community" when referring to scientists. "Community" implies that all scientists are of one group and one hive mind and all have the same results. This excludes the scientists who have not dismissed chemtrails. You can find papers from scientists (not the scientific community) on the chemtrail research page of this site.

The Wikipedia blog regarding chemtrails is long and too much to copy here, but I want to point out another important paragraph within it: "The USAF says these accusations were a hoax fueled in part by citations to a strategy paper drafted within their Air University entitled Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025""

I think the faultiness can be easily seen here. Wikipedia is depending on a response of the accused as evidence against the reality of chemtrails. No judge or jury is needed when it's a government agency. Also, notice how the air force document "Weather as a Force Multiplier, Owning the Weather in 2025" was also cited as cause for the "theory" by Olivia Nuzzi (in article referred to at top of this page).

 

I will continue this later...

 

 

Links of publications mentioned: Rationalwiki, Wikileaks