Not everyone has the gift of discernment or a mind which questions the media, so they’re not able to see the attempts at manipulation made by the media. What this means is that most people in this country will be deceived. What happens when someone who wasn’t exposed to the manipulation looks out into society and, believing that what the majority believes is the safe belief to have, believes what the majority believes? They will believe also, and thus be deceived.
The information provided in this article will give some insight into what goes on daily, all day, in this country. And it’s not just FOX News that does it.
Media Manipulation 1/3: Tactics Exposed and Analysed [MIND CONTROL]
Media Manipulation 2/3: Tactics Exposed and Analysed [MIND CONTROL]
Media Manipulation 3/3: Tactics Exposed and Analysed [MIND CONTROL]
These next videos on Bishop Eddie Long are an example of the verbal manipulation that takes place. I’ve already went over this before, so I know it’s full of manipulation. To show you what I mean, I went through it again (without trying to catch every single thing) and noted the manipulation. Keep in mind, Eddie Long was accused, that’s it. There’s no telling if he’s guilty or not at this point. And this claims to be an unbiased look into the allegations.
:42 — “… this so-called man of God …”
:52 — “.. he allegedly bought them gifts, cars …” and then a pause, and then beginning the rest of the list with “He …” Anything following “He” will be taken as what he actually did.
2:50 — “Keep in mind, this is the man …”
5:33 — “Especially fatherless young kids.”
5:42 — “Let me add to what you’re saying.” The guy was saying, talking about, what Eddie Long had and accomplished; Rick Sanchez, claiming to be adding to what was being said, goes on the read from a paper –that they actually put the camera on– and reads statements, while pointing to each word with his finger, in a way that says “it was founded” — as if an investigation was conducted — while not even mentioning where the words are from/whose words they are. And then there’s what the words said.
6:22 — “I mean, it sounds like he’s working them.” This is said as though the allegations are true.
6:50 — An interruption, a scratching out of what was just said by the other guy, and a move to reading more damaging statements — statements that are typed and being read as “what Eddie did,” not “what Eddie is accused of.”
7:32 — It will be now.
7:55 — What effect does the sigh have on the viewers? And he’s talking about an ACCUSED man.
8:29 — “… to be perfectly fair …” Convinces the viewer that they are being fair, even though they may not be. All unfair media loves to use this.
8:30 — “… there are a lot of people tonight from his congregation, and others around the country, who believe in this man STILL and ARE Doubtful of what these allegations are saying. Let’s go through what those folks are saying, and then let’s hear how they’re answered by …”
Go through what those folks are saying? What folks? “A lot of people from Eddie Long’s congregation and others around the country.” Or at least that’s what they’re going to have a select few – a carefully selected few– represent in Part 2.
1:00 — He’s just asking himself, that is, it’s his personal question. Amazing how the other guy has information which matches his “personal question.”
2:34 — Nice defense of the boy, which means the opposite for Eddie Long.
3:01 — Gotta let you know it’s not everybody, just these ….
3:03 — These are those folks @ 8:30 of Part 1. “… there are some people out there who DEFEND their minister, believe in him, love him as a man, and are WILLING to DEFEND him ALREADY. Let’s go to some of those if we can.” And they show viewers, you, Tweets (Twitter statements/questions) from individuals. They do this as though it’s random, when in fact, for a fact, they sat down beforehand and chose those exact Tweets to be the one’s shown. Being chosen, is it a coincidence that they are Tweets that support what Rick Sanchez was just saying, and are all statements which will be clearly seen as bias towards Eddie Long — basically saying “Eddie Long’s followers don’t care what the truth is, they are defending him no matter what” and “If you defend Eddie Long, you do so out of favoritism; you don’t care about the evidence (which there actually is none of).” This is the same way your local news selects interviews and/or segments of interviews of individuals, especially on the streets, and plays them after the news person says something, as proof or support of what they say, making any group of people say what they want them to say. Look for it, you’ll see it.
4:37 — Is that what it’s about, regime change?
Can you see the manipulation?
Can you see the desire to cause the viewer (you) to believe in his guilt?
(whether he’s guilty or not is another issue)
Why would they intentionally try to make you believe he is guilty?
That’s for you to determine.
They did it for the boys? So, the media cares about young black men getting molested? Think of their reaction, or lack there of, to young black girls getting kidnapped and raped. The media cares about young black men getting molested? Think of the media’s view and portrayal of young black men? Their intention is Eddie Long, that is, they’re doing what they’re doing because of Eddie Long.
The Media: What they say, how they say it, when they say it, what they do when they say it, where they are when they say it, and how many times they say it can be adjusted to have a desired effect on you. Once you start questioning everything they put out, and even questioning if what they put out is all there is, you may start to see their attacks/attempts.
This is a very good, must-see documentary which compliments what you have read and watched:
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism
“Subliminal Messages Exposed”
How politicians use psyops on your brain to get your vote then your money
This video discusses mental manipulation in campaign commercials, but the video itself is manipulation. What it is saying (programming into the viewer): “Watch out for attack ads against Obama.” “If you see an ad against Obama stating or showing … it’s an psychological attack ad.” Now that’s devious!
“The whole point of brainwashing, is that those being brainwashed don’t know it.”
— Graham Haley
“More generally, people have little specific knowledge of what is happening around them. An academic study that appeared right before the presidential election reports that less than 30 percent of the population was aware of the positions of the candidates on major issues, though 86 percent knew the name of George Bush’s dog. The general thrust of propaganda gets through, however. When asked to identify the largest element of the federal budget, less than 1/4 give the correct answer: military spending. Almost half select foreign aid, which barely exists; the second choice is welfare, chosen by 1/3 of the population, who also far overestimate the proportion that goes to Blacks and to child support. And though the question was not asked, virtually none are likely to be aware that `defense spending’ is in large measure welfare for the rich. Another result of the study is that more educated sectors are more ignorant–not surprising, since they are the main targets of indoctrination. Bush supporters, who are the best educated, scored lowest overall.”
— Noam Chomsky
Mainstream Manipulation by Writeous1 is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.