Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017) • Hacker News Board

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#221

Post by temp8964 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 12:16 PM UTC

tolbish wrote: post #215

temp8964 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's truly "everywhere". There are too many photos of those crazy presentations come out almost every week. Maybe you think it's not widely spread. But those crazy nuts are being adopted by many places. Parents are rightfully concerned.

It must be everywhere. Everyone is talking about it. It's all you hear about. We must be right. https://www.theonion.com/conservative-man-tearfully-informs-...

Yes. I should wait for it to be literally everywhere, untill then I can be concerned.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#222

Post by Ensorceled » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 12:30 PM UTC

Fellshard wrote: post #205

Ensorceled wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While it is not the /norm/, it is quite common: almost 150K children are removed from their parents and put into foster care a year. Exigent circumstances happen quite a lot.

What's that look like per capita? That's still an extraordinarily small minority.

There are about 74 million children in the US and about 450K of them are in foster care and at least as many more have been moved to relatives by CPS (grandparents, aunts/uncles, older siblings etc.)

So well over 1% maybe as high as 2% ... not an extraordinarily small minority.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#223

Post by infamouscow » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 12:57 PM UTC

bosswipe wrote: post #186

whatthesmack wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's harder since they've all gone back and stealth-edited their articles. Here's one example from PaulG: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1396769717805780994

Jeez those are some minor edits. This whole lab leak theory is turning into a major vindication talking point for the right but it's all built on a straw man as far as I can tell. And no one brings up things like hydroxychloroquine any more. Everything is framed as left vs right when it doesn't have to be just to increase polarization and outrage.

The problem is the hypothesis was dismissed without evidence and any suggestion for further inquery branded you an anti-science. The irony is unbelievable.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#224

Post by bena » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 1:18 PM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #84

bena wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ad hominem is never useful. It doesn't tell me anything about the other side and tells me more about you. You don't like the other side. That's what I now know. And misinformation usually has one of the problems that would put it further down the pyramid than actual arguments. It's usually ad hominem or tone policing itself. Or sometimes just a straight up lie. And pointing out those elements would fall under Counter…

> You don't like the other side. That's what I now know. And that's very useful for establishing which sources we should rely upon in a shared discussion. My sister's husband was quoting Breitbart news to me. I let him know that I believed that was a propaganda channel. In many discussions, its very important to establish who is, or isn't, a trusted source of information. ------------- There are others who quote Elon…

> And that's very useful for establishing which sources we should rely upon in a shared discussion.

Not necessarily. If someone doesn't like the dictionary, for example, then you're not really dealing with someone who is looking for actual information about the definitions of words.

Calling Breitbart a propaganda channel doesn't say anything except you think "propaganda" is a negative word and you don't like Breitbart. If you would instead have told him of the many times it promoted misinformation and conjectural outrage over substance and you don't feel like sifting through the chaff for any possible wheat so by default you don't treat Breitbart as a source of reliable news. That would be different.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#225

Post by BitwiseFool » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 2:53 PM UTC

pacerwpg wrote: post #175

bsagdiyev wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a stereotype. I tend red sometimes, but have no question who won the election. Maybe the issue is you see things that way due to what you see in the media and are told instead of from actual interactions with people from opposing viewpoints?

I would say I get that impression from the continued strong support for the former president, who is arguably still the leader of the party, and his insistence that the election was stolen. https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news_and_polls/over-half-republi...

A large contingent of Democrats thought 2016 was stolen because of Russian Interference, so now I guess the shoe is on the other foot.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#226

Post by blindmute » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 3:24 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #131

_ivvf wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The evidence that radicals have already successfully overtaken Western universities is overwhelming, and the evidence that these radicals are in the process of taking over secondary education is also readily available for anyone who is interested. If you are actually looking for some eyewitness accounts, Jordan Peterson has many podcasts where he interviews specific people that have experienced the ideological takeov…

There's no evidence in the parent, just the opinions of a few political actors. > radicals have already successfully overtaken Western universities Ironically, this uses techniques from the OP. It's an emotional appeal - calling people radicals, catastrophizing, etc. - but there's no evidence and really no information. Hyperbole eliminates information; it's like screaming 'we're all going to die!'.

If eyewitness accounts are not evidence, what would pass as evidence to you? Anyone with children in public school has seen this. Do you really need a peer reviewed study on every piece of information to form a worldview?

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#227

Post by clipradiowallet » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:10 PM UTC

flippinburgers wrote: post #201

nostromo wrote: post #19

There's a lot of good content in this article focused on the media. The media is highly visible and well-documented, so it makes sense. I'd like to see more content about indoctrination and propaganda happening in US education. This to me is much more insidious as it takes an impressionable populace (kids and young adults) and provides an authority figure (teachers and professors) that are largely hidden from public…

Critical Race Theory as I have read about it being applied in schools teaches youth that they are inherently racist (note this is only taught to the white children) and that the minorities get to share their anecdotal, lived experience while the white students stand by and are not permitted to say anything. I find the entire formula to be a groundwork for severe social damage. It certainly does not build bridges. Nor…

CRT is a new [political] spin on an old evolved trait in all human beings(and in some non-human life forms). That trait is "pack mentality"; the idea that a single organism has a higher survival rate when in a pack. Example: lone wolf VS pack wolf - the lone wolf has a higher mortality rate. Expulsion of a pack wolf from the pack invariably leads to a shorter lifespan for the expelled wolf. This works in humans also... eg, a tribe of humans can hunt larger mammals, which results in more food security for the tribe. A single human cannot do this, and has no safety net when they are physically unable to hunt/gather.

Whether CRT is right/wrong is another issue altogether...but it's just another lens on a very old behavior trait of species that have survived over long periods of time.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#228

Post by bosswipe » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 5:25 PM UTC

infamouscow wrote: post #223

bosswipe wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeez those are some minor edits. This whole lab leak theory is turning into a major vindication talking point for the right but it's all built on a straw man as far as I can tell. And no one brings up things like hydroxychloroquine any more. Everything is framed as left vs right when it doesn't have to be just to increase polarization and outrage.

The problem is the hypothesis was dismissed without evidence and any suggestion for further inquery branded you an anti-science. The irony is unbelievable.

That's the victimization story that the right tells itself but I haven't seen much evidence that it happened.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#229

Post by cbsmith » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 6:01 PM UTC

esyir wrote: post #220

cbsmith wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's not what Critical Race Theory is or how it could be applied to schools. The irony of you bringing this up in the context of propaganda is amusing. There's a good short interview NPR did today with Gloria Ladson-Billings, who has been working on applying critical race theory for education policy for over a couple of decades: https://www.npr.org/2021/06/22/1009182206/academic-who-broug... Be careful out th…

Having seen the media about crt, as well as the way it's applied and the attitudes of its adherents, its pretty close to the truth. And its hard to argue with the result. Whatever is going on, that particular strain of "crt" is virulently spreading.

"The media about crt"

s/media/propaganda/

Keep in mind you're being fed a narrative. CRT has been around for decades, and isn't something you can apply in a grade school curriculum (as Gloria Ladson-Billings said, it isn't something you teach in undergrad at college... it's a subject for post graduate study/research). There's a reason you're hearing about this now.

Re: Types of propaganda, propaganda techniques, and propaganda strategies (2017)

#230

Post by wolverine876 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 6:24 PM UTC

nickpp wrote: post #218

wolverine876 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once you learn the propaganda techniques, you start seeing it everywhere in the mainstream media. I think it heavily depends on what media you see. The best journalism generally avoids it (i.e., the straight news side). Most journalism isn't in the top few percentile, but you don't need to read anything less than the best. I stick to the best, and when I encounter lesser stuff (e.g., I was visiting relatives and CN…

I remember ProPublica's story from a few days ago. It was the very definition of propaganda: clearly biased, obviously wrong to anybody who has the slightest idea about finance and obviously working hard to push a foregone conclusion against an imagined enemy ("The Rich"). To my dismay, mainstream media, including the BBC, picked up the story as if it was anything else than bad journalism, thus offering it credibilit…

> It was the very definition of propaganda: clearly biased, obviously wrong to anybody who has the slightest idea about finance and obviously working hard to push a foregone conclusion against an imagined enemy ("The Rich").

That repeats what a blog post on HN's front page said, but that doesn't make it true. It was the blog poster who didn't understand finance, as many on HN commented, and their argument was weak in many other ways. Also, the conclusion about ProPublica's motives has no evidence - even if the article is inaccurate in that way, there are many possible reasons why. It's an appeal to emotion when we start saying "the slightest idea", "obviously", and "imagined enemy", not to fact and reason.

Even the allegations don't necessarily fit the definition of propaganda; bias or even deceit are not necessarily propaganda.

Why are people so ready to believe that a carefully researched story, rich in evidence, is wrong and take at face value a ranting blog post, with no evidence or research, by some anonymous person?

The answer is, that is how propaganda works: An appeal to emotion, and many other tactics described in the OP, were in that blog post. That is killing our society, IMHO.